Relic finally fixed their engine editionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbI--hIXb18
>>1738882looks nice, i see people are finally coming around to this game
>fixedThey intentionally added delay to unit response to try and make multiplayer less lag dependent. This is them being forced to undo their retarded design decisions under the threat of bankruptcy.
>>1738915being intentional is better than an oversight i guess
>>1738882why didn't they launch with this?
>>1738925One of a large number of bad decisions that likely came from the retards at Sega. It's weird that they seem fairly aware of everything that was fucked about the game at launch, despite a lot of it being deliberate. They've been unfucking their own shit for the last 6 months and now the game is actually good, but why wasn't it like this in the first place.?
Have they finally introduced modding tools that don't suck ass?
i dont like how the US plays compared to coh2, so ill never be able to like coh3.
>>1738939really? i hate the way the USF plays in coh2
>>1738921no, being intentionally retarded is worse than making a mistake
>>1738931>why wasn't it like this in the first place?You said it yourself: because Sega.
i just hope they nerf bundle nades. though at least i'll be able to react to things without being a fucking precog now.
>>17395321. Skill issue2. No, the TTK is too high and nothing in coh3 feels lethal so its good they made the bundle nades nukes
>>1738915>>1738992stop being negative or else I'm going to have the Janitor come into this thread and deal with you.
>>1738882173ms is still a fuckload of input delay desu. I can't imagine a real time multiplayer game outside of the strategy genre considering that acceptable.
>>1739577idk why it's so different for strategy games. maybe a requirement for the genre because of all the moving parts
>>1739577>mfw you will never be playing shooters from Alaska to servers down south on 56.6k modem with 350ms ping again>mfw I now have gigabit fiber and just play single player games anyway
>>1739577Street Fighter 5 at release had 8 frames.That's 200ms, for a fighting game no less, where 1 frame links were relatively common (though not as much as SF4).
>>1739577it's fine for an RTS that's more a complex simulation than a blizzard game (which have always had extremely simplistic calcuations).
Company of Ass
>>1738882Have they fixed the 'time to kill' problem? Seriously why does it take half a minute for a heavy MG to kill one squad? And that's if they don't press the magic escape button. Shit takes forever to die in this.
>>1738992it shows they thought about it at least, this game isn’t supposed to be gookclick instant turns/acceleration
>>1739735Because MGs are for suppression, not killing, and have worked that way since the very first game. Sorry that playing your shitty mods rotted your brain and concept of what COH is.
>>1739770>Press R>No longer suppressed and immune to 99% of damageRope yourself lelic cúck.
>>1739778>NOOOO! GAME MECHANICS THAT HAVE ALWAYS EXISTED IN THE FRANCHISE! SAVE ME, FORTNITEGod pressed R for retarded when making you
>>1739789>Reddit opinion>Reddit comebackPlay a real WW2 rts like Gates of Hell, you worthless nigger.
>>1739670A lot of modern fighters intentionally introduce a buffer window of input delay to mitigate the impact of latency. 200ms of latency means your experience remains consistent in 200ms ping. But even then, that decision caused an open rebellion in the FGC and they still seethe about it to this day.
>>1739794>recommends a reddit gameAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAI >runs at 50 FPSsure love my>AI sees through smokepoorly coded, grimy, forever broken>soldiers forget to shoot things they should shoot piece of shit Men >uses 80 gigs of space to copy paste 150 halftrack modelsof War mod! It's so >tanks spins around aimlessly"realistic"!
>>1739813Bro thinks he's on reddit
>>1739818>Faggot has no argument
>>1739823>Plays RTS against AI>Thinks his opinion matterslaffin
>>1739789got his ass lmfao
>>1739831>MP cuck>especially for gates of hell, a game whose only redeeming quality is conquestOh I'm laffing
>>1739850>>1739843reddit
>>1739794Shouldn't you be in a Donbas trench, Ivan?
>>1739831>plays 4v4 games only>first one to leave when he loses his vet 2 infantry squad on retreat>thinks his opinion matters
>>1739778Yes, that's how the game works. They retreat their unit, you take the territory, the extra resources and you can either fortify or press your advantage.Why does this thread always attract one autistic Gates of hell shitter? Is it because no one outside of the urals has ever expressed any interest in that game so they just have to swarm coh threads?
>>1740019>AAAAA IF I RUN AWAY BOOLETS DON'T HURTIs this why anglos never made it to Berlin?
>>1738882kek good job too bad they will never fix this shit game to be playable
>>1740019Most retarded post I've seen in a long time
>>1739796Well, no surprise. I'd be up in arms if I was a fightan game player too.
>>1740041>same amount of reviewsSo much for the "better" game lmao
>>1738939CoH2 USF playstyle may be very unusual and unique compared to basically any other faction in the franchise, but I never liked it, so it's no biggie.
>community-voted italian setting>no playable italian factionthis will never not be sad
>>1740831I love the pasta units that got into the game but this shit is frustrating. The Axis could have finally gotten some much needed variety, and historical accuracy for what shows up on the field has always been loose for the franchise. At least Panthers aren't the default late game unit for krauts, again.
>>1740041>>1740041This image unironically cucks the CoHtroon. The RTS community has largely moved passed base building faux realism of the CoH franchise.Base builders moved on to city builders and tactical players moved on to GoH or MoW or Graviteam or Combat Mission.So many games do CoH better than it ever has, which is why it's a dead series, propped up by the "competitive" community of like 40 faggots and a couple trannies (also faggots).
>>1740831>>1741098>waaaah why is there no hiroshima faction in hiroshia vs little boy: the rts?Next time try picking a faction that didn't get instantly annihilated, fags
>>1741696>waaaaah game must always be historically accurate!next you will tell me that Shermans should be 7 times cheaper than a Panther to reflect how outnumbered German tanks were.
>>1741714Asymmetrical game design does exist, yes. Relic just forgot how to do it after DoW1
>>1740019Retreat mechanic is absolute dogshit
>>1741696Germany should be destined to lose every match if that's your logic, retard.
>>1741858then go play something else. CoH has always been an arcade series.
>>1739577The RTS genre doesn't consider it acceptable either. It's practically unplayable by modern standards. Maybe if you went back in time and played Starcraft in 1998 in a distant server would that level of lag be acceptable
>>1741714No. I would tell you that shermans actually fought in Italy, unlike italians
>>1741914i dont think that's true anon, most people are happy to see input delay below 200ms, and its definitely not "practically unplayable"
>>1741860i disagree anon.
>>1742226except Italians did fight in Italy on both sides, so you would be retarded either ways. Bit sad, innit?
>>1742566>i-italians did fight!>posts an image of the national republican army, which were just some fascist pastas commanded by germans much like it happens in the gamelmao
>>1742603good thing you don't have to be an independent country to be featured in this series as a faction, like how the OKW, Panzer Elite and DAK are all part of the German army but still get their own separate factions anyway. Anything more to add, retard?
>>1742603explain separate german factions.tip: "accuracy" doesn't mean shit.
>>1739735Bro, your assault troops?They've either fixed TTK or you want CoD tier times, half the units in the game absolutely fuck each other to death. Ass grens, Gurkha with Tommies, even sappers fuck shit up at close range. Even Aussies rek infantry that aren't in green cover with their Enfields. I also see way less instances of retreating units feeling invincible or like they have super low received accuracy. Anyway, I like where MGs are at the moment, their primary purpose is to suppress and they do that fine. I don't think they need to be killing machines on top of that, and half the time they steadily whittle down HP anyway. The idea is to accompany them with infantry to fuck them up while they're down. Im also pretty sure the mechanics are still the same in that once pinned, units take less damage which then escalates back up over time if you leave them pinned. Gives you an opportunity to save their ass with another unit but also punishes you if you wait too long. I might be wrong though.
>>1741139The whole point of CoH is balancing fun and relatively simple design including unit and ability synergies with only a surface level of realism which is you know, the thing most videogames do anyway?I like MoW too but it's pretty fucking autistic in comparison. Good for people who want more detail but just not as simple and enjoyable to play most of the time. Both are fine.
>>1742652??? Is that supposed to be some clever retort? One is germans in Italy, the other germans in north Africa. Dunno if you know but they fought the war differently.>nooooooooo b-but...Beyond that, even in real life the Wehrmacht, SS and Luftwaffe ran their own, separate ground forces complete with different gear, vehicles, uniforms and insignia.Stop embarrassing yourself nigga lmao
>1742761>>the national republican army can't be its own faction because it's controlled by german!!!!!>>but different branches of the wehrmacht can be split into their own factions despite all being controlled by germans because...uh...because uh...because don't embarrass yourself NIGGERearn your (you) by not being a mouth-shitting retard.
>>1742761>Vgh... yes... my GROSSGERMANIUMS... Hitler my beloved... Holocaust didn't happen but it should have... vgh...This is how you sound retard.
>>1742662>assault troops have fast ttk Thats how it's always been. People complaining about ttk are referring to mainline having such dogshit ttk that an assault unit can walk across an open foeld into a fortified position and clear it without dropping a model.
new shit looks nice
I like spamming nothing but mortars on CoH1 as wehrmacht and playing a long thin map so I can create an impassible chokepoint for the AI until they unlock calliopes and decimate my blob. How do I feel about this game?
Next patch is when I leave coh 2 I reckon. I couldn't stand the input lag and actually being able to spawn next to my friend instead of sandwiching two retards between us is appealing.Is dak more like panzer elite or okw?
>>1739789lmao
>>1742811Just stop.
>>1744693dak is more like panzer elite I think - mobile, light armored. you can call in a tiger tank non doctrinally but it takes alot of resources
>>1744811Can brits still just play Sim City?Still have nightmares about overrepaired mortar pits and invincible trenches.
>>1744175I dunno, I've never noticed any egregious cases of that happening. If they've charged from cover over a short distance then it can be a little frustrating but they've at least tried to be tactical about it and even then it's not always a guaranteed win.I've fought off charging assault squads with grens and infantry sections before, and conversely have had ass grens or pastatori smacked up by mainlines when I've tried charging them over a longer open area and forgotten to smoke it. Either way, mainlines are usually not that lethal until they've gained vet or had an upgrade which seems only fair in the overall balancing of the game. They cost less to produce and reinforce than cqc squads, and making just a few mistakes with cqc squads can put you pretty far behind in manpower compared to if you'd done the same with mainlines. CoH has never been about realism but trying to balance tactical play and fun, and making infantry too squishy would just make everything a bit too micro intensive for your average player. A lot of people won't want to play a game where to get caught off guard for a few seconds means losing a whole squad because they were microing another engagement and barely had time to register which unit was getting rekt (which can still happen pretty easily even now)Otherwise you just have to use the usual counters - MG, lights or mediums with anti-inf... it's rock paper scissors.
>>1744839The latest doctrine focuses on that but it's not as bad as in previous games.
>>1744848i think a lot of the people who want low TTK are 4v4 casuals who are only every having to focus on one microscoptic part of the map, whereas in 1v1 you are constantly engaging on multiple fronts. even in high micro games like starcraft typcially you will have one main army then a secondary just for drops/harrass, and the secondary is largely disposable and expected to die at some point. you don't have the option of just letting things die in CoH so in a low TTK game pushing multiple fronts in 1v1 just becomes a casino where if you're not paying 100% attention to the correct part of the map at the exact moment they a-move at you, it's over. coh 1/3 are far more competitively consistent than 2 as a result and less prone to dice rolls and wild swings due to moments of dumb luck. the only reason i can think to prefer 2 is because you are a casual 4v4 shitter.
full 1.65 patch notes: https://community.companyofheroes.com/coh-franchise-home/company-of-heroes-3/blogs/121-pc-1-6-5-patch-notesThank fuck they nerfed faust range vet buff and bundle nades. shit was so dumb.
the best move relic can do right now is drop support for CoH3 and make a remaster of CoH2. I am dead serious. Why invest in a shitty game that has half of the playerbase of CoH2 on a good day when they could just restart support for CoH2 instead?
>>1745403Because CoH 2 is played almost exclusively by third world subhumans who don't spend money and can't run modern games
>>1745412CoH2 actually runs worse than 3 because it's an actual PC game instead of a glorified console port for niggers.
>>1745419Maximum cope
>>1745422consolebabbies say what?
>>1745412as opposed to 3 which is played by first world retards?
>>1745412Half of them are just russian/Chinese account levelling bots. No idea why they're still active but you still see them idling in lobbies for weeks at a time.
>>1744839no - as >>1744853 said their latest doctrine has the bofors and 17 pounder pit but it sucks and isnt very good. brits are more of an all rounder faction this game
>>1744693dak is like panzer elite but instead of something like tankbusters you get absurdly powerful light tanks.>>1744839germans are the only ones who can really simcity in 3, and all emplacements suck.
>>1745871I think the brit 17pdr emplacement is pretty crazy. If you have something spotting for it it has absurd range and eats all German armor alive. So long as you keep it repaired it's pretty good. But I agree that in terms of survivability emplacements are all pretty bad. I'd rather that than them being incredibly difficult to remove (like that one UKF commander in 2) though
>>1746081The problem with it and all emplacements is that as soon as it's spotted your opp can just kill it from a safe distance. A pair of AT guns kill it (and any other emplacement) in a few shots from complete safety.Wehr bunker cancer works both because the bunkers are dirt cheap and because they have no population cost, so they have a negligible impact on your overall army size. Other emplacements cost a lot of manpower and population so you're punished harder when they die and you're far less equipped to counterpush AT guns just sniping them from a screen away.Since AT guns can't be suppressed and don't count as emplacements, the only good way to chase them off is to push with infantry or flank with massed vehicles, but you can easily cover them from inf with an mg and having the critical mass to flank is impractical when you spent a tank's worth of resources on your emplacement that can't actually fight back.
>>1746081the 17 pounder emplacement is pretty good yeah, it also auto faces any tank, so you dont ever have to micro it. but like >>1746237 said, the second you drop an emplacement every single enemy player on the map begins to stack barrages on it until it explodes. they really only need 2 mortars cycling or 2 AT guns firing at it to take it out
>>1746237Ive come to love seeing bunker spam played against me as a brit main because i just get 2-3 bishops and keep up a literal constant barrage cycle until he can't do anything but waste manpower replacing his casualties and dropping new bunkers
>>1746283Yeah, it's a bit of a fundamentally flawed concept in a game like this. It's always bothered me because my cheese trolling side loves sim city but it's either OP as fuck according to some people, and utter dogshit to others, and it really has always been either-or. Maybe it would make more sense to have emplacements easily decrewed but much harder to outright destroy? So barraging them gives you a window of opportunity by decrewing rather than easily wasting your opponents fuel and manpower investment? And direct fire from something like an AT gun doesn't decrew, just chips away at the emplacement health allowing for a response. It would need to be artillery fire or any kind of HE, grenades etc to guarantee a decrew. Might also need to allow the movement of the crew as a unit? So they can 'unload' like infantry from a building, can gain vet etc, but are pretty useless beyond manning the gun. You could still recrew using trucks/HTs though which would be pretty frustrating to play against. I kind of liked the brace mechanic from 2 since it was sort of like that - forcing the emplacement to be useless for a time in exchange for high durability. Might need to bring that back along with resistance to non-HE shit using attack ground on it. Or super long pack up and set up times?I'm sure they'll end up being useless in high level play no matter what
>>1747573>Maybe it would make more sense to have emplacements easily decrewed but much harder to outright destroy?This is what they went for on release but it led to a super cancerous flak emplacement cheese because the cost of recrewing them over and over and over was so cheap that there was essentially no downtime, and you'd take half the game barraging it before your indirect fire caused enough manpower bleed to pay for itself.Emplacements are just kind of a weird concept in a game like this oriented around fluid combat, unit preservation and retreating. It's a relic of the fact that CoH1 was building off the same engine as DoW1 that they continue to commit way too much effort and time to.
>>1738882>RTS (Real time strategy game)>Critically important to have a solo campaign>Not important to have team modes or even 1v1 pveAre RTS gamers brain dead?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ymKjz2gjiQ
>>1748538Most people play singleplayer, comp autists make multi annoying for the rest
>>1748550>comp autistsNever understood this complaint except to see it as cope for being bad at the game. Do people seriously think you should go into a competitive environment and play below your own skill level on purpose? If I enjoy a game is it not unreasonable for me to spend a lot of time on it, and as a consequence get better?
>>1748538the source for that "graph" has never been provided btw
>>1748553>you should go into a competitive environment and play below your own skill level on purpose?Yes? The point is to have fun playing the game. If you go in rock hard into every match even when you know you're facing a much less skilled player and just curb stomp them, you're an asshole.
> game flopped so hard that sega had to sell relic
>>1748645>The point is to have fun playing the game.I have fun by winning. Do you have fun by losing? Do you go out of your way to do dumb things because it's funny? Trolling is 'fun' for instance, is this in the spirit of the game or is there a scoreboard and objectives for a reason?>If you go in rock hard into every matchNope. If I have a high skill level in a game its from a lot of practice and thus playing well becomes second nature. >even when you know you're facing a much less skilled playerHow would i know this prior to playing against them? Nice scenario you constructed for me retard>you're an assholeYea.
> scoreboard le bad. compniggers ruined RTS> sits in public lobby all day long waiting for some rando with 20 hours of playtime to join so he can curbstomp him on a map he's played a thousand times alreadywhy are people like this?
>>1748538Tutorial Campaign, you're forced to play Pajeet units.Did Relic really fall for muh sjwism?
>>1742226>>1741696> game has Afrikakorps (active until May '43)> no Italy doe (active until September '43)
>>1748538Singeplayer campaigns are the most boring things in RTS. I get playing skirmish against the AI, that's okay. But rts sp campaigns are fancy puzzles.
>>1748671They didn't sell them. Relic has no parent company now, they're fully independent.Why did SEGA cut them loose instead of just dissolving the company? Anybody's guess.
>>1748782> They didn't sell them> Relic did so bad they gave it away for free
Need to go back to Stuart glory days
>>1748645git gud fgt
I fucking love coh3.
>>1748729I'd argue comp stomps are even worse unless the AI is genuinely good, it's the same shit every single time and it's a sad, pale imitation of the dynamics of playing with people. Sure, humans might follow the meta a lot of the time, but in a game like CoH they can at least be caught off guard or make weird plays themselves.
>>1749217Honestly, I kind of do too. It's finally at a point where it feels great to play MP. Balance is interesting and while you still have the eternal ragers carrying on about rangers (suppression resist is gay as fuck to be fair), foot guards, or whatever else is considered OP, I find myself winning and losing games at roughly the same rates across all faction except USF. All factions feel fun to play and you don't feel overly gimped by picking particular BGs or factions (apart from USF in some cases). Just needs heaps more BGs and maps, and maybe some fun SP/co op content and I'd say it would surpass 2, and I loved 2 so much I have over 1k hours in it
>>1749303>>1749306>>1748550It adds so much context to know this is the same person
>>1749327Wrong. What point are you trying make anyway?>yes I am a phonefag
>>1748553Nope but enjoy having only a few other autists to play with, not everyone is doing everything possible to win just to have fun with the experience. Players online are about as robotic as the AI itself in terms of strategy unless its someone new to the game in which case they just lose quickly until they embrace the meta autism like the rest or like most people end up leaving the game for better ones.>>1749016There it is, the score the only thing that matters to the autist. Might as well not even have a game just make it abstract numbers to see who is the best just cut out the middleman.This is why RTS died, why no one gives a shit about Company of Heroes 3 since its shit in every other way.
>>1749387you didn't understand the point.you don't have to be perfect to win. you have to make smarter decisions. Low APM but better management won against high AP but worse management. "le gookclick" is cope.
>>1749327uh oh anon - you got btfo. upset that coh3 is being appreciated for the good game that it is?
