Someguy's Fun with Company of Heroes @E3(edit: COH Multiplayer impressions, 5/13)

[Someguy]

Hey guys, I had an interview with Relic today with Josh Mosqueira, the lead designer of Company of Heroes. I got a lot of info from him and you guys will love it. Here goes...

edit: please excuse all my horrible spelling/grammer/context errors. I'm tired as hell and I'm not that good in writing.

Basic Stuff:
-The game is looking for a fall 2006 release
-System Requirements are not known at this point, but the essence engine will be very scalable. So folks with low-end computers won't have to worry too much about high-end PCs.
-The game will figure Relic's homemade Essence engine for providing realistic graphics, deformable terrain, destructable buildings, etc. The Havoc engine will provide non-deterministic physics for realistic flying stuff.
-Josh explained that the game should utilize end-high hardware such as 64-bit processors and dual-core. Josh wasn't sure however since he is not a programmer. 5/12: This was confirmed true by the lead programmer(his name escapes me at the moment). They're using the experience gained from programming the Outfit since the 360 utilizes multiple cores
-The game will have widescreen support for you widescreen monitor crowd.
-The game is on the Vista lineup. This means that the game will utilize DX10 features. This does not exclude the non-Vista users however as it'll use DX9 features to power the game.
-Edited 5/14: I talked to the senior graphics programmer (not lead programmer) about the DX9/10 features in the game. The game will make full use of DX10 features if you have Vista. As a result, the game will run better and look better. No worries, the game will use DX9 features if you do not have Vista.
-A multiplayer beta test is in the works, but no release date given. We'll all be informed of when this will happen though
-No comment on Blur Studios making an intro, (wait and see).


Gameplay:
-(Tacit Correction): The three resources are Manpower (primary purpose: building squads), Munitions (primary purpose: purchasing upgrades and using abilities), and Fuel (primary purpose: unlocking technology and building vehicles).

-(more Tacit Correction): The control points in sectors don't actually give you the resources. They are simply the mechanism you use to take control of a sector. The conceit we're using is that control of actual physical territory (a finite, delineated space) justifies your off-map commanders supplying you with additional manpower, munitions, and fuel with which to get more troops, vehicles, and upgrades/abilities. The important distrinction here is that the SECTOR is what's important. And there are other benefits to capturing and securing territory, ex: you can only build defenses in territory you control.

-The game map are also broken down into many sectors on the map(like the board game Risk). The key here is that in war, supply lines are essential in maintain control of areas. To benefit from the resource points you hold, there must be a connection from the resource point to your HQ.

-The tactical map shows the boundaries of the sectors on the map, show you current enemy positions based on current line of sight, and a map of what sectors you control on that map. It'll also show what resources a strategic point gives.

-There will be different kinds of infanty troops. They can be equipped with different kinds of weaponary such as machineguns and anti-tank weapons. They will also have different abilities at their disposal such as quick charges and throwing satchel charges(those make a big hole in buildings).

-Garrisoning in buildings play a huge role in defense. Buildings have different attributes that'll affect the strength of buildings. Wood buildings are easy to burn down with fire, but brick buildings won't burn as easily. Units in garrisoned buildings will also be smart about their placements around the building. For example, if a building is being attacked from two fronts, infanty on one side and a tank on the other, garrisoned units will move around appropriately to deal with the threat. If the garrisoned unit has an anti-tank weapon, the anti-tank unit will reposition himself to attack the tank while the anti-infanty will position themselves to deal with the infanty.

-Vehicles has specific armor properties on all four sides. Front has the stronger armor, side armor isn't as tough, and the rear armor is the weakest. Flanking is an important tactic to take down a tank really quick. There are also the probability of scoring a critical hit. The severity depends on how powerful the shot is and where the vehicle is being hit at. Obviously, a Sherman getting hit from behind from a Panzer could cause the Sherman's weapons cache to cook off and explode. Other critical events can include destorying a main gun to tank trends being blown off.

-Open and light vehicles like jeeps, critical hits will usually kill the driver causing the vehicle to go out of control and blow up.

-Playing through a mission or game, you'll get command points that you can use to specialize in three different paths in the tech tree(Infantry, Vehicle, Airborne). Depending on the path you take, your units will reflect those changes. For example, going infantry will make your infantry units stronger. Besides that, you'll get additional abilities that are on a timer. For example, going airborne will allow you to summon airstrikes or paratroopers.

Single Player:
-The campaign will feature the Allies in their campaign against the Axis Forces
-Not telling about the number of missions or what they will compose of yet... aka no comment :D
-There will be a storyline which will go along with the campaign
-Cutscenes will be performed by the in-game engine.
-Josh said no comment about additional NPC forces like the British or the Italians

Multiplayer:
-5/14: Would not reveal if COH will use Quaza or gamespy for their matchmaking services

-Relic is working to develop the multiplayer into a strong team-based experience. The idea is that you fight as a team and die as a team. Normally, you would see tactics where you would eliminate one player at a time like in Dawn of War. Relic is working to avoid that type of gameplay. So comebacks are really possible.

-The max players in multiplayer is eight players.

-There will be only two sides, Allies and Axis. However, players can decide on what tech tree they want to go to, so you won't have the same units, based on stats/abilities. They will also have access to special units that other tech trees won't have.

-Multiplayer beta test in the future.

-Maps will be scenario style meaning that there will be some objective tied to the map.

-Maps are pre-made and not randomly generated because a lot of thought is put into the map. "oh should there be cover here or not?" Stuff like that

Modders:
-Relic is looking to offering many different mod tools when the game is released

-Movie Maker, where you can create your own scripted action and watch it like a movie.

-Unit Editor, for playing around with unit attributes and abilities. People with modeling skills can import new models

-Attribute Editor, for changing the attributes of objects in the game. For example, making something more flammable or bulletproof.

-Map maker, for making maps...

Edit: 5/12
COH Multiplayer Impressions:

Josh Mosqueira reminded me yesterday that there was a multiplayer demo being ran somewhere around the windows booth. I checked that out today and squeezed out about two games. I got to play axis against two allies (WTF not fair :/).

The was a long straight map that feature 5 strategic points. Capping and holding 3 of those points start a countdown victory(10 minutes in my case like Dawn of War).

Axis had a different tech tree compared to the Allies in both building and unit construction. They also featured a different commander tech tree as well(Blitzkreg, Defense Doctrine, and something else that escapes my mind).

Going against two Allies, I was beaten easily. However I learned a few interesting tactics from that game mainly dealing with vehicles and out flanking them to get a good shot at the rear. Getting the high ground is important as well because the terrain will actually stop bullets and reduce accuracy. I managed to take down two squads of riflemen with one squad while micromanaging grenade tosses.

Also what you play inside buildings are very important. Machinegun troops are important in turning buildings into super machinegun nests. There are multiple ways of flushing guys out of garrisoned buildings. My axis engineers could upgrade themselves with flamers, so while I was tossing grenades, my engineers where lighting up the building on fire. You can also mortar the crap out of a building too.

So you think COH is Dawn of War but in a WW2 setting? hell no. units don't shoot through hills or buildings. Terrain makes a difference. Smart and gutsy flanking can turn a game around.

Edited 5/13: While you're still all here, you can go check out my E3 Photo Album (http://www.flickr.com/photos/someguy925/sets/72057594133849865/)

[the_sidewinder]

Give.Me.Now.

[NovaBurn]

Relic is going to make this the best possible RTS ever, they are thinking about the community adn the future of the game. Yet another reason I love relic.

[EarthBorn]

A.w.e.s.o.m.e.

I can easily see where the 2006 Game of the Year award is going..

[Mogolov]

Modders, here comes the pain!!! :blow:

Be prepared for some very very late nights! :bombface:

Its good that we can import new models, that would make things abit easier if some of us(me!) are intent on making an apocalyptic wasteland.

[vsc714]

Holy jeebus I would love to find out when beta testing starts, and I would love to have this game right now.

[immortal44]

Still no official word on SP skirmish? I'd think it would have to be included but it'd be nice to hear it.

[Someguy]

Still no official word on SP skirmish? I'd think it would have to be included but it'd be nice to hear it.

I'm probably sure that there is. It's a basic feature in most RTSes now, but I'll check up on that tomorrow.

[Mogolov]

Indeed, we should form an orderly queue for Beta haha.

[vsc714]

Yea, I've been waiting to here if there will be a skirmirsh for sure, I'm sorry I know its included in most RTS's and all Relic games have had them, but I'm more anxious because I really love playing against AI and especially I know I would love to face this new and actually intelligent AI. Once again, Relic, I love you.

[Killer Of Many]

Excellent reporting someguy, :report: but ur making me WAAAY too excited for this game, i just cannot wait :loco: :loco: :flamer: :juggle: :juggle:

[Weavern]

Great work someguy :)

[vsc714]

Oh hey yea and theres a nice video intro of Company of Heroes at the THQ website. The main screen shows E3 click that and then click on Company of Heroes. Just a nice little video I found just so you guys know.

[Mogolov]

where too mate? Cant see anything about E3 on www.thq.com

dont worry, found it within the search function, handy tools that is aint it? ;)

[Retroboy]

Good job, SG.

Be interesting to see if the modding capabilities extend to single-player scripting. Relic's always been light in that area, and some of the modding promises made for Homeworld 2 didn't exactly come to light as intended.

-- Retro

[Worf]

Love relic? I hate these guys, I'm not gonna work a single hour...
Let's just hope they don't release Dark Crusade and CoH at the same time....

[Tiresias]

damnit give it to me now...

[Starfisher]

Awesome someguy! Awesome!

Yeah, I can't wait for the beta frenzy to begin.

[Tesla]

MUST join.....BETA!!!!! :sam: :loco:

[Borriesz]

"There are also the probability of scoring a critical hit. The severity depends on how powerful the shot is and where the vehicle is being hit at. Obviously, a Sherman getting hit from behind from a Panzer could cause the Sherman's weapons cache to cook off and explode. Other critical events can include destorying a main gun to tank trends being blown off." Looks like this is gonna give some cool gameplay.. like, a tank's main gun is blown off, the tank can still wreck some serieus havoc to infantry!

[Tiresias]

It'll also pose some intresting gameplay decisions, if you knock the turret off a tank do you retarget your guns to another undamaged tank, or carry on on the other one till the job is done?

[Tesla]

i suppose that would rely on the situation, if u have tanks it would be wiser to knock out the cannons as soon as possable

[LoneWolf666]

Blow off a tank's turret and you still have to take care of the hull mg. But can a tank crew survive the sheer energy of ripping off the turret?

[Klaus88]

Werider things have happened in war :D.

Yeah that sounds like a really interesting gameplay situation.

[Soldier of Dest]

Still waiting to hear from Someguy about skirmirsh :)

Would be great to play both Axis and Allies against AI :argh:

[Demon_Eyes]

This is what I like to see, this looks more like a revolution in RTS, not an evolution, change the core essence instead of just adding on more junk.

[LoneWolf666]

This has nothing to do with revolution, this is basically DoW in WW2 with some more junk added. But that sure is a ton of junk and everybody's bound to find something he or she likes! ;)

[Starfisher]

What? Have you been following the game at all?

It's got a totally new AI system, and a brand new core engine that's worlds above DoW's.

[hillhome]

Not only a Beta, in the Gamespot interview there is also a demo mentioned as well. Just in case you need to try it first... I'm not sure why you'd need to but at least that will be there as well.

[Mogolov]

no mention of when though i take it?

[hillhome]

The demo and beta are just things they'd like to do sometime soon, but no word on what "soon" means.

[immortal44]

ust in case you need to try it first... I'm not sure why you'd need to but at least that will be there as well.

How about because the full version won't be out?? ;)

[Tranj]

Still waiting to hear from Someguy about skirmirsh :)

Would be great to play both Axis and Allies against AI :argh:
You will be able to play skirmish as both Axis and Allies against the AI in several different gameply modes.


This has nothing to do with revolution, this is basically DoW in WW2 with some more junk added. But that sure is a ton of junk and everybody's bound to find something he or she likes! ;)
The game really has almost zero DoW code in it. While some of the core "RTS" mechanics are shared, CoH is new in almost every way. Remember that CoH was started at the same time that DoW was.

[Busby]

Wow... Relic pulled (is pulling?) a double job, and the quality, thats pretty impressive.

[Maximus Decimus]

How about that high res 15min gameplay demo Tranj? :agree:

[Mogolov]

CoH was started the SAME time as DoW?


Wow. Sounds like an immense amount of work has gone into this. Can.Only.Await.It's.Arrival.

26th september would be nice, thats my birthday. ;)

[Killer Of Many]

Me thinks itll be before september. Argh1#!#@!?#! i cant wait :juggle: :jig: :king: :dunce: :notlisten :notlisten Tranj eta on the demo? Need to something to satisfy me while i wait for the game

[A ok]

the game is like actual warfare , but more interesting . And its the first rts to do this.

i think the game is going to rock .

Although i wish they were not put in the WW 2 era . ( cause there have been over a million games out there that that are based on WW2). and the point of 2 teams is kinda ugly.

[Mogolov]

I just hope that relic take on the idea of WW3 and use the same engines to make an absolute stormer of a WW3 version. Russia & China Vs Europe & the US.

[Trizzdog]

Wow, the feature list has made me wet myself....

... with drool. I'm almost drowning in it. I mean, DC and CoH... really Relic, you guys are too much. ;)

[TheBladeRoden]

I still have nightmares about that attribute editor :shudder:

[Someguy]

This has nothing to do with revolution, this is basically DoW in WW2 with some more junk added. But that sure is a ton of junk and everybody's bound to find something he or she likes! ;)

Maybe you should sit down and play with it before saying Company of Heroes is Dawn of War 2 but with Allies and Axis. For one, the game is more focused on capturing sectors on the map. This is important because you can get cut off from your resources on the map. Tactics also play a huge role in the game. Can't blow up a tank head on? Why not go and flank it from behind since the game features locational armor.

The COH Multiplayer demo showed off how important tactics will be as well as unit/building placement.

[Soldier of Dest]

*read Tranj's post*

Weeeeeeeeeeeeee :dance:
Now, minutes are as long as hours for me :crazy:

[LoneWolf666]

I was actually speaking about CoH following a path set by DoW (squads of infantry, strategic areas) than saying CoH is based on DoW...


It's got a totally new AI system, and a brand new core engine that's worlds above DoW's.

And that's revolutionary in what way? It doesn't change the principles of the game, you still command these guys. They are not lambs anymore, that's for sure, but it is evolution, not revolution.


Maybe you should sit down and play with it before saying Company of Heroes is Dawn of War 2 but with Allies and Axis.

I never said that. I said that CoH is expanding on the concepts first shown in DoW and adding some stuff in, like destructible environments or combat experience.

[DatonKallandor]

And you've been proven wrong by the fact that CoH and DoW were started at the same time.


Daton

[LoneWolf666]

And you've been proven wrong by the fact that CoH and DoW were started at the same time.

Still, it's not revolutionary. And it's not like the game mechanics are set in stone right after the development began. If the DoW system failed, CoH would introduce another one. Fortunately, DoW proved to be one of the best RTS games of all time, so Relic could easily proceed with it in CoH, knowing it already proved itself.

Anyway, we're getting off-topic here, so let's not derail this thread any further. ;)

[PuGGy]

Am I the only one worried about the fact that someguy had to 'micromanage' granades on his squad? I don't like the idea of being able to kill superior numbers of enemies through micromanagement... wasn't the idea of this game to get rid o that?

[Tesla]

i am a bit worried about that, but i guess that we will all see it when it comes out

[LoneWolf666]

The idea behind the game is not playing it for you, it's making it easier to play while rewarding those with micro skills, like in any RTS game. Still, it's also well-made, you just cilick to throw a grenade, then on the building and your troops throw the grenade right into a windo with a MG in it. It's not like you have to select which window to throw the grenade in. ;)

[Tesla]

if every squad has greanades it would be hard to manage when u have more than a couple of squads at the front, meaning that it might be more rewardins to put forward a few mirco managed squads than just unloeasing hell and not being able to manage all of them

[Druidika]

Someguy, how did troop recruiting / reinforcing and base building work in the multiplayer games you played?

[LoneWolf666]

And how does "reinforcing buildings" to make them production buildings looks like? And what if every single building on the map is crushed? No more unit production?

[Borriesz]

That's a good question! I was already wondering if a factory for example, that creates a tank, will look like those 'old' factorys with those big chimney's on top of the roofs? What I do like is the HUD, its perfect.

Therefore I still got some points of critic:

1) The shiny green lines, and the bright colored red lines I don't like so much, hope you can adjust that to own taste;
2) Bullets shooting trough a tank, planes flying trough buildings, Units don't using destroyed tanks as cover.. all just pre-beta?;
3) Whats the thing right to the Smart-map? Its round-shaped and fills with red color, this reminds me of Age of Empires III, NOT a good point. This means this thing fills up while you gain xp, and then you get a bonus of be able to 'summon' extra units? Don't hope so, this will screw the realistic balance then..

For sure I'm just so goddamnded worried that Relic announced a game that should be the first game in my life to be so cool, but maybe they screw it, like Activision did with Call of Duty 2.. I beg you, make this game worth the waiting!

[Tesla]

um real war generals called for reinforcements, thats basicly what its doing here, calling in paratroops ect

[Corsix]

Beta? Where? When? I want in!

[PuGGy]

I think borries has a good point... this game should be really cool, and its suppsoed to be really realistic, but still you get people standing right next to each other and not killing each other.

It will still be a great game, and i hope somebody can convince me that all these things are really an issue

[Maximus Decimus]

Still, it's not revolutionary.

You are defending a lost point. The only similarity the two games might have is capturing points instead of farming resources but hey then you could say its like Ground Control II as well. Next, I cannot find one RTS that has implemented real world tactics into gameplay with the addition of no HP stats, completely destructable environments, self sufficient AI, and supply lines. All these come together to make it like no other RTS that has come before it and if that is the case then it is indeed a revolutionary game as its transforming how we think of the RTS genre. I would like you to support your argument that it is DoW 1.5 or 2 specifically with blatant similarities and so on. CoH is as much DoW as it is GCII.

[Soldier of Dest]

I agree with [/url]Maximus Decimus :nod:[url="http://member.php?u=11652"] (http://member.php?u=11652)

[Tesla]

man that entire speach just wants me to have this game MORE! adadhdah!

[DatonKallandor]

Whats the thing right to the Smart-map? Its round-shaped and fills with red color, this reminds me of Age of Empires III, NOT a good point. This means this thing fills up while you gain xp, and then you get a bonus of be able to 'summon' extra units? Don't hope so, this will screw the realistic balance then..

Thats the exp meter. You unlock higher tiers in your tech tree (airborne, armor, infantry) with it.


this game should be really cool, and its suppsoed to be really realistic, but still you get people standing right next to each other and not killing each other.

No it is not. Relic said right from day one that its supposed to be AUTHENTIC not realistic. Fun comes before realism - always.


Daton

[LoneWolf666]

it is indeed a revolutionary game as its transforming how we think of the RTS genre.

... Do you build bases? Yes? Units? Yes? You buy upgrades? Yes? Use special abilities like grenades? Yes? Collect resources? Yes? And do we get tons of new stuff in addition? Yes. All you have mentioned, everything, is hardly revolutionary, it's simply another step forward in the RTS genre.


I would like you to support your argument that it is DoW 1.5 or 2 specifically with blatant similarities and so on.

My point was more like "CoH is simply another RTS" than "OMG it's DoW!!1". One of the things I view as a true revolution is the multiplayer "live together, die together" system. I don't remember any RTS game having respawning players and it will change the player "gang up on one player and move on to the next" mentality. However:


no HP stats, completely destructable environments, self sufficient AI, and supply lines.

Supplies were introduced in Rise of Nations and the AI is NOT self-sufficient, just cleverer, taking away some micro, but certainly not changing your role as a commander, just making it more enjoyable. The completely destructible environments are truly unique and will help make the battles less repetetive and introduce more tactical choices. As for the no hp feature, it remains to be seen if it is really so, because from what I've seen on the trailers, looks like soldiers do have hit points, and they cannot be shot until that value reaches 0 (I base this theory on the inability of a german rifle squad to hit a bazooka soldier standing a meter away with no cover at all). But I may be very wrong in this.

So this game basically gives players more tactical choices and takes away some micro to actually give us time to plan our next move. It isn't a revolution and this is my real point. Now let's keep it civil or this thread will get locked.

[DatonKallandor]

Do you build bases? Yes?

No you don't. You garrison buildings already present on the map.


Collect resources? Yes?

No. You don't "collect" resources in the bogstandard RTS sense. You capture sectors which provide resources if a supply line to the HQ is present.


Daton

[Someguy]

Someguy, how did troop recruiting / reinforcing and base building work in the multiplayer games you played?

Base building is basically like any other RTS. Recruiting is done through unit-producing buildings however reinforcing can only be done when the squad is standing close by either your own buildings or the unit producing ones(I don't remember because I never had the time to reinforce my squad. I let them die. )

[Tesla]

live together die together is seeming to me like it might be like GC2, were if u have no units u can order som basic infanry units that apear of the side of the map if u have som resourses still avalible, and with the way the game works it seems that defence will be a lot more producive than attack, (cover making a big differnence, being able to build cover, destory there cover so they ahve to charge into a trench like thing) i think it would probaly be hard to knock out a player anyway

[Someguy]

Am I the only one worried about the fact that someguy had to 'micromanage' granades on his squad? I don't like the idea of being able to kill superior numbers of enemies through micromanagement... wasn't the idea of this game to get rid o that?

The only micromanaging i did was telling the guys to throw out grenades once the timer recharged. Plus I had the advantage of cover and height. Now that you mentioned it, I'm not sure if the AI is designed to move away from grenades when it hits the floor since there is a 1 second delay before it exploded though when the grenade is arching towards you, you can tell your troops to run in a different direction.

[Tesla]

actuly my favoret part of a rts game is watching the battle, i find that when i watch a replay of a game i find i notice so much more than when i was playing it, though it is fustratng not being able to command the men in the replay (this probaly makes no scence) but im realy looking forward to giving the men the orders to attack, and locations to then doing som minor micromanagement *grenades ect* and watching the battle play out, i think this is also gd for the scinematic feel, for u will be consintrating more on the battle and enjoying it, rather on running one squad away from another *ok bad example*

[LoneWolf666]

No you don't. You garrison buildings already present on the map.

You also build MG nests, deploy sandbags etc. I think I recall something about makeshift bases, though that could be just garrisoned buildings.


No. You don't "collect" resources in the bogstandard RTS sense. You capture sectors which provide resources if a supply line to the HQ is present.

Done in DoW and GC2.

Are we through now? :D

Hey Someguy, may I ask you about base-building? I've seen a button on one of the videos that served to choose builder units. What types of buildings do we actually make ourselves? Only static defences?

[Tesla]

actuly i wonder how this game will deal with leavers, with live together die together it seems almost imposable for somone to stand alone vs 2 other guys

[Someguy]

Hey Someguy, may I ask you about base-building? I've seen a button on one of the videos that served to choose builder units. What types of buildings do we actually make ourselves? Only static defences?
Hey Wolfy!
Buildings that you get to build range from barracks/vehicle bays for producing infanty/vehicles. Engineer units can build these. They can also build sandbags, tanktraps, mines, and barbed wire. Axis can build multipurpose bunkers that you can upgrade with a machine gun or repair vehicle abilities and a medic station in the bunker. Allied are a little different, they can build observation posts(with a medic station upgrade) that give them more resources when built by an resource point. They can also build a MG nest that has a limited firing arc(it looked like a 90 degree wide arc).

I recall that axis riflemen can build only bunkers while Allied troops can build observation posts.

If I remember right, you can also convert a garrisoned building into a unit-producing building.

[LoneWolf666]

That's some excellent news! Thanks, Someguy!

Personally, I'm looking forward to creating defensive positions using lots of sandbags and barbed wire... ;)

[Tesla]

w00t that means that if u go full defencive u can make WW1 style gameplay, gimmi!

[Mogolov]

I prefer intense urban battles, lots of streetfighting.

[Someguy]

w00t that means that if u go full defencive u can make WW1 style gameplay, gimmi!
You could do that but it makes you horribly vulerable from mortar and artillery strikes.

[LoneWolf666]

Is it possible to tell your infantry inside a building to lay low, so the enemy doesn't know your troops are inside unless he enters it? Imagine having 2 squads of riflemen with bazookas in 2 houses on both sides of the street, hiding. Then a german patrol comes by and goes between the two houses, unsuspecting of an ambush. You then click 1 button and your soldiers rush to the windows and unleash hell on the troops below. It would add a cool element to the game.

[Maximus Decimus]

Do you build bases? Yes? Units? Yes? You buy upgrades? Yes? Use special abilities like grenades? Yes? Collect resources? Yes? And do we get tons of new stuff in addition? Yes. All you have mentioned, everything, is hardly revolutionary, it's simply another step forward in the RTS genre.

That my friend is a game classed under the RTS genre. When we speak of "revolutionary" steps we arent talking about turning a turtle into a pink flamingo, we're talking about significant advancement in the RTS genre.


Supplies were introduced in Rise of Nations and the AI is NOT self-sufficient, just cleverer, taking away some micro, but certainly not changing your role as a commander, just making it more enjoyable.

I have Rise of Nations. There is no such thing as a "supply line" or being cut off. If you have a supply truck with you then your army does not suffer health degen in enemy territory. I would hardly call that supply lines at all nor can you infiltrate behind enemy lines and cripple those supply lines because they simply do not exist.

Supply Line: a route over which supplies can be delivered

The AI takes away the majority of the micro management. You are confusing micro management and macro management. No longer do you have to babysit your troops tell them to move to cover A and "dance". However, you still implement manoeuvres and other tactical functions along with strategic functions. The emphasis is placed on macro management instead of micro management ala Warcraft. I cant name one RTS that has AI such as this. Ai that seeks out cover and utilizes it without input. AI that also takes advantage of the environment without input such as the blown hole in the house example at IGN.

Next, PCGAMER featured CoH in 2005 explained that there is no HP system in CoH. All damage is locational meaning if a soldier is hit in the leg he wont go down, hit in the head well hes dead.

You describe CoH as just another RTS meaning its your normal RTS with a few tweaks here and there. Lets look at the definitions and see which fits better

Revolution: a drastic and far-reaching change in ways of thinking and behaving
Normal: The usual or expected state, form, amount, or degree

I argue that Company of Heroes is not your normal RTS with a few tweaks here and there. Having taken a look at all the features that CoH is bringing to the forefront one has to conclude that it must be the former over the latter and we aren't arguing semantics here either as I assume you imply CoH is pretty similar to CnC, WCIII, RoN, DoW, save for a few interesting twists. The fundemental core of this game which is environmental damage (manipulate battlefield to gain the advantage) and no HP (cant dance units, cant retreat as per the norm) changes how one goes about conducting strategy entirely.

I hope I'm not coming off hostile or derogatory as I'd say this is a valid and civil discussion.

[Tesla]

i suppose if u had acurate scouting you could arty there artys, though how does scouting work in this game, so far its all about front lines and flanking, is there any abilitys/skills that alow you to see whats going on behind lines (apart from airborne)

[Mogolov]

I would assume your snipers have a far greater visual range than most infantry types or you may have spotter planes that come along and show you what awaits.

[Tesla]

thats a gd point i had fogoten about snipers, in that HD video u see a blue bar on the units control, im guessing that might be a moral bar, will the same thing happen on DoW when moral goes to 0 (if it is moral). or maby it will be supresion, and the way the A.I works depends on how 'supresed' it is

[Someguy]

i suppose if u had acurate scouting you could arty there artys, though how does scouting work in this game, so far its all about front lines and flanking, is there any abilitys/skills that alow you to see whats going on behind lines (apart from airborne)

I didn't get to see all of the different tech tree paths for the Axis. For Allies, they get an air recon ability.

[LoneWolf666]

There is no such thing as a "supply line" or being cut off.

Artillery in RoN fires at half it's RoF when not in supply. The way in which you supply you units is different, there you need to be on your territory or near a supply truck and in CoH you must control a chain of sectors, but the concept already was introduced. And you could cut off the enemy's supplies by destroying his supply trucks.

I still argue that CoH is in no way a revolution, as destructible terrain and greater unit mortality rate is hardly a revolution. It won't change the gameplay drastically, just add a few interesting twists to the outcome of each battle.

For units micromanaging themselves, we still have to manage their reinforcement and special abilities, all they do is seek cover. It's an evolutionary change. If the soldiers approached a building, ecountered an MG, spread out, fall back, call a sniper to take out the mg and radio you for an airstrike, that would be revolutionary, a VERY drastic change.

On the whole "no hp" topic, it doesn't change anything. Sure, it will no longer be possible to grind a tank with machine gun fire, but it already was implemented in Codename Panzers and still it played fairly ordinarily, as it is better to focus you small arms fire on infantry anyway. In the same game, you had to flank tanks if you hoped to win some of the harder missions, shooting the front of a Tiger with a Sherman had little to no effect. It's all about positioning troops, nothing "revolutionary" here. In some games, it pays to have a high ground, in others, it pays to have melee troops closer to the enemy than the rest and in CoH, it pays to have your tanks on your enemies' flanks.

As for manipulating the battlefield, I'll admit that it can make a difference, like having your base surrounded by walls no longer makes it safe (although c&c series has it) and that you can place your own cover on the map (though RoN had entrenching) or make new routes (in w3 you can bombard woods to cut paths).


I hope I'm not coming off hostile or derogatory as I'd say this is a valid and civil discussion.

(Valid and civil, yes, but off-topic.. ;))

[Tranj]

You also build MG nests, deploy sandbags etc. I think I recall something about makeshift bases, though that could be just garrisoned buildings.



Done in DoW and GC2.

Are we through now? :D

Hey Someguy, may I ask you about base-building? I've seen a button on one of the videos that served to choose builder units. What types of buildings do we actually make ourselves? Only static defences?
Bases are built, but not in the grandiose empire sense. You build small frontline buildings using either you engineers (Allies) or Pioneers (Axis). These include both light and heavy armor, basic barracks and support weapon barracks. This is an example of one area where we take the "fun" route over the real one. You can also build units from garrisoned buildings that you have upgraded to either barracks or factories (later requires special type of building).

[Starfisher]

Lone, you must be missing some major part of the definition of "revolutionary".

CoH's terrain destruction alone is revolutionary - it's a major change in the way an RTS will be played. No RTS that I'm aware of has allowed you to completely alter the landscape and buildings in the way that CoH purports to. This in itself is going to change the way the game is played immensely.

Add in AI capable of handling this and the other little things and it adds up to a completely new RTS experience - a revolution.

Seriously, your logic would make all revolutions in history nothing more than "minor changes" because all the components that made them up existed in some form before the actual event. Revolutions are just big changes. They don't need utterly unique components to create major change - they just need to change enough that it becomes a significant overall difference in the way things work.

[Mogolov]

i think this is certainly revolutionary, just look at the HD clip that was posted, you can see where the flames are shooting out of the shermans barrel and as loose fire hits the floor, smoke rises straight up.

Tell me the last RTS that would have that much indepth detail.

I also noted at the start of the clip, the left hand panther, watch how as its hit, bits and pieces fly off before it gets blown well and truly.


Its almost a work of art.

[retroholyfire]

Lone the features that you pointed out that make Coh not revolutionary were also in command and conquer. Now are you saying company of heroes and command and conquer are the same with just a few minor changes?

[immortal44]

The dynamic battlefield and squad ai are revolutionary. They change how the game and hopefully the genre will be played. The rest seems like evolution, but more like 3 steps forward than 1 step. I particuarly like the idea of controlling sectors and supply lines, garrisoning buildings etc to set up defences. I don't think that any of us can disagree that this is looking to be the most significant leap forward in the genre for years. Along with supreme commander this is the next gen of rts.

[NovaBurn]

lone is making nothing but rash grandiose assumptions about what to expect with the game and that they are nothing special. We all know the basic concepts of RTS' and what to except. What Relic is doing with CoH is going for the realism aspect that most other RTS don't aim for as much. Destructable terrain, supply line type territory control, etc the game is going to be revolutionary because other RTS' don't have that level of detail.

Also i badgered someguy to ask the directx 9/10 related question. WHich is good to hear because he also just mentioned in IM that the game will support 64-bit and dual-core processors. One nice reason to go to DX10 is that the graphical rendering will be a lot faster and be overall prettier with the new DX10 extentions.

[Mogolov]

Excellent stuff, i dont suppose he mentioned anything about dual monitor support at all?

Would be awsum on my two 19" screens.

[xtc-alec]

Was that demo at E3....or...can we play it now!?!?!

[Mogolov]

beta will be first i think mate, tranj said they would release it when the date is more solid.

Think beta will be advertised here.

[vsc714]

Awesome, I can't wait for the beta to be announced. Also on the subject about CoH being revolutionary, it is most definitely revolutionary with, as said before, the new and advanced intelligent AI, concept of, "live together, die together," no more HP, and destructable environments that changes the tactical gameplay. I've never been so obsessed and crazy about any game as much as with CoH, really can't wait for it to come out.

[immortal44]

Would be awsum on my two 19" screens.

Will be awesome on my dell 30 inch ;)

[Tesla]

hopefuly will be playable on my 2.2 GhZ, 768MB of ram and a G-force FX 5500 (goes outside and prays)

[Someguy]

Excellent stuff, i dont suppose he mentioned anything about dual monitor support at all?

Would be awsum on my two 19" screens.
heh you sure you weren't thinking about supreme commander's dual monitor support?

I have no idea regarding that question =P

[LoneWolf666]

No RTS that I'm aware of has allowed you to completely alter the landscape and buildings in the way that CoH purports to. This in itself is going to change the way the game is played immensely.

Being a long-time PC player I heard all sorts of awesome ideas that basically turned out to be nothing special when they came out. Yes, we can change the landscape. It looks real good, too. But I would advise caution when saying this will completely change the way RTS games are played, unless it plays an immense role in battlefield tactics.


i think this is certainly revolutionary, just look at the HD clip that was posted, you can see where the flames are shooting out of the shermans barrel and as loose fire hits the floor, smoke rises straight up.

Tell me the last RTS that would have that much indepth detail.

We're discussing gameplay mechanics, not eye candy.


The dynamic battlefield and squad ai are revolutionary. They change how the game and hopefully the genre will be played.

The squad AI is an addition, not revolution. They don't make decisions on their own, they run for cover and have very good targeting priorities, that's about it.

If anything is a drastic change here, it's, IMHO, the multiplayer concept.

[Tesla]

right we should all stop this now, people stop aguing with lone wolf, and wolf stop arguing back, its deepressing me that we are all looking at what looks like a realy fun game and arguing if its a revelution or not, personaly i dont care, it looks fun.

BTW. Must...HAVE....BeTa!!!!

[Busby]

Changing the landscape does effect the game. Blow a hole in a wall of a building, and infantry will recognize it and ever avoid it, or use it as a firing position.

[Worf]

No more revolutionary arguements please. Keep questioning Someguy here to squeeze more information out of Tranj :)

[retroholyfire]

how will fighting within buildings work?

[Someguy]

how will fighting within buildings work?
Question is kinda general. But Do you mean Allied and Axis troops fighting in a building? Mosquiera said that there will be no in-building fighting. Main reason is that you can't even see the action going on in there.

[LoneWolf666]

If there is no in-building fighting, then we cannot storm a building with infantry and have to clear it out with grenades? :(

[retroholyfire]

Ah that sucks. I really wanted to see up close and personal fighting inside buildings. Can you send troops into a building occupied by the enemy then and just hope they clear it or is it impossible to send troops into buildings occupied by the enemy?

[Dys]

In the video I saw that when the cursor moved over buildings the buildings got a highligting box around them, I guess buildings can be 'occupied' by squads and the only way to get the squads out of em would be to blow the buildings up or set them on fire (smoke 'em out :O ??).

Oh yeah but I also saw that the flame tank actually tried to burn each individual soldier at the window of the building that they were occupying, ie it was shooting each individual soldier and not 'burning the building down'

[Someguy]

Oh yeah but I also saw that the flame tank actually tried to burn each individual soldier at the window of the building that they were occupying, ie it was shooting each individual soldier and not 'burning the building down'
Flame tanks are the best on infantry and garrisoned units. The reason why those burnings didn't burn down was because they were made of brick. If they were made of wood, that would be a different story. Relic talked a lot about how building material has different properties that affects the gameaply.

[LoneWolf666]

You mean wooden houses actually burn down are fall apart easier than the rest? Sounds like fun! :D

I hope you won't mind a few more questions... :D How many tank upgrades have you actually seen and what special branch abilities were shown except the 4 shown on the movie (strafing run, recon airplane, rocket run and "battalion shot")?

[Someguy]

I hope you won't mind a few more questions... :D How many tank upgrades have you actually seen and what special branch abilities were shown except the 4 shown on the movie (strafing run, recon airplane, rocket run and "battalion shot")?
Tank upgrades I didn't get to see.

You can branch off to 3 different ability trees(Allies and Axis have different ones). The ones shown with the paratroopers, air recon, etc. were from the Allies airborne tree. I don't know any stuff other than that.

[Tacit]

There were a couple of minor errors in Someguy's report...

- The control points in sectors don't actually give you the resources. They are simply the mechanism you use to take control of a sector. The conceit we're using is that control of actual physical territory (a finite, delineated space) justifies your off-map commanders supplying you with additional manpower, munitions, and fuel with which to get more troops, vehicles, and upgrades/abilities. The important distrinction here is that the SECTOR is what's important. And there are other benefits to capturing and securing territory, ex: you can only build defenses in territory you control.

- The three resources are Manpower (primary purpose: building squads), Munitions (primary purpose: purchasing upgrades and using abilities), and Fuel (primary purpose: unlocking technology and building vehicles).

- The tech info provided was actually from a senior graphics programmer. Our lead programmer was not at E3.

[Someguy]

There were a couple of minor errors in Someguy's report...
I'm the fail :/

[n0z3k1ll3r]

- The three resources are Manpower (primary purpose: building squads), Munitions (primary purpose: purchasing upgrades and using abilities), and Fuel (primary purpose: unlocking technology and building vehicles).So to overgeneralise horribly, Manpower is sort of like Dawn of War's requisition and Fuel is sort of like Dawn of War's power?

[vsc714]

I wonder when the website for CoH will be online. I think its just a bit like DoW, at least the concept of capturing, "strategic point," but its with sectors instead. Only just a tad bit though, but I really like the new supply lines and sectors concept of gaining resources and supplying your army. Definitely much more strategy is needed in this game to keep your army from being depleted of ammunition or fuel.

[LoneWolf666]

- The control points in sectors don't actually give you the resources. They are simply the mechanism you use to take control of a sector.

But isn't taking the control point equal to capturing the sector? ;)

[Tiresias]

*huggles Someguy*

[Starfisher]

But isn't taking the control point equal to capturing the sector?
Apparently not, according to Tacit. It's a similiar mechanic, but the implementation and effects are a wee bit different.

[Worf]

Thanks for the clarification Tacit :)
So does this mean when I capture a territory I don't find like 1000 fuel but my fuel income gets higher because I control another sector, indeed like requisiton in DoW?

And noze: I don't think it's like power, because there is no building you can destroy to stop the income.

Don't you worry Someguy, we depended on you for new info!

[Riess]

That's an interesting thing though.. Is it possible to destroy resources? Like, if I bomb a fuel sector flat, does it still produce fuel?

Very nice report, SG. Never mind the errors. ;)

[LoneWolf666]

That's an interesting thing though.. Is it possible to destroy resources? Like, if I bomb a fuel sector flat, does it still produce fuel?

It isn't, because you don't get supplies from this sector, the HQ sends you those. A bombed sector is still captured terrain, so you still get more resources. However, you can INCREASE the income by fortifying a sector by building defensive structures, as this means you have a stronger grip on the area. Command values you higher that way and sends more goodies. :D

It's not like you get ammo because you have captured a munitions depot/factory. Even if the sector is empty, you will still get something from controlling it because all resources come from off-map.

[Demon_Eyes]

Hehe, normally I make a 200 word essertation and I get 10 words back, I make a 10 word observation and get 1000 words back in debate over my observation? Maybe I should stick to shorter posts. ;)

Anyways, I suppose I am chimming in a little late in the thread but just wanted to say LoneWolf is right and so am I. Some parts of the game are deffinately not revolutionary, some are even plain standard in some senses. Supply lines and capturable buildings are not new, though supply lines are extremely rare in RTS titles and capturable buildings are not common elements either though more common than supply. While the resource construct appears to be more evolutionary from the dawn of war resource model, it is still unique and does bear a pattern more similar to The Outfit than it does DoW.

Where we get in to revolutionary is, as was said previously, with the destroyable terrain and unit AI and how these two aspects interact with gameplay and eachother. The premise is that units will react to situations with the given options at their disposal to complete player commands, this in and of itself is unique to the RTS genre where units require constant babysitting/micromanagment. This combined with the way the AI interact with the destructable terrain in more than a superficial manner by making the battlefields dynamic and decreasing the predictability of games.

Overall I would say that the game appears revolutionary because the most unique part of the game is the core component, while more droll aspects of the game such as resources and production have kept a more evolutionary path to provide a familar and stable base to introduce this core concept. In short it appears to be a new take on combat with refined standard aspects, hopefully making for an incredibly fun and dynamic game that is more accessable than typical micromanagment RTS titles while retaining familiar yet unique resource management. In reality however, it is simply my opinion and could change or be made defunct when we see the retail release of the game.

[Starfisher]

...

So, you agree that it actually is a revolutionary game, due to the introduction of elements that are so far and beyond what every other title has had to date that the gameplay may be significantly changed?

If not, you're not understanding the definition of revolutionary. This isn't the introduction of something blindingly new and unique - that's never happened, ever, in any aspect of history. Revolutions, instead of the introduction of utterly new things, are simply a culmination and refinement of past ideas to a point where they change the way something is done. The American revolution, for example, would not be called a revolution based on your logic, despite it changing the way things were done. Nor would the Protestant Revolution, despite it shaking the world.

CoH isn't anywhere on par with those events, of course, but to say, "oh, it's nothing new" is just faulty reasoning. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and the whole is the revolution - not the parts.

[Demon_Eyes]

That is exactly what I said but with the addative when looking at a piece item by item you can identify a individual item uniquely. That is why the first paragraph might appear contradictory in nature to the rest. I am stating, if you look at the individual pieces lonewolf has a point, but the core component (combat) is the radical change, the revolutionary piece. I thought that was pretty clear ;)

[hillhome]

The main difference in "strategic points" I see between CoH and DoW is that in CoH holding the territories actually has a strategic purpose. In DoW it doesn't usually have any strategic importance, I mean it gets your more req but... does having three points right by your initial stronghold building imply any kind of "strategic value"?

Whereas what I see in CoH is that it is more about controlling and holding territory, sort of like a game of Axis and Allies or Risk would be. The more territory you hold the more resources are given to your particular sector of the war effort by the unseen high commands.

It would be cool if you could use the airborne powers to "resupply" a group that has been "cut off" from the line by a supply route being severed. That happened a couple of different times in WW 2 and of course in Berlin after that war was over. I doubt that will be possible but it would be a neat option to have. (Edit: Any word on whether this is possible Someguy? Tranj? Anyone?)

As I see it CoH is more about strategy and Dawn of War is more about tactics. For the most part tactics take care of themselves through the AI in CoH (or so it would seem). However, we will all just have to wait for a beta or a SP demo to see how it plays for ourselves. I'm pretty psyched about the things I read and see about this game so I hope it lives up to the hype it has created.

[LoneWolf666]

As I see it CoH is more about strategy and Dawn of War is more about tactics.

You control roughly the same amount of units as in DoW and maps seem only a bit larger. It's still tactical combat. Also:


does having three points right by your initial stronghold building imply any kind of "strategic value"?

Holding a sector full of burned down rubble isn't much more valuable either. :D



It would be cool if you could use the airborne powers to "resupply" a group that has been "cut off" from the line by a supply route being severed. That happened a couple of different times in WW 2 and of course in Berlin after that war was over. I doubt that will be possible but it would be a neat option to have.

A VERY nice idea, coulld be a benefit of choosing the Airborne branch. After all, these guys would often land behind enemy lines, so some kind of supplying their lone sector should be provided.

[Maximus Decimus]

You control roughly the same amount of units as in DoW and maps seem only a bit larger. It's still tactical combat.

Just wondering where you got that info from? I heard it was company level, 100-200 troops, where as in DoW the races have nowhere near that number. However, using the new supply line gameplay there is plenty of strategy as you conduct operations to cut off the enemy forward positions. As flanking and garrisoning buildings/territories is emphasized more strategic elements come into play. It should also be said that the only real strategy game i have ever seen is either from the total war series, Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, TA, or Supreme Commander.

Most RTS games are usually real time tactical games with strategic elements that come in to play when selected forces, base construction, and so forth.

[Worf]

*cough*
I said: no more talk on revolutions please. Discuss what we have on the game. Next one ignoring my directions gets slapped with warnings...

[Maximus Decimus]

A question to Someguy, did you get to see how exactly medics work in the game?

[Someguy]

A question to Someguy, did you get to see how exactly medics work in the game?
nope.

[Tacit]

But isn't taking the control point equal to capturing the sector? ;)
At a high level, yes, but there is a semantic distinction worth making.

[immortal44]

I heard it was company level, 100-200 troops

I doubt it is important but a unit =/= a troop. I don't think it is meant to be taken literally, just as an example to show that like DoW it will focus on smaller scale combat. Also remember that we will very likely be able to edit the caps anyway.

Sounds good that the maps are larger. Unforunately it doesn't sound like I'll be able to do unlimited caps on a battlefield similar of similar size to half scale in DoW. Then again, maybe you wouldn't want to with the detail that will exist in this game.


Most RTS games are usually real time tactical games with strategic elements

I would argue that many don't require tactics at all, and those that do require tactics tend to be hero/special abilities over conventional tactics (like flanking, high ground etc).


plenty of strategy as you conduct operations to cut off the enemy forward positions. As flanking and garrisoning buildings/territories is emphasized more strategic elements come into play

Definately, and finally. I hope the AI will be able to handle it. A frontline, reinforcements to reinforce frontline/protect supply line, be able to position defences (MG nests, barbed wire, sandbags etc) and defensive forces (occupy building flanking a chokepoint etc) intelligently.

Sounds like an awesome game for a rainy day. Guess I'll be moving to the tropics for monsoon season ;)

About basebuilding. Are units actually produced from the building or appear as reinforcements at the edge of the map? Can you build multiples of the same building to reinforce/produce faster? Can these buildings be built anywhere in your territory?

My only worry about the game right now is that we'll be able to building a ton of barracks/factories near the frontline and mass produce units from that location. This is why I don't like base building but I have no idea how it is being handled in the game which is why I'm asking ;)

[Tesla]

i think they spawn from the building but can only be built in sectors you control and are not being contested for i think, so that logicly they would have been able to move up to the position

[retroholyfire]

I heard it was company level, 100-200 troops, where as in DoW the races have nowhere near that number. IG could get 10 squads of kasrkins (10x9) that is 90 troops then you can get 3 commies, 3 priests, 3 psykers, assassin and CS. that adds up to either 101 or 105 depending on if u count the CS as 1 or 5 :D

[immortal44]

Talking about size of battles is pretty much irrelevent as the caps will on doubt be modifiable. I've had battles where there have been thousands of troops on the battlefield at the same time :rolleyes:

[Mogolov]

thats what we need for multiplayer, massive huge maps where we can effectively have battalion or regimental sized fights that could last for hours!!:D

[vsc714]

Mmmm yesss I can see it now, soldiers dying by the thousands from artillery and airstrikes. Wounded being carried off the battlefield by medics desperately trying to avoid the crossfire, BUT WAIT, 3 Tigers ambush from all sides picking off the medics and the retreating, and then OH NOES the US Rangers come in with reinforcements charging in and ambushing the tank putting sticky mines on the TIger and airborne dropping in behind the Germans OMG ITS MAHEM, and then German reinforcements come with MG42's and officers armed with STG's come running out into the streets throwing grenades and garrisoning buildings with their MG42's blasting away BUT WAIT a squad of rangers find their way through and throw a satchel charge OMG Will it EVER enD1/!? And then out of nowhere a giant Hitler Robot comes out of nowhere because someone put that on the end of the German Infantry tech tree as suggested by Daton and destroys everything including himself. The End.

[Soldier of Dest]

I think there will be as many troops size mods as there are for Dawn of War (if CoH has mod support)

[Lochar]

Talking about casualties, how was this handled? Do they auto replenish? Need to move back to base to get reinforced? Medics?

[DatonKallandor]

Medic can rescue the wounded (you can see them squirming around in the HD video). You can reinforce at your base.


Daton

[immortal44]

I think there will be as many troops size mods as there are for Dawn of War (if CoH has mod support)

If you mean scaling (like Half Size mod), it would be awkward without rescaling things like buildings, vegetation etc so it will probally be alot more work.

Someguy, when you say 'the maps seem a bit bigger than DoW' I assume you mean 512x512??

Imagine a half scale mod on a 1024x1024 map with no caps...

[Lochar]

Medic can rescue the wounded (you can see them squirming around in the HD video). You can reinforce at your base.


Daton

Where are you getting this info? I havent seen much on medics yet and the only reference I've seen is they mention withdrawing in 1 interview to recover.

[Starfisher]

There was a german language interview published a while back. Daton happens to be german.

The lucky [bleep] ;)

[vsc714]

Maybe medics heal up the wounded at the battlefield and don't have to drag them back to base. Either that or maybe they keep them alive until you can get like a transport to get them back to base to heal up. But I'm guessing most likely it'll probably be on the field of battle maybe, though it would be kind of strange seeing these guys on the floor wounded come up fine a few moments later and fight again. I don't know maybe Tranj or Tacit can help out answer this one.

[Soldier of Dest]

There was a german language interview published a while back. Daton happens to be german.

The lucky [bleep] ;)

Confirmed. I read something like that too (I'm coming from Germany) :heyhey:

[DatonKallandor]

Medics bring the wounded back to the base (based on Relics reserach: "only 10% of soldiers actually died") for healing. Wheter or not they are availible again or if you get a resource boost is unknown.


Daton

[vsc714]

I'm hoping the same soldiers that you rescued would be put back into battle because of their experienced gained and if say a high ranking officer gets wounded I would like to patch him up and put him back into the fight because I wouldn't want to lose that high rank officer. Hopefully thats how it would work I'm not sure.

[DatonKallandor]

Exp gets passed onto the rest of the squad when the expirienced people die.



Daton

[Bonnet]

This game makes me so hot...

[vsc714]

I bet this game makes me more hot than it does yoUUUUU, haha yea really can't wait for it.

[re-con]

guess whose going to put a deposit on a game first thing Monday morning

[NovaBurn]

why do we care and dont bump old threads with pointless info. unless there is further discussion to be had, locked.