Company of Heroes 2 - Confirmed in PC Gamer

[roflmao]

I completely agree that in order for this to be a winner they need to stick to the original CoH formula. CoH1 even with its relatively small scale got to be pretty epic.

Now, what I would not mind is a increase in the number of individual units in a squad accompanied by the same decrease in durability. One of the ridiculous things about Company of Heroes is that two squads could stay firing at each other at point blank range for over 10 seconds (depends on the squads) and they'd never die. I wouldn't mind seeing some tweaking in this area.

Upping the ante on terrain dynamics is completely and totally awesome. Because you're not changing any of the style of the game (as terrain dynamics was quite important in CoH1).

But yes, stick to CoH1!

[Celution]

Well said ap0k, v1.71 for life, anyone?

The way CoH1 is setup is that a single unit can make the difference, like how well you placed your HMG team, or how good our use of cover and that one squad ability is. I really liked OF nonetheless, however ToV was quite a rip-off if you look back to it and stuff went kind of downhill after they stopped regularly releasing patching. vCoH and OF had quite a lot of patches, especially the first of the two.


Just as roflmao said, I think tuning the overall weapon system to be a bit more lethal sounds great and would be much appreciated, as well as proper tank armor and such. Otherwise it's quite damn fine how it is. We see with a lot of mods for CoH1 where there are squads with up to 12 people. Although this might be historical, I'd hate to see this in vanilla for the plain reason that the relative small scale vCoH has would be ruined and as others said, units and especially casualties would be less important. In vCoH it's so important to keep your stuff alive, even the most basic unit. When upping the scale this just becomes less and less important, and would create a whole different game.

[Imperial Dane]

Actually those larger squads tended to be split up themselves. I mean i can imagine this being interesting. But it could also throw in a lot more units. Making managing them harder and one more likely to throw some away and such I just hope to see squad leaders be a bit more than just guys with a slightly better gun.

[Sturmhaubitze]

The good news for modders is that the new sight-blocking system they mention in the magazine article will allow for greater sight distances and weapon ranges.

I've experimented with semi-realistic sight/weapon ranges in CoH1, but beyond 60m it breaks down. You end up being able to see enemies through large amounts of terrain; it both looks odd and it doesn't play well. But with CoH2's system your view range will be blocked by solid objects and smoke clouds, so you'll still be able to sneak around enemy look-outs and prepare ambushes.


So I don't at all expect CoH2 to feature large squads, large population caps, realistic weapon ranges, nor massive maps. But modders will be able to achieve all that if they wish.

[firefish]

Definately agree on that bit that they want a completely different game with larger scale which would make managing cover and maneuvring not really viable or functional. Sounds like they just want it to become supreme Commander or something :/

Nope (as far as I'm concerned)

May I tell what I've done (like several other guys here) with my COH as an example for what I would like to see within COH 2 :

I've altered all max. distances within the Sight Packages so that different units have different sight ranges:

Tanks and armoured vehicles: Around 35 to 40
Softskins and Infantry: Around 40 to 50
Infantry like scouts or Commanders with binocculars and artillery spotters or Beobachtungspanzer have additional ranges so that they can see about 60 while using special actions.

With the weapon ranges I did similar things:

Pistols: About 25
MPs: About 35 to 40
Sturmgewehre and Carbines: Around 45
Rifles: 60+
Guns and tanks dito

This way I like it much more. What major advantage does an eight-eight (or 8,8cm L/71 of the Tiger II) can have if not blowing those allied shermans to hell at distances of about 2km? What are the benefits of upgrading Gewehr43 instead of MP40 without having an distance advantage?

Ok... These are only my $0.02 but I would like to see something similar within COH II

----------

The good news for modders is that the new sight-blocking system they mention in the magazine article will allow for greater sight distances and weapon ranges.

I've experimented with semi-realistic sight/weapon ranges in CoH1, but beyond 60m it breaks down. You end up being able to see enemies through large amounts of terrain; it both looks odd and it doesn't play well. But with CoH2's system your view range will be blocked by solid objects and smoke clouds, so you'll still be able to sneak around enemy look-outs and prepare ambushes.


So I don't at all expect CoH2 to feature large squads, large population caps, realistic weapon ranges, nor massive maps. But modders will be able to achieve all that if they wish.

Wow! That would be really great (and way much better than what I dared to hope...!

[Mirage Knight]

If you guys really want to play out the brutal meatgrinders that comprised the battles at Minsk, Kiev, Stalingrad, Kursk, etc. then the unit caps, pop limits and squad sizes currently seen in Platoon of Heroes (vCOH) are not going to do that the justice even small sections of those battles deserve.

Just saying.

[Sturmhaubitze]

Company of Heroes is more a brand name than it is a description of the game's scope. The article and screenshot all points to them keeping the core gameplay of the original, and incrementally improving every aspect rather than re-engineering it.

Though on the Eastern Front, the name Company of Heroes can be more accurate of the scope than on the Western Front. Soviet heavy tank and assault gun companies were much smaller than their Western counterparts. All you need is 5 assault guns or heavy tanks to make an historical company, and vCoH's population limits would allow for that.

[CommissarRezail]

I think Bayard talking in code, he says "tools" a lot , which i come down to think tools has 5 letters, so russian squads are 5 man squards. Now for the word it self T could = T-28 Doulbe O's = 2 times Overland mass death charges, and L = Land aquirement. Spell tools back wards you get Sloot as in Salut ha i think i cracked it!! There will be T-28 fighting along mass infantry who move with squads of 5 that cost 1 pop cap each, charging to their deaths by commissar command to capture points that look like the resource you are capturing !!. Am i close bayard?

[[]inveigle[]]

^^^OMG I get it, You sir, are a genius! I will second this statment with the following:

After swearing my oath to the elder god Dagon, I enrobed myself with a luxurious cloak with occult properties, some who say it belonged to the German war machine as they continued to experiment with prisoners in 1943. I then head down by the hallowed river, passing by the primordial graveyard of old lore and step up to my chariot of undead horses, brought to life by Cthulhu. I head to the altar where I will lay my prayers, begin the ceremony and administer today's fun, activity filled day. Starting with mead drenched blood orgies, blitzkrieg raids against the christian hordes living nearby, and ending with an endless buffet and karaoke. This day shall be our own and CoH2 shall be the second coming...literally.

[Gorb]

r.e. "I am apprehensive because the CoH team moved on and as such I wonder if the new team can do the franchise justice" (just a general point more than anything, also it's cool seeing Duffy post ) - GameReplays thread/post.

[Akranadas]

I got to use to Europe in Ruins way of Multiplayer to go back to the same old base building and resource management.

[Imperial Honour]

I concur, vCoH v1.71 was/is probably one of the best renditions of Company of Heroes for me (balance wise). That said Company of Heroes with Opposing Fronts and Tales of Heroes is still a great RTS game, and one of my all time favourites. Great to see people like Quinn Duffy still around too. Cannot wait for more information to come about, the announcement has had me playing CoH with friends again .

[BurroDiablo]

The screenshot shows a T-34 obr 1942

Actually its the M1943 with the hexagonal turret and the half cylinder shaped mantlet. M1942 was only a minor improvement over the M1941 which had the curved front turret. Hopefully Relic have the 1941 model handy too.

[Vijil]

I went to see my Opa the other day - lost his memory but still with us. He fought for the Germans on the Eastern front all the way to Moscow. Got out because he was injured. This will be the first game I've played that has the same conflict he fought in so it'll definitely be interesting to see how relic handle it.

[eliw00d]

@BurroDiablo
Actually, it is an obr 1942 by Soviet nomenclature. The "1943" is Western nomenclature based on German Intelligence; the Soviets did not distinguish between the improvements as being different models, only counting the obr 1939, 1941 and 1942.

[Mirage Knight]

T-34 obr 1942 is the more accurate, appropriate, Soviet designation for T-34's fitted with the hexagonal style turret as the turret was the result of an upgrade program for the T-34 that officially started sometime in 1942. M1943 / Model 1943 is the designation given by German observers and adopted by Western writers, probably owing in part to the fact that the type was only seen in significant numbers around the beginning of 1943.

On a side note, I understand that the Wikipedia entry for the T-34 identifies the hex turret version as Model 1943, but keep in mind that Wikipedia entries are only as accurate as the sources used by the article's author / writer.

On topic: Relic - is there any chance we might see Tankodesantniki (Tank-riders) ingame?

[BurroDiablo]

@Eli Ah, shit, that's right. Sorry, I'm so used to people mixing the designations up I mixed them up myself >< It's been a long day :P

[Imperial Dane]

@Mirage Knight: Well T-34 designations even with that can be a bit messy since there was no real standardisation of T-34 tanks. Different factories made Different T-34s.

As for Tank Riders. Would be cool overall to have that. Both sides used them to a certain extent. German StUG Brigades for example had Begleit Infantrie , which were troops tasked with staying close to the StuGs and would ride on them i believe.

[fuggles]

The PCG article seemed to suggest it would be nothing but different variants of the T34.

[Imperial Dane]

I think it was just discussing the T-34. Not sure why though. Plus it brought in the T-43 for some reason and i don't think we'll be seeing that. I mean we'll probably see the T-34/85..

[dams]

This better sell well and fund Relic, THQ and DoW3, because I have zero interest in WW2 RTS games.

[LoneWolf666]

It's basically a CoH+, so it'll probably do about as well as vCoH.

[gorays]

I hope COH 2 has basebuilding.

[Makemap]

Hope so too. The Official website is up. http://www.companyofheroes.com/

I would love to see a new environment with those Flak Tanks and Amphibious Tanks in the game.

[guardsman lover]

I'd like to see it as grimdark as World at War.

I want to kill civilians with Katyusha rockets.
I want to burn surrendering soldiers with Molotovs.
I want to execute people begging for mercy.
I WANT TO CHARGE INTO MACHINE GUN FIRES.
COMMISSARS GO BLAM.
I WANT TO SEE COWARDS HANG FROM TREES.
I WANT TO SEE THE DYING HEART OF THE FASCISCT REICH.
FIRE THE PANZERSHRECK!!!!!!!!


Needs more Vasili, Petrenko, and Reznov.

[Romanov77]

Need also the mandatory sniper section ripped from Enemy at the Gates.

[mandead]

Any screenshots? If it's like the DoW 2 games I probably won't buy it as I don't care for that engine. It's hard to explain but it just doesn't feel right compared to CoH.

Hopefully they just build on the success of the original, but I can see them scaling it down and making it more about controlling a small group of troops and maybe one or two vehicles with various different abilities (akin to Men of War). I'm guessing structures are gone too. (I haven't read the magazine).

Obviously I hope I'm wrong because a better-looking, more dynamic/moddable and bug-free CoH v2 in the snow sounds amazing.

[LoneWolf666]

Scaling it down? It's the eastern front, if anything it should be scaled up.

[drChengele]

This is me right now: .

I was slightly worried if they ever made CoH2 they'd be tempted to go the Tales of Valor / CoHO / DoW2 design route (smaller scale, more detailed model, heroes, RPG-ish elements) because that's "in". That's never been what CoH 1 was about. The scale, ranges, mechanics, feel etc. of the original CoH were all simply perfect for my tastes. It appears the design team knows where they want to go with this. If they manage to keep at least half of that visceral feel, it will be hands down the best RTS of 2013, no matter how many Starcrafts and Nouns of Nouns other studios release. And if they match, or overshoot it... best RTS ever, bar none.

Fingers crossed.

[ARMYguy]

Coh 2 will have to defeat generals 2 though. And since generals 2 uses bf 3 engine, it already has way better graphics and a better engine. If they make generals gameplay and depth, thats a hard act to follow. I hope to get two great RTS in 2013 though.

[Shaitan]

They've shown screens from Generals 2, the graphics are not better. I'm looking forward to both of them, just CoH2 much much more.

[SpardaSon21]

They're both going to be good games. Generals 2 will have outlandish weapons like laser tanks and orbital particle beams while CoH2 will be about gritty realism on the Eastern Front of WW2. There's room for both of them to coexist.

[gorays]

Generals 2 visuals are pretty meh, and the scaling is piss poor. Anyways, COH 2 is finally happening, yay!

[ARMYguy]

I must be missing something, i didnt recall the graphics being meh. But oh well, that was just promo stuff anyways. Gotta wait longer for better screens. I like relic rts as much as the next guy, but i also like cnc gameplay too, so hopefully they are both good.

[Imperial Dane]

Well hopefully generals 2 gets off well. The more attention for the RTS genre, the better. But it is interesting we actally know less about Generals 2 than we do for CoH 2..

[sporty]

Saw this bit teasing more information coming early this week, has anyone seen some new information pop up somewhere?

[GeoffS]

The Company of Heroes Facebook page is teasing new press briefings about to happen.

[sporty]

Thanks, that looks like something might be shown today (freedom time however).

[chosen40k]

I personally hope for Blitzkrieg style gameplay. Would make for incredibly epic and more realistic battles. Like MGs shredding infanty in seconds rather than minutes, and huge AT guns one shotting tanks.

[Celution]

God, please no. Oneshotting is terrible for game balance and turns the game into a game of luck instead of skill. I agree that weapons can be a bit more lethal but oneshotting and shredding stuff to pieces in a matter of seconds, without having time to react is quite bad for balance and gameplay.

[Sturmhaubitze]

One benefit of hit points is that units can be worn down over time, and players can observe this effect and make tactical decisions based upon it. Instant death robs you of that, and you end up with sporadic casualties that are difficult to gauge. If the accuracy is poor enough, a unit might go a while without suffering any casualties, and then suddenly lose one or two to bad luck; does this mean the unit is in trouble? The player can't tell, because they don't know the math that's going on in the background, they just know two soldiers died in rapid succession despite being under heavy fire for a while with no effect.

The mechanic may not be realistic, but you can tweak the damage and hit point values until the outcomes of firefights feel plausible. You just need to not look at the health bar so literally.

[Ghost Sniper]

Little late to the party, but man is this awesome! COH2 set on the eastern front, with the devs implying that some of the biggest battles of the war may show up. All the new features sound like they'll only add to what was great about original.

What I'm wondering is how shots will be counted. Will it be like in the original where its a hit percentage thats calculated behind the scenes and visuals just match that (I think thats how it worked), or will they use accuracy and actually track shots? Are we going to keep heat-seeking, curve-ball anti-tank shells?

@Sturmhaubitze: Exactly my thoughts.

When people talk about adding more realism to a game, it never feels like their thinking about actual game-play consequences. The only thing increasing lethality would do is decrease the amount of time a player a player has to react to the changing tactical situation, and also increase the importance of APM. It would also make luck and randomness much more of a game decider. In current CoH terms, think of getting off the first shot in a sniper duel, missing, and then having your sniper get killed on the first shot. Then apply that to everything in the game.

That, and one of the main concepts in CoH is keeping your units alive. Take some time to think about how much of the game revolves around that concept, and how much less important increasing lethality would make it.

If your looking for a game similar to CoH but more realistic, try Men of War. CoH doesn't need to be more realistic when there is already a game that does that.

[Imperial Dane]

Health bars are fine. Not every tank got knocked out at first shot, and sometimes it just came down to actually firing several rounds to them until other factors knocked them out. Like say spalling on the inside :P

As for Realism. I find that most people who seem so intent on it aren't so much intent on the realism itself. But more the idea that they can claim to be better for mastering it. Never mind that their conception of Realism tends to be for the larger part pretty limited to what i'd call "Technical" realism, that is, guns, armour all that. But anything like say unit organisation, if it was actually in the war or say, did the two sides actually fight each other has a tendency of flying out the window. MoW being a good example of that. Which honestly means that while MoW is flashy.. It just comes off as being less historical real than CoH.

And what CoH does brilliantly is taking all the more complex things and making them much more accessible, much more simple and understandable, without taking away any great amount of depth involved. And i imagine CoH 2 will take this one step further.

[roflmao]

Hyper fragility can work. SC2 has hyper fragile units and there's no problem. Where you go braindead is when you combine hyper fragility with a game focused on unit preservation. When you have those two together your game is just about luck and no skill.

Which is my problem with DoW2 for the record. They doubled both the fragility and importance of unit preservation and the end result is a game where a single lag spike or mouse slip can literally lose you the game. That sucks.

About the realism debate:
I think there's an important distinction to be made between realism and plausability. A game doesn't have to be realistic, but it does have to be plausible. One of the implausible things in Company of Heroes (as I've mentioned) is the way units can shoot at point blank without dying for as long as 30 seconds, and I would like that tweaked.

[Imperial Dane]

I suppose i'd have to ask who can shoot at point blank without dying for 30 seconds.. Don't think i've honestly seen much of that.. I mean i'd LOVE for my Volksgrenadiers or Riflemen to last that long up close :P

[Sturmhaubitze]

That problem is a bit tricky, because the game's firefights play out at relatively short ranges. Everything looks and plays well when soldiers are firing at each other from cover, but once they charge into close quarters it looks ridiculous. But it only looks ridiculous, it doesn't break the game per se.

It's not easily solved because the slower pace of the firefights means it's not suicide to charge out of cover and get right up close. So if you make up-close fights super lethal, you end up with it being way too easy to trigger that situation. So the firefights are slowly paced at first, but once you jog an extra 10m closer people are suddenly dying very rapidly on both sides.

If you have a game where the combat ranges are closer to 100m, then the problem mostly vanishes. Charging out from cover then becomes too dangerous, because you'll be shot at for 100m until you close in, rather than the 30m we currently have in Company of Heroes. But 100m combat ranges is not what CoH is about, so that's not a solution.

[Muad'Dib]

I wish they'd make map based skins a reality. Like if the maps is a winter map, all skins from the infantry, the buildings and vehicles will have snow on them and will be in winter uniforms. Of course the maps will have to fall into categories, but its a new game anyway...

[Gorb]

Heh.

Heh.

Heh.

[Imperial Dane]

@Muad'dib: They do. There's even a piece of concept art floating about with a German soldier in regular uniform and then kitted out for winter.

[mandead]

That's awesome if true - proper dynamic maps linked with their own camouflage types for both factions. That's very cool.