Company of Heroes: Eastern Front
Eastern Front Mod (Read-Only) => General Discussion => Topic started by: heinrich.rommel on March 17, 2010, 10:01:53 PM
-
i have an idea for 1.05 :))
would it be possible (if only in single player skirmish games.....if not also multiplayer), to have civilian wars?
aka USA v USA etc...basicly any country vs any country :))
could add a tick box Allow/ Disallow Civil Wars :)
just thinking :p
ye ye i know historicaly isnt accurate...but thisi s a GAME :)
not a simulator per se :D
just ponder on it .....
-
...meh
i don't like the idea, personally i don't see the fun of it.
you could go play a Civil War game though :P.
-Narizna
-
it would be "Who can tech up fastest" and not really a good game
-
Only in single player skirmish games.
It wouldnt take anything away from the game.
I also want Allied vs other Allied and PE vs Wehrmacht games, even if they wont be balanced (who needs balance when youre plaing AI).
-
This idea has been floating around since the beginning of coh "Why no mirror games?", the answer? They are generally bad games.
-
I like it, nothing to loose.
-
I like it, nothing to loose.
True. It´s not like the vCoH factions were created having in mind their weaknesses and strengths against the other factions.
Oh wait...
-
I like it, nothing to loose.
True. It´s not like the vCoH factions were created having in mind their weaknesses and strengths against the other factions.
Oh wait...
Personally, I think this idea is stupid, but like he stated, if it doesn't damage the original game, let them have what they want.
-
This would open a huge can or worms balance wise.
-
i see peeps bringing in the balance factor
yes, i m roughly a begginer.....but please do enlighten me - what EXACTLY is the balance issue in mirror matches ?!?!
in normal games, where a different civ faces another different one, THERE are REAl balance issues!
else, all those patches are just devs wating time ?!? (retorical...ofc devs didnt waste time! was making a point)
in standard games, there ARE real problems (i.e. soviets at start in 1.01 patch now solved mostly)
but what issues in mirror games ?!?!
BOTH civs would have same weaknesses and strenghts!
it would ONLY come down to whoever has best military thinking, be it teritory dominance, teching etc
i wouldnt be just techning, cause it useless o be top tech, and as a draw-back have only a handfull of units and thus, bearly any teritory , and thus, live inconstant fear fear of beeing overrun by a vastly superior (tho quality inferior) enemy
so the point of ,,it would be dum|! jus ta tech race'' its moot
and i reckon that if me, as a begginer sees this, so do others
i think the REAL reason is somewhat more mundane ... HIPROCRISY
why ? because in mirror matches, it would hurt even more to lose!
in different civs matching, one may (allbeit with low odds of success) conjure up the imbalance argument....
but there is no such argument in mirror matches!
thus, your own incompetence becomes 1000x more obvious!
thats why people hate the idea of mirror matches!
concrete example ---- someone who play russians alot, learn them very well, think they ve mastered it....then suddenly, face another human who prolly played another civ a long time, but that guy beats the living hell out of them ROFL
now hats gonna hurt the feelings of that guy who played russians a long time....
rationally ,that would be the only real reason to be against mirror matches .... there is no other objective one
-
Just imagine it... defensive medic bunkers facing off against defensive medic bunkers. Or invisible super paks invalidating wehrmacht tanks like they do US ones. What would axis do endgame against each other? Would certainly be an interesting game.
Honestly it's not a terrible idea, but why waste time and money coding this in and since Relic didn't do this to begin with, asking them again won't change much.
-
i wasnt asking Relic :)
but the E.F. guys :D
all they have to do is add a tick box Allow/ Disallow Mirrors
DONE!
who wants to play mirrors....plays...who doesnt...doesnt!
BOTH sides win ! NONE loses !
so...whats the harm !?
and no..i do NOT think it would be hard to add!
all it needs be done, is change the code that lets user select sides on the starting screeen, to allow for mirror matches, if the tick box is checked ,,yes''
regarding medic v medic issue.....you re fighting a warr with medics ?!
when you hear the attack warning...dont you normally zoom there and check things out ?!
and then decide what forces to send ?!
if you allow your medics to fight war for you other than them beeing attacked and normal defending.....just quit E.F. now and save yourself the embarassment
-
I agree with there being a tick box option. People who want it can have it and people who don't want it don't have to do it. Everyone wins.
-
OK he brings up a good point with the endgame Wehrmacht....they are both gonna sit back and shoot at each other with Vet 3 gren blobs and PaK snipers.... two teams of equal skill level will eventually just say f-it and quit because the game lasted 3+ hours because neither can punch through... Grens get suppressed my MG Tanks get blown up by cloaked paks and Stukas counter battery each other while trying to blow up defenses... it wouldnt be a productive game, just a giant stalemate unless someone gets lucky...
-
OK he brings up a good point with the endgame Wehrmacht....they are both gonna sit back and shoot at each other with Vet 3 gren blobs and PaK snipers.... two teams of equal skill level will eventually just say f-it and quit because the game lasted 3+ hours because neither can punch through... Grens get suppressed my MG Tanks get blown up by cloaked paks and Stukas counter battery each other while trying to blow up defenses... it wouldnt be a productive game, just a giant stalemate unless someone gets lucky...
Since when did 2 people have the same amout of skill? I like it because you its a challgene! No one factored that in. Plus you put grendairs with tanks so they dont get blown up, inf with tanks to take out the paks, and if the other player has the same and you two meet, well you got a big battle to commade with your skill and lets see who wins.
-
MG fire produces an area effect suppression and as stated in a few threads the Paks produce 400 damage on the three opening shots, 4 PaKs (by game mechanics and stats) can kill 3 P4s and damage/kill a 4th before becoming uncloaked. Point is, is a mirror game would be very counter productive and eventually would kill the game, at least for CoH
-
I don't actually see anything wrong with this option. lets you have more of a choice :D. Heck, if you don't want to play same frac vs. same frac, just dont check the box
-
Why people dont understand that this topic is about single player skirmish games only?
Some mirror MP games could also be fun but the real problem is fractions are not balanced to fight different fractions from the same side. Thats why Im asking for SP games only.
The game is based on counters.
Wehrmacht is defensive so stalemate would be a normal thing. PE, US and Soviet mirror games would on the other hand be very quick.
-
Balance aside, I don't like this idea. CoH is WWII, not hypothetical British/USA civil war.
-
Wehrmacht is defensive so stalemate would be a normal thing.
Not exactly, they are kind of balanced but a lot of people abuse their defensive perks.
-
Wehrmacht is defensive so stalemate would be a normal thing.
Not as much as you think, I play Wehr and PE almost exclusively and only those two in 1v1s, you need to be aggressive but not blood thirsty with Wehr, uncap/take points keep the allies busy till you can upgrade and end game them... its a delicate balance that is needed to play them effectively
-
I would appreciate this "civil war" option only to have Cold War/Red Alert battles of Soviets vs Allies.
-
I think they dont have it for 2-3 reasons.
1: It must be hard to make
2: It might ruin mutiplayer becuase the only games we will see is civil wars and people would leave
3: I forgot what I was goig to say
-
I'm neutral on this concept.
On one hand, it could produce very interesting games, like SOV VS USA.
On the other hand, like stated, factions could stalemate for hours upon hours. And it's happened to me before.
-The point: 5 hour games arn't fun. AT ALL. I ended up convincing the other guy to leave XD (Note: Was US VS Wehr)
The other negative thing is getting 2 similar factions in the same game on different sides of the map. A hell of a coding job.
Personally? I don't really care. If they implemented it I'd end up doing SOV VS USA because I don't have opposing fronts
-
I don't like it much , with US it would be who could get Pershings first, with commonwealth, who ever could get Churchills first etc, it would be whomever could get the best stuff first.
-
I hate it when people say "Its who ever gets the best stuff first". SO what is the best stuff? So yea, you got a tank. Hurry! You win the game! Wait, No darn it got blown up by an AT gun. OH crap! A blob of inf is coming what do I do????? Oh, I got a tank. I got 3 Tanks what gotta own the pile of inf. WTF! They had bazookas!!!
So tell me, what is the "best" unit?
-
a LOT of noobs ITT...
2: It might ruin mutiplayer becuase the only games we will see is civil wars and people would leave
This - and you are not the only one to use this argument, you just wrote it more explicitly than the others - is a seriously weak argument. If people will only use civil wars, that is because they think it is a fun game mode, no? Since when does people having fun make people leave? There will still be automatch and other custom games for people who wants to play normal.
The other argument in this thread, that it will just be a race to tech up fastest - well - THE GAME ALREADY IS! This game, like all RTS, is about balancing the need to dominate the field now vs the need to get nice tech in the future. Sure you could tech fast, but that would put your map control in a bad position.
-
Ots not as weak as you think, If 2/3 of the people play it and 1/3 of the people dont like and cant see much other games, some of them could leave. Thats what am saying,I didnt mean everyone.
-
Don't you guys realize that doing this is basically impossible programming wise?
Besides, this is the Eastern Front mod. Start a new mod if you want this feature so badly.
-
On the other hand, like stated, factions could stalemate for hours upon hours. And it's happened to me before.
-The point: 5 hour games arn't fun. AT ALL. I ended up convincing the other guy to leave XD (Note: Was US VS Wehr)
Well said "it's happened to me before". The truth is stalemate can happen with any fraction plaing vs Wehrmacht or UK.
But COH is also based on slippery slope mechanics. 1 mine can change the whole game.
Someone said that PAKs on both sides = stalemate. But germans have nebels, stukas, the most powerfull arti call-ins. All paks and bunkers wuold be burned to the ground very quickly.
Theres no way that both players would allways drop their arti barrages at the same time.
-
Ok you blow up my MG bunker, oh wait i just dropped Nebel on your blob and now a firestorm or here comes the blo.... nvm there is prop war.... TANKS?!?! Wait you only killed my MG bunker MWAAHAHAHA eat Pak Bitch! it would continue on like that till someone got caught taking a piss and had his Paks and MGs blown to hell and back
-
I thought when I brought up the Wehrmacht mirror people would catch onto all the mirrors but apparently everyone's fixated on wehr. So let me bring up some other things...
Brit vs Brit
Can anyone imagine a more dull game. Mass emplacement spam because they suck against buildings. Brits also have very poor ways of dealing with trenches, so expect plenty of those. Arty would be the name of the game as you try to bring down the enemy city.
US vs US
The rifle battles would be unbelievably slow because they would always be fighting at max range because charging rifles is suicide, even when you use the same unit against them. The things that make US fun, the pace of the game and the brilliant flanks, would all disappear.
PE vs PE
Well, we all know how poor against early light vehicles PE are...
USSR vs USSR
Could actually be strangely fun. I'll admit I would want to try that.
The reason why mirror matches wouldn't work in CoH is because it is a game of situation, not like the standard RTS. It doesn't always matter what troops you have but how you use them. If your troops behaved exactly as the enemy did, whoever had the defensive advantage (which is far more significant in this game than others) would win. This game has a far simpler economy than other RTSs where the skill in mirrors comes from being economically superior. In CoH, the gameplay doesn't stem from the resources you acquire but the use of the units you have. What makes the game fun and dynamic, is the differences between the factions which changes how you play.
-
That wouldnt be good at all , go play dawn of war 2 ( which is terrible) if you want that.
-
:O!! Bite your tongue! .
@ G.L.D. Brit v Brit Would actually be fun, I am a strictly defensive player(Also making me a terrible player), so it sounds perfect to me :)
-
Bit of a necro thread but anyway...
Akalonor, does that REALLY sound fun to you? Being completely unable to counter your enemy's trenches, kang vs kang battles, Brit blob vs Brit blob with poor ways of hunting enemy Lts early in the game and fireflies outranging all of your emplacements. I know you're a self-confessed compstomper but even this game would be way too defensive. Not that there would be any defending to do because your opponent would be doing the same thing.
If you can take 10 straight hours of arty spam, you are a stronger man than I :P
-
I <3 Arty :)
-
Can we just lock this thread? It's absolutely absurd...
-
Can we just lock this thread? It's absolutely absurd...
i couldnt agree more.
-
That wouldnt be good at all , go play dawn of war 2 ( which is terrible) if you want that.
Why you hatin DoW II? It's a great game.
-
The singleplayer and last stand modes are great. The multiplayer leaves a bit to be desired. There is no such thing as a teching order really, and you are forced to get certain units depending on the faction you face. There really isn't much diversity in it. Just to reiterate though, last stand is awesome.
-
That wouldnt be good at all , go play dawn of war 2 ( which is terrible) if you want that.
Why you hatin DoW II? It's a great game.
Yeah i think the singleplayer is pretty good , but the only way anyone really wins the multiplayer , is to bunch your army together (which is usually 2 tanks and 4 infantry squads) and you win. No tank traps and the pop caps are ridiculously high . Its like coh , but MUCH more simple.
-
Play on some of the open maps and you'll realise that you need to manuver alot and spread your army out to control the battlefield
-
Play on some of the open maps and you'll realise that you need to manuver alot and spread your army out to control the battlefield
Its dawn of war 2 that killed coh , now Relic are going for this " Simplistic Strategy " type game which is horrible
-
what do you mean by simplistic strategy?
-
He means how DoW2 is less of a real time strategy game and more like a real time tactics game. Overall strategic thinking isn't that important due to the lack of base building and build orders. Also, you only really control about 6 units at a time so it's pretty small scale. That being said it's not a bad game, just vastly simplified compared to something like company.
-
I thought when I brought up the Wehrmacht mirror people would catch onto all the mirrors but apparently everyone's fixated on wehr. So let me bring up some other things...
Brit vs Brit
Can anyone imagine a more dull game. Mass emplacement spam because they suck against buildings. Brits also have very poor ways of dealing with trenches, so expect plenty of those. Arty would be the name of the game as you try to bring down the enemy city.
US vs US
The rifle battles would be unbelievably slow because they would always be fighting at max range because charging rifles is suicide, even when you use the same unit against them. The things that make US fun, the pace of the game and the brilliant flanks, would all disappear.
PE vs PE
Well, we all know how poor against early light vehicles PE are...
USSR vs USSR
Could actually be strangely fun. I'll admit I would want to try that.
The reason why mirror matches wouldn't work in CoH is because it is a game of situation, not like the standard RTS. It doesn't always matter what troops you have but how you use them.
Brit vs Brit
That would mean mass emplacements use but Churchill Croc and AVRE are made to kill emplacements.
Commandos can use nades vs trenches and Radio Triangulation to precise barrage repairing sappers.
Finnaly Priests! No arti is better than it Priests. It would destroy enemy emplacements very quickly.
Many people play bridge maps and shell one another with arti untill anihilation. UK vs UK would be a similar game.
US vs US
Rifles can be upgraded with nades, stickies and BARs so all infantry battles wouldnt look the same. A flamer squad is a cheap unit and it denies using green cover.
There are Thompsons SMG to fight at close range and WSC to make youre oponent move out of cover. WSC + Forward HQ (to produce rifles) would probably work well vs barracks+BARs.30cal and stickies can be used to kill M-8/T-17 so the teching up quickly wouldnt mean winning.
US vs US would be a fast game with a lot of micro.
PE vs PE
AT halftrack would finally be a good unit used for something more than treadbreaking. It would be used to counter AC spam.
AT nades and quick shrecks would be what infantry needs vs vechicles.
Panther battle group could be countered by AT infantry.
Everything that PE has can be counterer by PE.
88 vs Jagdpanther? I would love to see that.
PE would be a fast game. Quick reaction to build counter units would be needed.
Civil war games would be something else.
As youve said GodlikeDennis "It doesn't always matter what troops you have but how you use them".
If someone can hold a good defence but wont advance (cap) he wont tech-up. If someone attacks on all fronts he will loose steem quickly and wont be able to counterattack.
You need to attack weak points, defend when having less units.
If someone digs a trench and sits in it the whole game he wont win a game. Units need to be doing something, not just defending.
-
Wehr VS Wehr and Soviet VS Soviet could be quite interesting, but what about games like Soviet VS US or Soviet VS Brit, Brit VS US?
Or when the Ostheer is released? PE VS Wehr, Wehr VS Ostheer and Ostheer VS PE?
Could be interesting, but I think it takes the basics out of COH.
-
Nahh
-
The people who don't like the idea shouldn't alienate those who do. If you don't like it, don't play it, that simple. Those who do, will. Personally I think it's a fantastic idea that can really shake up the games. I don't know about you guys, but each day I'm usually "feeling" a faction, I want to play as them and no-one else. Suddenly I find myself stuck on a side that cannot choose that faction. GRRRRRRR!!! It would be a nice yet interesting addition.
The scenarios that people have produced are all 1v1 scenarios and a mirrored faction. You forget 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 with varied factions! I know I'd love to see a PE,WE,UK,RU vs. US,RU,RU,WE (just a random selection). That would be one intense war.
It's not like this is impossible to code either. There are mods that have already done this. I would just like to see it integrated into this one.
-
I think it's a great idea and would open up many different possibilities for outcomes.
At the very least you'd have to think differently using tactics.
who cares if there's balance issues if it opens up a few more ways to fight a battle i'm happy with it.
It boggles my mind to think why CoH never tried this to begin with. i mean just about every rts i can think of has this option.
-
Many of you make good points but I still personally disagree. It would be too similar to several other RTSs where you are forced into a specific build order in order to vs your mirror. For example, Paciat, if he builds trenches you are automatically forced to go commandos, not to mention you can't get them until 3cps in. You would have absolutely no counter against each other for about 5 minutes.
This is not like every other RTS, it is the BEST RTS. It has done fine without mirror matches thus far.
Also, priests are not the best arty. Hummels and Calliopes are much more effective.
-
I HATE CPU CALLIOPE SPAMS ):<