[PC] Company of Heroes 2

[CeeKay]

6-25-2013.

[Cota]

How does Relic going from THQ to Sega affect the DRM used I wonder? Does Sega get to decide on DRM? What have they used in the past?

This is one of the few titles I'm looking forward to this year, but I'm afraid it'll have some obnoxious DRM and I'll pass on it.

-Cota

[Hrothgar]

They've usually used steamworks.  I believe Aliens: Colonial Marines was their last release.  It used steamworks.

[Lordnine]

Looks like the closed beta will start next week.

[Blackjack]

Impressions from skirmish beta:
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/399346/previews/company-of-heroes-2-preview-beta-disappoints-but-hopes-remain-high/

But most improvements seem inconsequential. In the seven years since Company of Heroes, what should be innovation is instead artifice - things blow up a bit more, and there's snow now.

Later, in a fierce two-on-two winter battle against human opponents (the maximum amount of players you can have in a match is six), we uncovered more problems. You can't scroll out far enough, so your zoomed in view increases the chance of losing track of troops; you can't rotate the map - still; and the rusted brown menu feels outdated and unintuitive, like something out of '90s PC strategy Commandos rather than a product of 2013.

I have been getting the impression the game is more of an ambitious expansion pack than something really meriting a "2" in its title. imho that speaks more to how advanced COH already was in its release year (2006).

[Turtle]

Or the writer doesn't quite know what he's doing. This is a multiplayer open beta, not a single player skirmish game. Although AI skirmish is there for people to try.

I pretty much disagree with the vast majority of his criticisms.

I've tested the view distance and it is the same as CoH1 99% of the time, unless the reviewer did something wrong. You can also rotate the view to your leisure, the same way you could in CoH1.

It is definitely a full sequel. It's like saying Starcraft 2 was just an expansion pack to SC1. There are a lot of big and small changes to CoH2 that justify a full sequel.

The cold tech/blizzards that the writer says is contrived has a helluva lot of tactical and strategic nuance that clearly went over his head. I have won and lost games due to excellent or poor planning for an incoming blizzard.

I have done raids on enemy territory on the verge of a blizzard, destroying all the fire pits and preventing his infantry from having any warmth, meanwhile I built extra fire pits in my side of the map, allowing me to launch an all out assault in the middle of a blizzard while his troops froze in the fields trying to counter it.

I've used the drastic sight reduction during blizzards to navigate flanking vehicles around the sides of AT gun killzones to hit enemy lines as soon as the blizzard let up.

I've tracked large troop movements right after a blizzard by their footprints, then redirected my entire army to counter a massive flank movement.

Cold tech is not a contrived feature, it's just another tactical and strategic nuance that players need to learn to use, a nice addition to a genre where so far, no RTS game has really had interesting weather effects.

The graphics are definitely improved from CoH1, and this is just a beta, the final 10% polish doesn't go in until very late in the game, and even then, honestly how much better can graphics really get when you're trying for a level of realism? This isn't Crysis or Doom 3 with its crappy gameplay justified by flashy graphics. It's a strategy game that's making a clear trade off in graphics for more gameplay.

Oh and let's talk about the Skirmish AI which the writer made no mention of. Those of you who like to play against AI and don't do multiplayer will be very satisfied. The AI is challenging and aggressive, a vast improvement over CoH1's AI. It's interesting to fight, pulling off flanking maneuvers and building units appropriately. It still does some weird things, but those can be fixed later. This will be the same AI that will be used in the single-player campaign, so that's a big plus as well.

I think that writer is the type who doesn't even know what he wants, so he's just clamoring for more generic CoH1, and not opening his mind to the subtle and not so subtle changes to the game. Effectively, he writes we wants CoH1, but also wants everything changed?

[Lordnine]

I’m also in the beta (12 hours of experience so far); some of the writer’s statements are blatantly incorrect.  The game actually supports 4v4, so 8 players at once.  

The zoom level is also perfectly fine in my opinion.  There is a world zoom option that defaults to 133% for me for whatever reason.  I turned that off, maybe he did not.

The game IS overwhelming.  You will be at least three games in before you have any idea what you’re doing.  Even now there are some things that I don’t know how they work or which unit is better in a situation but that is standard for any Relic RTS.  

Some legitimate complaints:

Vehicle pathing is terrible.  This was bad in DoW2 but they somehow made it worse here.  This is supposed to be addressed in an upcoming patch.

Weather is interesting but it’s not quite right yet.  Part of the problem is caused by other problems in the game (See pathing is terrible).  In one game I played I had my tank roll over my fire pit going backwards instead of heading forwards like I had asked.  As a result my infantry started to freeze to death because I couldn’t rebuild it.  There are talks about adding other sources of heat, like use a Flamer to light a tree (or tank) on fire for warmth until it burns out.

[ATB]

Weather is interesting but it’s not quite right yet.  Part of the problem is caused by other problems in the game (See pathing is terrible).  In one game I played I had my tank roll over my fire pit going backwards instead of heading forwards like I had asked.  As a result my infantry started to freeze to death because I couldn’t rebuild it.  There are talks about adding other sources of heat, like use a Flamer to light a tree (or tank) on fire for warmth until it burns out.

This makes weather sound more of a hassle rather than adding anything fun to the gameplay. is it?

[Lordnine]

Weather is interesting but it’s not quite right yet.  Part of the problem is caused by other problems in the game (See pathing is terrible).  In one game I played I had my tank roll over my fire pit going backwards instead of heading forwards like I had asked.  As a result my infantry started to freeze to death because I couldn’t rebuild it.  There are talks about adding other sources of heat, like use a Flamer to light a tree (or tank) on fire for warmth until it burns out.

This makes weather sound more of a hassle rather than adding anything fun to the gameplay. is it?

I actually do like it because it offers some new strategic elements but right now the implementation is a bit clunky.  One of my favorite additions in the game is ice over rivers.  When frozen, tanks and infantry can drive over it but a well-placed explosive or artillery barrage will collapse the ice and sink the tanks.  I’ve taken to planting TNT on ice wherever there is heavy traffic.

That said there are a number of ways they can improve weather, they just need to pick one and carry through with it.

Also, there are summer maps as well as winter so you don't always need to use the same tactics.

[Turtle]

Weather is something people will get used to. I'd rather have harsh weather than "winter" maps that just happen to look dusted with white powder.

[Lordnine]

You can get your own beta key if you like the Relic page on Facebook. 

[pingwrx]

Just did can't wait to try it later tonight.

[Lockdown]

Excellent!  Thanks.

[Turtle]

Even if you don't like multiplayer, give the AI botmatches a try. They have drastically improved the AI. It's aggressive and reacts to all sorts of situations.