Company of Heroes

[Mr Bean]

Completly destructable terrain and buildings?

Check, Company of Hero's infantry AI is downright brillant, and it's just a joy to see them taking cover and assaulting houses.
Nevermind how downright evil the German's Iron Cross squad is(A full vet squad of Iron Cross holders are like having three frigging german Tom Hanks on the field, they eat through American infantry squads like a chainsaw through jello... even if tanks rip them apart.

On the flip side can I say how nasty Ostwinds are when used as anti-infantry weapons? Use one to suport a Stug or two and you can clear a map with three tanks alone.

And that whole "destructable terrain" thing comes in handy, getting flanked? Blow yourself a new whole and escape! Or drop the cover they are hiding behind.

[Count Dooku]

Completly destructable terrain and buildings?

Check, Company of Hero's infantry AI is downright brillant, and it's just a joy to see them taking cover and assaulting houses.
Nevermind how downright evil the German's Iron Cross squad is(A full vet squad of Iron Cross holders are like having three frigging german Tom Hanks on the field, they eat through American infantry squads like a chainsaw through jello... even if tanks rip them apart.

On the flip side can I say how nasty Ostwinds are when used as anti-infantry weapons? Use one to suport a Stug or two and you can clear a map with three tanks alone.

And that whole "destructable terrain" thing comes in handy, getting flanked? Blow yourself a new whole and escape! Or drop the cover they are hiding behind.

The destructable enviornment is a really cool feature. Personally, I think ALL the explosion animatios are really well done. I have pervertedness about me when I have 6-7 mortar crews set up, and I take out a few MG42's .

[Rekkon]

That is just asking for a Walking Stuka strike.

My friend and I also found that while a group of mortar teams can defend themselves from a BMW (third guys not manning the mortar all massed their fire to kill it), one flamethrower equipped Pionner/Engineer team will eat them alive.

[Cincinnatus]

Is anybody else having major stability problems online? The last two games I've played have dropped out right at the end, which was especially annoying the second time because I was about to win.

My screename is the same as it is here, if anybody ever wants to play. I prefer playing as the Allies on the Armor branch, because Armored Cars are good at capturing points and the Sherman Calliope is just cool.

[InnocentBystander]

I've found on occasion the game buggers out; the more players the more likely it is to happen. My working theory is that its because someone decided they didn't want to play anymore, left in some way which is non-normal, and caused everyone else to sync out. Usually seems to happen when one side is winning, and usually someone on the losing side is the first to drop. Of course that is just a theory.

Allied armor is a good investment; but sometimes getting useful abilities sooner can really save the day. Airdrops can totally ruin your day, for instance

[Cincinnatus]

I've found on occasion the game buggers out; the more players the more likely it is to happen. My working theory is that its because someone decided they didn't want to play anymore, left in some way which is non-normal, and caused everyone else to sync out. Usually seems to happen when one side is winning, and usually someone on the losing side is the first to drop. Of course that is just a theory.

I was losing in the first game, and my partner was making a pretty big stink about it, so it makes sense that he would try and disconnect. We got rushed by Flakpanzer's and Goliaths, and I only had Armored Cars, so we were losing pretty bad.

Allied armor is a good investment; but sometimes getting useful abilities sooner can really save the day. Airdrops can totally ruin your day, for instance

Raid is really useful! Plus, if you get the Calliope reinforcement ability, you can get a lot of tanks fast, which is useful if you don't have a lot of fuel.

I've found that Armor and Airborne make the best team, though.

[InnocentBystander]

Flakpanzers are dangerous, but not unstopable. In fact, some well placed tank traps and an AT gun can totally ruin a Flakpanzer's day

Raid is useful; but I've often found armored cars to be a little... flimsy, especially when the nazis can get anti-tank weaponry very, very easily.

Now airborne can do some useful stuff; drop some paratroopers behind an enemy MG, for instance.

Problem with Calliope is that they're rather expensive (600MP), and really aren't that potent, as far as tanks go. They're stuck with the 75mm medium velocity cannon and though speedy, are only useful for their rockets and engaging an enemy you know lacks any serious Anti-tank weaponry.

Of course the Calliope is great for taking out masses of infantry, and tanks; move it in closer and the cone should shrink; I think that the calliope rocket strike is one of the best uses for allied munitions.

[Stark]

I know it's a silly question for DoW-engine... but can't I zoom out more?

PS, for some reason my system can't handle CoH *at all*. Even with low shaders, low models and low textures, it runs like it's going to fall down. What gives?

[Cincinnatus]

Flakpanzers are dangerous, but not unstopable. In fact, some well placed tank traps and an AT gun can totally ruin a Flakpanzer's day

The Flakpanzers completely ignored the victory points and went straight to our bases. I'd only just built a Motor Pool, and since I chose to built Armored Cars (they hadn't made any real big offences before then, so I thought I defense was adequate), I didn't have time to crank out any AT guns before their Goliath's blew the building up. I don't know how they got the Flakpanzers that fast, but it definitely taught me to make sure to have at least some anti-armor protection in your base, the bunkers you start with aren't going to cut it.

Raid is useful; but I've often found armored cars to be a little... flimsy, especially when the nazis can get anti-tank weaponry very, very easily.

They can flank AT guns pretty well because of their speed, but yeah, if they run into anyone armed with Panzerfausts they're pretty much screwed. That's when you run away and come back with some infantry or better armored tanks.

Problem with Calliope is that they're rather expensive (600MP), and really aren't that potent, as far as tanks go. They're stuck with the 75mm medium velocity cannon and though speedy, are only useful for their rockets and engaging an enemy you know lacks any serious Anti-tank weaponry.

They don't cost any fuel though, which is good for those maps without any large fuel points.

Any tough armor you run into, you draw them out with the Calliope and then flank them with M10 Tank Destroyers, which are nice and cheap.

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

I know it's a silly question for DoW-engine... but can't I zoom out more?

PS, for some reason my system can't handle CoH *at all*. Even with low shaders, low models and low textures, it runs like it's going to fall down. What gives?

Well, what's your graphics card? They recommend at least a 6800GT (granted, I run it fine on medium-ish with my 6600).



Re: Flakpanzers, they're easy as hell to rush to. At 410/40 F they're inexpensive, and all Axis needs to do is increase their phase (200/30, then 40, then 65 I think Fuel), then build a Pz Command for not much more. They don't need any buildings, something that has irritated me in the past (Pioneer spam with flamethrowers and rush to StuGs is pretty ridiculous to fight, though it's not quite as bad in the full version as it was in beta).

If you don't see much activity and nothing heavier than an MG or even Pioneers, and especially if you don't see any proper infantry (ugh), then bet your ass they're rushing to StuGs or heavy armor. Prepare accordingly.

Re: Calliopes, they thankfully nerfed the rocket barrage. It used to be goddamn ridiculous and killed infantry, tanks, and buildings with impunity. Now it has virtually nil tank-killing power (though I maintain there should still be a unit cap of 2 on them, they weren't exactly common).

[Stark]

Well, what's your graphics card? They recommend at least a 6800GT (granted, I run it fine on medium-ish with my 6600).

Yeah, I've got a 6600GT. I love how the game both looks like shit and runs like shit on low though - it's obviously not the shaders or geometry that's slowing it down. I get no performance difference between full and lowest settings, and it's playable-ish much of the time.

[InnocentBystander]

When you say it runs like shit, is the game/voice stuttering a lot in the tutorials? If thats the case, its something that the demo does for some reason, the full version doesn't suffer from this. However if you're just getting low FPS while playing the single player missions or skirmush, then I'm stumped. No one on the relic of planet coh forums posted about poor performance, other than the SLI related stuff, which I think wasn't a problem for the demo anyway.

Also, make sure you've got the latest GPU driver. And you've got more than 768megs of virtual ram (though the game shouldn't start if thats the case...).

Out of curiosity, what are you system stats?

Further, how bad are the graphics? I run the game on rather modest settings (@1024x768) and the graphics seem pretty decent even when zoomed in.

[Stark]

Oh nah I'm talking about the full game. And yeah it's stuttering - just panning the map (with nothing going on, no fx, start of a skirmish etc) jerks like a bitch. It's quite strange, since DoW runs just fine.

What's with that virtual RAM thing anyway? I mean, I know it's time for me to upgrade from 2Gb to 4Gb, but it's an odd request to make.

I'm using a 3200/64, 6600GT, 2Gb system. If I turn shaders/textures down, the cutscenes et al look pretty bad texturewise but otherwise okay, but there's no real benefit framerate-wise and you lose all the shiny. I guess it's just 'reinstall windows' time.

As an aside, I don't know how you guys can play that zoomed in. I want to zoom out MORE! If I could change one thing about the game, it'd be like DoW - make infantry move slower. They're like the damn Flash right now.

EDIT - PS, sorry about hijacking into a techsupport thing.

[InnocentBystander]

The virtual ram thing is just that the game won't run if you have less than like a gig of it available. A few folks got pissy about it during the beta on the relicnews forums.

A new GPU and a dual core CPU would help, otherwise I don't see any problems.

I don't actually *play* zoomed in; it just makes for good screenshots

Also, the infantry aren't fast at all, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Ya, they can scoot out of the way at times, but they don't move all that fast. Play a decently sized map, you'll see why forward barracks are useful.

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

Hm, have you patched up Stark? There's been a couple post-release fix type patches.

[Stark]

Heh. The 1.2 patch improves performance dramatically. I'm happy now.

[Rekkon]

Ah yes, the Ostwind rush. Fell for that once myself in the beta. I actually had plenty of AT guns, but they were all on one flank of the map. Axis players rushed for the bases, and both my teammates had jack to stop them.

Armored cars have their uses, but I too find them too flimsy. Getting one out early as the Allies can be worthwhile, but I am usually Axis and almost never bother with Pumas. Friend of mine stacked 8 of them in one game though. We had already won and were just stockpiling forces while letting the newbie learn and throw stuff at us.

Anyone use the Panzer IV? I almost never bother. If I am Terror or Blitz, I save for Tigers, otherwise I usually have enough fuel for Panthers by the time I can spare the manpower.

A well handled Airborne player is very dangerous indeed. However too often I see them waste a paratrooper drop to flank an area of questionable importance and/or not support the new troops. They are too expensive to use as cannon fodder. Oh, and Ostwinds kill no less than half of them before they touch ground if they drop within its range.

We had one drop/crash game too. An Allied player dropped, and not long after the other did as well. Game froze, refused to give a Victory screen, and after I dropped manually it crashed.

Not faced Calliopes in the full version yet, though I am glad to hear they adjusted the rockets against armor. Had one beta game where both players just spammed Calliopes since they did not cost any fuel. I think every piece of our armor made got rocketed to death. As for M10s... I love them. Speed can be annoying, but I have no fear of their gun, and they are nice and squishy. Die much more easily than Shermans. We had one game where an M10 spam was pushing back my teammate, but a Flak 88 solved that.

[InnocentBystander]

I usually perfer the PanzerIV; more often than not I can build tanks before I can call in tigers, PanverIVs are solid tanks, decent against infantry too, give them a little infantry support, and save up until the heavy armor arrives. Panthers cost too much, I'd rather something cheaper thats still decent until the big guns arrive.

We had one drop/crash game too. An Allied player dropped, and not long after the other did as well. Game froze, refused to give a Victory screen, and after I dropped manually it crashed.

Yes I've had this happen to me several times, it sucks.

M10 TDs are nice, but I would not spam them. Use them with other tanks, or better yet, use them to flank an enemy; have AT guns firing AP shells from the front and drive a few M10s in from behind, both have very powerful shots, and will even drop Tigers in short order. If you just rush in M10s, don't expect good results unless you have a serious advantage.

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

Panthers suck ass against infantry. For Defensive player especially (which I often use) the Panzer IV fills a vital role. StuGs can be a cheap substitute if necessary, but Panzers are faster, sturdier, have turrets and more MGs.

[Rekkon]

I usually perfer the PanzerIV; more often than not I can build tanks before I can call in tigers, PanverIVs are solid tanks, decent against infantry too, give them a little infantry support, and save up until the heavy armor arrives. Panthers cost too much, I'd rather something cheaper thats still decent until the big guns arrive.

I use Stugs in that role. My usual strategy is to tech fairly hard to Stugs (not an ignore all else teching though), then produce several and support them with infantry. Usually this is at least sufficient until the manpower/fuel is available for heavy tanks. I never seem to have a fuel problem with the Axis (unless we are losing badly), but the darn stuff always seems to be holding me back as Allies.

If you are going to spend the resources on Veterancy upgrades, then I can see the Panzer IVs being useful. My current style typically ignores the upgrades in favor of more units faster. If I am facing a lot of Allied armor, the Panther is superior in firepower and survivability. If they are infantry heavy, I bring in a Flakpanzer or two. For me the Panzer IV typically occupies a middle ground niche that is not often worthwhile, whereas one of my usual teammates likes having several with the veterancy upgrades as his armor core. I typically rely on Stugs and AT guns until I can make the jump to heavy armor. Usually does not come back to bite me, but from experience I can tell you not to try using Stugs against Pershings.

[InnocentBystander]

I usually perfer the PanzerIV; more often than not I can build tanks before I can call in tigers, PanverIVs are solid tanks, decent against infantry too, give them a little infantry support, and save up until the heavy armor arrives. Panthers cost too much, I'd rather something cheaper thats still decent until the big guns arrive.

I use Stugs in that role. My usual strategy is to tech fairly hard to Stugs (not an ignore all else teching though), then produce several and support them with infantry. Usually this is at least sufficient until the manpower/fuel is available for heavy tanks. I never seem to have a fuel problem with the Axis (unless we are losing badly), but the darn stuff always seems to be holding me back as Allies.

If you are going to spend the resources on Veterancy upgrades, then I can see the Panzer IVs being useful. My current style typically ignores the upgrades in favor of more units faster. If I am facing a lot of Allied armor, the Panther is superior in firepower and survivability. If they are infantry heavy, I bring in a Flakpanzer or two. For me the Panzer IV typically occupies a middle ground niche that is not often worthwhile, whereas one of my usual teammates likes having several with the veterancy upgrades as his armor core. I typically rely on Stugs and AT guns until I can make the jump to heavy armor. Usually does not come back to bite me, but from experience I can tell you not to try using Stugs against Pershings.

Flakpanzers are great against infantry, but I feel that Panzer IVs are plenty good, plus they fill the anti-tank roll, when I'm building my first tank, and have to choose one tank, I'll take the Panzer IV. I don't break out the panthers unless the match turns into tank fest where both sides can afford large numbers of heavy vehicles.

[Cincinnatus]

Hey, wow, I have the second longest streak on 2v2 as the Allies. I technically shouldn't because of that game I would have lost, but that's still pretty cool.

I'm not that great at this game, but I've noticed that a lot of people online are pretty bad. I've seen games that have lasted a long time, but the Nazi player never even builds Stuggs, even at high rankings. I don't know how they could have won enough games to get that far.

EDIT: Well, now I don't, I just lost. Oh well.

[Rekkon]

Flakpanzers are great against infantry, but I feel that Panzer IVs are plenty good, plus they fill the anti-tank roll, when I'm building my first tank, and have to choose one tank, I'll take the Panzer IV. I don't break out the panthers unless the match turns into tank fest where both sides can afford large numbers of heavy vehicles.

I usually have at least two Stugs in play by the time my Panzer Command is operational, and by that time I know if the Allies are infantry heavy or not. Along with a PAK or two, my anti-tank role is filled for the moment, so the decision to make an Ostwind is based on if I need more anti-personnel firepower. An Ostwind in reserve also makes a great reaction force if an Airborne player really really likes using Paratroopers to backcap. I never save just for the sake of saving. Not long after the Panzer Command appears, in any competitive game, I am nearing the final points needed for Tigers on either doctrine. Not spending that 400-600 on a panzer means I plan to hit the magic 1000 manpower just when I can unlock Tigers.

Out of curiosity, what is your opening strategy? I queue up three Pioneer teams, and send my starting one to the farthest point I hope to capture, usually something in the middle. My second team goes for the second farthest point. Third starts the Wehrmacht Quarters. Last team starts capping the points closest to home, usually leaving one for the third team to take after they are done building. The farthest Pioneers start placing field defenses after they cap, depending on the situation, but I almost never use the resources for bunkers or OPs this early. First thing out of the Quarters is a BMW. With it I can win skirmishes against US Engineer teams. It also gives me a scouting tool, and ensures I have one onhand if an enemy sniper appears, which can wreak you early in the game. First 50 munitions is usually spend giving one of the secondary Pioneers a flamethrower. Several times I fought off that first Riflemen unit using one flamethrower, one regular Pioneer and my BMW. After that I adapt as necessary, but the next infantry unit is usually an MG to hold territory, and a PAK second or third, unless I am being attacked enough to know they are not sparing the resources to get tanks or armored cars yet.

[weemadando]

Wait moment - there's fucking BASE BUILDING?

[Ace Pace]

Wait moment - there's fucking BASE BUILDING?

Yes, thats what turned me off the game.