• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

[Game] Company of Heroes: Tales of Valor

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Psycho_Sam

Psycho_Sam

Grizzled Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
1,242
16
36
Birmingham, UK
www.rawgames.co.uk
#1
PC Gamer: Christmas 2008

Strategy Shrinks
The Company of Heroes expansion is a mini adventure in itself

Next year, Relic go experimental. They've spent the last few years polishing the traditional, C&C - derived RTS up to a shine with Dawn of War and Company of Heroes, but it's time to move on.

We already know Dawn of War 2 shifts from standard base-building to focused man-love in small squads, and now the second Company of Heroes expansion promises something similar. Tales of Valor (oh, how we mourn the missing 'u') is centered around three under-two-hour bitesize campaigns - each a tale of valour, presumably - starring just a few units.

Not just workaday units, either - they're specific characters from the between - mission cutscenes, so you'll hopefully form enough attachment to want to keep them alive. Even the ominous angles of a tank become not just a token unit, but a star.

In the German Wehrmacht campaign, you've just one Tiger Tank to play with, and a full British armour batallion to defeat. So that Tiger will mean everything to you, and you can show your love by taking direct control of its turret to pick off specific enemy enemies or lay down supressing fire. It promises to be bold stuff.

Over in multiplayer land there's a bunch of new shiny, too. Not so much of the standard new unit/army rigmarole, but rather a bunch of specifically co-op skirmishes. Again, some of these eschew base-building for a straight up warfare - for instance two players having their fixed, limited armies protect a town from vast waves of Axis attackers.

Perhaps best of all, though, ToV promises an ongoing feature for the original Company of Heroes, rather than another expansion or two and then death or sequel. Sort of like Neverwinter Nights, you'll be able to download new camaigns, maps and units directly into the game - no doubt with a price tag, but surely it's worth it to make one of the best RTSes of recent times into something that just keeps giving.
Click to expand...
So to recap;
  • 3 Campaigns - 2 Hours playtime each (6 hours total)
  • 1 Campaign focuses on a Tiger Ace (Michael Whitmann?)
  • 2 player co-op skirmishes
  • Downloadable content
  • Compatible with original CoH
 
#17
The Masta said:
why?
Click to expand...

A lot of things just make CoH a bad rts. The main thing is the game was never balanced from the beginning so every patch was like a complete overhaul of the game. There was never a time when a patch was about minor tweaks and refinement of gameplay. Many units have no niche in the game and are never used. Many aspects of gameplay are just completely random and can be very frustrating, eg. sometimes tanks at 5% health will deflect 20 hits, sometimes none. The game was slow paced before british, and with them even playing against a complete noob takes 15min, a good britsh player can drag the game out for an hour quite easily even when playing disatvantaged the whole game. By far the worst aspect of the game are the support powers, most of which are 'i win' buttons (strafing run) or serve as clunky comeback mechanics that further drag out the game (King Tiger).


Sorry for ranting but thats what happens when people go calling CoH the best rts.
 
Upvote 0
#19
You see, I think alot of what you just said is what makes CoH a great RTS.

First off with the length of the games, even against good players, most of my matches last around 45 minutes. And I think thats what makes it so fun, even when you do lose. It's not this rush-fest that StarCraft is. Playing out your units to the best of their abilities, strategy and teamwork generally win out over being able to micro your economy to the nanoseconds.

And that ties into the "I win" abilities. Strafing run is phenomenal only when units are clustered, otherwise it's just a huge waste of munitions. The King Tiger is an end game ability, which is where you should never allow the Germans to get to, even in a 45 minute game (at least not very far). It's really not that hard of a tank to fight if you have rangers or an American with smokescreen and took the armored route (instant healing and free units when they die). But even so, these abilities make the game interesting.

I can sympethize with the patches and some of the random aspects. I hate it when 1v1 I lose with a Stug against and un-upgraded Sherman when he isn't outmanuevering me at all. But I really shouldn't be in such an isolated fight to begin with, I should have some infantry (almost all german infantry of AT capabilities of some sort) or something else to help in the fight. As for the patches, yes, alot are somewhat drastic, but I think they'll get to a true balance eventually. I didn't like it when the Sticky bombs where nerfed in beta (it seems to be close to original now though) or when the Ostwind was temporarily OP (firepower upgrade and made infantry scatter), but its getting better. But even in matches, if one side goes all British or all Panzer elite, they will get beat by a mixed army side.

As for the no niche units, I think thats untrue. Many units that fell out of my favor are coming back. Like the Mortarman for instance. I used him in the beginning but later he seemed like a liability, but lately, I've put him to extremely good use in breaking up infantry rushes, light vehicles and garrisoned infantry in buildings and trenches. There's just a time and place for certain units and generally, variety makes a force stronger in CoH.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu