Killer344
The Inquisitor
 Posts: 6904
|
|
« Reply #40 on: September 06, 2008, 10:32:20 am » |
|
lol ?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I get shot and it's a gay medic fixing me up, he's not gonna be fondling my balls while he does it. You can't patch a chest wound and suck a cock at the same time.
|
|
|
| M4 Sherman
|
|
« Reply #41 on: September 06, 2008, 01:26:19 pm » |
|
In realz life you could shoot the flame at the tank, and if the fire goes through the peak-holes. Or if you can get the engies on top of the tank to burn into the hatch and burn the bitches. I also wish you could kill and ostwind crew or m10 with a Grenade that would be cool.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.
Adolf Hitler
|
|
|
| Cpt.Mastaajbomb
|
|
« Reply #42 on: September 06, 2008, 01:45:03 pm » |
|
ya it must have been panzers phase 2 cuz thats the only other ww2 rts ive played
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Need Balance
|
|
|
Thtb
The German Guy
EIR Veteran Posts: 3875
|
|
« Reply #43 on: September 06, 2008, 05:03:21 pm » |
|
Thats what Man of war is for or faces of war if you want.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Cpt.Mastaajbomb
|
|
« Reply #44 on: September 08, 2008, 01:47:50 pm » |
|
Thats what Man of war is for or faces of war if you want.
whats that? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Thtb
The German Guy
EIR Veteran Posts: 3875
|
|
« Reply #45 on: September 08, 2008, 02:59:17 pm » |
|
Responding to m4 Shermans post.
You can burn tanks with a flamethrower in Man of War or faces of war, you can do a ton more things than in CoH.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Cpt.Mastaajbomb
|
|
« Reply #46 on: September 08, 2008, 05:51:49 pm » |
|
Responding to m4 Shermans post.
You can burn tanks with a flamethrower in Man of War or faces of war, you can do a ton more things than in CoH.
then why play CoH? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| AmpmX
|
|
« Reply #47 on: September 08, 2008, 05:59:05 pm » |
|
Because while FoW and MoW are slightly more realistic, they have the problems of not really being an RTS, its more of an action game where you manually aim your tanks and weapons due to crappy AI.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Bodybag2224-Armor
|
|
« Reply #48 on: September 08, 2008, 06:26:52 pm » |
|
COH is more traditional, while MOW/FOW is more......complex?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Unkn0wn
No longer retired
 Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #49 on: September 10, 2008, 04:09:42 am » |
|
I'd say FoW/MoW is pretty fucking simple and COH is more complex.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Thtb
The German Guy
EIR Veteran Posts: 3875
|
|
« Reply #50 on: September 10, 2008, 07:30:50 am » |
|
How so unk0wn?
Can you use a tank as mobile cover for your infantery in CoH?
Can you ambush in CoH?
Do you have real LOS in CoH? There are actually 3 different possiblitys for LoS in MoW.
Also Man of war is not that forgiveing.
You rush my hmg with troops + no cover?
To bad. they die. FAST.
Rush hmg in CoH - Take your time, press throw nade and throw a nade sometime whenever you feel like it.
If you get supprsed in MoW your already dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Unkn0wn
No longer retired
Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #51 on: September 10, 2008, 08:25:55 am » |
|
In MOW you just fight, it's common sense what can kill what and how you can kill units best.
In vCOH there's a whole resource system, there's a tier system, there's complicated upgrades, population, etc.
Now don't tell me vCOH is easier to play than MOW.
This is also why there'll never be a succesful MOW ranking/tournament system in place, there's nothing to fucking master or get good at.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Thtb
The German Guy
EIR Veteran Posts: 3875
|
|
« Reply #52 on: September 10, 2008, 10:58:04 am » |
|
Sure unk0wn, aka Motars are overpowered, how come that a better player will beat a weaker player all the time? There is a lot of skill envolved and you cant just spam the same unit type all over the place in the hope to exploit something.
CoH is Rts with savety wheels.
MoW is more Action focused, no savety wheels.
Where CoH says, you cant drive throw a building with a tank, mow says, Go ahead, but you might get damaged.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Unkn0wn
No longer retired
Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #53 on: September 10, 2008, 11:45:00 am » |
|
Coming from someone who never played automatch 1vs1 vCOH on a competetive level I'll just ignore that statement else you would know what you're talking about when you say vCOH is 'not complex'. Also, in COH you can't drive ' throw' a building in the first place because they realised it would harm the tactical element. That's why in vCOH infantry can still play a role when tanks come on the field, in FOW/MOW you can play nothing but tanks from start till end and still win against someone who uses a balanced force. And yes, you're right you need infantry to capture but that's generally a pretty minor role and usually they'll just sit there idle all game from that point on. Anyway, I won't continue debating this with obvious fanboys :p. I like FoW/MOW (it's the same game although most of you still live in the illusion it's such a major improvement), I really do but I completely disagree with FOW being better than COH or at least more complex/strategic/tactic. MoW is great fun to play occasionally but it's not a game I or (I think) many others would ever bother playing competetively. In result I also think it's unlikely there will ever be a competetive scene for it like there is for COH. (And even COH's options for competition fail compared to SC/WC3/etc) Let's just agree we disagree and have a different definition of 'more complex/fun/whatever'  . |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 10, 2008, 12:11:37 pm by Unkn0wn »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| M4 Sherman
|
|
« Reply #54 on: September 10, 2008, 12:02:36 pm » |
|
heres what I want to see in COH 3 for our Russian friends.  |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 10, 2008, 12:05:49 pm by M4 Sherman »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Unkn0wn
No longer retired
Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #55 on: September 10, 2008, 12:11:54 pm » |
|
You mean CoH 2? :p
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| M4 Sherman
|
|
« Reply #56 on: September 10, 2008, 12:13:19 pm » |
|
I refer to OF as Coh 2 but yes basicly.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Unkn0wn
No longer retired
Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #57 on: September 10, 2008, 12:15:34 pm » |
|
Are you spitfire?
The name changes be confusing!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| M4 Sherman
|
|
« Reply #58 on: September 10, 2008, 12:23:41 pm » |
|
Yes Spitfires died to much, I need something bigger and badder.  **I'm not going to change it again though. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 10, 2008, 12:25:27 pm by M4 Sherman »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Rahx
|
|
« Reply #59 on: September 10, 2008, 02:07:57 pm » |
|
Lol shermans died even faster than spitfires , you dumbass... SO DIE MOTHAFUCKA... *Crushes Sherman with Tiger tank.* lawl heres what I want to see in COH 3 for our Russian friends. Btw, thats an american soldier... so why do you say "for our russian friends" |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 10, 2008, 02:10:52 pm by Rahx »
|
Logged
|
why is everyone except me retarded? |
|
|
|
