Better or worse than CoH?

[Faintestidea]

I was thinking about buying this from humble. Would you say it's worse or better than CoH? The demo seems pretty decent, not as serious as CoH but still strategy. Opinions?

[76561198006170904]

For me it is a lot slower than coh. At least campaign, i'm not going online, because I know my as will be murdered.. And it have a lot of more detail than coh, i mean you have to lure enemy bodies, so that your guys would have bullets. Tanks can have damages in a lot of places and you need to fix it. It is a great ww2 rts, but a coh with it's fast pace is more enjoyable. If you like to micromanage everything, then go for it.

[Shaq]

It's a great rts,depends on whether you like to build large armies or make each unit count,CoH is about base building and managing your resources,but MoW is more about micromanaging and customizng every unit.

[Jim]

''Not as serious as CoH''
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Get out.

[Miraged]

I grabbed it from Humble. Its beyond discounted and part goes to charity.

[Relnor]

It's much better than CoH as far as I'm concerned. CoH is very limited in comparison and certainly way less realistic ( I wouldn't say MoW is super realistic, but by comparison anyway ).

CoH is much closer to Starcraft as an RTS, while MoW is during quite a few of the campaign missions more like Commandos instead.

Also - Tank + Direct Control >>>>>>> Right clicking your tanks around in CoH

[Hara]

I wouldn't even compare the two. CoH just pissed me off on numerous instances. I've had entrenched machine gunners taken out by some German SMG troops running across a huge open field in the effective range of the MG's. I've thrown multiple AT grenades at a tank and have barely anything happen to it.
Just no. It's like CoH is all about whose stat numbers are bigger, while MoW is about tactics.

Tanks are clunky and vulnerable in close-quarters, all it takes is one soldier with an AT grenade to mess it up. You need the infantry to keep the tank covered. A well-placed squad will take down hordes of enemies if they don't adjust their tactics.
That and the direct-control gives it another edge, better control, more on-hand action.

It remains the only RTS I can enjoy.

[Nuclear Kangaroo]

i got the game in the humble bundle, its definitely not a looker... or a sounder, worst voice acting ive heard, laughably terrible

HOWEVER, the gameplay is very very good, ill just say that CoH 1 is still my 5th favorite game ever, but this one fills a nice little spot, kind of reminds me of commandos 2


since i got red tide alongside the base game, ill keep my eye out on the next sale for assault squad which is the other good expansion


anyways, is it better than CoH 1? in my opinion, no, is it still a great game? in my opinion yes

however compared to CoH 2, the gap between the game is less, mostly because CoH 2 was such a disappointment for me

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Relnor:

It's much better than CoH as far as I'm concerned. CoH is very limited in comparison and certainly way less realistic ( I wouldn't say MoW is super realistic, but by comparison anyway ).

CoH is much closer to Starcraft as an RTS, while MoW is during quite a few of the campaign missions more like Commandos instead.

Also - Tank + Direct Control >>>>>>> Right clicking your tanks around in CoH

CoH 1 is still a long shot from starcraft

[Relnor]

Yeah, CoH and Starcraft are hardly closely related, but it is closer to SC than MoW imo. (abstracted resource management - albeit different collection method, base building, focus on stats )

I could've said it's close to DoW, but really, it just IS DoW, so I didn't mention that =p

[Nuclear Kangaroo]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Relnor:

Yeah, CoH and Starcraft are hardly closely related, but it is closer to SC than MoW imo. (abstracted resource management - albeit different collection method, base building, focus on stats )

I could've said it's close to DoW, but really, it just IS DoW, so I didn't mention that =p

more or less, its a refinement of the mechanics found in the first DOWII

[Bazooka Joe]

Men of War is no doubt the better choice because I have respect for THQ and CoH but the only reason CoH is a big deal game is because its made by THQ and is now owned by SEGA the makers of the award-winning Total War series now i have palyed all of these games and compared if I have a medium tank and u have a heavy tank say a IS vs. a Pz.4 one shot could win it for me and thats how it was in real life and the variety and magintude the battles can transform into is huge and i always thought CoH was better not really anymore.

[poshD]

Basically MOW missions sticks you with a bunch of resources, men, tanks and then says "ok, now go win this thing". Sometimes you get reinforcements, that helps. But as mentioned by others in this forum, its quite different from COH which plays more like an RTS game. This has more Commandos 2 elements in it and if you can get over the funny voice acting, it's quite a blast.

[Bacon.熏肉.[DK | Newbee]]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Hellz:

Men of War is no doubt the better choice because I have respect for THQ and CoH but the only reason CoH is a big deal game is because its made by THQ and is now owned by SEGA the makers of the award-winning Total War series now i have palyed all of these games and compared if I have a medium tank and u have a heavy tank say a IS vs. a Pz.4 one shot could win it for me and thats how it was in real life and the variety and magintude the battles can transform into is huge and i always thought CoH was better not really anymore.

Actually CoH came out quite a bit in time before MoW and was pretty unique at the time for typical RTS games that use base-building and build queues.

[Bazooka Joe]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von ‡ ße®et ‡:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Hellz:

Men of War is no doubt the better choice because I have respect for THQ and CoH but the only reason CoH is a big deal game is because its made by THQ and is now owned by SEGA the makers of the award-winning Total War series now i have palyed all of these games and compared if I have a medium tank and u have a heavy tank say a IS vs. a Pz.4 one shot could win it for me and thats how it was in real life and the variety and magintude the battles can transform into is huge and i always thought CoH was better not really anymore.

Actually CoH came out quite a bit in time before MoW and was pretty unique at the time for typical RTS games that use base-building and build queues.

Now I'm not knocking COH becasue i know that it came out in 2007 while MOW in 2009. Now no doubt that COH was unique but it didn't take long for this game to sit on top of it. The only reason COH is well--known was because it is done by THQ (at least what was THQ before it went out of business) THQ the makers of the Saints Row series Warhammer and other hit games and thats why it is a metascore of 94 while MOW only 80/81, adn is far better known.

[Bacon.熏肉.[DK | Newbee]]

Back to OP, It's different style of game. Men of War is more like a combination of Microsoft's Close Combat series and Commandos then it is a Company of Heroes clone.

[Pte Maylam]

It's a shame, because lots of the mechanics of MoW are excellent, especially regarding vehicles (kill your first tank, never look back!). However, Company of Heroes feels a lot more polished. The graphics look a lot better, the animations are a lot better, even the idles (in MoW, once your soldier stops moving, be more or less stands like a statue. In CoH, the soldiers constantly look around, move around, change posture, and I do think it adds something. CoH is enjoyable, especailly with mods such as Eastern Front, The Great War and the European Theatre Mod (truly outstanding revamp). The voices, especially (in my opinion) the British ones, are extremely well done indeed. The camera is also a lot better than in MoW.

The two combined would be something very spectacular indeed.