So is this MoW "2" really?

[CerveroMalakias]

(Ill try not to be a troll cause is not my intention).Im being dissapointed as far as what I saw on videos. I didnt played it, and I think I wont play it. Just let me know the new things that this game has cause I dont see that much improvement if we compare it to Assault Squad 2. Graphically is the same,explosions look.. okey I guess but not that much better, animations are still the same kind of robotic ones though they added a few more, they didnt even change the voices of the troops!. If we compared it from CoH 1 to CoH 2 the advance was really bigger on them. What I see here is a lazy Men of War which could be named as a minor Men of War and not to carry the number 2, which should have much more upgrades. For what I saw GoH looks much better and is nearer to deserve the "number 2" than this game.

[GlassMan]

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

(Ill try not to be a troll cause is not my intention).Im being dissapointed as far as what I saw on videos. I didnt played it, and I think I wont play it. Just let me know the new things that this game has cause I dont see that much improvement if we compare it to Assault Squad 2. Graphically is the same,explosions look.. okey I guess but not that much better, animations are still the same kind of robotic ones though they added a few more, they didnt even change the voices of the troops!. If we compared it from CoH 1 to CoH 2 the advance was really bigger on them. What I see here is a lazy Men of War which could be named as a minor Men of War and not to carry the number 2, which should have much more upgrades. For what I saw GoH looks much better and is nearer to deserve the "number 2" than this game.

So this is ignorance, really?

1. This is a sequel to MoW not MoWAS2, so even if all this non-sense was right it would still be a massive improvement on that.
2. You got to be blind to not see the difference, but I guess facts are just fairy wishes to you.
3. Did not play any of the betas that improved the game massively in terms of quality and visuals. This effectively lowers the value of your opinion to 0 .
4. I am a nice guy...so I will explain anyway: YES, THIS IS REALLY MEN OF WAR II (the number is a Roman numeral for your info).

[CerveroMalakias]

1. I know that is a sequel to MoW, if I compare it to Assault Squad 2 is cause is the last MoW in the series, so it has sense to compare both and not the first one which is much older.
2.Seriously you see a huge difference compared to MoW Assault Squad 2? tell me the facts cause you didnt.
3.If I dont play the beta is because of what I explained and visally talking Gates of Hell looks much better. In my opinion playing the beta is not worth the time seeing what I saw.
4. I will act like I didnt read that.

[General T.Montana Tropic Thunder]

This game of course is in no way a match with the original World in Conflict game,
but IMHO it's the first proper RTS after 15 years.

Missing out on this game is like skipping Cyberpunk 2077 nowadays.

If one likes the Rambo III movie and does not complain afterwards that`s it unrealistic, then that helps

This is Saving Private Ryan in multiplayer.

------

Other RTS games:

I will not mention the title Company of Comedy 3, because mentioning that game franchise nowadays to someone is a sin.

Eugene could have made something great with their Steel Division Series,
compared to this game SD2 is like playing zoomed-out in Google Street Maps

The Wargame Series has never further evolved and Warno is a dead game.

One would have to see how the "Broken Arrow" game plays out, once its released.

I considered Call to Arms: Gates of Hell, but gave it a pass for various reasons - One of the reasons was playing this game.
It has 82% Steam User ratings, which is good.

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

So is this MoW "2" really?

[GlassMan]

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

1. I know that is a sequel to MoW, if I compare it to Assault Squad 2 is cause is the last MoW in the series, so it has sense to compare both and not the first one which is much older.
2.Seriously you see a huge difference compared to MoW Assault Squad 2? tell me the facts cause you didnt.
3.If I dont play the beta is because of what I explained and visally talking Gates of Hell looks much better. In my opinion playing the beta is not worth the time seeing what I saw.
4. I will act like I didnt read that.

Why would anyone bother, there have been enough materials and announcements that would answer any questions you might have. You are just one of the GoH drones that pop-up under every video with their "GoH is better mantra"no matter what I write. This approach might have been fine with the first open beta, but after 4 of them...feels simply lazy.
As I own GoH and all the subsequent CtA DLCs I simply see MoWII as a different approach to the topic, with a new engine, modding tools and full-fat matchmaking for its three main MP modes that satisfy anyone from greenhorn mainstreamers to number of the Old Guard. The frontline mechanic alone sells me on the game as it brings in a much more fun than mere destruction.

[CerveroMalakias]

Originally posted by General T.Montana Tropic Thunder:

This game of course is in no way a match with the original World in Conflict game,
but IMHO it's the first proper RTS after 15 years.

Missing out on this game is like skipping Cyberpunk 2077 nowadays.

If one likes the Rambo III movie and does not complain afterwards that`s it unrealistic, then that helps :D

This is Saving Private Ryan in multiplayer.

I will not mention the title Company of Comedy 3, because mentioning that game franchise nowadays to someone is a sin.

Eugene could have made something great with their Steel Division Series,
compared to this game SD2 is like playing zoomed-out in Google Street Maps :D

The Wargame Series has never further evolved and Warno is a dead game.

One would have to see how the "Broken Arrow" game plays out, once its released.

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

So is this MoW "2" really?

Warno is clear evolution from Wargame, that is what I want for Mow

[General T.Montana Tropic Thunder]

Originally posted by GlassMan:

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

1. I know that is a sequel to MoW, if I compare it to Assault Squad 2 is cause is the last MoW in the series, so it has sense to compare both and not the first one which is much older.
2.Seriously you see a huge difference compared to MoW Assault Squad 2? tell me the facts cause you didnt.
3.If I dont play the beta is because of what I explained and visally talking Gates of Hell looks much better. In my opinion playing the beta is not worth the time seeing what I saw.
4. I will act like I didnt read that.

Why would anyone bother, there have been enough materials and announcements that would answer any questions you might have. You are just one of the GoH drones that pop-up under every video with their "GoH is better mantra"no matter what I write. This approach might have been fine with the first open beta, but after 4 of them...feels simply lazy.
As I own GoH and all the subsequent CtA DLCs I simply see MoWII as a different approach to the topic, with a new engine, modding tools and full-fat matchmaking for its three main MP modes that satisfy anyone from greenhorn mainstreamers to number of the Old Guard. The frontline mechanic alone sells me on the game as it brings in a much more fun than mere destruction.

+1
The matchmaking and all associated multiplayer things are well done,
I also love setting up and messing around with unit decks for mp matches.
It`s just all fun joy and a great overall package :)

[GlassMan]

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

Originally posted by General T.Montana Tropic Thunder:

This game of course is in no way a match with the original World in Conflict game,
but IMHO it's the first proper RTS after 15 years.

Missing out on this game is like skipping Cyberpunk 2077 nowadays.

If one likes the Rambo III movie and does not complain afterwards that`s it unrealistic, then that helps :D

This is Saving Private Ryan in multiplayer.

I will not mention the title Company of Comedy 3, because mentioning that game franchise nowadays to someone is a sin.

Eugene could have made something great with their Steel Division Series,
compared to this game SD2 is like playing zoomed-out in Google Street Maps :D

The Wargame Series has never further evolved and Warno is a dead game.

One would have to see how the "Broken Arrow" game plays out, once its released.

Warno is clear evolution from Wargame, that is what I want for Mow

That is a very specific order. I love WARNO as it is, but the combat part of it still feels like somewhat "lane" based combat from Steel Division.

The thing is, MoW was always about the smaller scale with larger scale battles being the "culmination points" in the campaign. So I am afraid that unless the focus and audience changes it will never be the "Total War" with a massive number of units or long WARNO
frontline. Though it sounds exciting I have to admit. It is just tiresome that people want copies of copies of what they like instead of something new. But I get it.

[General T.Montana Tropic Thunder]

If one wants to throw a smoke grenade, then storm the house, shovel the guys inside and then get splattered by an Elephant driving through the collapsing house and then a buddy blows up the tank tracks with a grenade, then you knife the Elephant tank crew jumping out ...If one likes this type of action, then this is the go to game

[QUANTUM MECHANICS c000021a]

People use to compare wrong things. Better and more logical is to compare MoW1 2009 and MoWAS1 2011.
Both great games MoW was sequel to FoW and MoWAS1 a spinoff to MoW.
Now we can compare GoH and MoW 2.

MoW2 has basicaly the same core features as GoH means almost the same vehicle damage system based on range and penetration value of the fired shell.

[CerveroMalakias]

I think is logical to compare MoW AS2 to MoW 2 cause the first one was the last entrance in the series and thats the thing, I dont see that much upgrade, though Im thinking about to play the beta and taste it by my self

Originally posted by QUANTUM MECHANICS c000021a:

People use to compare wrong things. Better and more logical is to compare MoW1 2009 and MoWAS1 2011.
Both great games MoW was sequel to FoW and MoWAS1 a spinoff to MoW.
Now we can compare GoH and MoW 2.

MoW2 has basicaly the same core features as GoH means almost the same vehicle damage system based on range and penetration value of the fired shell.

[General T.Montana Tropic Thunder]

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

I think is logical to compare MoW AS2 to MoW 2 cause the first one was the last entrance in the series and thats the thing, I dont see that much upgrade, though Im thinking about to play the beta and taste it by my self

Originally posted by QUANTUM MECHANICS c000021a:

People use to compare wrong things. Better and more logical is to compare MoW1 2009 and MoWAS1 2011.
Both great games MoW was sequel to FoW and MoWAS1 a spinoff to MoW.
Now we can compare GoH and MoW 2.

MoW2 has basicaly the same core features as GoH means almost the same vehicle damage system based on range and penetration value of the fired shell.

Give it a try :)
Either there will be another play test or they will release the game.

[Immaluckez]

Try Gates of Hell, its better in terms of realism in my opinion

[General T.Montana Tropic Thunder]

Originally posted by Sharpy:

Try Gates of Hell, its better in terms of realism in my opinion

Your recommendation is a good game too.

[Hian Gomes]

Originally posted by Tukki:

I considered Call to Arms: Gates of Hell, but gave it a pass for various reasons - One of the reasons was playing this game.
It has 82% Steam User ratings, which is good.

Originally posted by CerveroMalakias:

So is this MoW "2" really?

Gates of hell is one of the most imprecise, random games, to get an idea if you try to penetrate a tank that is in the same place, at the same time you might not be able to do it, the armor of the vehicles was modified at their pleasure, a A good example is the Tiger with its incredible 130mm of armor, it is more armored than the Panther frontally,

the weak that the "legendary" should have are actually non-existent, the matchs turns in a tiger have 210 range, kill it or lose it.

everything that can destroy a tiger have 190, 200 range, it will shoot first and will kill everything and you will need to flank it also since it have 130mm of frontal armor

it's the only game in which I saw a tiger manage to bounce a massive 152mm cannon on an equal ground.

[QUANTUM MECHANICS c000021a]

Originally posted by Hian Gomes:

Gates of hell is one of the most imprecise a A good example is the Tiger with its incredible 130mm of armor, it is more armored than the Panther frontally,

Tiger I turret mantlet has around 200mm of armor, many Tigers had additional front armor protection in form of tracks attached to front hull. Those tracks were some 30mm thick. End of story.