Why are there so few battlegroups so long after release?

[Ba$ed]

This is different to COH 2, isn't it?

[Cesare]

4 BG are coming in the anniversary update. they will be sold as a bundle probably

[LeepriesT]

Small development team of only 150 people needs time to develop. 2 years is a very small time window.

[Felinewolfie]

Originally posted by Ba$ed:

This is different to COH 2, isn't it?

COH2 had 13 years. 2 years. Doesn't compare.
- Also +43 commanders (+ community, etc, etc...)
They needed to tweak balance, etc, first.

[Private twinkle toe 1010011]

Designing battlegroup isn't as easy as commanders in CoH2 where they ripped abilities out of the others to use. See how many panzer tactician and shock troops were present in the commanders in their rosters.

[SpitfireMkVIII]

Originally posted by Felinewolfie:

COH2 had 13 years. 2 years. Doesn't compare.
- Also +43 commanders (+ community, etc, etc...)
They needed to tweak balance, etc, first.

Saying CoH2 had "13 years" is a bit disingenuous. The last group of commanders (Grand Offensive, Strategic Reserves, Airborne, Lend-Lease, Urban Assault) were added in the November 2019 patch. The vast majority came within the first three years. Everything from 2019 to 2021 was balancing and bug fixes, with the last major update arriving in September 2021.

Either way, CoH3 has fallen well behind CoH2's 2015 pace in terms of adding new content. Read through the changelog[www.coh2.org]yourself if you're curious. Given all that Relic's went through last year, I can't say I blame them.

[ShodaN]

Originally posted by Private twinkle toe 1010011:

Designing battlegroup isn't as easy as commanders in CoH2 where they ripped abilities out of the others to use. See how many panzer tactician and shock troops were present in the commanders in their rosters.

Exactly. CoH2 commanders had maybe like 2 unique things to them each, while the rest was just shared abilities, passives or units, which were already in the game and on other commanders as well - fully implemented.

Like a KV-8 flamethrower tank is the same across all 5 Soviet commanders that it is in. Wehrmacht Panzer Tactician is in a full 6 commanders. The P4 command tank in 5. So are Shock Troops. And those are only in 5 now, because community patching replaced some with minor variations like Assault Guards and Guards Airborne Troops much later.

[Eazy_V]

Originally posted by Felinewolfie:

Originally posted by Ba$ed:

This is different to COH 2, isn't it?

COH2 had 13 years. 2 years. Doesn't compare.
- Also +43 commanders (+ community, etc, etc...)
They needed to tweak balance, etc, first.

The Visual Artists responsible for the 3D models, pictures, effects, animations for sure won't be coding for balance. There is a dedicated balance team while the rest was doing god knows what.

I understand the issues they had with the SEGA split but this is just SLOW AS ♥♥♥♥

[Rangefinder]

Originally posted by LeepriesT:

Small development team of only 150 people needs time to develop. 2 years is a very small time window.

then they shouldnt have released yet

[Demonic Spoon]

Originally posted by Ba$ed:

This is different to COH 2, isn't it?

CoH2 commanders are significantly smaller. Additionally, many of the COH2 commanders reused abilities - either multiple commanders just had the same abilities as each other (just shifted around), or the abilities did smaller/easier-to-implement things like giving infantry flares or the ability to build sandbags (which already exist in the game).

There's more unique abilities in the 4 USF battlegroups currently out than in all of the USF commanders, for example.

[Harris]

Originally posted by Private twinkle toe 1010011:

Designing battlegroup isn't as easy as commanders in CoH2

But it's a self-inflicted issue. Back when John made a post explaining those things, I pointed out that battlegroups are problematic:

1) they take more resources to make - which right now at Relic are at premium
2) they are perceived as "less content than COH2", and the fact you can make different choices within battlegroups don't help at all - options are rarely born equal, and people are gonna stick to what works best

I feel they should've reworked this system - either go back to commanders, or let people make their custom battlegroups, making abilities "weight" certain number of points for balance's sake. Naturally, they're welcome to ignore this feedback, but at this point, what else can we do for them?

That said, my understanding is a lot of specialists are needed to create new content - the kind of people who you wouldn't keep around and on payroll after the release, at best they're getting moved to other projects. I mean, the majority of sales for COH3 already happened, and it's hard for them to justify big commitment to the game at this point.

So we have a thermonuclear combination of a large-scale task and it most likely being done by a skeleton crew chained to their desks down in the basement. No wonder it's gonna take them a while. Sure, they're saving on wages this way, but they still end up paying in patience and trust of the community - which is definitely a finite resource. On the other hand, it's either we get updates like that or don't get them at all - this is the price we have to pay for RTS not nearly being as popular as shooters or RPG.

[SpitfireMkVIII]

Originally posted by Harris:

But it's a self-inflicted issue. Back when John made a post explaining those things, I pointed out that battlegroups are problematic:

1) they take more resources to make - which right now at Relic are at premium
2) they are perceived as "less content than COH2", and the fact you can make different choices within battlegroups don't help at all - options are rarely born equal, and people are gonna stick to what works best

I feel they should've reworked this system - either go back to commanders, or let people make their custom battlegroups, making abilities "weight" certain number of points for balance's sake. Naturally, they're welcome to ignore this feedback, but at this point, what else can we do for them?

That said, my understanding is a lot of specialists are needed to create new content - the kind of people who you wouldn't keep around and on payroll after the release, at best they're getting moved to other projects. I mean, the majority of sales for COH3 already happened, and it's hard for them to justify big commitment to the game at this point.

So we have a thermonuclear combination of a large-scale task and it most likely being done by a skeleton crew chained to their desks down in the basement. No wonder it's gonna take them a while. Sure, they're saving on wages this way, but they still end up paying in patience and trust of the community - which is definitely a finite resource. On the other hand, it's either we get updates like that or don't get them at all - this is the price we have to pay for RTS not nearly being as popular as shooters or RPG.

Very well put.

The vast majority of CoH3's follies can best be surmised as 'self-inflicted'. Making the setting World War 2 immediately drew comparisons to CoH1 and 2. Sticking with the interchangeable commander/battlegroup system made people compare it to CoH2.

In the face of adversity, they needed to innovate; to go in a completely different direction so as not to draw these harsh comparisons. Instead, they produced a slightly more barren version of a game they released 13 years prior, and which to this day still has more people playing it.

[SpitfireMkVIII]

Originally posted by ShodaN:

Exactly. CoH2 commanders had maybe like 2 unique things to them each, while the rest was just shared abilities, passives or units, which were already in the game and on other commanders as well - fully implemented.

Like a KV-8 flamethrower tank is the same across all 5 Soviet commanders that it is in. Wehrmacht Panzer Tactician is in a full 6 commanders. The P4 command tank in 5. So are Shock Troops. And those are only in 5 now, because community patching replaced some with minor variations like Assault Guards and Guards Airborne Troops much later.

"2 unique things"? That's a bit of hyperbole. But even treating your statement as true, what's the matter with having more options available to the player?

Say I want to use the KV1, but I'm not a fan of the Shock Troops that come with the Counterattack Tactics commander. Luckily, I have the Guard Rifle Combined Arms and the Conscripts Support commanders to choose from - both of which feature 4 other abilities unique to one another.

I understand CoH3 tries to marry the two by offering this unique "skill tree" approach, where one decision locks you out from the other... but on paper it still looks like less commanders.

[Cesare]

in the bigger picture, all commanders have copy/paste abilities, with new units. BGs will make everything unique

[Harris]

Originally posted by SpitfireMkVIII:

In the face of adversity, they needed to innovate; to go in a completely different direction so as not to draw these harsh comparisons. Instead, they produced a slightly more barren version of a game they released 13 years prior, and which to this day still has more people playing it.

Honestly, I did not really need innovation from Relic per se. A conservative, iterative sequel would be enough. Most "innovations" amount to things like clear building, which is used once in a blue moon.

On the other hand, "more barren version" is spot on. I personally miss Soviets from COH2, and I feel a lot of people do, too. This, along with the new approach to commanders contributed, I feel, to the overall perception of "COH2 but less/worse".

Originally posted by SpitfireMkVIII:

Say I want to use the KV1, but I'm not a fan of the Shock Troops that come with the Counterattack Tactics commander.

See, this is why I think it would be rad to let us unlock units and abilities and then mix-and-match in our own commander builds. Within reason of course, but still. Dozens of commanders in COH2 felt like you're getting overwhelmed (if not spammed) by them; it's hard to justify them existing for other reason than to make people buy them separately as mtx.

Originally posted by Cesare:

BGs will make everything unique

Yeah, but at what cost? So the 4 BGs drop, each with ~3 commanders in terms of content each. People are gonna figure out the meta quickly, at which point it's gonna become effectively 4 commanders (played the same way every time) as opposed to 12.

The novelty of those heavy tanks is gonna wear off quickly - that's even assuming they'll be implemented in a way we actually see them in games, because most are decided early on by rifle squads. And then what? Relic is simply incapable of supporting COH3 with new content at the rate we would like them to - or at the rate to keep sustained interest to the game.

[SpitfireMkVIII]

Originally posted by Harris:

Most "innovations" amount to things like clear building, which is used once in a blue moon.

lol, you're right. I'm reminded of "Cold Tech" in CoH2 which I immediately turned off and never ever turned back on. Too bad you can't do that with Breaching.