|
Palani's Company of Heroes (PC)
|
| [January 19, 2007 05:05:06 AM]
|
Following another week of playing company of heroes it is now that I post my final log:
The single player experience offers sufficient depth to keep a player occupied with the use of cutscenes and varied objectives. Each level was exceedingly expansive with secondary objectives and a large map. This however left a cautious player such as myself spending far too long on an individual level, without feeling any sort of reward and offering more of a slow crawl towards the objective. For me the true strength of this game lies in its multiplayer.
As I mentioned in previous posts I have been battling cesanders across a variety of maps and exploring different strategies. In multiplayer the game seems to have a much faster pace as you scrap for objectives and a simple "load game" from the menu will not correct your tactical errors. The drive to beat a human opponent also adds more pressure to the game (especially when your trying to maintain your 5 game win streak) aswell as a more satisfying reward.
The more technical aspects such as unit balance are the best I've seen in an RTS with the two sides (Axis and Allies)having completely different play-styles yet being an even match for one another. To summarise the tactics and strategy of the game I work to a simple rock paper scissors effect:
Tank>Infantry>Anti-Tank Gun>Tank
This is of course a massive over-simplification but by attacking enemy units with your counter unit you're minimising your chance of defeat. The other advantage of such a game mechanic means that there is no super-unit which once built will win you the game.
To conclude Company of Heroes is the best RTS game I've played in a long time especially from a multiplayer stand point. I wouldn't go so far as to recommend it to people who dislike the RTS genre but its gameplay alone certainly makes it worth playing.
P.S. My score against cesanders is now 7 wins: 0 losses and its becoming very dangerous to be around him
add a comment 
|
| [January 12, 2007 01:41:32 PM]
|
In a second encounter with cesanders I was once again the victor. This time I made use of a different command tree which gave an infantry focus to the play style. With an early rush foward the central territory of the map was the subject of a series of small skirmishes. The changing frontlines demonstrate how rapid and fluid the pace of the game is as both cesanders and myself fought and lost minor advantages over one another.
With static defences being costly and mostly ineffective more resources are spent on units. This creates a more dynamic style of play as MG42 teams retreat to avoid being flanked and snipers move after each shot to avoid being found. Of course the AI does not do this on its own and the game requires exceptionally fast mouse control to micro-manage your troops out of trouble or give them the edge in an otherwise even encounter.
To better understand why I won and even analyse the play style of my opponent I saved the replay of the match. With this feature I was able to view the recent match from both sides, and it was evident that despite excellent use of cover and micro-management cesanders lost as he became too focused on individual areas of the map. Idle units and my simultaneous attacks from other areas were given little attention.
Unfortunately company of heroes does not allow an axis vs axis or allies vs allies game. Because of this it is impossible for me to directly compare myself to an opponent as each side has different units and tactics. It also means that cesanders can keep complaining about my units being overpowered giving me an early advantage. In my next blog I will play as axis to assess balance issues.
read comments (1)  -
add a comment
|
| [January 12, 2007 01:08:18 PM]
|
Much like other RTS games it takes considerable time and practice in company of heroes to become a better player. After each multiplayer match I find myself with a sense of accomplishment and confident of my own improvement.
I played a 1 on 1 match against cesanders today and have developed a preference for the allied forces (as oppose to the axis faction). Both the allied and axis forces have considerably different play styles and its a testament to the game design that the two are so well balanced. From the start of the game I used riflemen to establish a foward base and quickly established map control. This is where balance issues first started to arise as cesanders complained that his early infantry were underpowered. With map control I then started harassing his resources. Unlike other RTS games where resources are "harvested" here they are gained by means of captured territory. By taking territory behind his frontline I was able to cut supply lines reducing his resources and giving me the advantage.
Using the command tree I unlocked paratroopers which are possibly the most overpowered unit of the game as they allow for what I term "cheap tactics". By air dropping troops directly into his base I bypassed defences and quickly destroyed his HQ winning the game. It will be interesting in the future to see what tactics cesanders uses to counter this strategy.
add a comment
|
| [January 12, 2007 01:06:48 PM]
|
This entry has been edited 1 time. It was last edited on Jan 19th, 2007 at 05:09:50.
add a comment
|
| [January 12, 2007 05:10:49 AM]
|
Being in a World War 2 setting there was a distinct feeling (especially from the opening cinematics of Omaha Beach) of "been there done that" because so many games have recreated this era. The graphics and sound are exceptional right from the start as machine gun fire, explosions and even the dialogue of your units create a superb atmosphere.
An infinite supply of troops in the first mission eases you into the game (even if you didn't do the tutorials) although the difficulty escalates the moment tanks are introduced in the later missions. I found the missions refreshing with changing objectives and none of the "destroy the enemy base" style levels found in traditional RTS games, definitely a welcome change.
A multiplayer scenario gives the best representation of the gameplay, here players compete for the capture of resources and make use of an arsenal ranging from infantry to tanks and artillery. My favourite feature is not an individual unit but the destructible scenery. It creates a wealth of different strategies as tanks smash through walls bypassing potential choke points aswell as adding to the realistic atmosphere. Due to the complexity of the gameplay my traditional strategy of outnumbering my opponent with a "tank rush" is destined to fail against an opponent using cover and efficently micro-managing his squads. Company of heroes also favors the aggressive player who takes the capture points early rather than a player such as myself who would much rather sit back and let the attack come to me.
After a few hours of play I quickly found myself with enough tactical knowledge to beat other beginner players. However with a number of different tech trees for commander abilities and specialised ground forces I'm yet to fully explore all the potential strategies and tactical nuances required for victory.
add a comment
|
