From: Southern Missouri
Can't wait for this either. COH PC was the letdown of the century for me. WCS took a wrong turn at every corner IMO.
I just want a game with more depth. Although I like the CoH interaction of players during the turn, I'm just not sure if the system is almost too simplistic for my liking. Maybe it is the small number of units available, but the action almost seems too similar for every session.
Lebetron, what is it that they went wrong with? I knew you were unhappy with the direction concerning persistent ap's, but were there others. My initial reaction when I was first offered to try the game was not very good. But IMO, it still beat anything else on the market. There of course isn't much out there.
Were you a fan of the boardgame? Have you revisited it since they added classic ap's and the boardgame maps? Those have helped I guess, but I really want something with some depth. I wonder if they spent too much capital making it 3-d.
Why can't we just get a game that is like ASL? I want various buildings, many different movements, weapons, more combat results, leaders and leader actions, tons of terrain types, many different levels of units and differing types of squads etc ala ASL. I'm just not sure that CoH, even in its original form, could ever deliver that.
I'm not dissing CoH by any means, I'm just wondering if the system may be at fault.
I do like the look of HoS. Much like the looks of ASL. I am not familiar with that system either. Does it play closer to ASL?
< Message edited by Missouri_Rebel -- 3/3/2013 6:12:38 AM >
**Those who rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul
**A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have-Gerald Ford