@@CapybaraConnoisseur89I would love to have Japan even though they had poorer tanks compared to the allies they still had a few that could take on a Sherman
The thing with the Italian Dynamic Campaign is that it isn't trying to be like Total War's campaign map; it's trying to be the successor of CoH2's Ardennes Assault Campaign which was well received by the community. Like, playing CoH2's AA campaign will make you understand majority of what CoH3's Italy campaign is putting out. I will still say though that yeah there should've been a better introduction to the system. Still, I advice to not look at this from a Total War perspective, and instead look at this through the Ardennes Assault perspective.
What aggravates me is that it looks like they really didn't use North Africa or Sicily with the Western Allied dynamic campaign. In spite of how those are precisely the places you'd use to introduce the mechanics of the game system. And agreed, this is an elaboration of the Ardennes Offensive, not Total War per se.
As someone who played ardennes assault and enjoyed it, CoH 3 campaign is a giant letdown! It is repetitive, has ui issues, graphical glitches, and a terrible storyline that doesn’t really add up all that well, and in my opinion the worst part is the dollar general versions of Patton and Montgomery that they put in to add some tension to the allied alliances side, it barely effects anything and is so horribly done! Oh and I forgot how you could essentially speed run the “missions” (glorified low difficulty skirmishes) to complete them! I feel like they also gimped the game as an excuse to put it on console
My dream for Coh3 is for it to evolve over the years to include the western eastern and pacific fronts hopefully including France Soviets OstheerOKW the US Marines/ANZAC and the Japanese army
I wish that too, but I doubt it. Their pre-order bonus was skins for multiplayer… my guesses they’ll go down the CoH2 path and just concentrate on multiplayer.
First issue I noticed in the campaign is that the ai makes terrible decisions during real time battles. Instead of playing objectives, the ai is constantly rushing units through the front line to capture points deep in my territory instead of pushing the front line back or pushing objectives to win.
Yea it’s basically whack-a-mole AI. I think the reviewer is right that it would be a huge improvement if more of the missions focused on a defense/ timed attack objective and there are pre randomized waves of enemies you have to dynamically react to. They already have a template for one, they could just add variation and difficulty levels to it depending on the situation
I assume that they chose to program the AI quite heavily around the capture points on a map since those are generally the focus in skirmish matches. So really even in most campaign battles these are largely what it sees.
I'd be willing to bet a Pacific DLC is 100% in the future. The focus on naval combat, islands, oceans etc. . It would be too easy to make a pacific campaign. I know COH1 and COH2 had western front i.e. France , Belgium etc but I think a campaign map with Western Europe would be fantastic. Dropping Paratroopers . Allied forces pushing through. A Successful Market Garden. Man that be sick.
There was a dev interview a while before release where they were asked about Pacific and claimed that it would be impossible to design. I shit you not. I was pissed when I heard them say that. I hope they were bullshitting and changed their mind but I haven't heard anything else about it from them.
@@CrizzyEyes I think it's more that Relic is owned by Sega, a Japanese company And they don't like doing things that has to do with their involvement in WW2
Whilst the tactical and interactive map isn’t perfect by any means, it is a welcome addition and something I’d love to see in more WW2 RTS games. I would love this feature in Call of Arms: Gates of Hell.
Seems like the Campaign map has some rough edges for sure but I’m glad to see another company try and blend Strategy and Tactics together like Total War. Amazing overview!
Hey Andy! Amazing video! This whole concept was introduced in LOTR BFME 2. A criminally underrated game that deserve a full recogciontion for beeing a decade ahead of its time.
@@NewKanyeFan Kind of. Close Combat which was released in 1996 has it. The world war 2 tactical strategy game had an “overworld dynamic map” that functioned how LOTR BFME 2 had and Total war. All of them are great games. But Shogan total war, the first one didn’t come out until 2000. Even close combat 4 had a good unit assigning and moving feature on the map before total war in 1999
@@NewKanyeFan There was game called "Lords of the Realm" back in 1994, Lords of the Realm II 1996, and Lords of The Realms III 2004 (this one was the worst) ppl say it was predecessor for Total War games.
I feel like this COH is probably as close as a WW2 Total War we're gonna get. The complexity of WW2 but especially the Italian front is a bit overwhelming and you can't really represent every movement and unit like it was. However the mix of turn-based map and real-time battles is what always worked out for Total War, although never in this scale. Maybe a little more polishing (or mods) can turn it into a blast
@@xavierjones9735 while I enjoy Steel Division, COH is another monster. They both deserve the reputation they have, but seeing COH try the concept of a campaign map is something I never thought I'd see before.
@mandead From what they have said about Essence it seems to be better than COH 2's launch modding tools so that's a step up I'd say. I'm not expecting good large mods in the first year or so. But the game seems pretty solid so far, same as the mod tools.
What they need to improve firsthand is the explosion effects, and adding more smoke and plume to fires and bombardments. I love this game, the gameplay is great for each army, but it’s definitely missing company of heroes three graphics , and sometimes it doesn’t feel like a company of heroes game lacking the fluff of shells hitting and the debris that gets kicked up. Not to mention, we’re fighting in deserts, and if you see any World War II footage, you’ll see tons of smoke and dust .I still think some of the sounds need to be louder as well. I feel like there’s a few units in the game that need some enhancement. Even when the artillery lands, I remember playing the first Company of heroes, and absolutely loving the way mortars and artillery comes down because it’s ear shattering, but plays well and immerses you. I really hope they improve that because it’s definitely lacking, and that’s just the truth. I still love the game very much, and very grateful for their hard work, but I think there’s an opinion amongst many of us that feels it needs to be fixed.
Do the devs have a good track record of listening to community feedback? This would be my 1st coh game, I am really considering getting it when it comes to ps.
Honestly more of the same is perfectly fine, its more of what we loved, and especially since sometimes more of the same is better than full inovation *Remember The Entry of Command and Conquer that shall not be named as a example.*
Agree with everyone you said. I think that ships & planes shouldn't contribute to pop cap as they're already limited by airfield size, fuel & munitions. I always found myself wanting to use new companies but never having the population cap to do so
Company of Heroes 3 makes me really excited for Company of Heroes 4.. Its the first step in a new direction and has great groundwork laid but so much room for improvement
I hope Relic doesn't take CoH3's mixed reception as an indictment of the Campaign map. This RTT/4X mix is what I've been craving ever since Total decided to go fantasy. They should iterate on it, and make it better, instead of abandoning it.
Did they remove gore? I saw no dismembering in the whole video or other videos for that matter. I realy liked that in COH 1 and 2, made combat a lot more visceral.
I grew up with This game series loved COH 1 it was all I had back on my old pc. In my eyes nothing will ever beat COH 1. And I personally felt that COH 2 flopped hard. From what I’ve played COH 3 seems to be the redemption that the game series needed. So far I’ve enjoyed myself. But I’m a skirmish only kinda guy. The turn based mode is cool but not what I play COH for.
gonna have to disagree with you, CoH 2 has much tighter gameplay than CoH 1. I played CoH 2 first and going to CoH 1 made me appreciate just how much they improved the gameplay in CoH 2.
I haven't purchased this yet because the reviews are so mixed. I was hoping for much better myself but maybe I'm setting my hopes high because I loved the other 2 games. After the DLC for the 2nd game made the AI waayyy too hard, I'm glad it's toned down but I'd still like a challenge. Thanks for the great review!
Id love if they build on the foundation of this and go forward fixing the issues. This has a lot of potential for a possible future Pacific theatre campaign .
Went in blind today, knew about it offcourse that's why I got it. I have to say I agree with your summary. It feels like a good foundation to build upon. But a bick lackluster in terms of visuals and audio. The campaign map suprised me, in a good way. It needs ways to tinker with it. Let's see where they take it.
Apparently the last patch screwed up the Afrika campaign. Just tried it and got to the third mission IIRC, where you have to protect the command tank. Problem is the only thing that showed up was the salvage vehicle and couldn't see the command tank anywhere on the map. The invisible command tank quickly gets destroyed and the mission is failed in less than 1 minute.
This is what they can do. they can make new maps that are better suited to fighting an attacking and defending battles with more aggressive AIs in an update once they get it working. What they can do to make things interesting is if battles at the same place happens close to each other (like say you win a battle and take a town and right after the enemy counter attacks in an attempt to take it back) craters, damaged buildings and such that occurred from the previous battle would still be there in the next battle. this would make it so battle after battle in the same location, it's constantly evolving so your tactics also have to evolve with each battle.
Looks pretty good! I think the campaign map is a huge improvement. Even just a campaign like in Panzer General 2 or Ultimate General: Civil War gives you some context for the battles, replay value, and reward for doing well, but having an actual campaign map is awesome.
Never understood why that theater doesn't get more attention. It would be perfect for Company of heroes style game which is more infantry focused than large scale tank warfare and not as overplayed as Western Europe. Like Iwo Jima mission is literally made for COH with the marines hoisting up the "VP" flag 😂
I tried the campaign in the early access, it was too complicated and unnecessarily restrictive. This is a major fail and disappointing. Total War’s campaign works because of the simplicity and straightforwardness
The review and comment section really has me question if anyone else played axis and allies for pc from 2004. The gameplay is remarkably similar, and a lot of mechanics could be inspired from that game which I wish had gotten a sequel.
I wacked this on the hardest difficulty in my first playthrough and it deff feels different to what people are saying , actually lost a few battles, causing me to lose some areas.
The gameplay for COH3 is great, the turn based feature is almost the same as Total Wars. If you played turn based games in mobile devices then it is very easy for you to play the game.
Adding "another game" in "another genre" a top of the RTS - is not an leaping improvement. Its literally genre-meshing that was in a lot of RTSs before and what, in my opinion, halts the genre back, since developers by popular demand have to make two games in one.
Coh3 is great, it brings back the feel of the first game for me. The italien campaign was a bit lackluster with too many skimish battles inbetween that would have benefitted from an autoresolve. The african campaign was good but short. The multiplayer is good, but the coop against ai is missing the part where you increase difficulty
Nice breakdown. Was wondering if I want to buy this game. Based on your input, I agree with your points. Looks like they need to make some updates and changes before I decide to buy.
Umm, I hope you're not saying that COH3 is revolutionary for having a strategic map. RTS games have done dynamic campaigns for a very long time, Steel Division 2 being the most recent example.
Why allow planes and ships if the Population Cap is so low?? That means you have to build the same couple things every game and never get to experiment.
100% agreed. It is fantastic that these devs have the balls to take risks and try something new and innovative instead of regurgitating the same stuff over and over again like Age of Empires. Other reviewers do not understand the complications that arise with trying out something new, so they just shit all over the Italian campaign. I have confidence that Relic will gradually release patches that will make this campaign the best of the entire series. It might even become a moddable platform where modders create their own massive world scale 'campaign map' with resource management and everything. The possibilities are endless. But some reviewers dont see that, hence they just have a short term view, which determines their score.
I really love and enjoy the campaign game mode and the tactical battles. Particularly how different elements can impact in real time battles. I think one of the best ways that it can be improved is by adding an entire new campaign (say Burma, pacific, Normandy, eastern front etc) or if not at least allow the opportunity to play a defensive campaign as the Germans and add more maps, of different sizes and such, to add more variety to tactical battles. Would the campaign be better with more company types?
I want to make sure I understand. So if on the campaign map I have a full army, I would still have to start a battle with limited troops having to build stuff to “recruit” my army into the battle? That doesn’t seem logical so I am assuming I misunderstand.
hopefully someone comes out with a kmod equivalent. The minimal pop caps always killed it a bit for me, k-mod felt more like what the game was supposed to be.
I wish they would take Company of Heroes outside of the constraint of realism and add more "what-ifs" stuff into the game. Like prototype tanks, tanks that were drawn and built a few models but never seen the light of day again (like in World of Tanks). Infantry weapons, chemical weapons, etc. Heck, they can take it further and make a completely alternative, retro-future style CoH World War 2 with "futuristic" stuff imagined in that period, similar to Iron Harvest and just name it something else to avoid upsetting CoH diehard fans but still retain the CoH gameplay value. The main CoH 3 problems for me has been all quality issues. The UI looks cheap and cartoony, the audio sounds cheap, no graphical upgrade and in some instances it's a downgrade (especially explosion, gun effects).
I'm glad I'm not the only one who looked at the price and recoiled backwards. Imma just delete it from my wishlist and DL CoH 1 and mod it. I understand they need money, but damn, at least make me wanna play the game for 60. I don't even care about the campaign tbh, I'm more of a skirmish type.
Whenever someone has to use CAPITALS in a sentence, I’m always gonna be assuming it’s slightly sketchy. Especially if it’s honest. Usually people don’t have to say it’s honest.
Sounds like it's very tweakable and possible to patch and iron out the bugs and dodgy gameplay mechanics. As long as the base gameplay is great, I'm fully confident in this game.
It would be a dream come true for me if a game exactly like this came out in the future but the only difference would be it literally would be the entire world war 2 from the Pacific all the way to Russia to Berlin and all the battles all in one game I would fucking kill for that. I'm a completionist when it comes to games like this I would play that campaign for months. My literal dream
I feel like it's not fair to complain about there being 4 playable factions at launch since CoH2 only had 2 and you had to pay for the others. This is honestly a huge step up from that.
Allkeyshop search them up, I bought CoH3 with a 40% discount, allkeyshop show different sites and prices and compares them. I have not had any scams yet but I would research the lesser known stores first tbh. The total price difference for me was nearly 25eu so worth a look, the one I used through allkeyshop was HRK if you were wondering.
Exactly Jon. My friend bought this, and warned me not to get it. Told me to just get 2 at a fraction of the price. Said 3 was like a beta with worse graphics than 2. Also, said AI it total trash. I am still shocked the current generation is like "oh well, I paid $60 for an AAA title, but it's more like a $30 beta EA remake, but what'arya gon'a do (shrug)", then talk about how they MIGHT, eventually fix it, possibly, someday. . . 😕
Imagine a battle mode on total war where, if (for example) a battle has less than 100 troops in it, you could control them in small units or even individuals, like company of heroes. It makes a lot of sense to me, like a skirmish between long range units in napoleon, or an ambush of natives on a small colonial force on empire. It would be not only a completely new and fresh battle mode for total war, also would be historical, if you don't have a big enough force, you don't fight in lines, you get behind trees and fences. (yes I imagined it mostly for musket era total war, but I could see it happening in other settings too).
Here's the main point being missed here, nobody in the COH fanbase was really asking for this campaign. There are cool aspects to it sure, maybe bringing in new players potentially, but it really seems they spent tons of time on this campaign and experience and other aspects of the game completely suffered. CoH's playerbase lives within multiplayer, whether hardcore competitive players, comp stomps, custom games, etc. and it seems a lot of that was overlooked by the devs/team. We were given a completely unfinished game. Imagine the abysmal state the game released in, and jump forward several months earlier to the original release date. Some of this should be so straightforward I don't even know how they fucked it up lol
My problem is this game does not punish you, The turret rotation speed, the vehicles, the Sprites all move too fast. There's very little strategic decisions and moments. Everything looks like it snaps on target
“The honest truth” can only have two meanings: 1) The author is usually dishonest and now has to alert the viewer that he/she is now being honest. 2) If the author is usually honest then that phrase is meaningless and shows the author is prone to hyperbole and therefore cannot be trusted.
Only 4 factions to play? It’s had 2 more armies to play than the last two for a base game, Lol I see a lot of patches and plus’s in the future and opportunities from playing the last two. It’s great the campaign map hasn’t been used since a game like battle for middle earth. I think it’s good imo, graphics are a little improved above 2’s but somewhat the same. Coulda been more immersive with the explosions 🤷♂️but nonetheless it still seems good.
The only problem most people have is the inability to zoom out thankfully its one of the first mods to come out other than that this game is fun as hell
Right now more people play CoH2 with all of it’s DLCs than CoH3, and for good reason. Even though CoH2 vanilla was released 10 years ago, it is still more enjoyable to most fans of the series than CoH3. Numbers don’t lie. According to Steam Stats - as of 8/31/23 CoH3: Last 30 Days - Average Amount of Players Online: 1,521 CoH2: Last 30 Days - Average Amount of Players Online: 3,776 There’s just not enough content currently in CoH3 to warrant playing it over it’s predecessor. Sure, the graphics are a little better, but the gameplay is just not as enjoyable - gameplay wise - both of the older titles blow it out of the water in comparison. Also, what is the deal with CoH3’s game balance still being such a problem this long after release? As just one example, why have they still not nerfed flamethrowers when used in the open field like they were in the previous titles? Sure, have them ignore cover and do tons of damage when attacking structures with enclosed spaces, I’m all for it, but having them actively engage infantry with rifles at about the same distance, and be more effective is just silly. Need double or even triple the current amount of maps, need more game balance, and all of the quality of life options we had in the previous titles should be in the newest one. You can’t even forfeit or vote to surrender after 10 minutes. Why!? It’s as if the devs who made 3, didn’t really play the predecessor all that much. If they had, they would know they got a lot of work still cut out for them to try to get this game close to the level of the previous ones in this franchise. I wish RELIC the best in their endeavors, I would love to see CoH3 be salvaged and updated to the quality the community had originally expected out of a full price sequel that felt like it was only half way done.
I might be dumb or something it took me 10 minutes to figure out that you were saying your army on campaign map will not be brought into local battles. This is a huge turndown tho
Again another example of a game released too early. I’m a single player person, I love the attention to detail in the Italian campaign but the enemy is so passive on the campaign map that it’s just boring. The pre-order bonus was bloody skins for multiplayer so we already know what direction the devs are going to go with this (unless a Dawn of war 3 situation happens)
focusing on a campaign map was such a huge mistake when they're struggling to put out models and buildings that even look better than CoH1 with the same fidelity of destruction
The problems you identify with the Italian campaign sound a lot like the problems the Brits and Americans had in the Italian campaign - not enough resources, inability to deploy sufficient manpower at critical sectors, allies at odds with each other, other fronts getting more attention and thus drying up the assets available to fight in Italy. Just saying, at least the problems are relatively historically accurate.
to be fair to company of heroes, the total warhammer games had the same few battle maps all the way up until immortal empries release so thats spanning several games so i wont knock them too hard for it
Eleonora Valenti never existed, the partisan leaders were others in Italy and very well known. Not only we have not received the Italian faction but we are historically represented in an very approximate way! the potential is high but the game right now is by no means convincing
Hmmm I don’t want to sound so negative but this doesn’t feel like a AAA $100 game. Nor does it feel like the technology and excellent game design from coh 1 has grown at all. It feels as if it has gone backwards a little
I don't know I think I'll stick with Men of War: Assault Squad 2 Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront Just the health system for tanks seems outdated. in the games I mentioned one shot can destroy a good tank if the shot comes from the right angle and just penetrates the armor.
![Natanael Cano - Amor Eterno [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EO4prCs6WpM/mqdefault.jpg)
The campaign map allowing naval bombardments and strategically moving forces around would work really well for an island hopping Pacific Campaign.
I was thinking perhaps we will get Pacific DLC with US Marines and Japanese obviously. That would be dope.
That would be awesome. And people have been asking for this for a long time.
I'm hoping they release a pacific campaign next, and then eastern front and lastly western front
@@CapybaraConnoisseur89 probably they're saving that for coh4
@@CapybaraConnoisseur89I would love to have Japan even though they had poorer tanks compared to the allies they still had a few that could take on a Sherman
The thing with the Italian Dynamic Campaign is that it isn't trying to be like Total War's campaign map; it's trying to be the successor of CoH2's Ardennes Assault Campaign which was well received by the community.
Like, playing CoH2's AA campaign will make you understand majority of what CoH3's Italy campaign is putting out.
I will still say though that yeah there should've been a better introduction to the system.
Still, I advice to not look at this from a Total War perspective, and instead look at this through the Ardennes Assault perspective.
What aggravates me is that it looks like they really didn't use North Africa or Sicily with the Western Allied dynamic campaign. In spite of how those are precisely the places you'd use to introduce the mechanics of the game system.
And agreed, this is an elaboration of the Ardennes Offensive, not Total War per se.
Either way the Italy campaign is near unplayable, UI is not intuitive at all and your choices seem to matter none when fighting battles
As someone who played ardennes assault and enjoyed it, CoH 3 campaign is a giant letdown! It is repetitive, has ui issues, graphical glitches, and a terrible storyline that doesn’t really add up all that well, and in my opinion the worst part is the dollar general versions of Patton and Montgomery that they put in to add some tension to the allied alliances side, it barely effects anything and is so horribly done! Oh and I forgot how you could essentially speed run the “missions” (glorified low difficulty skirmishes) to complete them! I feel like they also gimped the game as an excuse to put it on console
The AA campaign stank. The Soviet campaign was better.
naah I will wait when they fix the game and drop the price.
My dream for Coh3 is for it to evolve over the years to include the western eastern and pacific fronts hopefully including France Soviets OstheerOKW the US Marines/ANZAC and the Japanese army
Totally agree mate! I would love that!
They said CoH4 is the pacific
Provide a source for your CoH4 claim dude. It doesn't show up when I Google it.
I wish that too, but I doubt it. Their pre-order bonus was skins for multiplayer… my guesses they’ll go down the CoH2 path and just concentrate on multiplayer.
@@maccaronich "They" shut up dude lol
First issue I noticed in the campaign is that the ai makes terrible decisions during real time battles. Instead of playing objectives, the ai is constantly rushing units through the front line to capture points deep in my territory instead of pushing the front line back or pushing objectives to win.
Yea it’s basically whack-a-mole AI. I think the reviewer is right that it would be a huge improvement if more of the missions focused on a defense/ timed attack objective and there are pre randomized waves of enemies you have to dynamically react to. They already have a template for one, they could just add variation and difficulty levels to it depending on the situation
The ai has always been like this tbh, flooding your rear and unprotected points
@@davidj217 Your thinking of the other game.
I assume that they chose to program the AI quite heavily around the capture points on a map since those are generally the focus in skirmish matches. So really even in most campaign battles these are largely what it sees.
Sounds like your lines are too open. If there are pockets of enemies slipping trough like at the line at Bastogne, you got a problem
I'd be willing to bet a Pacific DLC is 100% in the future. The focus on naval combat, islands, oceans etc. . It would be too easy to make a pacific campaign.
I know COH1 and COH2 had western front i.e. France , Belgium etc but I think a campaign map with Western Europe would be fantastic. Dropping Paratroopers . Allied forces pushing through. A Successful Market Garden. Man that be sick.
There was a dev interview a while before release where they were asked about Pacific and claimed that it would be impossible to design. I shit you not. I was pissed when I heard them say that. I hope they were bullshitting and changed their mind but I haven't heard anything else about it from them.
@@CrizzyEyes impossible to design ? I am not game developer but I don't imagine it being too difficult . Who knows
There were several big tank battles in the Pacific, but not what Europe experienced.
@@CrizzyEyes I think it's more that Relic is owned by Sega, a Japanese company
And they don't like doing things that has to do with their involvement in WW2
this comment did not age well at all...
Whilst the tactical and interactive map isn’t perfect by any means, it is a welcome addition and something I’d love to see in more WW2 RTS games. I would love this feature in Call of Arms: Gates of Hell.
call to arms gates of hell needs to fix its graphics first lmao
@@Ahmed-wb7ko wdym? it looking fine
@@Ahmed-wb7ko Gates of hell graphics look way better and more realistic than company of heroes imo
@@antoniopacheco9423 still pretty bad
Seems like the Campaign map has some rough edges for sure but I’m glad to see another company try and blend Strategy and Tactics together like Total War. Amazing overview!
Hey Andy! Amazing video! This whole concept was introduced in LOTR BFME 2. A criminally underrated game that deserve a full recogciontion for beeing a decade ahead of its time.
Total War started this mix of RTS and turn based back in the 90's
@@NewKanyeFan Kind of. Close Combat which was released in 1996 has it. The world war 2 tactical strategy game had an “overworld dynamic map” that functioned how LOTR BFME 2 had and Total war. All of them are great games. But Shogan total war, the first one didn’t come out until 2000. Even close combat 4 had a good unit assigning and moving feature on the map before total war in 1999
@@xCKxspartan709 This. Close Combat was certainly the first one I can remember that did it in this way. Loved those games.
@@NewKanyeFan There was game called "Lords of the Realm" back in 1994, Lords of the Realm II 1996, and Lords of The Realms III 2004 (this one was the worst) ppl say it was predecessor for Total War games.
I miss that game wish I could find it online
I feel like this COH is probably as close as a WW2 Total War we're gonna get. The complexity of WW2 but especially the Italian front is a bit overwhelming and you can't really represent every movement and unit like it was. However the mix of turn-based map and real-time battles is what always worked out for Total War, although never in this scale. Maybe a little more polishing (or mods) can turn it into a blast
Im so excited to see what modders do with this mode. Im sure we are gonna get some sick mods for it
Steel Division 2 is a far superior attempt at that concept
@@xavierjones9735 while I enjoy Steel Division, COH is another monster. They both deserve the reputation they have, but seeing COH try the concept of a campaign map is something I never thought I'd see before.
@@Mischievou5 Oh man, you have no idea how disappointed you're going to be on the mod tools front.
@mandead From what they have said about Essence it seems to be better than COH 2's launch modding tools so that's a step up I'd say. I'm not expecting good large mods in the first year or so. But the game seems pretty solid so far, same as the mod tools.
What they need to improve firsthand is the explosion effects, and adding more smoke and plume to fires and bombardments. I love this game, the gameplay is great for each army, but it’s definitely missing company of heroes three graphics , and sometimes it doesn’t feel like a company of heroes game lacking the fluff of shells hitting and the debris that gets kicked up. Not to mention, we’re fighting in deserts, and if you see any World War II footage, you’ll see tons of smoke and dust .I still think some of the sounds need to be louder as well. I feel like there’s a few units in the game that need some enhancement. Even when the artillery lands, I remember playing the first Company of heroes, and absolutely loving the way mortars and artillery comes down because it’s ear shattering, but plays well and immerses you. I really hope they improve that because it’s definitely lacking, and that’s just the truth. I still love the game very much, and very grateful for their hard work, but I think there’s an opinion amongst many of us that feels it needs to be fixed.
Do the devs have a good track record of listening to community feedback? This would be my 1st coh game, I am really considering getting it when it comes to ps.
Honestly more of the same is perfectly fine, its more of what we loved, and especially since sometimes more of the same is better than full inovation *Remember The Entry of Command and Conquer that shall not be named as a example.*
i feel your pain.
if only C&C Gerneral 2 had come out instead of that one that should not be named and the mobile game that came years later.
@@stinville yeah...
@@JohnYoga that is steam price not a on key sites....
Agree with everyone you said. I think that ships & planes shouldn't contribute to pop cap as they're already limited by airfield size, fuel & munitions. I always found myself wanting to use new companies but never having the population cap to do so
yeah exactly this
Company of Heroes 3 makes me really excited for Company of Heroes 4.. Its the first step in a new direction and has great groundwork laid but so much room for improvement
I hope Relic doesn't take CoH3's mixed reception as an indictment of the Campaign map.
This RTT/4X mix is what I've been craving ever since Total decided to go fantasy.
They should iterate on it, and make it better, instead of abandoning it.
The bad reviews are because the game looks plays and sound worse then CoH2 from 2013.
the campaign map is honestly nothing inovative or new. Batle for Middle Earth already had something silimar in 2005
Hopefully we'll get something like Company of Heroes: Pacific Assault. We could have the Marines, Japanese, and Australians.
I don't know if I want company of heroes turn into total war
Did they remove gore? I saw no dismembering in the whole video or other videos for that matter. I realy liked that in COH 1 and 2, made combat a lot more visceral.
They maybe wanna sell that as dlc
Yes there is dismemberment etc
Yes it’s removed completely
I grew up with This game series loved COH 1 it was all I had back on my old pc. In my eyes nothing will ever beat COH 1. And I personally felt that COH 2 flopped hard. From what I’ve played COH 3 seems to be the redemption that the game series needed. So far I’ve enjoyed myself. But I’m a skirmish only kinda guy. The turn based mode is cool but not what I play COH for.
Same thing here.
I'd disagree, COH 1 pushed PC graphics and gameplay. This isn't pushing anything. Looks dated and I'm not impressed with gameplay.
gonna have to disagree with you, CoH 2 has much tighter gameplay than CoH 1. I played CoH 2 first and going to CoH 1 made me appreciate just how much they improved the gameplay in CoH 2.
@@confusedasian2212 Not even close. The battles in COH were awesome and battles lasted a long time. CoH2 had tiny maps.
@@atheismisamentaldisorder1839 um ackshully, I’m right, you’re wrong, I win
I haven't purchased this yet because the reviews are so mixed. I was hoping for much better myself but maybe I'm setting my hopes high because I loved the other 2 games.
After the DLC for the 2nd game made the AI waayyy too hard, I'm glad it's toned down but I'd still like a challenge. Thanks for the great review!
Id love if they build on the foundation of this and go forward fixing the issues. This has a lot of potential for a possible future Pacific theatre campaign .
Awesome video
Explained the idea really clear
And great commentery
Much appreciated! :)
@@AndysTake you sir, you have inspired me
I Will make a video talking about RTS
Went in blind today, knew about it offcourse that's why I got it. I have to say I agree with your summary. It feels like a good foundation to build upon. But a bick lackluster in terms of visuals and audio. The campaign map suprised me, in a good way. It needs ways to tinker with it. Let's see where they take it.
they need to bring the italie army to so you can fight the allies and a usual they need to give more popcap
yeah, relic needs to fucking take risks and make new factions, Italy has a lot of good stuff for a faction.
Apparently the last patch screwed up the Afrika campaign. Just tried it and got to the third mission IIRC, where you have to protect the command tank. Problem is the only thing that showed up was the salvage vehicle and couldn't see the command tank anywhere on the map. The invisible command tank quickly gets destroyed and the mission is failed in less than 1 minute.
Guys.....IMAGINE they make dawn of war 4 like this......one can dream.
I like the bigger scale of the battlefield like in Sudden Strike
This is what they can do. they can make new maps that are better suited to fighting an attacking and defending battles with more aggressive AIs in an update once they get it working. What they can do to make things interesting is if battles at the same place happens close to each other (like say you win a battle and take a town and right after the enemy counter attacks in an attempt to take it back) craters, damaged buildings and such that occurred from the previous battle would still be there in the next battle. this would make it so battle after battle in the same location, it's constantly evolving so your tactics also have to evolve with each battle.
Looks pretty good! I think the campaign map is a huge improvement. Even just a campaign like in Panzer General 2 or Ultimate General: Civil War gives you some context for the battles, replay value, and reward for doing well, but having an actual campaign map is awesome.
Company Of Heroes 1 from 2007 is still the best.. Still play it from time to time
I wish CoH would do a pacific theatre. Burma campaign and island hopping with the marines would be epic
Never understood why that theater doesn't get more attention. It would be perfect for Company of heroes style game which is more infantry focused than large scale tank warfare and not as overplayed as Western Europe. Like Iwo Jima mission is literally made for COH with the marines hoisting up the "VP" flag 😂
@@lastword8783 bro the italian theater is in 0 games, it's also quite a cool one since a ton of nations fought there.
@Tommaso Pisapia
I believe Sniper Elite 4 took place during the Italian campaign
@@tommasopisapia7464 as did the whole of the British empire forces and the free French and china and America all fought in the east
@@benmoore3539 still less than in the Italian theater
The game doesn't convince me to buy it. I'll keep playing CoH2
Same it’s unfinished garbage. Diversity 😂
I tried the campaign in the early access, it was too complicated and unnecessarily restrictive. This is a major fail and disappointing. Total War’s campaign works because of the simplicity and straightforwardness
Very good summary, I have exactly the same impressions after the first few hours of the campaign.
The review and comment section really has me question if anyone else played axis and allies for pc from 2004. The gameplay is remarkably similar, and a lot of mechanics could be inspired from that game which I wish had gotten a sequel.
i loved that game. spent many hours playing AA on my old laptop
Thanks for this review, I have been on the fence on buying this yet.
I wacked this on the hardest difficulty in my first playthrough and it deff feels different to what people are saying , actually lost a few battles, causing me to lose some areas.
The gameplay for COH3 is great, the turn based feature is almost the same as Total Wars. If you played turn based games in mobile devices then it is very easy for you to play the game.
thx now i know that i dont buy it atm. COH2 is enough than. We are getting only Beta Games...
I was mostly looking forward to this campaign so I will probably wait and hope they fix and improve it
Adding "another game" in "another genre" a top of the RTS - is not an leaping improvement. Its literally genre-meshing that was in a lot of RTSs before and what, in my opinion, halts the genre back, since developers by popular demand have to make two games in one.
Great breakdown mate. I will likely buy.
Coh3 is great, it brings back the feel of the first game for me. The italien campaign was a bit lackluster with too many skimish battles inbetween that would have benefitted from an autoresolve. The african campaign was good but short. The multiplayer is good, but the coop against ai is missing the part where you increase difficulty
Total War: Company of Heroes: Dark Crusade
Mediterranean theater, Homers voice: BORING!!!
The issue I can’t stand is there seems to be a bug trying to plant mines in the beginning
Nice breakdown.
Was wondering if I want to buy this game. Based on your input, I agree with your points.
Looks like they need to make some updates and changes before I decide to buy.
Umm, I hope you're not saying that COH3 is revolutionary for having a strategic map. RTS games have done dynamic campaigns for a very long time, Steel Division 2 being the most recent example.
Why allow planes and ships if the Population Cap is so low?? That means you have to build the same couple things every game and never get to experiment.
100% agreed. It is fantastic that these devs have the balls to take risks and try something new and innovative instead of regurgitating the same stuff over and over again like Age of Empires.
Other reviewers do not understand the complications that arise with trying out something new, so they just shit all over the Italian campaign. I have confidence that Relic will gradually release patches that will make this campaign the best of the entire series. It might even become a moddable platform where modders create their own massive world scale 'campaign map' with resource management and everything. The possibilities are endless. But some reviewers dont see that, hence they just have a short term view, which determines their score.
pls, the game is not finished, fix the game before release, then you might see some apreciation for the new stuff.
Nice to see the Italian Campaign getting some love, at least.
imagine when a games studio adapts gpt to deal with in game ai
well its been 8 months, have the patches made the game better?
Beware it has Denuvo drm on PC version
I really love and enjoy the campaign game mode and the tactical battles. Particularly how different elements can impact in real time battles. I think one of the best ways that it can be improved is by adding an entire new campaign (say Burma, pacific, Normandy, eastern front etc) or if not at least allow the opportunity to play a defensive campaign as the Germans and add more maps, of different sizes and such, to add more variety to tactical battles. Would the campaign be better with more company types?
I want to make sure I understand. So if on the campaign map I have a full army, I would still have to start a battle with limited troops having to build stuff to “recruit” my army into the battle? That doesn’t seem logical so I am assuming I misunderstand.
If your army is 'wounded' then new units called into the battle will start at below full strength, tanks will have damage, HP will be missing etc.
I don’t see how this is so confusing. It’s company of heroes.
@@matthewjones39 yes, I understood…a year ago.
hopefully someone comes out with a kmod equivalent. The minimal pop caps always killed it a bit for me, k-mod felt more like what the game was supposed to be.
I wish they would take Company of Heroes outside of the constraint of realism and add more "what-ifs" stuff into the game. Like prototype tanks, tanks that were drawn and built a few models but never seen the light of day again (like in World of Tanks). Infantry weapons, chemical weapons, etc.
Heck, they can take it further and make a completely alternative, retro-future style CoH World War 2 with "futuristic" stuff imagined in that period, similar to Iron Harvest and just name it something else to avoid upsetting CoH diehard fans but still retain the CoH gameplay value.
The main CoH 3 problems for me has been all quality issues. The UI looks cheap and cartoony, the audio sounds cheap, no graphical upgrade and in some instances it's a downgrade (especially explosion, gun effects).
I'm glad I'm not the only one who looked at the price and recoiled backwards. Imma just delete it from my wishlist and DL CoH 1 and mod it. I understand they need money, but damn, at least make me wanna play the game for 60. I don't even care about the campaign tbh, I'm more of a skirmish type.
being completely honest if the tac map was bland i would probably not want it so bad the map basically sold me on wanting to get it one day
Relic has gone so massively down hill, let us not forget DOW3
"The Devs are willing to innovate"
Steel Division 2 campaign already did this style of campaign. CoH3 is just a lot prettier.
And shittier too
Whenever someone has to use CAPITALS in a sentence, I’m always gonna be assuming it’s slightly sketchy. Especially if it’s honest.
Usually people don’t have to say it’s honest.
Coh 2 and 3 does not even touch the feeling the blitzkrieg mod gives me for coh 1
Sounds like it's very tweakable and possible to patch and iron out the bugs and dodgy gameplay mechanics. As long as the base gameplay is great, I'm fully confident in this game.
It would be a dream come true for me if a game exactly like this came out in the future but the only difference would be it literally would be the entire world war 2 from the Pacific all the way to Russia to Berlin and all the battles all in one game I would fucking kill for that. I'm a completionist when it comes to games like this I would play that campaign for months. My literal dream
Play hearts of iron then
It has denuvo, right?
Yes
Not every RTS need a campaign map stop forcing the trend, if you like it play total otherwise let other game have a good linear storyline
I feel like it's not fair to complain about there being 4 playable factions at launch since CoH2 only had 2 and you had to pay for the others. This is honestly a huge step up from that.
The visuals are disappointing to say least... look the explosions, smoke, and fire. I don't even know how they can messed that up.
I just started CoH (2006) and it is just better, than CoH 3.
Reminds me of the campaigns in Wargame Red Dragon or Steel Division 2
This game looks like how I remember CoH1.
I like how they toned down the cartoony look of the trailers though.
The question for me is if you would go for this game over the cheaper COP1 or 2? Does it bring enough to warrant the higher price tag?
If you’re on a tight budget, start with CoH 2 when on sale.
Stay with coh 2- this is a steaming pile of shit
Allkeyshop search them up, I bought CoH3 with a 40% discount, allkeyshop show different sites and prices and compares them. I have not had any scams yet but I would research the lesser known stores first tbh. The total price difference for me was nearly 25eu so worth a look, the one I used through allkeyshop was HRK if you were wondering.
Exactly Jon. My friend bought this, and warned me not to get it. Told me to just get 2 at a fraction of the price. Said 3 was like a beta with worse graphics than 2. Also, said AI it total trash. I am still shocked the current generation is like "oh well, I paid $60 for an AAA title, but it's more like a $30 beta EA remake, but what'arya gon'a do (shrug)", then talk about how they MIGHT, eventually fix it, possibly, someday. . . 😕
no stay with coh2/1
Imagine a battle mode on total war where, if (for example) a battle has less than 100 troops in it, you could control them in small units or even individuals, like company of heroes. It makes a lot of sense to me, like a skirmish between long range units in napoleon, or an ambush of natives on a small colonial force on empire. It would be not only a completely new and fresh battle mode for total war, also would be historical, if you don't have a big enough force, you don't fight in lines, you get behind trees and fences. (yes I imagined it mostly for musket era total war, but I could see it happening in other settings too).
No.
@@sebaaullador1292 bruh
Damn you didn’t get to faggio until 37, I beat it in 39 turns.
Here's the main point being missed here, nobody in the COH fanbase was really asking for this campaign. There are cool aspects to it sure, maybe bringing in new players potentially, but it really seems they spent tons of time on this campaign and experience and other aspects of the game completely suffered. CoH's playerbase lives within multiplayer, whether hardcore competitive players, comp stomps, custom games, etc. and it seems a lot of that was overlooked by the devs/team. We were given a completely unfinished game. Imagine the abysmal state the game released in, and jump forward several months earlier to the original release date.
Some of this should be so straightforward I don't even know how they fucked it up lol
1:30
It’s not a Revolution. Total War has been doing this for decades.
I never tried the italy campaign because It's allies only.
My problem is this game does not punish you, The turret rotation speed, the vehicles, the Sprites all move too fast. There's very little strategic decisions and moments. Everything looks like it snaps on target
“The honest truth” can only have two meanings:
1) The author is usually dishonest and now has to alert the viewer that he/she is now being honest.
2) If the author is usually honest then that phrase is meaningless and shows the author is prone to hyperbole and therefore cannot be trusted.
It looks ok but for the price they're asking I will wait for a sale.
Cdkeys 28pounds ….
It’s looks ok after 10 years that’s not ok
I am excited to check out this game but I will do so later on.
There is still much better games out that are much older.
If your not poor buy it. Its so much fun and energy content. Some awesome new audio if you set up your game correct. Patches daily.
Only 4 factions to play? It’s had 2 more armies to play than the last two for a base game, Lol I see a lot of patches and plus’s in the future and opportunities from playing the last two. It’s great the campaign map hasn’t been used since a game like battle for middle earth. I think it’s good imo, graphics are a little improved above 2’s but somewhat the same. Coulda been more immersive with the explosions 🤷♂️but nonetheless it still seems good.
How is the map thing a revolution? Dune II, mother of RTS, had it 1992, and Dawn of War also had it....
The only problem most people have is the inability to zoom out thankfully its one of the first mods to come out other than that this game is fun as hell
Right now more people play CoH2 with all of it’s DLCs than CoH3, and for good reason.
Even though CoH2 vanilla was released 10 years ago, it is still more enjoyable to most fans of the series than CoH3. Numbers don’t lie.
According to Steam Stats - as of 8/31/23
CoH3: Last 30 Days - Average Amount of Players Online: 1,521
CoH2: Last 30 Days - Average Amount of Players Online: 3,776
There’s just not enough content currently in CoH3 to warrant playing it over it’s predecessor. Sure, the graphics are a little better, but the gameplay is just not as enjoyable - gameplay wise - both of the older titles blow it out of the water in comparison. Also, what is the deal with CoH3’s game balance still being such a problem this long after release? As just one example, why have they still not nerfed flamethrowers when used in the open field like they were in the previous titles? Sure, have them ignore cover and do tons of damage when attacking structures with enclosed spaces, I’m all for it, but having them actively engage infantry with rifles at about the same distance, and be more effective is just silly.
Need double or even triple the current amount of maps, need more game balance, and all of the quality of life options we had in the previous titles should be in the newest one. You can’t even forfeit or vote to surrender after 10 minutes. Why!?
It’s as if the devs who made 3, didn’t really play the predecessor all that much. If they had, they would know they got a lot of work still cut out for them to try to get this game close to the level of the previous ones in this franchise.
I wish RELIC the best in their endeavors, I would love to see CoH3 be salvaged and updated to the quality the community had originally expected out of a full price sequel that felt like it was only half way done.
I might be dumb or something it took me 10 minutes to figure out that you were saying your army on campaign map will not be brought into local battles. This is a huge turndown tho
Great review!
Again another example of a game released too early. I’m a single player person, I love the attention to detail in the Italian campaign but the enemy is so passive on the campaign map that it’s just boring. The pre-order bonus was bloody skins for multiplayer so we already know what direction the devs are going to go with this (unless a Dawn of war 3 situation happens)
yeah :(
focusing on a campaign map was such a huge mistake when they're struggling to put out models and buildings that even look better than CoH1 with the same fidelity of destruction
The problems you identify with the Italian campaign sound a lot like the problems the Brits and Americans had in the Italian campaign - not enough resources, inability to deploy sufficient manpower at critical sectors, allies at odds with each other, other fronts getting more attention and thus drying up the assets available to fight in Italy. Just saying, at least the problems are relatively historically accurate.
Well thanks all, It's unlikely we will get another game from this series. publishers didn't kill RTS, we did.
No we didn’t. CoH2 is still a masterpiece with a large player base.
Coh3 s multiplayer balance is the big improvement. 3is actually much better in multiplayer.
to be fair to company of heroes, the total warhammer games had the same few battle maps all the way up until immortal empries release so thats spanning several games so i wont knock them too hard for it
Eleonora Valenti never existed, the partisan leaders were others in Italy and very well known.
Not only we have not received the Italian faction but we are historically represented in an very approximate way!
the potential is high but the game right now is by no means convincing
Game mechanics looks like a Total War game now.
Hmmm I don’t want to sound so negative but this doesn’t feel like a AAA $100 game. Nor does it feel like the technology and excellent game design from coh 1 has grown at all. It feels as if it has gone backwards a little
I don't know I think I'll stick with
Men of War: Assault Squad 2
Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront
Just the health system for tanks seems outdated. in the games I mentioned one shot can destroy a good tank if the shot comes from the right angle and just penetrates the armor.
good for you
Good job comparing an arcade game to a realistic game.