Good work @saphire2383!!!

don't condemn people to death please!

A tip : you can watch series at flixzone. Been using it for watching all kinds of movies lately.

@Milo James definitely, I've been watching on Flixzone} for since december myself :)

In the campaign you just have to remember that it could take up to an hour for certain missions. Rushing is no good in this game. It's extremely important to remember the fundamentals, use cover, attack from multiple angles etc. Once you get more experienced, you'll start to see certain patterns and which fights to take. A tip would be to have faith in your units. Once you've input all the necessary commands, staring at one part of the map and enjoying the spectacle will do nothing to alter the course of the engagement (unless grenades are being thrown), quickly move your camera somewhere else and start issuing more commands to idle units. You need to believe that your decisions regarding cover and machine placements are good enough and your units can hold out while you focus some attention elsewhere. You need ALL your troops to always be doing something, idle units are not a good thing. Sadly, to play an RTS game like CoH2 well, you can't enjoy the game; you can't spend too much time enjoying the graphics and the animations. You have to treat it like a system to be used and not an experience to be enjoyed. Are you playing the US campaign on easy or hard mode?

@@samwu1836 Thanks for the reply and helpful tips. I do have a problem with having all my units occupied all of the time. Often times I find my base full of injured/depleted squads which I just forget about. Controlling the map is also an issue for me, I may be winning a lot of engagements, but bleeding on VPs. However, I'm frankly enjoying this complicated nature of the game, it's really interesting to tinker around all the time. The game (at least on my level) is really versatile as there are so many different units/commanders/abilities. Hopefully, I will better at it soon.

@@samwu1836 As for the US campaign, I'm playing it on hard mode, managed to advance quite far, but lost way too much manpower. Started it all over again and came to the exact same problem. Unit preservation is still an issue for me, I think, but I'm working on that.

​@@farkhodbekmamadjanov8719 Personally I own the master collection (didn't like or complete the USF campaign), but I've focused much more nowadays on elite 1vs1 (I just beat a top 100 player yesterday. I was sitting at around 350 to 360 on the leaderboard at the time :P). I've played the original Soviet campaign to completion though. Besides unit preservation and healing (which you'll 100% need to focus on, whether it's against CPU or multiplayer), have you spend time learning the unit profiles. It's not really hard and won't take long, but always managing your engagement distance is important. There's nothing wrong with instantly smashing your retreat button when a squad with SMGs or Sturmpioneers get close to your long range riflemen (without BAR upgrades). USF in the current state/balance of the game fields the most overpowered units in terms of infantry combat, it's not hard to walk up to the enemy with 2 or 3 riflemen squads with double BAR upgrades and take minimal losses because of the absurd amount of damage inflicted. But it sounds like you're dealing with VP bleed and being overwhelmed? In that case I seriously suggest building a few more machine guns. The USF have the most overpowered, quick scoping machine gun in the game. The Browning HMG practically has 0 setup time when compared to every other machine gun in the game, and although its firing arc is small, it provides extremely high DPS and good suppression against anything it hits, furthermore, even without it's AP ability activated, the Browning machine gun will absolutely destroy light vehicles in a few bursts (at least against the OKW's Kubelwagen, use the AP rounds on Scout Cars). What you need to remember is that the machine gun must have units nearby protecting its flanks and providing sight, but in my experience, USF machine guns are super hard to flank because of their fast repositioning speeds, and with veterancy, their range increases as well. If you use Rangers, get the SMG upgrade ASAP and use grenades appropriately. If you use Paratroopers, use the LMG upgrade (position them behind cover at medium range) and also use grenades. In the campaign, never forget to use the Pathfinder beacons to reinforce the Paratroopers instead of retreating to base (once they become veterans, I think they can heal themselves if I remember correctly). In elite 1vs1 you'll start to notice the importance of having a bigger plan. As long as they're able to repel and capture any territory at will, many players focus on building up a solid staging point on their end of the map and may choose to sacrifice early VP gains for a solid presence on the map and focus on control of the resource points. Likewise, there's no need to rush the VP in the campaign. All you need to focus on is having at least 1 VP under constant control and building up a strong, healthy and LARGE army of infantry and making a quick push to retake the point you want. Never forget to deploy machine guns on a VP you've captured. In the case of USF, you can also use fighting positions against the AI (real players will destroy these thing with AT guns and mortars though). That should help you out if you pull it off properly.

Brace yourself. Playing against others is something different than against the AI.

I only played vs ai for years, then went into custom games and now been on ranked for the past year and I can say it’s been tough but my gameplay has improved massively, defo worth getting into pvp

​@@swashbukk I got completely wrecked after playing a couple of years on/off vs ai 😂

@@xdennisdamenacex6449 hey, you tried. If you are of the stubborn type, you can stick around and get better. After that, you will smile about the ai.

Iron Harvest had a seven year head start and still lost?!? RIP

@@AECoH Harvest = 0 dynamic war.

Good luck

Got it for $1 on steam sega games sale

thank you 😊

@Sixtyfps Gaming yeah I play regularly and that's my experience. In 3v3 and 4v4 if you make a mistake you still have a team that can cover it up for you. In 1v1 and 2v2 there is simply no coming back from some mistakes. You can see how it's not ideal for new players. Anyway that's my opinion

Perhaps it's easier in 3's and 4's, but to say it tends to be more friendly is quite a stretch. Beside some irritating auts, 1vs1 tends to be 'glhf' and 'gg'... but once you start introducing more people it definitely gets more heated, and there have been plenty of times when you get abused by your own team more than the opposition. In my experience you're better off learning the game in 1vs1. You learn quicker and because the mistakes and triumphs are your own, it makes your weaknesses quite clear. Because here's the thing, usually nobody in multiplayer is there to teach each other how to play. If a new player relies on other players to cover their shortcomings, either they lose the game and feel like crap or they win the game and are blind to their own faults. Not to mention, in larger game modes you often get incompetent, temperamental players who leave at the drop of a dime and ruin the experience for the team. As I recall, 4vs4 also has a modified pop cap limit which doesn't apply to any other match size, not a great way to teach game mechanics. A summary list of other critical problems in 4's: - Maps are abnormally large. This doesn't teach the importance of capping order and how to approach early game aggression and defence - 4's a filled with trolls who build things like artillery only or tank spam etc. It's the fastest way to create another idiot in the community or turn off a new player. - 4's make it difficult to learn the ins and outs of your units and the enemies'. When you've got 20 units on screen with 5 pieces of artillery firing simultaneously, you can't account for the intricate effects that your unit is inflicting or receiving from the enemy. This may lead to idiots screaming 'OP' or 'buff this' on forums without proper knowledge of game and balance theory. 3's aren't much better. - The skills of 4vs4 honestly don't translate to other formats well. Unless the new player is actually an intelligent player, who's very experienced in other RTS games, playing 4vs4 is simply not setting the player up for any success in CoH2. If you become good at 1vs1, your capacity to micromanage, analyse, and respond quickly and decisively to any given engagement are honed and transferable to 3vs3 and 4vs4 any day. If you don't want to go in alone, it's actually better to play 2vs2. Proper co-ordination is often times hard enough in 2vs2. So don't shoot yourself in the foot by playing 3's and 4's as a new player. At least in 2vs2 you take more responsibility (and learn as a result) and can complement another player if you run out of strategic ideas halfway through the game.

Play it and play some more. Accept being humbled for the first few games and then earn to feel victorious.

Push whenever you can, even a de-cap on that point means more time your enemy has to spend re-capturing. Never be idle, that MG shouldn't be sitting there (unless it's a fuel point it's watching). Move the AT gun to be in a crossfire or to cover your vehicles, you never want to be moving a tank without an AT and a plethora of infantry bodyguards nearby. Understand the difference between spamming and building appropriate amounts of certain units, don't listen to snobs, observe what you need and build it; there's nothing wrong with building 2 AT guns (especially if the Allies are building 3+ medium tanks) and 2 mortars if it's deemed appropriate; there is however, something wrong with building 8 mainline infantry squads. Learn how to manipulate the pacing of the game. If you're low on manpower, learn how to maintain pressure while being conservative of your manpower; likewise, learn how to make your opponent cry even more when they're already at their lowest, be like Cobra Kai... without John Kreese. Garrison in buildings increases your DPS... so if you have an infantry squad with a single, powerful weapon (like LMG Obersoldaten) keep an eye open for those opportunities. If the enemy is building (wires, mines, repairing tanks, sandbags), strike while the iron is hot, because their received damage is multiplied significantly, if you shoot a rifle grenade at a Soviet combat engineer squad planting mines, you will almost certainly wipe them (and that mine they were planting). Finally, it's ok take some damage to move into cover, would you much rather lose 3 soldiers because you stood in the open getting greedy for a little bit of DPS and possibly losing that very squad when you get forced to retreat? or would you much rather lose 1 soldier but have continuous DPS for the duration after that, when you're safely behind cover? Heroes don't exist in this game, your Grenadiers aren't going to pull a s1mple 5 in a row, AK headshot spree. Not even the Soviet guards can do that... so please, hide behind cover, even if it looks unnatural doing so.

What would you like to know?

@@AECoH More of this newbie guides. Like how to properly micro units, what commands to use on keyboard, what commanders to use per faction, what is worth it what is not you know stuff like that :)

It is annoying, but in answer yes you get supply for completing games, and a supply bonus for winning games you can spend this on commanders, you can also sometimes get them in random crate drops after each game.

So it takes some time but once you get to prestige 1 you start getting supply often when you rank up. However dont worry about it too much. The commanders you get are very good already. Commanders like gaurd motor coordination tactics for soviets is one of the best commanders in the game. Same goes for Elite troops for axis. So it may seem annoying but it really isnt such a big deal once you learn the game.

As a relatively new player, I recommend to buy only a few commanders for they don't really add that great value and most of them won't even fit your playstyle. I bought one or two per faction when they are on sale and I think a lot of commanders don't have good ability set so that's enough buying for me. Edit: Also when you register to Relic in game it gives 30.000 supply points which means at least 2 free commanders.

Supply bonus will add up, especially if you play and win PVP. I haven't spend a dollar on commanders or skins, I have just used supply bonuses. And sometimes you get awarded with commanders and extras instead of just supply.

I have over 2000 hours on this game and every dime I spent on it was worth it. The game is highly unique and it is worth the investment of what amounts to a menial amount of money. The money invested is is no way a pay to win option, if that is your concern. You could buy every commander and will still lose your ass

I mean you are not wrong but ostheer can still be decent in late game 4v4. In 1v1, they are so bad due to shit mainline infantry and lack of light tank so most player have to use commander with call in unit

@@sorahidaka9977 thats why most ostheer players use ostruppen or assualt grenadiers for 1v1 and sometimes 2v2. They're very good. Right now my trio commander setup for ostheer is Blitzkrieg, mechanize assualt, and ostruppen doctrine. Those three commander are my go to commanders for every occasion.

Me too, man.

Im from central Europe and often get mixed Together with korean and chinese players

The delay isn't ever bad enough to be complaining about unless your connection itself is unstable or your ISP is sh**, or you happen to be unlucky and SEGA/Relic's servers are playing up. The networking is done very well, and the delay is not one which prevents you from applying your skills (even when dodging grenades). A testament to that is the fact that top players vary from USA to Korea to China and Europe. These players invariably play against each other regularly and the results are never consistently tilted to any one region. Remember that due to this game's genre, the impact of lag on gameplay and very different to FPS games. Lag has been managed very well for this game in my experience (and based on the testament of top players as well).

@@samwu1836 i play Moba like dota 2, and I don't get any delays. So, the delay is a huge thing for me. I want my games to be butter smooth. But if you wanna play laggy/delayish games, that's just your opinion.

​@@benedictjajo I have acknowledged the existence of lag, but I mentioned quite clearly that the lag is not significant enough to have any influence on gameplay, even on CoH2's elite players. Let's try to focus arguments and complaints on problems which have a true, tangible influence on the gameplay and avoid taking a snobby approach. Again, don't discount the possibility of a bad day on the server side or unstable client side connection either. Now, if you're the kind of player that gets your high on pressing retreat when the timer displays 0.5 seconds on an enemy grenade's fuse (even without lag, you'd probably still get screwed in that situation, and better yet, your opponent has now forced a retreat), then you're not going to get very far in a game like CoH2 (because when you have fight off engagements in 3 separate locations, sooner or later sloppy players will get themselves wiped, and it's not because it's the lags fault. Don't tempt fate, because CoH2 will punish such arrogance, and you get very little reward for such a playstyle in this game). CoH2 is a game which gives plenty of advance warning for: incoming tanks (audio cues, tank tracks, trees getting crushed etc); infantry actions (like throwing animation, AT snares etc) and much more. Finally, straw man arguments are a dick thing to do on your part, they waste time and are actively counter-productive to a genuine discourse about whatever topic is being discussed.

Hmmm I was more going for sound understanding of mechanics and strategy means that if you play the right way and learn things then apply them you shouldn't fear it! The fact that I used a faction you're not a fan of and a cookie cutter meta strat shouldn't detract from those points!!

​@@AECoH It's really not that I dislike Soviets per se. I definitely agree that all your points were fair and if there was a beginner friendly faction, SU would be it. I'd even add that conscript merging and versatility serve to illustrate to new players the importance of keeping squads alive, and give them a chance to recover in their early days, much like a floatation ring or 'rubber armband'. I suppose I was jumping too far ahead, I love the game so much I have it on my mind 24/7 nowadays, so I always approach discussions with overall balance in mind and eagerly go deep rapidly. As for the strats... I don't think your point floats. As a chess player, it's prudent not to deride certain tactics merely because they're common. The king pawn opening is universal because it is the best move. Doing otherwise is setting yourself up for failure. Likewise, I hold nothing against you for playing a 4 conscript build. However, beside my comment being a slight inside jab amongst the community, I am hinting at underlying concerns and encouraging a greater sphere of thinking in build decisions and diversity for any one who reads my comment, both new or experienced players. It also is no lie to say that Soviets are oppressive in a few distinctive ways. I suppose I'll just mention my beginnings. When I was new, I opted for the Germans, and so in many ways, I did have to fear these elements and mechanics in the game (even when I slowly improved). With no real tutorials either, I had to sink or swim. What can we experienced players say to the beginners who are (equally entitled) to start on Axis instead of Allies? When I was level 8 to 9, the automatch system consistently & constantly matched me against a level 16 Chinese player on a Thursday afternoon every week, this is 1vs1 we're talking about as well. I remembered the cathartic feeling of finally beating him on our rematch in Crossing In The Woods, even despite the level disparity at the time (I got trashed quite a few times though, over the course of a few months... I had nightmares about him and obsessively ruminated on his tactics and my shortcomings. Honestly, I have to thank him for how far I've come.) Nowadays, because of my geographical location, I don't get to play against the European majority as often, and as RNGesus love me so much, I've had to face Asha when I was only level 10. Needless to say, I got bloised... such is RNG. My journey in this game is brutal, and I suspect many players have experienced similar things in 1vs1. However, my obsession with this game and desire to share in that joy is what compels me to write, and to express my concerns. I recall writing a comment when you unveiled Master League... in many ways, I still have mixed feelings about it. I just don't want to see CoH2 become a toxic ego cesspit like CSGO, Dota, League etc. Likewise, I'm writing here so that anyone, even if it's the new guys (Welcome to the Coh family BTW), who reads this may gain a different perspective. New players won't understand everything I wrote, but once they start playing, they might look back and think about it. As I've mentioned before, you are a beloved caster to me and I don't lie when I say I love your content and efforts which have brought much excitement to my days. In my own way I'm also trying to share with the greater Coh community. This is a game which I believe has the potential to transcend the shallow culture found in other heavily commercialised eSports (it has enough depth, like chess, to spur genuine obsession). To do so, I personally believe in a straightforward, introspective and educated approach which comes from experienced players who have worked hard for a higher level/understanding (something which the coh forums rarely display anymore)... perhaps my phrasing has been too blunt though. For that I do apologise. PS. Can you get Stephan to sign some merchandise... I'm Luvnest's #1 fan. I also want to know where Talisman is at. I fell in love with his OKW from GCS2, and I don't think I saw him in the Master League players Steam group. 2020 championships just won't fly without another Talisman and Luvnest skirmish.

haha Oh God...

Mate they're not very common at all, like the map hackers get caught relatively easy and are usually the shitter players in 4v4s or something.

I've been playing CoH for over 10 years and spent a lot of time in top 100 in 1v1, don't think I've ever, ever seen anyone hacking.

@@AECoH 4v4 is my favorite game mode ever since SC 2 days. Only in 4v4 you can blame your team members for losing the match even when your APM throughout the match was around 15 :) It is guilt-free blaming at its best! Sadly, map hacking happened to me in SC2 and CoH2 as well, just in my experience it´s much more common in CoH2.

Buddy I dont mean to be a d*ck here but the map hackers in COH2 are pretty much always in the lowest bracket of 4v4 matches. So you won't really see medium to high rank players making an issue about it because they almost never encounter them.

As a former DOTA 2 player. To say that Company of Heroes 2 community is toxic is such an overstatement. 😅

Sorry to clarify, playing on a top range CPU with fast ram means you can power through the worst of the bugs. It's still buggy as fuck at its core agreed.

64bit version seems a hell of a lot smoother. To bad it took them so bloody long to get there.

Fixed most of the nonsense like bugged retreats and ghost faust, thankfully. For the most part it's mostly bug-free, tbh. Just that memory leaks resulting in bugsplats are a super annoying issue.

You don’t have to buy anything. The really good players would win regardless of bought items or commanders. You actually have to be skilled to win at this game. It is the least pay to win game you can play.

Lol I think it’s small because RTS and WW2 are both relatively niche. Somebody made the point a while ago that if COH2 was a fantasy game, maybe like Command & Conquer or Star Craft, it might have wider appeal. I don’t know, but I love this game.

@@MrSmokincodz I think there is a meta around certain commanders, which is pretty silly; all that shit should just be included in the game at this point. Coh2 is barely hangin in there. No one really likes "RNG" based mixed with "Strategy" not gonna lie. Random rng wipes and mortars killed the initial playerbase of COH2. Did we mention that the beta was god awful? Every faction had the same infantry, the "snow" mechanic was just annoying etc etc.

Otaku Talks then don’t play. I don’t know what to tell you. It’s a game after all

@@MrSmokincodz dead game; waste of effort from what's left from the community