COH 3

#1
3 years ago

_COH 3 Africa (the historical campaign in Africa)
COH 3 Italica (the campaign on Italy)
COH 3 Pacific (the campaign east of Asia)

Which one would you prefer._

«13

Comments

  • #2
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681

    I say The Pacific, Europe is too simple, too obvious
    at 0:47 seconds here's the reason why relic should go against the rules
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=3NuapJMw5R4

  • #3
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681

    also they shud implement a native language option in there in order to not repeat the same mistakes as in CoH 2

  • #4
    3 years ago

    @The Big Red 1 said:
    also they shud implement a native language option in there in order to not repeat the same mistakes as in CoH 2

    That i agree

  • #5
    3 years ago
    SAS CommanderSAS Comma… Rule Britannia Posts: 55

    @The Big Red 1 said:
    I say The Pacific, Europe is too simple, too obvious
    at 0:47 seconds here's the reason why relic should go against the rules
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=3NuapJMw5R4

    why pacific, you'd need naval implements and that's not really in COH fashion....

  • #6
    3 years ago
    DaveMarcusDaveMarcus HungaryPosts: 1

    coh 3 is a good idea maybe the campaign can focus on Hungary or Romania the allies of Germany

  • #7
    3 years ago

    @SAS Commander said:

    why pacific, you'd need naval implements and that's not really in COH fashion....

    Why ? The war was decided on land. And what do you want the ships on land beside their artillery ,something that is easily brought like the air strikes.
    I would prefer the campaign in Africa .

  • #8
    3 years ago
    SAS CommanderSAS Comma… Rule Britannia Posts: 55

    @.☠. oOIYvYIOo said:

    @SAS Commander said:

    why pacific, you'd need naval implements and that's not really in COH fashion....

    Why ? The war was decided on land. And what do you want the ships on land beside their artillery ,something that is easily brought like the air strikes.
    I would prefer the campaign in Africa .

    Id love africa...... Not enough games focus on it

  • #9
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681

    @SAS Commander said:

    @.☠. oOIYvYIOo said:

    @SAS Commander said:

    why pacific, you'd need naval implements and that's not really in COH fashion....

    Why ? The war was decided on land. And what do you want the ships on land beside their artillery ,something that is easily brought like the air strikes.
    I would prefer the campaign in Africa .

    Id love africa...... Not enough games focus on it

    the same can be said with the pacific theater not too much focus on that either

  • #10
    3 years ago

    @The Big Red 1 said:

    @SAS Commander said:

    @.☠. oOIYvYIOo said:

    @SAS Commander said:

    why pacific, you'd need naval implements and that's not really in COH fashion....

    Why ? The war was decided on land. And what do you want the ships on land beside their artillery ,something that is easily brought like the air strikes.
    I would prefer the campaign in Africa .

    Id love africa...... Not enough games focus on it

    the same can be said with the pacific theater not too much focus on that either

    You have more than the campaigns in Africa and the campaigns in Africa were and are alot more interesting and with alot more quality than the campaigns on the Pacific, land battles .

  • #11
    3 years ago
    Doktor_SDoktor_S Posts: 134

    Or, better yet, go back in time a little more, and do World War 1.

    Give both sides nothing but Trenches, riflemen and Arty. 1 Multiplayer game will last 12 hours and will be a battle of who can get bored quickest

  • #12
    3 years ago
    dukejasondukejason Posts: 1,386 mod

    I would prefer ww1.

  • #13
    3 years ago

    @dukejason said:
    I would prefer ww1.

    yes ww1 good idea

  • #14
    3 years ago
    dukejasondukejason Posts: 1,386 mod

    I could see CA doing a ww1 total war or civil war.

  • #15
    3 years ago

    I would prefer a WW 2 & WW 1

  • #16
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681
    edited April 2016

    @.☠. oOIYvYIOo said:

    @The Big Red 1 said:

    @SAS Commander said:

    @.☠. oOIYvYIOo said:

    @SAS Commander said:

    why pacific, you'd need naval implements and that's not really in COH fashion....

    Why ? The war was decided on land. And what do you want the ships on land beside their artillery ,something that is easily brought like the air strikes.
    I would prefer the campaign in Africa .

    Id love africa...... Not enough games focus on it

    the same can be said with the pacific theater not too much focus on that either

    You have more than the campaigns in Africa and the campaigns in Africa were and are alot more interesting and with alot more quality than the campaigns on the Pacific, land battles .

    imo why the next CoH should take place in the pacific is the japanese are a more interesting enemy then the germans were because they were far more brutal and traditional when it came to fighting (eg. swords and banzai charges). if they do have CoH 3 taking place in the pacific they should finally implement hand-to-hand melee combat just like in the first DoW 40k

  • #17
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681

    @Emperor2000 said:

    @dukejason said:
    I would prefer ww1.

    yes ww1 good idea

    a slow meat grinder no-mans land fight im no so sure about that...

  • #18
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681

    @SAS Commander said:

    @The Big Red 1 said:
    I say The Pacific, Europe is too simple, too obvious
    at 0:47 seconds here's the reason why relic should go against the rules
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=3NuapJMw5R4

    why pacific, you'd need naval implements and that's not really in COH fashion....

    have you seen the HBO epic miniseries The Pacific yet?

  • #19
    3 years ago

    CoH 3 Pacific Sun.
    eg: I want to play for a Russian turn on the second
    has reached
    I want to play for Japanese
    I have to turn off 2
    And then turn 3
    And I want to play again for Russians
    turn off 3
    And again I turn 2

    It is a bad idea

  • #20
    3 years ago

    Some people do not play two because there are no Japanese.
    But when it is added,
    So is buying Japanese.
    But they will also fall on things other factions.
    So they buy them, too, and still buys skins and Commander
    So you can earn Relic

  • #21
    3 years ago
    HuntsmanHuntsman Malton North YorkshirePosts: 72

    Why does everyone forget the Korean war? I think coh would do Korea rather well. Though I do predict centurion spam like in the wargame series.

  • #22
    3 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948

    (Episodic?) Theatre-based COH3 may be problematic, given different time frames and units featured. Just screams name change to Company of DLC.

  • #23
    3 years ago
    CaptWarCaptWar Posts: 91

    I would rather see a company of heroes modern warfare game since there has not been a good one since world in conflict in a long time plus it's something different for the franchise. I mean come on, can you all imagine company of heroes 3 except in modern warfare era......with the graphics we see now......oh my......=)

  • #24
    3 years ago
    The Big Red 1The Big R… Daly City, CA, USAPosts: 681

    @CaptWar said:
    I would rather see a company of heroes modern warfare game since there has not been a good one since world in conflict in a long time plus it's something different for the franchise. I mean come on, can you all imagine company of heroes 3 except in modern warfare era......with the graphics we see now......oh my......=)

    graphics isnt always everything crysis is a fine example of niceness that even a computer cant handle (eg. a hardware hog)

  • #25
    3 years ago
    HuntsmanHuntsman Malton North YorkshirePosts: 72

    @CaptWar said:
    I would rather see a company of heroes modern warfare game since there has not been a good one since world in conflict in a long time plus it's something different for the franchise. I mean come on, can you all imagine company of heroes 3 except in modern warfare era......with the graphics we see now......oh my......=)

    Depends what you want Command modern air naval operations does all modern conflicts rather well but it's a limited market. There is also the wargame series, and if your wondering a SK m36 Jackson doesn't do well against a USSR T80UK

  • #26
    3 years ago
    MusketmarineMusketmar… Being a USF ParatrooperPosts: 68

    Why not all fronts in one game?

    Who cares if you get Japanese on a snow-map?

    It's a bloody game, not 100% historically strict.

    You can keep the Campaigns 100% strict to history.

    While the Skirmish modes should allow players to have anyone fighting on any front.

  • #27
    3 years ago
    vilevile Posts: 4

    When released CoH 2 was billed to be an all incompasing WW2 game. To me thats everything from the Eastern front to Burma, Afrika, Finland, Italy & the Pacific theater. With the necessary forces also being added for each front. If this original concept was to be followed through, then there would ber no need for CoH 3. It could be done by adding campaigns, & more ToW. The knock on effect of this would be to give players a greater choice of faction, & that can't be a bad thing.

  • #28
    3 years ago
    MusketmarineMusketmar… Being a USF ParatrooperPosts: 68

    @vile said:
    When released CoH 2 was billed to be an all incompasing WW2 game. To me thats everything from the Eastern front to Burma, Afrika, Finland, Italy & the Pacific theater. With the necessary forces also being added for each front. If this original concept was to be followed through, then there would ber no need for CoH 3. It could be done by adding campaigns, & more ToW. The knock on effect of this would be to give players a greater choice of faction, & that can't be a bad thing.

    ^
    This

  • #29
    3 years ago
    Emperor2000Emperor20… Posts: 122

    @vile said:
    When released CoH 2 was billed to be an all incompasing WW2 game. To me thats everything from the Eastern front to Burma, Afrika, Finland, Italy & the Pacific theater. With the necessary forces also being added for each front. If this original concept was to be followed through, then there would ber no need for CoH 3. It could be done by adding campaigns, & more ToW. The knock on effect of this would be to give players a greater choice of faction, & that can't be a bad thing.

    Yes, I agree. With everything.
    But there's nothing we will not do :(
    You have to write them on Facebook or Twitter or anything else.

  • #30
    3 years ago
    FUBARFUBAR Posts: 1
    edited June 2016

    Would COH ever go modern, like Afghanistan/Iraq?

    Build FOBs, call in support from Apaches, F117, AC-130s...reclaim territory from taliban etc. Maybe even something different like using special forces teams to do recon and call in precision strikes.

    But ya, Africa campaign would be cool too

  • #31
    2 years ago
    Seal8615Seal8615 Posts: 1
    > @.☠. oOIYvYIOo said:
    > _COH 3 Africa (the historical campaign in Africa)
    > COH 3 Italica (the campaign on Italy)
    > COH 3 Pacific (the campaign east of Asia)
    >
    > Which one would you prefer._

    I say scratch all that...make COH3 atleast campaign like Band of Brothers and The Pacific and be able to play on both sides: Americans or Germans, Americans or Japanese. That would be awesome!!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.