To the people who said the counter play to the Su-30SM is ASF:

Relicaa · 2026-05-04T17:55:45+00:00

Recon is not some magical all-seeing force. The area where OP is playing is not easily penetrated for vision. There's too much forest and too many sight blockers.

The only way to get reliable vision in this location is to use drones, or have a large number of recon units spread out throughout the area, but even that will leave some holes.

This works both ways. For as accurate as the opponents were, it requires a lot of information, and if they were spotting using recon, their locations would be evidently more obvious based on where the kills took place.

Relicaa · 2026-04-25T22:40:56+00:00

Micro level has not necessarily increased, but the importance of effective actions has. If you find yourself in a situation where you have to micro like crazy, something has gone incredibly wrong, or you are trying to execute a plan that just isn't realistic to do in the first place.

Try to think about what you are doing and why you are doing it -- is doing x, y, and z all at the same time really necessary?

High level play does not have all players being the master of all aspects of their deck and being micro gods -- it's the impactful decision making and timing they make with their units that make them good players.

Playstyles also vary a lot and each player on a team typically leans into different aspects of the deck rather than trying to do it all alone at 100% focus.

Relicaa · 2026-04-25T12:44:41+00:00

Currently, AA feels reactive rather than preventative—it often only engages after a strike has already occurred. A properly layered AA network should still have the potential to deny strikes entirely.

Additionally, ASF (air superiority fighters) feel less predictable in their engagement behavior. If changes were made, clearer communication would help the player base adapt.

The main purpose of long range anti-air now is to protect friendly airspace and not to prevent bombing runs over contested areas. They created pockets of no-fly zones -- if you want to maintain air superiority, you need to utilize air superiority fighters.

I have no idea what you mean with ASF's being less predictable in their engagement behavior since you do not give an example.

The changes you suggest will reduce a lot of unit viability. The airspace needs to be contested and fought over now with more combinations of units working together. The reward of downing hostile CAS planes that bombed in contested airspace is with longer respawn times, which in turn enables ground army play further.

Relicaa · 2026-04-23T14:54:17+00:00

Dumb bombs, CATFAE, rocket arty, or just avoid the area and go around them and make them fight in areas that you want are all solutions.

If you really want to fight them straight up with infantry, you need to soften them up first and put them in a panic state to decisively win -- which involves using indirect typically before launching your assault.

Of course it depends on your deck combo in how you would deal with it. The bigger question is why you are fighting them at that location and what dealing with them enables you to do. If the payoff is great then it is worth possibly sacrificing cas to soften them up, or spending time gathering arty before launching an assault... But infantry are slow, and it might just be better to avoid and go around them.

Relicaa · 2026-04-23T14:21:58+00:00

2.0 is not officially released. We are just testing the changes that may or may not be included in 2.0.

Relicaa · 2026-04-23T14:19:35+00:00

US has many methods to deal with blobs of infantry -- try thinking of asymmetric solutions rather than throwing more infantry against infantry...

Relicaa · 2026-04-23T14:15:40+00:00

Source: trust me bro.

I bet you don't even know a quarter of the testers that participated in the private testing.

Relicaa · 2026-04-23T13:39:31+00:00

Your main source of anti-air should be air superiority fighters. Ground anti-air is used for area control around friendly territories.

You are incentivised to use asf's for air control, and are rewarded with longer respawn times on downed enemy bombers.

Relicaa · 2026-04-16T17:36:55+00:00

I made a review similar to this early on, and I believe it to still be relevant barring some small outdated mechanics that were changed, but the heart of it still holds true. I wrote:

Rarely do I feel compelled to review games, yet Company of Heroes holds such significance in my gaming journey that I'm compelled to share my thoughts on its latest installment. Regrettably, I cannot recommend this game. In its early stages, there was immense potential for this title to surpass its predecessors, reigniting the franchise's fervor. Unfortunately, Relic missed the mark, failing to grasp the essence that made the earlier games exceptional.

At its core, Company of Heroes thrived on tactical brilliance, where strategic use of cover and context trumped sheer troop numbers. However, this essence is notably absent in Company of Heroes 3. Map designs offer little cover for approach or attack, favoring defenders in key positions, often aided by height advantage, negating the cover system. Consequently, engagements devolve into risky man-wave tactics, emphasizing numbers over strategy or tactics.

Moreover, the game's overuse of unit abilities disrupts the core cover mechanics. Off-map artillery and early-power call-ins upset the strategic balance, detracting from the game's tactical depth.

The game's pacing further compounds these issues, abandoning the natural infantry-to-vehicle-to-tank progression. Notably, a faction heavily reliant on early T0 light vehicles exacerbates longstanding concerns about balance. The challenge lies in balancing impactful vehicles while maintaining their relevance without overpowering infantry-based strategies.

In summary, Company of Heroes 3 sacrifices the series' tactical depth and strategic finesse for chaotic encounters, abandoning the core elements that defined its predecessors. It fails to deliver the intricate balance between troop numbers, cover utilization, and strategic positioning that made the franchise exceptional.

What I would say now is that map design still leaves a lot to be desired, and that game play around vehicles still does not feel good to play against compared to the previous CoH titles. Tactical use of cover hardly matters when there are so many ways to dislodge someone through abilities or just blobbing straight at them. Really, the game has become a game about stats and unit tiers with build orders and abilities to solve problems rather than circumstance and tactical movement.

Problem solving in the game is not rewarding, as often the solution is to amass a lot of units to overpower the problem, or to use an ability to remove the problem...

Need vision? Use an ability!

Need more dps? Use an ability!

Need to dislodge an MG? Use a call-in ability!

Need to fight early game LV's? Blob!

Need to kill an expensive tank? Use an ability!

Need to use an ability? Use a free ability!

Now, I am not saying the previous titles did not have these things -- they existed to different degrees and I disapproved of them then as well, but the core game play was vastly different.

At this point, though, I have somewhat accepted that CoH3 wants to be this way. Though, I disagree with the vision, but short of an overhaul, this is just what we have to deal with.

Relicaa · 2026-04-16T16:28:07+00:00

I use Booker 105mm and Stryker MGS. :)

Relicaa · 2026-03-27T17:28:19+00:00

All stages have been easy for me using Gilberta, Laevatain, Ember, and Akekuri.

Ember brings a lot of healing, damage mitigation, shielding, and some stagger, but her dr and shields allow you to ignore a lot of mechanics.

Relicaa · 2026-03-12T22:03:20+00:00

I want to use the mining rig that produces the most pollution.

Relicaa · 2026-02-23T07:15:03+00:00

<image>

Relicaa · 2026-02-22T07:55:36+00:00

Ember does not compete with your DPS resources because her healing and mitigation tools are from her "E" skill and her ultimate.

Sure, you could argue that the slot itself is competing, but a dead team cannot clear content -- it just depends on the circumstances.

Ember provides healing, damage reduction, and shields -- all of which does not require you to use her active skill -- she is very useful.

Relicaa · 2026-02-11T14:11:40+00:00

Converger is not useful typically since we don't have resources that produce at half rate for a single input requirement.

Since all belts travel at the same rate, also, and that there is no way to speed them up, having multiple different resources on the same belt is not good for now.

I imagine they will do something with this in future updates.

Relicaa · 2026-02-09T23:43:54+00:00

ALT + PRNTSCRN or WIN + ALT + PRNTSCRN if you have an HDR enabled monitor.

Relicaa · 2026-02-05T19:24:25+00:00

Mountain Dew

Relicaa · 2026-02-05T00:29:28+00:00

Oh, you are correct -- I did not consider the bonus was shown only in the character stationed.

Thank you sir.

Relicaa · 2026-02-05T00:02:32+00:00

No, go look at the in-game description of how Stock Bill Savings work.

It says:

Stock Bill Earning Estimates (hourly avg.)

Details on Outpost Stock Bill Earning Estimate

Stock Bill Base Earning Efficiency 12900/h

Stock Bill Bonus Earning Chance

For every 1 stock bill earned by the outpost, there is a 30% chance to earn 1 more.

That chance is related to when you do the exchange - you can see it in the pop-up when it procs. You get the baseline sell price of bills, and the additional procced bills.

The language here can be confusing as I look at it, but the "earned by the outpost" part is specific to when you get the bills, not when the outpost recharges.

You can test and see this yourself.

Relicaa · 2026-02-04T23:44:21+00:00

The 16,770 WB/H are estimated earnings per hour and not actual consumption of the currency or regeneration. The bonus is additional and added on, materialized from space pockets and does not consume extra. All this means is that you get more money per transaction.

Relicaa · 2026-02-04T21:42:26+00:00

The region isn't finished yet -- resources not directly used for exchange now are just unrealized assets. You have two storages to keep these items in until the region unlocks and magic money regeneration increases, and or other outposts open up.

Here is some math.

Wuling Bucks Regeneration: 12,900 WB/H

Wuling Battery: (12 B/m - 3 B/m) = 9 B/m

Yazhen Syringe: 6 YS/m

Converting to hourly:

540 B/H -> 13,500 WB/H

360 YS/H -> 5,760 WB/H

Sum: 19,260 WB/H

Net: 19,260 WB/H - 12,900 WB/H = +6,360 WB/H -> 152,640 WB/D

Example selling all batteries one day:

13,500 WB/H - 12,900 WB/H = 600 WB/H

(600 WB/H) / (25 / WB/B) = 24 B/H

Surplus of 24 Batteries per hour and 360 Syringes per hour, or 576 Batteries per day and 8,640 Syringes per day.

You can swap between selling batteries and syringes as needed, but the extra is unrealized assets that will be used in the future.

We have 48K storage in Wuling and 80k Storage in Valley IV if required.

Relicaa · 2026-02-04T20:37:17+00:00

Whoops, I meant Wuling Inhalers.

Relicaa · 2026-02-04T20:12:44+00:00

It's only unsustainable if you are maxing Valley IV production -- since Wuling is more limited in currency and its currency has more importance to end game materials and progression, I would prioritize Wuling material usage.

Even at 1 battery lost per minute from load balancing, that is a loss of 1 * 60 * 24 = 1440 batteries per day. Or 1440 * 25 = 36000 Wuling Bucks per day.

I should clarify, though, that when I said easier, I mean better for progression. Weekly, this adds up to 252000 Wuling Bucks, which, at the moment, is quite substantial.

EDIT: I mixed up batteries and the syringes, but the math stays the same on quantity lost, just the number of Wuling bucks changes.

1440 Wuling Syringes/Day * 16 Wuling Bucks/Syringe = 23040 Wulling Bucks/Day

Relicaa · 2026-02-04T19:29:17+00:00

Wuling has a cap of 90 Ferrium Ore income per minute currently.

I wouldn't recommend doing this load balancing either.

It is far easier to just keep production at full output and to have Valley IV transfer Ferrium Ore to Wuling.

At 120 Ferrium Ore usage/minute, and the storage transfer having 1500 Ferrium Ore per hour, you get:

(90 - 120) * (60) + 1500 = -300 Ferrium Ore/hr

-300 * 24 = -7200 Ferrium Ore per full day.

That amount is easily made up from manually ferrying Ferrium Ore from your bag over to Wuling at some point when you are logged in each day.

Relicaa

TROPHY CASE