Go West In Company of Heroes 2 Multiplayer Standalone

By Alice O'Connor on March 28th, 2014 at 6:00 pm.

Ah, sunny afternoons in the park!

As summer slowly creeps up on us, what we want is sunshine and dappled shade upon green grass, not ice and snow and muted tundra. Relic understand this, and are bringing Company of Heroes 2 to pleasant western Europe. The RTS is introducing new maps and armies from the western front in a standalone multiplayer release, due to arrive this June.

Company of Heroes 2: The Western Front Armies includes eight new multiplayer maps set across the region and the seasons, along with new armies in the shape of the US Forces and Germany’s Oberkommando West. Each brings new infantry units, weapons, vehicles, abilities, and all that.

Larking about amongst the haystacks

The standalone will also able to play regular CoH2 maps with regular CoH2 players, and vice versa, as well as AI matches. Buying any one individual Western Front army for $12.99 will get you the client, or they’ll both be bundled together for $19.99. We’ve asked Sega if they might possibly be so kind as to tell us the UK prices too.

It’s a strange and mildly confusing approach to a standalone release but, as a large playerbase is so very important for any multiplayer-driven game, probably a sensible one.

, , , .

26 Comments »

  1. persopolis says:

    Too bad they don’t add the Brits/commonwealth. That would have been a guaranteed purchase.
    Or should I perhaps say: “GuaranTEAd”? Amirite? Amirite?

    I regret nothing!
    In all seriousness though, I would love to play that faction again.

  2. Sheogorath says:

    Will the US be shown machine gunning their own soldiers and burning down Paris to deny it to the Nazis?

    • Smashbox says:

      Are you seriously upset about American involvement in WW2?

      • Ravenholme says:

        No, I think he’s complaining about the “unrealistic” portrayal of the Russians in CoH2

        • TheJanitor says:

          ‘Kay. What’s with the quotation marks?

          • Strabo says:

            Because it’s mostly considered unrealistic by Russians wanting to glorify their Soviet past and trying to whitewash all the shit the Soviets and the Red Army did to civilians and their own soldiers.

    • WinTurkey says:

      There will be a mission where you carpet-bomb Dresden into submission

    • JohnnyPanzer says:

      Jesus, man. I assume you’re pissed about the way the russians are portrayed, but let me tell you: At no point during the game is the bravery of the individual soldier questioned, only the humanity of the Stalinistic leadership.

      Russian soldiers WERE gunned down by their own officers when they fled. The scortched Earth Tactic WAS used to thwart the Nazis. It’s not intended to portray the men and women who gave their lives in the fight against Hitler as anything less than the heros they were, but that doesn’t change the fact that those men and women were at the mercy of one of the most paranoid and murderous madmen in history, Joseph Stalin.

      I don’t get how this is considered controversial. If anything, I’d say the Germans have more to complain about, seeing how the millions of men and women of the wehrmacht who fought and died, not to support Hitler, but to defend their country from the very real threat of total annihalation that Hitler set in motion, are ALWAYS portrayed as being just as bad as the inhumane German leadership.

      Or were you trying to make another point?

      • Sheogorath says:

        Oh yeah, they don’t question the bravery or integrity of the soldiers, but the only reason Russian soldiers go into battle is because their officers are behind them threatening to machine gun them (which never happened,) while forcing the unthinking brutes who compose the Soviet army to burn down villages full of civilians and set fire to their own soldiers.

        I’ve got news for you, sonny. The Soviet Union couldn’t afford to waste men in such a fashion. Through the entire early part of the war, the Soviet Union suffered chronic manpower shortages. There were no mass shootings of retreating soldiers, and in the end less than 10,000 people were killed by the Commissars, and then after a trial. And yes, they probably were show trials, but that’s a bit different than shooting them in the field.

        Sorry, but that doesn’t seem like they’re just questioning the leadership.

        As to scorched earth, the Russian high command was generally keen on evacuating civilians, not burning them alive in their own houses. Every dead peasant represented that much more lost labor. Lost labor meant fewer T-34s and PPsH’s.

        The Germans are invariably portrayed in an admirably neutral light. If only we could have done the same thing for our allies.

        • JohnnyPanzer says:

          Uhm… sonny?

          The manpower shortage was not due to a lack of people as much as it was due to consistantly heavy casualties. That’s sort of the downside of a human wave tactic. Towards the end of the war, high command had pretty much drafted every russian male able to stand.

          Of course civilians were evacuated when possible, but that would be due to low or mid level officers, not the benevolance of the high command. For most of the war high command consisted of people hand picked for one abilty only: fierce loyalty to Stalin, as all others had been executed.

          Is the game playing things up for effect? Yes. Is it portraying russian soldiers as anything but brave? Not at all. Bottomline is th… no, wait. Sonny? Are you for real?

          • Sheogorath says:

            Yes, sonny. Do you have a problem with it, lad? I can address you by a variety of diminutives kiddo.

            Your lack of knowledge about Russian history is plain here. Manpower problems have been an issue since there has been a Russia. Defending the borders of a nation that big is really quite difficult, particularly when there are potential aggressors along most of said borders. Go check the Wikipedia article on Operation Barbarossa. You’ll note that of the five and a half million troops the Soviet Union possessed, only two and two thirds-ish took part in the defense against Operation Barbarossa. Note that Germany had almost FOUR million. Holy shit what an amazing discovery! The Soviets were…outnumbered!

            As to human waves, they were never an official part of Soviet doctrine, no doubt they were used now and then due to inexperience or desperation when surrounded, but the primary Soviet tactic was artillery and air bombardment, followed by two waves of tank assaults and a final wave with infantry support. The image of Soviet soldiers marching shoulder to shoulder into German machine guns like it’s WWI never happened.

            The orders to evacuate civilians came from Stalin. Again, you need civilians to make weapons, bullets and farm grain. Stalin knew this. Thus, efforts were made to keep them alive, and because the average Soviet citizen was quite well aware of what would happen to them under German occupation, cooperation with the army seems to have been the order of the day.

            And again, I ask you, is there a scene where those brave and noble US soldiers only stay on the battlefield because there are machine guns at their backs? Machine guns the Soviet command has so many of they can gratuitously waste them with ‘blocking units’? The game portrays Russian soldiers as unthinking animals at best, and cowards at worst.

            Anything else, junior? Your other choices are sprout, squirt, lad, fellow, my little shaver, and whippersnapper.

          • JohnnyPanzer says:

            I have no rebuttal. Your vast social skills and charming personality have utterly disarmed me and I am left with no choice but to accept that 13 million dead russian soldiers were the result of a combination of extreme manpower shortage, a deep respect for the individual soldier’s safety and sound tactics.

        • Strabo says:

          Are you trying to deny documented orders by the Soviet command about how soldiers (and their families) who show “cowardice” are to be treated (= shot and the family deported). Or that there weren’t units behind the front troops for the explicit reason to kill any Soviet soldier who turns and runs in the wrong direction? Because you don’t have a leg to stand on if you try to start that kind of revisionism. That’s on a level of trying to say the Wehrmacht didn’t participate in atrocities and genocide.

          • Sheogorath says:

            I make no such denial. What I DO deny is that the NKVD set up special units with machine guns directly behind advancing troops.

            “Blocking units” were not a blunt instrument against retreat, nor were there any cases of mass execution of retreating soldiers. Blocking units were special NKVD detachments who set up shop at major transit junctions, along railroads and suchlike to look for deserters. If you got caught, unpleasant things would happen to you, yes. However, as far as I have read, summary executions were not one of them.

            Soviet records of the time indicate that the NKVD encountered more than half a million retreating troops, of those only about 1/10th were arrested. Of those execute, one in six as executed. The rest went back to active duty. Presumably some were sent to penal battalions.

            Think about it for a moment, if you will. You’re in an dire situation where your military is literally threatening to fall apart. Even if Stalin had authorized the indiscriminate shooting of retreating troops, I find it very unlikely that even the most incompetent commander is going to waste good cannon fodder. As I’ve mentioned, the Soviets suffered chronic manpower problems. Soldiers were a finite resource for them.

      • Meneldil says:

        Man, I suggest you update your WW2 knowledge. It’s been established that the average Gunther took part in the various genocides and slaughter of captured soldiers and civilians set in motion by the Nazis. And more often than not showed little remorse after the war.

        Not only did they do it in USSR, but they also did it in newly captured Poland in 1939 and in France in 1940.

        So yeah, the Wehrmacht is portrayed fairly accurately in most traditionnal medias, from the murdering brainwashed idiot, to the educated, franco(or englo, or whatever else)phile officer, to the poor sob who was forced to take a gun to defend Berlin.

        As opposed to the soviets, constantly depicted as poor dudes who had no guns, batshit insane officers and crazy orders. Not that this never happened, but it constantly overshadows the bravery of all the soviet soldiers who fought for their nation, and often willingly gave their lives. Millions of people from USSR took great pride in having fought this war.

        It’s the same thing as the “cheese eating surrendering monkeys” tale. Who cares that french soldiers died to fight Hitler and his crazies? They got pwned so, you know, lulz.

        Edit: Just to add something, even if we can look at it with disdain and pity nowadays, many soviets actually believed in the whole “we fight for freedom and progress” thingy.

        • Sheogorath says:

          I think a lot of them might have had a more cynical view, but their choice was literally between being oppressed by Stalin and being straight up murdered by the Germans. As I recall, Germany’s plan for Ukraine basically boiled down to ‘kill of 2/3 of the population, enslave the rest.”

        • MadMattH says:

          People tend to categorize things and by saying that I mean other people. It really doesn’t help that the stereotypes are reinforced through propaganda and media. In the long run, you most likely would come across the entire gamut of reasons for fighting in a war, from the most steadfast patriot to the guy who had to be forced to even touch a weapon. I’m not saying that this would have only been true for the Soviets or the Germans though, it happened in every army throughout time. You can just about bet that in the very first armies to fight that there was always the one dude who was super gung-ho about going and slaying the next village and there would just as likely have been the poor guy who got dragged out and a spear shoved in his hand just to fill ranks.

        • JohnnyPanzer says:

          My WWII knowledge is fairly up to date, allthough not perfect.

          But the only thing of that nature that has been established is that lots of soldiers from all nations commited horrible crimes, and that lots of soldiers did not. Plenty of German soldiers commited genocide on a large scale. Plenty of Russian soldiers were guilty of mass rape of german civilians on a massive scale. Plenty of American soldiers, Japanese soldiers and British soldiers commited crimes against humanity as well, and the list goes on. But the vast majority of soldiers, on all sides, were good, regular people who fought bravely for their friends, families and neighbours.

          As far as portrayal in media, we simply have to agree to disagree. In my experience, german soldiers are consistantly humiliated in media and almost always referred to as “nazi swines”. At the same time, I have always felt that the portrayal of russian soldiers is (and justly so) that of “look at what they had to put up with from their own leaders, and STILL they fought willingly and bravely for their people. Now THAT’S heroics!”.

          I can’t even count the number of articles I’ve read where the loss of several million german soldiers has been brushed off with a “but you know, nazis, so they got what they deserved” which I find pretty offensive considering that the first country to fall victim to the Nazi regime was… Germany.

    • GenBanks says:

      That’s a bad analogy… you probably wouldn’t try to claim that anything close to either of those two events ever occured. Whereas even if the Soviet campaign was indeed extremely over the top, its inventions have some truthful origins. Also, you misread it as an attempt to downlplay the heroicism of Soviet soldiers… Burning a town to stop it helping the enemy is viewed as a dramatic symbol of resolve inspired perhaps to the burning of Moscow in 1812. It’s not meant to show craziness or extremism.

      A better original comment would have been:
      “Will the US be shown putting Japanese Americans in concentration camps or destroying entire cities full of civilians?”

      The difference would be though, that Brits and Americans generally acknowledge these atrocities and don’t try to deny them or get upset that people don’t respect our soldiers enough. I’ve seen lots of Soviet and Russian made films about the heroicism of WW2 soldiers. So what if there’s a game that makes a story out of some of the less savoury things?

  3. Memphis-Ahn says:

    It’s a shame Harlequin isn’t around to cast this game, since I have absolutely no interest in CoH2 multi-player (but would play a standalone single-player version).

  4. Chuckleluck says:

    I’m sorry, but we already have a western front CoH game. Personally, I enjoyed the first CoH much more, too (though it’s been a while since I played CoH2, maybe they’ve rebalanced the tanks and mortars). Anyway, there’s lots of other fronts to make an expansion about, why not have a Pacific or North Africa setting?

    • battles_atlas says:

      CoH2 is CoH but with no way of actually setting up the MP game you want, so kudos to Relic for managing to go backwards on that one.

  5. zaprowsdower says:

    So first we have to pay $20 for the two new armies and small map pack then we’ll have to pay $5 for each commander for the new armies. This game needs a true expansion like Opposing Fronts not piecemeal turd-nuggets of overpriced DLC.

    • DatonKallandor says:

      20$ for two new armies is INCREDIBLY cheap. Blizzard wants you to pay FULL PRICE for less than a dozen new units and no new armies at all. The only reason 20$ for two new armies seems expensive is because Relic used to pack even more content than that in their expansions (2 armies, plus campaign).
      5$ for a commander is absurd though.

  6. Lemming says:

    Some African or Mediterranean campaigns would be nice for a WWII game. Do we have to keep pinging back and forth between Western and Eastern front?