Talk:Company of Heroes 2

New journal article regarding the COH 2 controversy in Russia

I have an article by a prominent WWII historian who addresses the "controversy" surrounding COH 2 with a lengthy analysis of the real issues prompting the moral outrage from the Russians. I plan to add it shortly once I have his permission. He's publishing it in one of the journals so I'm not authorized to post it yet, but I'd like to give the abstract so I can figure out how to incorporate it.

In a nutshell: after three-quarters of a century, most people in the US, UK and Russia are able to believe that their soldiers were "mostly good people" despite a general consensus that things such as the aerial bombings of Hiroshima/Nagasaki/Dresden etc. were regrettable at best and reprehensibly amoral at worst. There is a sort of ability from the general public to appreciate the complexity of the war and the vast variety of interconnected parties and motivations, and to recognize that some were good, some were bad, and its impossible to stamp anything so huge as WWII with monolithic labels. This includes the German army, the Russian army, and everybody's army.

In Russia, there is no such public discourse and no such deviation. At all. Not even a little bit. There were no good Germans except the dead ones. There were no bad Russians except those who died without having killed any Germans. Two decades after the demise of Communism, it is still called the "Great Patriotic War". Russian school textbooks do not make a single mention of how Stalinism co-opted Russian patriotism and twisted it into a gruesome, brutal, wasteful caricature. Nothing of the commisars who approved every order issued based on it's "ideological soundness" and sent thousands of men like Solzhenitsyn to the Gulag or the grave on the flimsiest pretense. Nothing of the NKVD "blocking squads" who followed Stalin's orders to kill any man who retreated, no matter how pointless the assault, no matter how hopeless the battle. Nothing of how the Stalin's Great Purge murdered 45% of the officer corps on trumped up charges, including the finest armor tactician in Russian history, all while Hitler observed and plotted how to take advantage of it. Nothing of how Stalin refused to admit the USSR had been invaded for almost a full week after the start of Barbarossa, threatening to execute those who said so and refusing to even cut off Soviet grain deliveries to Germany, and then finally went into sulking isolation for almost a month, leaving Molotov to address the nation. Nothing of how average Soviet citizens were given armbands and sticks and sent out of Leningrad to attack a panzer army and were slaughtered to the last man without inflicting a single casualty. Nothing of the literally millions of rapes inflicted on the German population by the vengeful Soviet army.

Any attempt to bring up the above issues is likely to elicit a howl of visceral patriotic rage from your average Russia. Because they genuinely don't believe any of it. To this day, they still believe Stalin's propaganda: there are things that glorify Mother Russia, and there are Nazi sympathizer spies who deserve to be shot. There is no middle ground. There is no debate. There is no complexity. Media portrayals are either one or the other, glory or slander, with every Western media portrayal basically being slanderous in one way or another. The professor lists several examples, such as the howls of rage that came from Enemy at the Gates daring to show blocking squads shooting retreaters, "one man gets the rifle, the other gets the ammo" and other true examples of the sheer inhumanity endured by the average Soviet soldier at Stalingrad (despite the fact that the movie is a heroic film about a great Russian sniper vs. a diabolical German!).

73% of the Russian population currently believes Stalin was "a mostly good person". How can any reasonable human being hope to please such a fanatical population? Court Appointed Shrub (talk) 19:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Even with your overview we would require the source first and foremost. You mention having such a piece, if this is the case once you have permission (see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission), I would strongly recommend to link it here in the talk page first for the best way to, if even at all to mention said reference. For now can you give a name since you have mentioned said person being "prominent". Thank you. Stabby Joe (talk) 18:14, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

@User:Court Appointed Shrub: I will echo Joe: it seems you forget to cite your source. Please link to the article... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:13, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I`m sad to dissapoint you, but those "examples" of rage against the "truth" are totally inadequate. First of all the facts of blocking squads and shortage of rifles could not exist at the same time! There could have been problems with weapons and ammo distribution at the begining of the war in USSR (in 1941) but blocking squads were created (using german expirience by the way) at the end of the 1942-nd! At that time there was shortage of soldiers rather then weapons... This and other cliches and disinformation are things that drive us nuts.

The main point of rage against the game was exactly about the horrible disinfo when words, written by people long before the WWII were used as a proof for the games plot - that is something Gebels would do!

Russians do admit there were real facts of war crimes. And people who comited them were punished... But those crimes do not negate the ones the other side did! That is the main point you should never forget. By the way there is no good or bad at war, there are allies and enemies! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.16.143.91 (talk) 08:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

PS: sorry for my bad English...

Pay to Win

Someone removed the section on Pay to Win with the statement.

"The former entry was created as an instrument of provocation and to spread false information"

This is simply not true. The pay to win elements of the game are plain and simple.

If you pay more you get powerful unique abilities and commanders that are not part of the full priced game.

Rather than removing sections for spurious reasons please discuss the point here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.8.48 (talk) 12:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

So far the most blatant pay to win elements are.

CoH 2 - German Commander: Elite Troops Doctrine Released: Nov 12, 2013 - $3.99

GERMAN COMMANDER: Elite Troops Doctrine Utilize Germany's most elite companies using stronger base troops with added abilities. Tiger Ace High command sends in the remaining available support in the form of a legendary Tiger ace.

CoH 2 - Soviet Commander: Soviet Industry Tactics Released: Nov 12, 2013 - $3.99

SOVIET COMMANDER: Soviet Industry Tactics Using the built up Soviet industry, make use of more and stronger vehicle units at the cost of infantry numbers. KV-2 Heavy Assault Tank A KV-2 Heavy Assault Tank can be ordered in to the battlefield.

These commanders allow you to filed unique, powerful troops that are not part of the full priced game - clearly giving an unfair advantage to the owner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.8.48 (talk) 01:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Company of Heroes 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131009054853/http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/26/company-of-heroes-2-review.html to http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/26/company-of-heroes-2-review.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131005010957/http://www.gamespot.com/company-of-heroes-2/reviews/company-of-heroes-2-review-6410716/.html to http://www.gamespot.com/company-of-heroes-2/reviews/company-of-heroes-2-review-6410716/.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:09, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Outside info

I was wondering if you wikipedians wanted to get any information about the game design from credible and high-ranking members of the game's community (such as myself and others) from the community forums staff. I'm not sure how this would work with wikipedia's policies around information sources. Usename policies (talk) 04:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)