Company of Heroes (Series)

Overall Opinion: When Company of Heroes was first released in 2006, many of the aspects of the real time strategy (RTS) formula polished by Blizzard had become rote. Success in the higher level tiers of gameplay were less about strategy and more about how quickly players could click their mouse and make use of keyboard macros. Building on some of the features introduced in Relic's Warhammer: Dawn of War series, Company of Heroes was a game changer for the genre. What Company of Heroes brought to the table was a refreshing take on the importance of tactics. Its predecessors in the genre created an over reliance on exhaustible resource piles and mob tactics, and the push and pull of these games came down to vast armies piling on against the enemy through sheer overwhelming force. In place of this approach to resources, Company of Heroes created a system where resource hubs where limitless instead of exhaustible, and the core focus came on connecting resource nodes back to your home base. Building and maintaining a supply line offered a whole range of new tactical strategies where defending every aspect of your base's structure became imperative. Players could no longer turtle against incoming offensives, and there was a cost-benefit analysis to expanding where you had to consider the risk that came from maintaining a larger infrastructure with more weak points to exploit. Along with this fresh new approach to resource management came a greater focus on the importance of each and every unit. Rather than controlling each soldier individually, units were naturally organized into battalions. Casualties to a battalion didn't necessarily result in the eradication of your force, as they could be further supplemented with other troops or merged together to keep your forces strong. Over a dozen unit types provided a unique combination of differing strengths and weaknesses. In Company of Heroes, pumping out the production of a single unit type became a foolhardy method for success, and players were required to learn the intricacies of each unit so that they could be better prepared to face the opposition. Moreover, units grew in power the longer they survived, encouraging the judicious use and implementation of forces. Further adding to the complications of the systems was the implementation of a rich and destructible environment. Making use of cover became a crucial determining factor in success. Units could hide behind cover, garrison in buildings for additional protection, or create their own foxholes in more sparse map environments. Since the development of Company of Heroes, Relic has produced two expansions for the core game and released a sequel. All told, these greatly expand the mythology of the series by expanding to new warfronts and added a third faction, the Russians, to the existing Axis and Allies. In addition to deep and engaging campaigns, a variety of multiplayer modes were also offered.

Pros: Brings deep layers of strategy and tactics to an aging genre A realistic depiction of war drawn from real historical records Nuanced and meaningful maps force players to react responsively to the world around them

Cons: Draws from World War II, an era already well mined in video games The expansions and sequel don't add a whole lot to the Company of Heroes formula