When Company of Heroes 3 launched three years ago, the communitys anticipation was palpable. However, the initial release was met with widespread disappointment. The game felt hollow, lacking the profound tactical depth and polish that defined Company of Heroes 1 and 2. Now, with three years of patches, DLCs, and updates behind us, it is time to answer the ultimate question Has Company of Heroes 3 finally justified its premium price tag or is it fundamentally flawed by design
If there is one area where Company of Heroes 3 undeniably succeeds, it is the visual presentation. The developers opted for a vibrant, modernized art style that leaves the drab, muted tones of earlier titles in the dust. Whether you are navigating the sun drenched, sandy expanses of North Africa or dismantling rustic Italian villages brick by brick, the environmental destruction is spectacular.
Unit details have seen a massive upgrade. Vehicle degradation is persistent meaning battle scars and wear remain visible even after a tank has been fully repaired. The sheer cinematic quality of the explosions and firefights is awe inspiring, though it comes with a caveat. The visual noise can sometimes be so overwhelming that it distracts from the tactical map, leading to easily avoidable blunders like losing an entire squad because you were too busy admiring an artillery strike.
Single player enthusiasts are treated to two distinct experiences in Company of Heroes 3. The Italian campaign experiments with a grand strategy, turn based overworld layered over traditional skirmishes. While starting with limited resources and pushing northward is a neat concept, the execution feels disjointed and never quite reaches its full potential. Conversely, the North African campaign is a more traditional, linear, story driven experience, and it stands out as the far superior solo offering. Yet, when placed side by side with the iconic campaigns of the past, both feel somewhat lightweight.
While pathing, AI behavior, and general unit responsiveness have improved significantly since the rocky launch, the competitive multiplayer ecosystem in Company of Heroes 3 is currently suffering from deep rooted design choices that strip away tactical creativity.
In previous iterations of the franchise, maneuvering, flanking, and utilizing cover were the keys to victory. Today, the most effective tactic in Company of Heroes 3 is blobbing
selecting your entire army and marching them around as a single, massive deathball. This is not because players lack skill; it is because the games mechanics heavily reward this behavior.
Several factors contribute to this:
- Explosive Damage and Model Caps: Artillery and mortars are incredibly precise but lack punishing area of effect damage. Company of Heroes 3 limits how many individual soldiers (models) in a squad can be killed by a single explosive blast. Consequently, large squads can absorb tank shells or mortar strikes with minimal casualties, entirely removing the fear of bunching units together.
- Survivability Stacking: Units in the late game become absurdly durable. Between escalating health pools,
received accuracy
bonuses (which make units harder to hit), and flat damage reduction modifiers, elite infantry can literally sprint through open ground, shrug off machine gun fire, and decimate entrenched defenders. - The Death of Cover: Because units are so inherently tanky and explosives are so capped, the defensive bonuses provided by sandbags or buildings (cover) feel inconsequential. If flanking and cover no longer matter, clumping your units together for maximum firepower becomes the only logical choice.
Tanks and light vehicles suffer from similar design regressions. Vehicles are generally cheaper and easier to mass produce, removing the economic sting of losing one. This leads to armored blobs crashing into each other, devoid of nuanced positioning.
The core issue lies in the armor penetration mechanics. Company of Heroes 3 calculates damage based on whether a shell hits the front, side, or rear of a tank. However, it completely ignores the angle of impact. In reality and in older systems a shot hitting side armor at a sharp, grazing angle would deflect. Here, a side hit is a side hit, making it incredibly easy to bypass frontal armor without actually outmaneuvering the enemy. Furthermore, vehicles can easily phase
through friendly units, making it simple to maneuver massive tank columns through tight spaces.
Repair mechanics further break vehicular combat. Repair speeds do not decrease when an engineer squad loses members, units can be repaired while actively moving away from danger, and there is an abundance of passive, area of effect repair stations. Tanks simply have too much uptime.
The strategic economy is heavily skewed. Fuel points dictate the entire pace of the early and mid game, while Munitions traditionally used for upgrades and abilities are largely irrelevant early on. Why Because many devastating infantry abilities require no munitions at all. An opponent can simply charge you and click a free rapid fire
ability to win an engagement, entirely bypassing resource management.
Because players float so many munitions, the late game devolves into spamming high powered, map clearing abilities on cooldown. The game becomes a contest of who has the best buttons to click, rather than who holds the best tactical positions.
Furthermore, the Call In
meta remains a thorn in the games side. Allowing powerful units to be deployed instantly to the battlefield without requiring the player to invest time and resources into base building structures completely undermines fundamental strategy mechanics. While the developers have slowly started moving some units back into standard production buildings, the progress is painfully slow.
The Anti Air Conundrum: Even when the developers attempt to add micro management to Company of Heroes 3, it misfires. Recent updates force players to manually switch Anti Air units into a deployed stance to track planes. However, the damage output is so low that enemy aircraft still drop their bombs before being shot down. If you demand micro management from a player, the mechanical payoff must be worth the effort.
Content remains a glaring weak point. The unit roster was skeletal at launch, and while subsequent patches and DLCs have expanded it, the variety still feels highly restricted. This brings us to the price. Asking $60 for the base game, with subsequent DLCs priced between $14 and $25, feels steep for an experience that still feels like it is trying to find its footing. To get a complete tactical toolkit, those overpriced DLCs feel mandatory rather than optional.
Pc Version Tested.
Disclosure: We received a free review copy of this product from Devs
