November 8, 2006 - Men know that wars are not won by one solider alone. It is the combined acts of many, working together, that bring the battle to an end. Similarly, victory isn't achieved by sending soldiers blindly to their deaths; it's accomplished by making the right choices, recognizing tactical advantages, and deploying your resources strategically.

Such is the message in Company of Heroes, the latest real-time strategy offering from Relic. You are placed in command of a small army of soldiers, ready to fight against the enemy in this World War II game. Instead of the standard one-man army seen so often with WWII games, Company of Heroes places a heavy – and I assure you it is heavy – emphasis on the strategic element of warfare.

Anyone who has played the Dawn of War real-time strategy games by Relic will already be versed in the primary paths to success in Company of Heroes. For those that are unfamiliar: instead of the standard RTS formula that has you 'mine' for resources like gold and whatnot, in CoH you must instead capture specific points on the map- so-called resource points - by sending certain units to them. There are three kinds of points, each pertaining to a specific resource at your disposal. When you capture and hold these points, you gain a continuous stream of that particular resource. In other words if you lose the strategic point, you lose the income.

In terms of gameplay, this means players can no longer simply amass their forces behind an impenetrable wall. Instead, fortune favors the expansionist commander, and it's up to you to capture and defend as many strategic points as you can to maintain the upper hand. Personally, I prefer this kind of method since it solves problems such as running dry of resources to mine, and it also forces you to think about how to defend both your base as well as your resources scattered across the map.

One aspect of the game that may be jarring to some is the heavy emphasis placed on unit management. Buildings are relegated to a relatively minor role as there are only four primary buildings: those used for creating the units that you fight with, some defensive structures and one or two other structures that serve specific purposes such as healing units or producing upgrades. That's a good thing, considering that it affords more time to concentrate on the unit battles, which are far more in-depth than I've seen in most RTSs.

There are three primary types of units in CoH: infantry, light vehicles, and tanks. What makes the game so good, however, is the way that they all interact with each other. Some infantry are good against tanks (comparatively speaking), while others devastate enemy infantry. Similarly, some tanks can destroy other vehicles with ease, while others can just tear holes in advancing armies of men. Success is determined not by sheer numbers, but rather the breakdown of those numbers and how you use the individual units in conjunction with each other. For example, an advancing group of tanks might look troublesome at first, but if you meet them with anti-tank guns they'll easily be fended off. If the enemy decides to reinforce with some infantry, a few heavy machine gunners, once deployed, will absolutely tear them apart. Scenarios like this are what makes this game so strategic: out-thinking the enemy, and countering what they might send.

Another great feature is that you're not forced to rebuild waves of units that have been recently destroyed. Each squad of infantry (with the exception of snipers) come in groups of anywhere from three to six. Put them in battle, and sooner or later than number is going to start to decrease until there's just one bewildered soldier out on the battlefield representing his squad. Instead of throwing him into a suicide mission, a far cheaper way to get back an army is to send him to base and and reinforce him, thereby replacing the fallen men with new recruits. This allows you to keep veteran squads alive (since they earn bonuses) and helps you feel like each troop is actually worth more than just cannon fodder.