It's time for Main Gun Crits to go

If you don't like it, go play chess. There is perfect balance and no critical damage. Do not go where you are not asked, the game is fine. Critical damage has been in this game for seven years. Let's delete them because you don't like them, let's further castrate the game.

If you do like RNG so much, go play slot machines. There is perfect balance and all is RNG coin flips. Do go where you are asked, the game is fine. RNG coin flips have been in this game forever. Let's not delete them because you like them, let's not further castrate the game.

These over exaggerations are utterly useless. What is the argument here?
Nobody playing this game is seriously debating to remove all RNG. You're trying to throw people into your premade "opinion baskets" by implying things they actually never said. With the same reason I could say you should go play slot machines because apparently you like RNG so much it should be the only reason that determines the outcome of a match (see the fake quote above).

Obviously this argument is bullshit.

The only question is: Is there enough influence the player(s) can take on the outcome of RNG to be in control of what happens?

Main gun crits are to a lesser extend controllable, yes. But the outcome can often be game deciding, especially if you just entered mid game and this is the first tank on the field. They are also not reliable. You are good to go 90% of the time, but 10% of the time it screws you (or your opponent) over. Which makes it also different from the "normal" RNG of accuracy and penetration rolls: These are always the same. Every player knows what his odds are in a certain situation. Hitting but not penning 10 times might happen, but these events are very low. Also these rolls are frequent enough to usually even things out over the course of a match. A main gun crit occurs once, maybe twice a match. They can barely even out at all.

These over exaggerations are utterly useless. What is the argument here?
Nobody playing this game is seriously debating to remove all RNG. You're trying to throw people into your premade "opinion baskets" by implying things they actually never said. With the same reason I could say you should go play slot machines because apparently you like RNG so much it should be the only reason that determines the outcome of a match (see the fake quote above).

Obviously this argument is bullshit.

The only question is: Is there enough influence the player(s) can take on the outcome of RNG to be in control of what happens?

Main gun crits are to a lesser extend controllable, yes. But the outcome can often be game deciding, especially if you just entered mid game and this is the first tank on the field. They are also not reliable. You are good to go 90% of the time, but 10% of the time it screws you (or your opponent) over. Which makes it also different from the "normal" RNG of accuracy and penetration rolls: These are always the same. Every player knows what his odds are in a certain situation. Hitting but not penning 10 times might happen, but these events are very low. Also these rolls are frequent enough to usually even things out over the course of a match. A main gun crit occurs once, maybe twice a match. They can barely even out at all.

I am absolutely fine with the RNG, absolutely fine with critical strikes, with the plane crash on my infantry units. Absolutely fine as it was. And my opinion is simple, if someone doesn't like it, make custom settings - a game without all this is like a historical skin. Do not disturb others who are enjoying it fully, as it is.

I am absolutely fine with the RNG, absolutely fine with critical strikes, with the plane crash on my infantry units. Absolutely fine as it was. And my opinion is simple, if someone doesn't like it, make custom settings - a game without all this is like a historical skin. Do not disturb others who are enjoying it fully, as it is.

Alternatively you could make your own custom settings and keep these terrible "features", if they get removed by the balance team. Don't disturb others who want the game to improve.

Alternatively you could make your own custom settings and keep these terrible "features", if they get removed by the balance team. Don't disturb others who want the game to improve.

Great, improvers. Continue in the same spirit.

What needs fixing is the high probability of AT rifles to cause criticals. They should be replaced by injured type criticals or removed.

I think this is a fair compromise if PTRS will still inflict criticals at a higher rate due to sheer volume of shots. Injured gunner or whatever it's called just temporarily increases reload time and isn't nearly as punishing as main gun destroyed. It's also a nice way to re-add back criticals and add additional flavor back to the game.

I think this is a fair compromise if PTRS will still inflict criticals at a higher rate due to sheer volume of shots. Injured gunner or whatever it's called just temporarily increases reload time and isn't nearly as punishing as main gun destroyed. It's also a nice way to re-add back criticals and add additional flavor back to the game.

Indeed if a weapons chances are to high to roll main gun crit need some toning down. I like the less punishing in ptrs's case. But to certain this wont be enough

I am absolutely fine with the RNG, absolutely fine with critical strikes, with the plane crash on my infantry units. Absolutely fine as it was. And my opinion is simple, if someone doesn't like it, make custom settings - a game without all this is like a historical skin. Do not disturb others who are enjoying it fully, as it is.

It is fully valid to think that this level of RNG is fine and that's the way you want the game to be.
It does not hold any better arguments though than changing it. As Pip said, you can also just make a mod and add all the RNG you want until you have the perfect game for yourself. There is no inherent truth in either of these opinions, but wiping other people's opinions away with "go play something else" is just arrogant and does not help at all.

RNG, and particularly random criticals, are not the core design principle of COH2, no matter how much you want to pretend that they are. Logical reasons have been given to you.

No you just gave your opnion and wishes nothing more.

You want not to change but outright remove what this game is best know for, what makes it stand out, unit presevation and rng based combat. Nothing logical about removing those stapels of the series.
If you would at least consider or discuss toning things down we can have a discussion. You seem to be unwilling to even try.

No you just gave your opnion and wishes nothing more.

You want not to change but outright remove what this game is best know for, what makes it stand out, unit presevation and rng based combat. Nothing logical about removing those stapels of the series.
If you would at least consider or discuss toning things down we can have a discussion. You seem to be unwilling to even try.

Why are you bringing up Unit Preservation, as though I have anything against that part of the game's design? You are outright refusing to argue honestly by trying to conflate these two things. RNG based combat is not what makes CoH stand out. Unit preservation, lack of economies, cover-based-combat, etc define CoH, not main gun crits.

There's already a compromise. Remove Main Gun Crits, other RNG in the game isnt being asked to be removed.

Also thank you, Hannibal.

I love when my opponent plays terribly bad and gets rewarded for it because my TD gets a main gun crit and can't get the killing shot off on his heavy tank. It makes the game so exciting, just as Lord Quinn Duffy intended, and I wouldn't have it any other way. #BringBackRandomPartisanWeapons

RNG based combat is not what makes CoH stand out.

Soft RNG based combat (mostly accuracy) totally does make the series stand out, but yeah not the extreme variants of RNG such as abandons, crashes or main gun crits.

Ideally I would personally change main gun crit into a penalty crit that only decreases accuracy/ROF/whatever rather than completely destroying the gun, so the vehicle still has a chance to defend itself.


At the moment we're looking at lowering the chance for main gun crits to 20% so that the crit won't happen in the most common engagements, i.e. 640hp mediums shooting at each other or being shot by ATGs, while still remaining for most heavier vehicles or when any vehicle is being engagement by different damage value weapons or had some unfinished repairs.

There is apparently also an issue with all PTRS rifles dealing twice the chance to score a main gun critical that is being looked into.

Yeah and lets change this game to star craft.


No coh2 has been watered down enoughh

People who compared it to SC2, AoE2 and WC3 don't play or know what they are talking about.

Why are you bringing up Unit Preservation, as though I have anything against that part of the game's design? You are outright refusing to argue honestly by trying to conflate these two things. RNG based combat is not what makes CoH stand out. Unit preservation, lack of economies, cover-based-combat, etc define CoH, not main gun crits.

There's already a compromise. Remove Main Gun Crits, other RNG in the game isnt being asked to be removed.

Also thank you, Hannibal.

The bit about the unit preservation i messed up. What i meant was (i disagree with @sander93 here) that it and rng including all the extra rng are the stapels of the series, no other series has the extra rng, that is why it defines coh, you cant name any other game that has them to this extent.

A lot has already been toned down or put into custom games etc. and more seem to like it (to an extent) then dislike it. you are not asking other rng to be removed but you also said: its unfortunatly to late to remove accuracy from the game, it shoudnt even have been put in in the first place.... its no wonder me and some others question if this is the right game for you.

you also need to look up what a compromise is "my way or the highway" is no compromise, not even close.

i am not against toning down rng crits such as main gun crits they, just dont remove them, air plane crash damage shoud be reverted so it actualy hurts btw. I also do like compremises such as sander has made, that certain threshhold need to be met for it to happen in most engagements.

The bit about the unit preservation i messed up. What i meant was (i disagree with @sander93 here) that it and rng including all the extra rng are the stapels of the series, no other series has the extra rng, that is why it defines coh, you cant name any other game that has them to this extent.

A lot has already been toned down or put into custom games etc. and more seem to like it (to an extent) then dislike it. you are not asking other rng to be removed but you also said: its unfortunatly to late to remove accuracy from the game, it shoudnt even have been put in in the first place.... its no wonder me and some others question if this is the right game for you.

you also need to look up what a compromise is "my way or the highway" is no compromise, not even close.

i am not against toning down rng crits such as main gun crits they, just dont remove them, air plane crash damage shoud be reverted so it actualy hurts btw. I also do like compremises such as sander has made, that certain threshhold need to be met for it to happen in most engagements.

One thing I'm not sure about is whether or not people like just having an RNG chance for something(anything) to occur, or if its just specifically main gun crits are cool.

Because If its just that you want rng of any type, couldn't you just swap out "main gun crit" for "chance to lock turret for 2 seconds" or "chance to knock out pintle gunner"-something that will be less impactful.
Or if its the semi realistic concept of Main guns being damaged that you like, why does it have to be attached to rng? Wouldnt a predictable but complex set of conditions to replace the rng actually increase the depth of the game, not water it down?



If main gun crits were replaced with a less punishing rng effect, It would be a fair compromise to me.
And if the main gun crits stayed but became a conditional and exploitable but predictable mechanic, I would also be ok with this as a compromise.

"the unreasonable over-impactful low chance randomness has to be curbed to everyone's benefit"
-RNG solutions section

I would 100% support removing main gun crits in ladder in COH2 with the way the game currently works

One thing I'm not sure about is whether or not people like just having an RNG chance for something(anything) to occur, or if its just specifically main gun crits are cool.

Because If its just that you want rng of any type, couldn't you just swap out "main gun crit" for "chance to lock turret for 2 seconds" or "chance to knock out pintle gunner"-something that will be less impactful.
Or if its the semi realistic concept of Main guns being damaged that you like, why does it have to be attached to rng? Wouldnt a predictable but complex set of conditions to replace the rng actually increase the depth of the game, not water it down?



If main gun crits were replaced with a less punishing rng effect, It would be a fair compromise to me.
And if the main gun crits stayed but became a conditional and exploitable but predictable mechanic, I would also be ok with this as a compromise.

I do get a serious amount of joy/excitement seeing it happen to my opponent or in tourny if they happend there. Just with hit or miss pen or no pen. I absolutly love that about the coh series, random crits and all, even when it happens to me (a lil while after it happens ofcourse)

I am open to changing them so that they require a condition before they can happen, preferably still a tiny chance without the condions for heavies like the tiger. Just do not outright removing them ever, enough has been taken out already.

I am open to changing them so that they require a condition before they can happen, preferably still a tiny chance without the condions for heavies like the tiger.

What about leaving them in but removing the random aspect similar to engine crits? Originally snares like panzerfausts were based on rng penetration, but were changed to be reliable, but only if the targeted vehicle was at 75% or less hp. This left the mechanic in the game but making them something you have to plan and create tactics before hand to access.

I guess for me, with something as impactful as main gun destroyed, if RNG in this style is so valuable, why not add Ammo rack detonations?
When shooting at an enemy vehicle, a small chance upon successful penetration at any HP that the "Ammo rack is hit" and the vehicle is blown up.
Or give all infantry a small chance to "snipe" another infantry model.
Or a chance that if your HQ is hit with a shell, there's a small chance it injures your commander thus locking out some abilities temporarily-or if it roles an even smaller chance, your commander is killed locking out your doctrine for the remainder of the match.

What about leaving them in but removing the random aspect similar to engine crits? Originally snares like panzerfausts were based on rng penetration, but were changed to be reliable, but only if the targeted vehicle was at 75% or less hp. This left the mechanic in the game but making them something you have to plan and create tactics before hand to access.

I guess for me, with something as impactful as main gun destroyed, if RNG in this style is so valuable, why not add Ammo rack detonations?
When shooting at an enemy vehicle, a small chance upon successful penetration at any HP that the "Ammo rack is hit" and the vehicle is blown up.
Or give all infantry a small chance to "snipe" another infantry model.
Or a chance that if your HQ is hit with a shell, there's a small chance it injures your commander thus locking out some abilities temporarily-or if it roles an even smaller chance, your commander is killed locking out your doctrine for the remainder of the match.

I would put the hp% for mgc at about 10 to 15 % of vehicles total health before it can even happen at another 10 to 20ish % chance per shot, but there is no damage taken when the main gun goes crit. This way the "victim" of this rng, esp axis with supirior armour values, can still have a decent chance to save the otherwise destroyed vehicle.

In the last part about ammo racks exploding, if your not trolling, what the hell?
A main gun crit, wich does not destroy the tank is the same as getting one shotted with ammo rack explosions how?
Again how is getting your commander wrecked for the duration of the game in any way simaler to a gun getting destroyed on a tank wich can be repaired?

In the last part about ammo racks exploding, if your not trolling, what the hell?
A main gun crit, wich does not destroy the tank is the same as getting one shotted with ammo rack explosions how?
Again how is getting your commander wrecked for the duration of the game in any way simaler to a gun getting destroyed on a tank wich can be repaired?

Ammo rack detonations exist in wargames. If you've played warthunder or any of wargamings titles you'll be familiar with them. Its a good example as the more competitive or performance based players dislike them as a mechanic while more casual players prefer the "realism".

The point was that if RNG like main gun destroyed or planes crashing into and destroying your troops is ok, at what point does it not become ok. Because its been said that RNG is what sets apart CoH from other strategy games, if this is the case why wouldn't relic double down on this strength?
I mean the bigger the RNG "payout" the bigger the impact, the more interesting to experience it. For that matter, why not have commander selection be random? It would force the players to adapt, and that would be good wouldnt it?




For me, rng like main gun crits or planes crashing is something entirely out of the player's ability to influence. That aspect of the RNG is something I have an issue with. But I dont have an inherent issue with rng in its entirety.
For example, its true that when you fire a katyusha, the shots are going to be randomly dispersed within the barrage indicator. But you can reduce the maximum shot deviation by moving the katyusha closer. This creates a risk vs reward scenario that adds depth and rewards player skill. This is an example of how rng can be implemented well.