Abandon

of course relic will happily abandon abandon in coh3

Nice one.

I'm thinking of a more advanced system now, that would feel a bit more fleshed out and be easier to implement.

The tank would be able to get repaired and recrewed like normal, but its gun would be unrepairably disabled until you 'refit' the vehicle for a certain cost.

Cost could be like:
- 50mp + 50% the fuel cost (minimum 5) for a light vehicle.
- 100mp + 50% the fuel cost for a light tank.
- 150mp + 50% the fuel cost for a medium tank.
- 200mp + 50% the fuel cost for a heavy tank.

Then it at least requires some economic investment besides the recrewing models, which makes the impact of abandon not quite as big and punishing.

This idea is for another game, but I've always wondered about having regular repairs (not just abandons) cost resources, so like a small amount of fuel/munitions to repair a certain percentage of health.

First off, Abandons should be completely disabled within base sectors. Now I like the idea of abandoned vehicles costing fuel to recrew. 10/30/60/80 for UL/L/M/H. Could even commit harder and say once an abandoned vehicle is recrewed it costs 25/50/75/100 for UL/L/M/H Munitions to repair the weaponry over some "x" amount of time, perhaps even prevent abandoned vehicles from being recrewed until fully repaired to lengthen the time they're effectively off the field. This would ensure that any late game impactful abandoned vehicle stays irrelevant for long enough to reset power balance for a time and even allow the opposing player enough resources to generate a new offensive before the abandoned vehicle is done being fixed providing some skillful counterplay to the concept rather than removing it entirely. The main problem with RNG at the end of the day are massive shifts of power with no control.

The difference between Main Gun Crits and Abandons conceptually is certainly fun factor with lesser skilled players but abandons carry a little more depth. Main Gun Crits just feel bad and are an "Oh I guess I'm dead now" or pity for an opponent who got one. Abandons provide a unique gamestate that if developed properly could be something worth maintaining that on a low percentage chance could provide a risk reward option of attempting to recrew, removing, or simply ignoring said vehicle based on other game factors which would appease everyone I feel.

Abandon is a good mechanic, Jesus.

It, along with a whole host of game mechanics promotes careful play. You are always generally supposed to mutually support your units, not over extending, abandon is just one more thing that *can* punish taking too big a risk.

Diving a tank way too deep is always a really bad idea for the unit preservation of that unit, you can calculate it's worth it if you are prepared to lose the unit, but there are just so many things that can go wrong.

Generally you should have supporting units and be prepared to at the very least kill an abandoned unit with attack ground or some indirect fire.

If you are talking about a single tank pursuing all the way into base with no support, either you are already winning, in which case it's an unnecessary risk to take and you are being punished for being greedy, or you are behind and you took the risk in order to try get back into the game and it backfired, sealing your fate. Neither option you should complain too much about.


The entire concept of RNG in coh, isn't to make the game unfair, or annoying to play. It's to create dynamic situations in which you can never predict the outcome (like real war huh). This makes it more exciting and means good players will react to RNG as it happens.

Abandon is a good mechanic, Jesus.

It, along with a whole host of game mechanics promotes careful play. You are always generally supposed to mutually support your units, not over extending, abandon is just one more thing that *can* punish taking too big a risk.

Diving a tank way too deep is always a really bad idea for the unit preservation of that unit, you can calculate it's worth it if you are prepared to lose the unit, but there are just so many things that can go wrong.

Generally you should have supporting units and be prepared to at the very least kill an abandoned unit with attack ground or some indirect fire.

If you are talking about a single tank pursuing all the way into base with no support, either you are already winning, in which case it's an unnecessary risk to take and you are being punished for being greedy, or you are behind and you took the risk in order to try get back into the game and it backfired, sealing your fate. Neither option you should complain too much about.


The entire concept of RNG in coh, isn't to make the game unfair, or annoying to play. It's to create dynamic situations in which you can never predict the outcome (like real war huh). This makes it more exciting and means good players will react to RNG as it happens.

perfectly well said.
we should aim for more than just black or white, we need more layers, 50 shades of grey, the excitement and leaking that comes with it. watch the ealier tightrope video, he got so excited the su85 got abandoned, and the axis player quickly drop the bomb to destroy it. priceless

to be fair, if it is found in the game code that some programmer cheekily made abandoned at base a higher %, we should change it to give a fair chance anyway on the map.

Abandon is a good mechanic, Jesus.

It, along with a whole host of game mechanics promotes careful play. You are always generally supposed to mutually support your units, not over extending, abandon is just one more thing that *can* punish taking too big a risk.

Diving a tank way too deep is always a really bad idea for the unit preservation of that unit, you can calculate it's worth it if you are prepared to lose the unit, but there are just so many things that can go wrong.

Generally you should have supporting units and be prepared to at the very least kill an abandoned unit with attack ground or some indirect fire.

If you are talking about a single tank pursuing all the way into base with no support, either you are already winning, in which case it's an unnecessary risk to take and you are being punished for being greedy, or you are behind and you took the risk in order to try get back into the game and it backfired, sealing your fate. Neither option you should complain too much about.


The entire concept of RNG in coh, isn't to make the game unfair, or annoying to play. It's to create dynamic situations in which you can never predict the outcome (like real war huh). This makes it more exciting and means good players will react to RNG as it happens.

Idea is good, execution is bad. Same shit happened with Blizzard.

It's also not properly balanced around small dmg + high ROF vs high dmg + low ROF.


Ideally abandoned vehicles would create a contention point around which players can fight over. Not randomly swinging the power advantage one has over the other player once in a blue moon.


Abandoned should either be something the player can work for or know how to play around (ex: as i said before with snares) or be contained in a way so it is a balanced mechanic.

Example:
-Abandoned vehicles can only trigger around the middle of the map. Implementation wise i can only think about been around VPs and surrouding strategic point as long as it's not connected to base sector and it has a set distance to HQ sector.
-Increase chance to abandoned.
-Abandoned requires fuel to recrew
-Increase HP of abandoned vehicle.
-Proportionally decrease repair speed of abandoned vehicle.
-Abandoned vehicles are always immobilized + main gun destroyed.

Abandon is a good mechanic, Jesus.

It, along with a whole host of game mechanics promotes careful play. You are always generally supposed to mutually support your units, not over extending, abandon is just one more thing that *can* punish taking too big a risk.

Diving a tank way too deep is always a really bad idea for the unit preservation of that unit, you can calculate it's worth it if you are prepared to lose the unit, but there are just so many things that can go wrong.

Generally you should have supporting units and be prepared to at the very least kill an abandoned unit with attack ground or some indirect fire.

If you are talking about a single tank pursuing all the way into base with no support, either you are already winning, in which case it's an unnecessary risk to take and you are being punished for being greedy, or you are behind and you took the risk in order to try get back into the game and it backfired, sealing your fate. Neither option you should complain too much about.


The entire concept of RNG in coh, isn't to make the game unfair, or annoying to play. It's to create dynamic situations in which you can never predict the outcome (like real war huh). This makes it more exciting and means good players will react to RNG as it happens.

In theory Abandon could be a good mechanic to promote more depth and change how important certain territory is on the map with the right changes. In practice all Abandon does is give any major assault into enemy territory you do a small percentage chance of losing you the game instantly. Part of the problem is that if you do abandon a vehicle in enemy territory and he recovers it. that's a Fuel swing of anywhere between 180 - 280 Fuel and something like 800 to 980 Manpower which is an absolutely insane amount of value over rng.

Not to mention a major assault into enemy territory is going to weaken your army via model and health damage meaning you're often forced to return to base and lick your wounds hopefully accomplishing whatever your push was meant to provide. This allows the optimal opportunity for your opponent to bring his Engineers over, set up a forward position ahead of the tank, and fix it cost free even with a weakened army since it'll still be stronger than yours after an attack due to defensive bonuses.

Proactive aggressive play in the late game should not be punished arbitrarily because it's significantly harder to mount an assault successfully than it is to hunker down and stall the game at the VP line.

It, along with a whole host of game mechanics promotes careful play. You are always generally supposed to mutually support your units, not over extending, abandon is just one more thing that *can* punish taking too big a risk.

Why exactly would this be a good thing? Risky play should be balanced around risk versus reward by itself, i.e. you risk losing your own units to kill more of your enemy's army in an aggressive push when you feel like you see an opportunity to do so. It doesn't need a total RNG mechanic like abandon to swing a game for no reason or to discourage anyone from attacking. It should be totally up to the player to determine how aggressive or defensive they play, and it should be totally up to the player to determine whether or not overextending is going to be worth it. This is a game about WWII, where manoeuvre warfare dominated, and not static positions. Defensive players are already favoured enough with mines, stationary accuracy advantage, laney maps, an abundance of snares, etc. There is absolutely no need for a mechanic that randomly punishes risky/good/exciting play as harsh as this. But alas, Relic does not want it removed so sadly we're stuck with it.

Why exactly would this be a good thing? Risky play should be balanced around risk versus reward by itself, i.e. you risk losing your own units to kill more of your enemy's army in an aggressive push when you feel like you see an opportunity to do so. It doesn't need a total RNG mechanic like abandon to swing a game for no reason or to discourage anyone from attacking. It should be totally up to the player to determine how aggressive or defensive they play. This is a game about WWII, where manoeuvre warfare dominated, and not static positions. Defensive players are already favoured enough with mines, stationary accuracy advantage, laney maps, an abundance of snares, etc. There is absolutely no need for a mechanic that randomly punishes risky/good/exciting play as harsh as this. But alas, Relic does not want it removed so sadly we're stuck with it.

Praise the Lord.

correct me if i wrong, but abandon happens when your hp is very low.

imo we should get the maths and alogrithm right so that abandon can happen to any players, any units, any place, any map, any time, in a match. so that players wont feel 'hard' done by it.

back to an earlier mention that some 'pro' player drop coh2 because he found the mechanics not esport ready.

to be honest, i agree with him. coh2 lacks the viewership, the fame, the hype, the sponsorship and the money that is needed.

in an alternate earth, sega organises annual league of 2v2 coh2, with the top team winning $1m, and 2nd 3rd 4th get good rewards, but we keep all the meme and rng mechanics that is coh2.

you may fight and practice but you may also leave empty handed if a plane crash on your head randomly.

i wonder if 'pro' players will still think it is esport not ready? or just make the best and adapt to a different expectation of a 'competitive' rts?

ironically, i believe most coh2 vet will agree that castings of coh2 is more exciting and potentially more viewership dollars than your sc or dota, no?

if the viewers want it, can the 'pro' not work towards that?

correct me if i wrong, but abandon happens when your hp is very low.

imo we should get the maths and alogrithm right so that abandon can happens to anyone, anywhere, any place, any time of a match. so that players wont feel 'hard' done by it.

back to an earlier mention that some 'pro' player drop coh2 because he found the mechanics not esport ready.

to be honest, i agree with him. coh2 lacks the viewership, the fame, the hype, the sponsorship and the money that is needed.

in an alternate place, sega may organise annual league of 2v2 coh2, with the top team winning $1m, but we keeps all the meme and rng mechanics that is coh2. you may fight and practicse but you may also leave empty handed if a plane crash on your head randomly.

i wonder if 'pro' players will still think it is esport not ready? or just make the best and adapt to a different expectations of an rts?

ironically, i believe most coh2 vet will agree that castings of coh2 is more exciting and potentially more viewership dollars than your sc or dota, no?

I'm glad that the Relic still has some kind of control in the game and has not abandoned everything. Because if you give full control over the game, it's like putting the game in the hands of Hannibal Lector. Slowly but surely the mechanics of the game will be cut off from the game.

If people are so worried about e-sports, make them a Tournament mode where they will play a castrated game.

if the viewers want it, can the 'pro' not work towards that?

I'm glad that the Relic still has some kind of control in the game and has not abandoned everything. Because if you give full control over the game, it's like putting the game in the hands of Hannibal Lector. Slowly but surely the mechanics of the game will be cut off from the game.
If people are so worried about e-sports, make them a Tournament mode where they will play a castrated game.

I'm glad that the Relic still has some kind of control in the game and has not abandoned everything. Because if you give full control over the game, it's like putting the game in the hands of Hannibal Lector. Slowly but surely the mechanics of the game will be cut off from the game.
If people are so worried about e-sports, make them a Tournament mode where they will play a castrated game.

at most, keep all the mechanics in automatches, and let the custom games have all that castrated options.

the problem with 'tournment' mode, you open can of worms how much resources will be put where.

like you see automatches already removed ice and snow today. if relic knew earlier, do you think they will even bother to create that mechanics?

the variables in coh2 is way more than sc2. creating and later 'balancing' sc2 is piece of cake.

Why exactly would this be a good thing? Risky play should be balanced around risk versus reward by itself, i.e. you risk losing your own units to kill more of your enemy's army in an aggressive push when you feel like you see an opportunity to do so. It doesn't need a total RNG mechanic like abandon to swing a game for no reason or to discourage anyone from attacking. It should be totally up to the player to determine how aggressive or defensive they play, and it should be totally up to the player to determine whether or not overextending is going to be worth it. This is a game about WWII, where manoeuvre warfare dominated, and not static positions. Defensive players are already favoured enough with mines, stationary accuracy advantage, laney maps, an abundance of snares, etc. There is absolutely no need for a mechanic that randomly punishes risky/good/exciting play as harsh as this. But alas, Relic does not want it removed so sadly we're stuck with it.

The design ethos of COH is for long drawn out back and forth games, thats what it trys to promote, i.e. anti base rush. Thats why its kinda rare to see a vehicle being built and rushed straight into base and ending the game right there and then.

Yes you can still do daring raids to get some cheeky kills, or to finish a crippled unit off, but you have to A) be prepared to lose that unit, and B) really you should be prepared to finish off an abandoned vehicle too, if your not, I would argue thats a gross over extension.

COH is about comebacks, it has so many come back mechanics, this is yet another.

If your talking about chasing a badly wounded tank, if you just dont chase, you are probably in a really good position.

correct me if i wrong, but abandon happens when your hp is very low.

imo we should get the maths and alogrithm right so that abandon can happen to any players, any units, any place, any map, any time, in a match. so that players wont feel 'hard' done by it.

back to an earlier mention that some 'pro' player drop coh2 because he found the mechanics not esport ready.

to be honest, i agree with him. coh2 lacks the viewership, the fame, the hype, the sponsorship and the money that is needed.

in an alternate earth, sega organises annual league of 2v2 coh2, with the top team winning $1m, and 2nd 3rd 4th get good rewards, but we keep all the meme and rng mechanics that is coh2.

you may fight and practice but you may also leave empty handed if a plane crash on your head randomly.

i wonder if 'pro' players will still think it is esport not ready? or just make the best and adapt to a different expectation of a 'competitive' rts?

ironically, i believe most coh2 vet will agree that castings of coh2 is more exciting and potentially more viewership dollars than your sc or dota, no?

if the viewers want it, can the 'pro' not work towards that?

Abandon happens when your Vehicle's HP reaches 0 or below, entirely randomly and with no way for you to influence it. (Excepting in the case of the Sturmtiger, which has an alternate Abandon mechanic)

I doubt most viewers find random abandons and MGCs to be the most exciting parts of a CoH2 tournament, and instead find the displays of skill of either team to be the biggest draw.

I can't see why someone would find the computer deciding to randomly fuck someone more interesting/exciting than a genuinely good play from either player.


Abandon would be fine if players had control over it, rather than it being determined capriciously by an algorithm. Same with MGCs, have them be caused by particular unit abilities or a vehicle being destroyed in a certain way, rather than being entirely random. All these things do is reduce the effect a player's skill has on the outcome of a match.

Absurd Randomness is not interesting, despite people insisting that reducing it is "Castrating" the game somehow. Tripping in Smash Bros Brawl isnt a fun and interesting mechanic either, its just an annoyance for anyone with the skill to play the game normally.

Abandon happens when your Vehicle's HP reaches 0 or below, entirely randomly and with no way for you to influence it. (Excepting in the case of the Sturmtiger, which has an alternate Abandon mechanic)

I doubt most viewers find random abandons and MGCs to be the most exciting parts of a CoH2 tournament, and instead find the displays of skill of either team to be the biggest draw.

I can't see why someone would find the computer deciding to randomly fuck someone more interesting/exciting than a genuinely good play from either player.


Abandon would be fine if players had control over it, rather than it being determined capriciously by an algorithm. Same with MGCs, have them be caused by particular unit abilities or a vehicle being destroyed in a certain way, rather than being entirely random. All these things do is reduce the effect a player's skill has on the outcome of a match.

Absurd Randomness is not interesting, despite people insisting that reducing it is "Castrating" the game somehow. Tripping in Smash Bros Brawl isnt a fun and interesting mechanic either, its just an annoyance for anyone with the skill to play the game normally.

Just stop and accept not every one likes 100% skill based games.
As it stands they are the majority. Most people came to coh2 for this rng, it sets it apart from all others rts's.

I can enjoy and understand why people enjoy tournies without the rng. But i and quite a few others enjoy the game with the rng such as mgc or abandon even more.
Here less games get decided in about 5 minutes that then get dragged out and hoping the ahead player screws up royaly.

Making mgc or abandon require certain units or conditions or abilities is bad imo. Only skilled players will get them to work. Ganing a massive edge over any who cant use them well and giving elitism a boost.

Just stop and accept not every one likes 100% skill based games.
As it stands they are the majority. Most people came to coh2 for this rng, it sets it apart from all others rts's.

I can enjoy and understand why people enjoy tournies without the rng. But i and quite a few others enjoy the game with the rng such as mgc or abandon even more.
Here less games get decided in about 5 minutes that then get dragged out and hoping the ahead player screws up royaly.

Making mgc or abandon require certain units or conditions or abilities is bad imo. Only skilled players will get them to work. Ganing a massive edge over any who cant use them well and giving elitism a boost.

Most players don't play CoH2 because "It's Random".

The idea that a better player shouldn't win is also absolutely laughable. "Elitism" lmao.

Most players don't play CoH2 because "It's Random".

The idea that a better player shouldn't win is also absolutely laughable. "Elitism" lmao.

Most players most certainly do not play it because its competitive, given most popular and played mode is random clusterfuck of 4v4 rt.

you can be competitive even with rng. like every real world sports ever....

we just need to make the rng calculation fair and closely simulate randomness. which shouldn't be that hard if relic hires some phd math genius using today powerful multi cores.

It's a 5% chance for a vehicle to get abandoned when it reaches 0HP.


If you are playing to win, you don't play around those odds, because realistically you don't see it happen in most games.

It's the same principle with "pre patch" ram. It has a 2% chance of MGD, 3% of immobilization and 5% of heavy engine dmg. You are suddenly rewarded for no reason at all.

rng is supposed to happen both ways, fairly, you may save yourself your own tank if it gets hit and abandoned in your defensive half

it is not in most 'compeitive' games, that makes it better already. again,if the prize money is there, do we think 'pros' will reject?

instead of removing to conform, we just need to get the random maths tighter and better