Death to all the RNG gods

RNG is something that I would like to see in a game like Company of Heroes 2, because it's what makes it different from all the other games on the market. The amount of RNG tho is simply too high to a point where the "realism" component becomes too dominant on a fight (where, despite the skill level, you feel bad when losing something or the whole game due to RNG).

I agree with the OP on pretty much all the points, especially on the general idea that RNG on many units/abilities should be turned down/changed in a way that promotes the player for using abilities in the right moment, not just relying on luck.

I would like to add, to your list, that another annoying RNG component is related to units garrisoning vehicles (units into M3A1/M5/Halftrack/HalftrackThatComesWithTheDoctrineWithAssaultGrenadiers )

50% chance per entity to die when the vehicle is a bit too high and should be lowered to a more 25% per entity.

50% chance per entity to die when the vehicle is a bit too high and should be lowered to a more 25% per entity.

This was changed in a patch from (iirc) 25% to 50% to make the use of M3s more risky because they were basically a very cheap hp buffer shield (that could be repaired) for your flamer Engies.
25% can still make up a great variance. So I'd suggest that crashes just deal X-Y% (e.g. 60-75%) max health damage to every soldier inside. On its own it wouldn't be enough to kill them but if they are already damaged from small arms/fire damage against the vehicle, some will die and the enemy can still try to focus fire the escaped units that would now be on low health.
However, it'd need to be a % of max hp because a flat damage amount would either always 100% kill snipers in vehicles or would do too little damage to other units in vehicles.

So no longer would you see outcomes like a M3 crashing but 3 Engineers escaping without a scratch. But neither would you see an outcome like losing a whole sniper squad happen as easily as now (25% chance on M3 crash).

Another alternative could be nerfing Halftrack Garrison cover and decrease the % chance. This would probably also give a more balanced outcome.
Right now these vehicles are basically 360° mobile heavy cover objects (75% small arms reduction, that don't seem to be affected by the close quarters cover denial). Though I am not sure how targeting the vehicle vs. the units inside works, my gut tells me this is another factor that makes it even better than heavy (green) cover.

Yes RNG is important and I like it to, but CoH2 has more of it to CoH1 and it is by far more punishing.

My primary problem with RNG in this game revolves around mines, in particular Soviet mines. They are by far the most broken part of RNG in this game. I have lost 2-3 games in the past week primarily because a single Soviet mine killing 4 men, full health gren squads. Yet other times, it kills only 1 model and hardly protects your flank. There is no predictability to mine RNG and it is frustrating.

Oh you just lost a shitload of respect from me. No way they should return an ability to full status that allowed the soviets to spam on type of tank over and over again. And with the thought the t-34 got some considerable buffs as well as soviet industry in mind i think you are obviously high.

That said i believe that some OS potential of some units should be reduced especially soviet mortars and mines. But RNG defines coh and forces you to adjust to an unexpected situation.

Rams should be effective as you are sacrificing a unit in order to just damage another. Anyway it's the fault of the Ostheer player by putting his tanks in ramming distance and therefore he should pay for it. Also for your information the t-34 was nerfed recently as well with the new scatter changes making it much less likely to hit targets on the move. Furthermore the other counters to the t-34 have been made cheaper such as the pak down from 360 manpower to 320. As for losing your respect I couldn't care less.

Yes RNG is important and I like it to, but CoH2 has more of it to CoH1 and it is by far more punishing.

My primary problem with RNG in this game revolves around mines, in particular Soviet mines. They are by far the most broken part of RNG in this game. I have lost 2-3 games in the past week primarily because a single Soviet mine killing 4 men, full health gren squads. Yet other times, it kills only 1 model and hardly protects your flank. There is no predictability to mine RNG and it is frustrating.

It is because mine damage does not decrease by distance like basically all other explosions in the game do, combined with their very high damage (200) compared to most other weapons. This is also why it is one of the suggestions the OP makes.
I don't understand why they chose to ignore this mechanic for mines but I guess it has something to do with mines sometimes not doing (any) damage to vehicles in the beta... now the poor infantry have to suffer for badly designed mines.

I wonder why mines don't just apply their damage directly to the entity triggering them like a direct hit from a tank would? The splash damage would still be there, just from the foremost corner of the tank rather than a half step in front of it.
That way it would also always kill one guy in a squad and the splash damage could be adjusted to just heavily injure the others because they will be hit more consistently.

Yes RNG is important and I like it to, but CoH2 has more of it to CoH1 and it is by far more punishing.

My primary problem with RNG in this game revolves around mines, in particular Soviet mines. They are by far the most broken part of RNG in this game. I have lost 2-3 games in the past week primarily because a single Soviet mine killing 4 men, full health gren squads. Yet other times, it kills only 1 model and hardly protects your flank. There is no predictability to mine RNG and it is frustrating.

Agreed, compared to vcoh the RNG was seen as a much less influential factor and was focused primary or artillery and not much else. In CoH2 we have Soviet mines and mortars 'one shoting' full squads which can totally be a game changing factor. This is an issue of balance as well as the 'one shoting' chance is much more in favor of the Soviets as they have more ability's and units than the Ostheer which do just that.

I have to agree with your points. While I think some randomness is a good thing that rewards players who can adapt, too many abilities are governed by pure dumb luck. Making ram and faust/nade actually require some skill to pull of would make the game more tacticly challenging yet more rewarding and remove some of the feeling of cheapnes that abilities like ram has.

Rams should be effective as you are sacrificing a unit in order to just damage another. Anyway it's the fault of the Ostheer player by putting his tanks in ramming distance and therefore he should pay for it. Also for your information the t-34 was nerfed recently as well with the new scatter changes making it much less likely to hit targets on the move. Furthermore the other counters to the t-34 have been made cheaper such as the pak down from 360 manpower to 320. As for losing your respect I couldn't care less.

I disagree.The proposal makes the German heavies to easy to counter with a generalist medium tank. It will lead to spam of t-34's and the Germans being permanently stuck on tier 2 . i say no thank you for that. You can say all you want that the germans should not put their tanks in vulnerable position but that means you can no longer use the brumbar or the tiger. The elephant shall need atrocious amount of support and using flank attacks with the panther can no longer happen if even one t-34 is on the field. Also for your information the German tanks where hit harder by the scatter nerf then the soviets tanks,
especially the p4.

Is it that hard to discuss something in a polite way?

Yes because Hans fully deserves it in this case.

Yes because Hans fully deserves it in this case.

Thank you, we may disagree about things but it shouldn't resolve to insults.

If you know your opponent is spamming T-34s then you shouldn't invest in big heavy tanks apart from the Elefant (as this tank can snipe from the rear) that could get knocked out. Instead counter with a variety of units be that paks, pgs with shreks and medium tanks like stugs or p4s and use the stun ability as soon as you see the ram happening. Also a few tellers would not go amiss.

Agree, AT and panzerfaust... Is cartoon shit... 100% fuck?

I personally couldn't believe when i first started playing that almost everytime as German I build a tank I expect to see it hit with engine damage within 2 mins of rolling out. I mean this should at least be 50/50 but it's around 90% of the time. So lame. I would be happy to accept not at nades and panzerfaust have the same reduced chance of engine damage that would make the game much more enjoyable.

Thank you, we may disagree about things but it shouldn't resolve to insults.

If you know your opponent is spamming T-34s then you shouldn't invest in big heavy tanks apart from the Elefant (as this tank can snipe from the rear) that could get knocked out. Instead counter with a variety of units be that paks, pgs with shreks and medium tanks like stugs or p4s and use the stun ability as soon as you see the ram happening. Also a few tellers would not go amiss.

I don't disagree that these units are not effective BUT only on the defensive. What your suggesting will take out all the offensive punch out of the german armor. Not to mention that with som support from other units your counters will be countered. paks and shreks? buy a Katusha , tier 3 units? just use guards in support or just spam t-34 because right now they are able to overwhelm both the the p4 and stug.

Your suggesting that one unit can counter infantry ,vehicles, medium tanks and heavy tanks . that's why the current ram is balanced . it can still mess up a tiger elephant or panther but at least the t-34's have a chance of defeating such units. it should be high risk or an all else have failed ability and not a counter. if i put a p4 against is-2's or kv1 i will not complain they are defeated.

This suggestion would not only make the soviets completely OP but also would make the game boring as hell as no German player would ever use tier 3 or 4 ever again.

I wonder why mines don't just apply their damage directly to the entity triggering them like a direct hit from a tank would? The splash damage would still be there, just from the foremost corner of the tank rather than a half step in front of it.
That way it would also always kill one guy in a squad and the splash damage could be adjusted to just heavily injure the others because they will be hit more consistently.

units dont need to directly step on the mine to trigger it, so if the mines explosion wasnt centered on the mine, it might look a little funny. i can understand why people dont like the mines, but i dont think there is an easy fix. the two reasons for its inconsistency are squad formations and AOE accuracy. squad formations would be extremely difficult to fix. if units stand too close together, they will always get wiped, if they are very spread out, mines will always be inconsistent in their damage dealt. AOE accuracy means not all entities in the 5m radius are hit. far range only has .6 accuracy, so 40% of the time an entity will survive at a distance of 2.5m or greater.

you could reduce the damage at range, while giving it 100% accuracy to be more consistent, but i think that would just result in more squad wipes. to solve that you would need to considerably lower mine damage at range, but that has the side effect of making mines suck against tanks like you said. keep in mind that the reduced accuracy doesnt affect tanks because of target size. so i think fixing mines isnt really that simple.

Well, they could also reduce AoE accuracy to a point where it always hits vehicles because of target size but infantry survive more consistently (e.g. 2.0 near, 0.3 far but the actual numbers could look very different). It would still cause some wonky situations (second closest man survives without a scratch, third closest man dies at 2 m range) and luck would still play a role (wipe still possible but less likely) but it'd cut down on the amount of squad wipes.

any AOE(except tank rounds, artillery) should have their lethality lowered at the edges of its effects. we all knew how bad things were when mortars were 1 shotting infantry when the game was released.

1 more thing about mines, any anti infantry mines in general, should have suppression just like vcoh, together with the AOE nerf as proposed. its very frustrating when ur well placed mine gets triggered off, kills only a single man and does not stop a flank. this way mines can assure a flank to fail and also removes the probability of a squadwipe.

Well, they could also reduce AoE accuracy to a point where it always hits vehicles because of target size but infantry survive more consistently (e.g. 2.0 near, 0.3 far but the actual numbers could look very different). It would still cause some wonky situations (second closest man survives without a scratch, third closest man dies at 2 m range) and luck would still play a role (wipe still possible but less likely) but it'd cut down on the amount of squad wipes.

well this is certainly an option, though its more of a nerf than a fix for RNG. currently, an entity will only survive 40% of the time. with your numbers, they would die 30% of the time. i know you were just throwing out numbers, im just saying its still completely RNG. removing RNG from mines to make them more consistent is what i think would be very hard to do. even if squad wipes are less common, that might just make people even more mad when it does happen.

I disagree.The proposal makes the German heavies to easy to counter with a generalist medium tank. It will lead to spam of t-34's and the Germans being permanently stuck on tier 2 . i say no thank you for that. You can say all you want that the germans should not put their tanks in vulnerable position but that means you can no longer use the brumbar or the tiger. The elephant shall need atrocious amount of support and using flank attacks with the panther can no longer happen if even one t-34 is on the field. Also for your information the German tanks where hit harder by the scatter nerf then the soviets tanks,
especially the p4.

What are you talking about?

All you need to do is cover your tanks with Gren squads and your heavies should never get rammed, ever.

Also, teller mines are your friend

What are you talking about?

All you need to do is cover your tanks with Gren squads and your heavies should never get rammed, ever.

Also, teller mines are your friend

grens all die very quickly with massive swarms of shocks at 1cp in every game now.

1 more thing about mines, any anti infantry mines in general, should have suppression just like vcoh, together with the AOE nerf as proposed. its very frustrating when ur well placed mine gets triggered off, kills only a single man and does not stop a flank. this way mines can assure a flank to fail and also removes the probability of a squadwipe.

+1 my thoughts exactly.

... Also, teller mines are your friend

Strictly speaking:True.
At 60 munis the opponent does need to cooperate somewhat in order to find those one or two German "friends".