That RNG that COH2 has but not vCOH....and the Coversystem

I read this all the time (that COH2 has so much RNG) and i want someone to explain it to me (if you like). I play both games so i will understand. And i know what RNG means, just saying.

And the second, i read this also so many times (that cocer does not play that big of a role in COH2 but it did in vCOH).

What are the big differences? Can you give examples?

I apreciate every Info you can give me.

Thanks!!!!

simplest explanation.
In COH days if you try to cross road with rifles to attack volks in green cover, you will lose that battle 100% of the time. You may lose 1 or none volks.

In COH 2 if you walk over red cover road with Cons to attack Grens in gren cover, you can either get wiped out or cross the road without any casualties, get to green cover and wipe the Gren squad.
Depending how the RNG God likes you.

Basically in COH you could be quite certain of outcome of engagement while in COH2 margin is blurry and a lot more unpredictable. Making it quite hard to make good decisions.

For example, in early game if you invest ammo for eng flame. Often it will explode in your face and wipe your squad from engagement with basic inf unit or other eng. Just because they scored a crit shot by chance.
Thats what people complain about. Way to much is decided by luck instead of skill and good decision making.

Hope that helps

Thanks, BabaRoga!!!

And i asume this is also the big difference for the covering system that everybody is talking about. You can not be sure that the unit in the green cover will win the fight, right?
Exept that, the coversystem is still the same, or am i wrong?

Last night I lost a game because a ram from a soviet tank immobilised my vanilla Tiger. It's a coin flip whether or not the Ram would succeed in disabling my tank, and I lost the game because the coin flip didn't go my way.

Thats why I hate the high amount of RNG in COH2.

Thanks, BabaRoga!!!

And i asume this is also the big difference for the covering system that everybody is talking about. You can not be sure that the unit in the green cover will win the fight, right?
Exept that, the coversystem is still the same, or am i wrong?

I think what you mean is auto cover units seek.

For example, quite a few times I would throw grenade on units in the cover and my opponent would move out, but some of my models from the same unit that trows grenade would seek auto cover exactly where I just threw grenade.

Or they would walk over to the cover when I don't want to be there because its covered by MG or there is mortar landing shells there. etc

Also not all units stay in cover like they did in COH, so you might have 1 model in green cover and 4 standing on the road.

Both are equally annoying and useless in my opinion

Both games have plenty of RNG, but as said, COH2's RNG is much more unpredictable and annoying.

Mines and ram success are the biggest culprits in my opinion.

Mines are just aggravating. The AOE effect obviously does more damage to clumped units but there's no way to control squad formation so you can't avoid it as far as I know. Maybe someone will find a way to shift right click moves when walking through narrow spaces to avoid clumping (I may today a bit). The AOE is basically messed up from what I read somewhere, it should not do as much damage to more distant members of a squad as what it's doing. Compared to vCOH, the effect is much less predictable. In vCOH a full-health squad might lose some members and a significant amount of health, but would never just get wiped.

Ram is a game-breaking failure of design given the RNG probabilities Relic have built in to it. Disabling a piece of expensive late-game armor is too big of a strategic event to be left to an RNG roll given the number of times it will occur in game. The Tiger Ace simply brought this problem to the forefront where everyone could clearly see that many games in COH2 are won or lost on dice rolls. As Inverse said in another thread, it's not the RNG, it's the scale of the event the RNG is affecting. Many small RNG events contribute to the game's complexity and actually do raise the skillcap, but huge events with major consequences that will not re-occur often enough for the RNG to affect both players equally are completely detrimental.

For those who don't know statistics a brief explanation - with enough occurrences of an event determined by probability in game you approach the programmed probability. But given one or two events in game, you will not hit it, just as flipping a coin only 6x will not always result in 50% heads/tails. You need a really large number of events for the actual game to reflect the programmed probabilities of the event occurring.

You can get the probability on your side though - you need about 3 well-microed T34s to have above a 75% chance of disabling a Tiger (if I remember someone's math from beta forums correctly). That's why the best counter isn't AT guns or SU-85s, but ramming. But that's still, in my opinion, an unacceptable level of RNG for such a major game event.

Mines and ram success are the biggest culprits in my opinion.

Mines are just aggravating. The AOE effect obviously does more damage to clumped units but there's no way to control squad formation so you can't avoid it as far as I know. Maybe someone will find a way to shift right click moves when walking through narrow spaces to avoid clumping (I may today a bit). The AOE is basically messed up from what I read somewhere, it should not do as much damage to more distant members of a squad as what it's doing. Compared to vCOH, the effect is much less predictable. In vCOH a full-health squad might lose some members and a significant amount of health, but would never just get wiped.

Ram is a game-breaking failure of design given the RNG probabilities Relic have built in to it. Disabling a piece of expensive late-game armor is too big of a strategic event to be left to an RNG roll given the number of times it will occur in game. The Tiger Ace simply brought this problem to the forefront where everyone could clearly see that many games in COH2 are won or lost on dice rolls. As Inverse said in another thread, it's not the RNG, it's the scale of the event the RNG is affecting. Many small RNG events contribute to the game's complexity and actually do raise the skillcap, but huge events with major consequences that will not re-occur often enough for the RNG to affect both players equally are completely detrimental.

For those who don't know statistics a brief explanation - with enough occurrences of an event determined by probability in game you approach the programmed probability. But given one or two events in game, you will not hit it, just as flipping a coin only 6x will not always result in 50% heads/tails. You need a really large number of events for the actual game to reflect the programmed probabilities of the event occurring.

You can get the probability on your side though - you need about 3 well-microed T34s to have above a 75% chance of disabling a Tiger (if I remember someone's math from beta forums correctly). That's why the best counter isn't AT guns or SU-85s, but ramming. But that's still, in my opinion, an unacceptable level of RNG for such a major game event.

Very well put, sums up my thoughts exactly.

Oh, and that's an unsupported Tiger of course. Your probability of success also depends on how well-supported it is and how quick the opponent is on the faust button.

I wish they used location damage with the ram. I proposed this long ago. Ram the back, engine damaged or destroyed, ram the sides tracks gone and tank immobilized, ram the front the gun is disabled. The ram and disable everything is just ridiculous.

But ya rng is a huge part of coh2. I remember I got a pio with flamer and THE FIRST SHOT from a con squad blew up the flamer. I went back to base and I got another one and the exact same thing happened when they went back into battle... Lulz...

Thanks guys, i am much more smarter now:-) (just kidding).
I knew that vCOH had RNG to but now i know the difference.

Tristan, this happend to me to "twice", ha ha. The best way to throw 120 munis out the COH2-Window!
Forget strafing, forget frag-bombing, just upgrade your pios wizh Flames :-)

Here's a fun example of RNG in tank battles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzoYxFEf8gc

You can get the probability on your side though - you need about 3 well-microed T34s to have above a 75% chance of disabling a Tiger (if I remember someone's math from beta forums correctly). That's why the best counter isn't AT guns or SU-85s, but ramming. But that's still, in my opinion, an unacceptable level of RNG for such a major game event.

160 Penetration vs 250/300 armor. You have a 75+ % chances of ram success with 2 T34 from the front.

Ram simply should not affect Tigers, a 700 manpower and 200 Fuel tank lost to a tin can with an engine. It's like having half a grenadier squad kill a shock squad.

Ram simply should not affect Tigers, a 700 manpower and 200 Fuel tank lost to a tin can with an engine. It's like having half a grenadier squad kill a shock squad.

I haven't played COH2 much. So you are saying that if I want to destroy a Tiger all I have to do is build a T34 and press the ram button and the Tiger is destroyed?

(Yes, I am intentionally including a whole lot of sarcasm). The T34 is guaranteed damage and immobility in return for the POSSIBILITY that it will damage (but not destroy) the Tiger. Seems to me one wouldn't want to ram in enemy territory where the tiger could be repaired and the T34 would be lost. Likewise that you wouldn't want to throw your expensive tank unsupported into enemy territory.

But yes, RNG should not be so prominent. It makes a mockery of skill and strategy.

It wasn't unsupported and it wasn't in enemy territory, it had a Panzer IV that was also rammed, an AT gun and PG gren squad that was overrun by shocks.

Soviets don't Ram unless they have a slight strategic advantage, if RNG is on their side the german player loses their tank and the soviet player loses nothing. It's fine when we're talking Panzer IVs but Tigers? come on, it's BS.

I've had games where I lost 5-6 t34s due to only shocking a tiger, feels to much like gambling at times, please can this one disable it. I think the best solution is to remove ram, make it more black and white (will work on this tank, not this one), or make it more related to where you hit the tank - side, rear, front.

I'm with you bubalo. It's the gamble thats the issue, sometimes a russian player can throw tank after tank into a ram and it fails losing them the game, sometimes its the other way. Winning or losing the game shouldn't be influenced to this extent by raw luck.

Here's a fun example of RNG in tank battles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzoYxFEf8gc

I call a bit of rose tinted glasses here. Vehicles had a hell of a lot more RNG for the longest time in CoH compared to what CoH2 ever has had. Remember the FUG? And in CoH infantry dodged in funny ways or didn't get into cover all the time.

When it comes to ram, yes it is RNG, for the guy executing it however for the german player it is poor skill to get rammed, you can back up or you close range or you can faust or place mines so you don't have to roll the dice.

Here is good old CoH with less RNG, a classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JgpYXmjUv4

When it comes to ram, yes it is RNG, for the guy executing it however for the german player it is poor skill to get rammed, you can back up or you close range or you can faust or place mines so you don't have to roll the dice.

Bollocks. How is an unvetted (no blitz) tiger supposed to out maneuver a T34 that comes charging right out of the fog of war.