Relic, the Community, and the NDA

It's not limited to esports either; the shape of a rugby/american football ball makes it;s bounce nigh on impossible to predict, and every now and again that results in an errant bounce falling into just the right hands for a try/touchdown to be scored. And that's why neither football nor rugby are popular sports, right?

Obviously it's possible for there to be too much randomness; hence, there are no world coin flipping championships. But some degree of randomness is not inimical to competitive games, and it's certainly appropriate for the subject matter of this one.

That's still a range. Regardless, this element just one tiny aspect of RNG in Dota 2. There are heroes like PA that can one-shot heroes if they get lucky, or hit a hero 4 times and barely deal 1/4 of a hero's damage if they don't. You can get teamwiped by a Kunkka with Daedalus who gets a lucky crit, or he could not get the crit and you jump him a second later and blow him up. You can get first blood on an uphill hit and snowball off it, or miss the uphill attack and completely lose your advantage. You can TP beside an AM with basher and get away safely, or get bashed and have your TP cancelled, losing you the game in the process. I could go on, there's really no limit to the number of situations possible in Dota where a random event can have a gamechanging impact.

In every single one of those situations, you as the player have zero control over the outcome of a single instance of RNG that could win or lose you the game outright. Dota is random as fuck. It's also one of the largest, most successful competitive games in history.

This is getting extremely off topic, maybe we should start a new thread?

Also, more instances of rng =\= greater impact of rng on the outcome of a game. A lot of the examples that you've cited are extreme scenarios. A few can be mitigated by players, when you claim they can't (spread out against kunkka, position better vs PA).

I'm pretty confident in saying that RNG has a greater impact on the outcome of a coh2 game than a match of dota2.

Or we can just go by your (flawed) theory and say that literally every bullet/projectile ever shot in a game of coh2 is ruled by RNG, and each of those instances has more random factors involved than a singular attack in dota2, therefore coh2 has more RNG. Yay. I guess snipers are guaranteed to hit against squads not in buildings though.

I've never said CoH2 has more RNG than Dota 2; in fact, I firmly believe the opposite. I simply mentioned mundane details in order to cover my bases.

A plane falling on a squad is just as extreme as a PA blinking on you and happening to one-shot you because of a lucky roll. How do you prevent a PA from ever blinking on you? It's impossible.

But regardless, you can play up a hero's weaknesses and beat, for example, the PA before he has a chance to reach a point where he can deal serious damage even if he does get lucky. This is easier to do in Dota because there are far more options than in CoH2 and because it's a different type of game with a different flow of gameplay, but it's still an important point to note, and would've made a much stronger rebuttal than what you offered.

Still, there are a ton of random elements that can have an impact on the game equal to that of losing a squad in a game of CoH. Missing an uphill attack on a carry that would've secured a kill can be a major turning point in a game. So can picking up a lucky rune and using it to get a few kills and win a lane. As a jungler, your camp spawn luck can have an incredible impact on how well your game goes; get all Centaurs and Hellbears as an Axe and you're pretty much fucked, same with not getting Wildwings or Trolls as a Chen.

You're right, when it comes to hero-specific RNG in Dota you do have a little bit of control over the outcome, though it differs depending on the situation and the heroes and items involved. But there are still elements of Dota play that have serious, far-reaching consequences on the outcome of matches despite being entirely independent of player influence.

I've never said CoH2 has more RNG than Dota 2; in fact, I firmly believe the opposite. I simply mentioned mundane details in order to cover my bases.

A plane falling on a squad is just as extreme as a PA blinking on you and happening to one-shot you because of a lucky roll. How do you prevent a PA from ever blinking on you? It's impossible.

But regardless, you can play up a hero's weaknesses and beat, for example, the PA before he has a chance to reach a point where he can deal serious damage even if he does get lucky. This is easier to do in Dota because there are far more options than in CoH2 and because it's a different type of game with a different flow of gameplay, but it's still an important point to note, and would've made a much stronger rebuttal than what you offered.

Still, there are a ton of random elements that can have an impact on the game equal to that of losing a squad in a game of CoH. Missing an uphill attack on a carry that would've secured a kill can be a major turning point in a game. So can picking up a lucky rune and using it to get a few kills and win a lane. As a jungler, your camp spawn luck can have an incredible impact on how well your game goes; get all Centaurs and Hellbears as an Axe and you're pretty much fucked, same with not getting Wildwings or Trolls as a Chen.

You're right, when it comes to hero-specific RNG in Dota you do have a little bit of control over the outcome, though it differs depending on the situation and the heroes and items involved. But there are still elements of Dota play that have serious, far-reaching consequences on the outcome of matches despite being entirely independent of player influence.

You cannot seriously compare RNG in Dota2 and RNG in Coh2, in Dota2 as you say there is a range and each ability can be countered by the right item. PA auto-attack, powerful as it can be is countered by a simple scepter.
Now effectively if one team is snowballing I'm not sure we can talk anymore of RNG. There is no RNG if you're still T1 out of fuel when your opponent build his first T4 unit.
Same goes for Basher, basher doesn't kill anybody and if you have 0 dps item beside, basher isn't going to kill a heros by itself.
if RNG weren't going further than miss or hit and a range of dps per hit, the game would probably be more boring to watch but more competitive to play.
The problem today is the range goes from miss to wipe. make it goes from miss to half wipe a squad or 3/4 wipe a squad and that's it.

Many people are complaining about the possibility to one shot a squad but completely forget that the same unit wiping your squad may have shot 4-5 times in a raw not touching at all your squad and the last shot wipe the unit. This is the core issue in my opinion.

Many people are complaining about the possibility to one shot a squad but completely forget that the same unit wiping your squad may have shot 4-5 times in a raw not touching at all your squad and the last shot wipe the unit. This is the core issue in my opinion.

But this stuff averages out. Just like coin flipping, the longer it goes the more likely it is that actual outcomes converge on the aggregate. All it really means is that the game doesn't run on rails, you are forced to adapt to unexpected circumstances. But seeing as this applies to both sides, it's still fair.

And anyway, you could similarly point to infantry shooting at the last model in a retreating squad: that's also random, and it can also result in a wipe. What's the real difference?

I really don't understand this objection. Look at poker, there's a game with a high degree of unpredictability, but it is nevertheless a game of skill, with great popularity, and on which big money rides. Randomness simply isn't antithetical to competitive gaming or sports; it's just an aspect of the game that you have to work with, or around.

Ciez, if you think this thread has gone off topic too far, I'd gladly help it out of it's misery.

Ciez, if you think this thread has gone off topic too far, I'd gladly help it out of it's misery.

I think the discussion at hand is fine and interesting, I only think that it is in the wrong place.

So far everyone has been civil and made valid points so I wouldn't want to kill it. The whole NDA topic may have run its course at this point anyways. Maybe we let it continue for now as long as everyone remains well behaved?

I think the discussion at hand is fine and interesting, I only think that it is in the wrong place.

So far everyone has been civil and made valid points so I wouldn't want to kill it. The whole NDA topic may have run its course at this point anyways. Maybe we let it continue for now as long as everyone remains well behaved?

sure thing, keep it up ^^

But this stuff averages out. Just like coin flipping, the longer it goes the more likely it is that actual outcomes converge on the aggregate. All it really means is that the game doesn't run on rails, you are forced to adapt to unexpected circumstances. But seeing as this applies to both sides, it's still fair.

And anyway, you could similarly point to infantry shooting at the last model in a retreating squad: that's also random, and it can also result in a wipe. What's the real difference?

I really don't understand this objection. Look at poker, there's a game with a high degree of unpredictability, but it is nevertheless a game of skill, with great popularity, and on which big money rides. Randomness simply isn't antithetical to competitive gaming or sports; it's just an aspect of the game that you have to work with, or around.

Poker isn't RNG, its probability with a set of pre-define cards. Here again there is a range, there are only 4 aces, not 5 or 6 depending of the game's goodwill. In Coh2, there are as many aces as the randomness let it, from 0 to infinite.

I don't think that can be true. There's no point writing code that generates very large numbers if you don't have to; those numbers have to be stored, at least temporarily, and that takes memory and processing.

In fact the more I think about it the less I understand what you mean. Generating a random number is quite a lot like rolling a die, except you can specify how many sides it has. I don't know how CoH's code works, but I could probably construct a fair pen-n-paper approximation of the outputs with 2d10 and some tables. Maybe 3d10, because that would generate numbers from 0 to 999, and I can't see much need for finer resolution than that.

In that sense, there can be as many aces, or 999's, as there are rolls, or checks, or tests, or whatever they are called, but it certainly cannot be infinite.

@Inverse - I know you weren't saying that COH2 has more RNG than DOTA2. But having played both competitively/extensively I have to disagree. COH2 probably has more individual instances of RNG than DOTA2 unless you want to count literally every single creep vs creep attack in the game, which is a bit extreme. It also has more impactful RNG than DoTA2.

I do agree with your assessment that RNG and e-Sports are not exclusive. RNG plays an extremely important role in games, especially games like CoH 2 which are way more dynamic than SC2. The levels of RNG have been slowly lessened over time, which is good, but the current levels of RNG are probably not acceptable to most hardcore competitive players. For most competitive players, the competition drives/motivates more than the actual game itself. These players want to feel like they out-played opponents and deserve their victories, just like when they lose they want to be able to look back and figure out where to improve.

For the most part this is possible in COH2, but there are numerous moments you look back on and have to say "Well I guess I should have known that my full HP vet 5 Volk squad was going to get 1-shot by that 120mm mortar." A lot of players in the COH2 community blame RNG to an unfair extent because they're unwilling to admit that they got outplayed, or that they could have improved - but the fact of the matter is that currently singular extremely random/unpredictable events *too often* decide the outcome of matches.

Now, I'm not saying that the reason CoH 2 isn't an esport is because of RNG - because it's not. Yes lessening the impact of RNG would help COH2 improve as a game. Unfortunately I'm not sure any RTS in the current gaming community could succeed as a true esport in the modern sense. As you've correctly pointed out - even SC2 is struggling massively compared to the major titles like DoTA2, LoL, CS:GO, and HS.

Another unfair comparison that you make however, is that the price point of entry for COH 2 has traditionally been massively higher than currently successful titles like our friends: DOTA2, LoL and HS. Even CoH 2 can run ~2x the cost as CS:GO if you were to buy all factions (not including commanders). At the end of the day COH2 is simply way too different to fairly compare with any of those titles though.

I guess the point I'm getting at is this: COH2 has grown to become an amazing game, but it is suffering just like every other recently released RTS. As I said before, COH2 is probably the second most successful modern RTS - only behind SC2.

Also, since it just popped into my mind, I think there are numerous reasons why MOBAs have replaced RTS in many ways:

*Their nature as team games makes it a lot easier for new players to get into. RTS has traditionally always been a 1v1 genre. 1v1 is scary for new players.

*Scrubs don't like 1v1s. It's easy to blame others for your loss in a 5v5 environment.

*Free to play. It's extremely easy to convince friends to try out free games. People naturally like to play with/against their friends. Getting five buddies to download and hop on LoL/DOTA is exponentially easier than getting 5 buddies to hop on CoH 2.

*More gradual learning curve. There are a myriad of mechanics that are not clear in CoH2. I still find myself learning random things, or trying to wrap my head around how some mechanics actually work in CoH 2. DoTA 2 has some similarities in this regard in that because of the WC3 engine it used do exist in, there were some really wonky things that happened. However, the base level of knowledge that you have to have to begin enjoying the game with friends is pretty limited. Put your newbie friend on Leroic, tell him to stun people on cooldown, and let him have fun. Plus DOTA2 has a solid tutorial now.

Anyways, this post is getting way too long now.

TLDR - You're making a ton of unfair/unfounded/unjustified comparisons to try and explain why a game that you know next to nothing about isn't an esport.

I have a friend on my friends list that is in alpha and has only 200Hrs played. So this guy that has 200 hours played is going to contribute a lot to the alpha community I'm sure. More so than a player that has played the game for 3 years, knows the ins and outs of the games. Sure makes a lot of sense there. thanks -

So you/ your friend said.

The NDA isn't so much the problem but how they do their product development. NDA to prevent the wrong kind of hype is good, but NDA and not even bothering to do things like keep the alpha forums secure is like saying your home is safe because you have a lock on your open door.

Really it is not so much NDA but the fact that the alpha seemed so small. How long is it going to be? When do they plan to announce and have an open beta, if they plan to? Note that Ardennes Assault virtually got no marketing outside of the immediate community, and I don't recall WFA being any different either.

It's Relic's general handling of their programs that is the problem, it is a fundamental root issue, one that is deeper than alpha or NDA or Cynthia's jazz hands.

This. I mean, comon, why you need hide NEW STUFF from your fans? To lose them in even great numbers?

This is the reason: if they make it in alpha and the participants try it out, but it ends up not being released for whatever reason, then the hype and marketing is considered false if Relic just lets people talk about it. Of course you can say "Well Relic can just pull it and make a note of it in marketing blogs and such" and I agree..but they don't do that. Again not so much NDA blows but general dumbassitude.

IMO they should just do open beta like how the vanilla COH2 was done- get into it, if you like it, you keep your war spoils and such; don't like it, you don't get any new stuff when its released. The loadout could be basic; players would be much more willing to drop cash if they've since made good progress on War Spoil drops.
Of course if your War Spoils drops are such shit during that time...

Also my guess is the alpha is meant to prepare the new faction, not so much balance things out. So come release time it's WFA all over again..

@Inverse - I know you weren't saying that COH2 has more RNG than DOTA2. But having played both competitively/extensively I have to disagree. COH2 probably has more individual instances of RNG than DOTA2 unless you want to count literally every single creep vs creep attack in the game, which is a bit extreme. It also has more impactful RNG than DoTA2.

I do agree with your assessment that RNG and e-Sports are not exclusive. RNG plays an extremely important role in games, especially games like CoH 2 which are way more dynamic than SC2. The levels of RNG have been slowly lessened over time, which is good, but the current levels of RNG are probably not acceptable to most hardcore competitive players. For most competitive players, the competition drives/motivates more than the actual game itself. These players want to feel like they out-played opponents and deserve their victories, just like when they lose they want to be able to look back and figure out where to improve.

For the most part this is possible in COH2, but there are numerous moments you look back on and have to say "Well I guess I should have known that my full HP vet 5 Volk squad was going to get 1-shot by that 120mm mortar." A lot of players in the COH2 community blame RNG to an unfair extent because they're unwilling to admit that they got outplayed, or that they could have improved - but the fact of the matter is that currently singular extremely random/unpredictable events *too often* decide the outcome of matches.

Now, I'm not saying that the reason CoH 2 isn't an esport is because of RNG - because it's not. Yes lessening the impact of RNG would help COH2 improve as a game. Unfortunately I'm not sure any RTS in the current gaming community could succeed as a true esport in the modern sense. As you've correctly pointed out - even SC2 is struggling massively compared to the major titles like DoTA2, LoL, CS:GO, and HS.

Another unfair comparison that you make however, is that the price point of entry for COH 2 has traditionally been massively higher than currently successful titles like our friends: DOTA2, LoL and HS. Even CoH 2 can run ~2x the cost as CS:GO if you were to buy all factions (not including commanders). At the end of the day COH2 is simply way too different to fairly compare with any of those titles though.

I guess the point I'm getting at is this: COH2 has grown to become an amazing game, but it is suffering just like every other recently released RTS. As I said before, COH2 is probably the second most successful modern RTS - only behind SC2.

Also, since it just popped into my mind, I think there are numerous reasons why MOBAs have replaced RTS in many ways:

*Their nature as team games makes it a lot easier for new players to get into. RTS has traditionally always been a 1v1 genre. 1v1 is scary for new players.

*Scrubs don't like 1v1s. It's easy to blame others for your loss in a 5v5 environment.

*Free to play. It's extremely easy to convince friends to try out free games. People naturally like to play with/against their friends. Getting five buddies to download and hop on LoL/DOTA is exponentially easier than getting 5 buddies to hop on CoH 2.

*More gradual learning curve. There are a myriad of mechanics that are not clear in CoH2. I still find myself learning random things, or trying to wrap my head around how some mechanics actually work in CoH 2. DoTA 2 has some similarities in this regard in that because of the WC3 engine it used do exist in, there were some really wonky things that happened. However, the base level of knowledge that you have to have to begin enjoying the game with friends is pretty limited. Put your newbie friend on Leroic, tell him to stun people on cooldown, and let him have fun. Plus DOTA2 has a solid tutorial now.

Anyways, this post is getting way too long now.

TLDR - You're making a ton of unfair/unfounded/unjustified comparisons to try and explain why a game that you know next to nothing about isn't an esport.

Isn't more RNG a good thing in a way ? I mean the more dice rolls you have in the game the less luck is involved right ? The sheer amount of RNG moments in CoH2 makes for games where the better player comes out on top. Wanting "less RNG" is a really weird thing to say refering to CoH2 considering that every single engagement is decided by RNG. I hope I'm not wrong with this but there is a chance to miss in every single shot fired in the game right ? There is no "if you let Unit A attack Unit B it's gonna take 8.523 seconds until Unit B is dead" sort of thing in CoH2.

The results of most engagements vary quite massively. I think that when people use RNG they're actually meaning luck which is something completely different and it has just become a trend to blame RNG for your losses even if your opponent was significantly better than you.

The only thing I can think of right now that actually matches the idea of RNG (luck) people spread are plane crashes. 120mm one hits happen regularly so I don't see how they're lucky. If you keep a 120mm on the field for a long time there is gonna be a one shot eventually which is most definitely bad for the game but has nothing to do with luck.

Isn't more RNG a good thing in a way ? I mean the more dice rolls you have in the game the less luck is involved right ? The sheer amount of RNG moments in CoH2 makes for games where the better player comes out on top. Wanting "less RNG" is a really weird thing to say refering to CoH2 considering that every single engagement is decided by RNG. I hope I'm not wrong with this but there is a chance to miss in every single shot fired in the game right ? There is no "if you let Unit A attack Unit B it's gonna take 8.523 seconds until Unit B is dead" sort of thing in CoH2.

The results of most engagements vary quite massively. I think that when people use RNG they're actually meaning luck which is something completely different and it has just become a trend to blame RNG for your losses even if your opponent was significantly better than you.

The only thing I can think of right now that actually matches the idea of RNG (luck) people spread are plane crashes. 120mm one hits happen regularly so I don't see how they're lucky. If you keep a 120mm on the field for a long time there is gonna be a one shot eventually which is most definitely bad for the game but has nothing to do with luck.

When people talk about "less" RNG they are mostly talking about instances of huge disparity in results with almost "0" counter play.

Examples: heavy engine damage from AT snares or death crits on tanks.

or when a plane lands on your army

Isn't more RNG a good thing in a way ? I mean the more dice rolls you have in the game the less luck is involved right ? The sheer amount of RNG moments in CoH2 makes for games where the better player comes out on top. Wanting "less RNG" is a really weird thing to say refering to CoH2 considering that every single engagement is decided by RNG. I hope I'm not wrong with this but there is a chance to miss in every single shot fired in the game right ? There is no "if you let Unit A attack Unit B it's gonna take 8.523 seconds until Unit B is dead" sort of thing in CoH2.

The results of most engagements vary quite massively. I think that when people use RNG they're actually meaning luck which is something completely different and it has just become a trend to blame RNG for your losses even if your opponent was significantly better than you.

The only thing I can think of right now that actually matches the idea of RNG (luck) people spread are plane crashes. 120mm one hits happen regularly so I don't see how they're lucky. If you keep a 120mm on the field for a long time there is gonna be a one shot eventually which is most definitely bad for the game but has nothing to do with luck.

I agree with your thought process on more individual instances of RNG giving the better player more opportunities to make the proper choices, ultimately leading to victory. I'm also not advocating for CoH 2 to have significantly less RNG. I love the RNG in CoH 2 and it is one of the primary reasons that I play it over SC2/AoE 2. Also, these individual fire fights/most tank combat can be influenced by each player. Grens in green cover will basically always beat Cons in green cover. To counteract this I can support the Cons with other units, or try and push to close range. This sort of RNG creates dynamic situations that each player can react to. It's not like my Cons are just going to vaporize instantly because of a lucky Grenadier shot - and I have a fair amount of time to react to rifle grenades that COULD wipe my squad.

It is as IpKai and Elchino have said - I just want to remove/greatly lessen the frequency of majorly impactful RNG moments that neither player can control like: plane crashes, main gun crits, 120mm one-shots, flame crits, etc. These sorts of events are outside either player's control therefore, in my opinion, they should not be part of a competitive game. I don't want to win just because my ISU got main gun crit while my opponent's Elefant died. Just like I don't want to lose because the opposite happened.

RNG is a good thing for games. Overly impactful RNG, in my opinion, is a bad thing.

Or you know, two panzer 4s bouncing 8 shots of the back of an IS2.

Or you know, An IS2 bouncing a shot of the side of a STUG-E

Or you know, A Panther bouncing of the side of an IS2

Or you know, 2 t34-85s bouncing 11 shots of a Tiger's front and back with marked target on it

Or you know, getting your 221 abondoned 5 times in a row

Or you know, a rifle nade wiping an entire maxim crew in one blow

Or you know, a rifle nade doing no damage to a maxim crew

Or you know, a molotov wiping 2/3 of an entire unit on burst

Or you know, a molotov doing absolutely no damage

Or you know, an AT nade not giving a critt whilst hitting the back of a tank

the list goes on and you know, this game is riddled with RNG, RNG that most of the time decides games. Wheter we like it or not, it will be there untill the game dies of, so we better learn to live with it.

Or you know, two panzer 4s bouncing 8 shots of the back of an IS2.

Or you know, An IS2 bouncing a shot of the side of a STUG-E

Or you know, A Panther bouncing of the side of an IS2

Or you know, 2 t34-85s bouncing 11 shots of a Tiger's front and back with marked target on it

Or you know, getting your 221 abondoned 5 times in a row

Or you know, a rifle nade wiping an entire maxim crew in one blow

Or you know, a rifle nade doing no damage to a maxim crew

Or you know, a molotov wiping 2/3 of an entire unit on burst

Or you know, a molotov doing absolutely no damage

Or you know, an AT nade not giving a critt whilst hitting the back of a tank

the list goes on and you know, this game is riddled with RNG, RNG that most of the time decides games. Wheter we like it or not, it will be there untill the game dies of, so we better learn to live with it.

1 - IS2 rear armor should be nerfed to bring the disparity between mediums and heavies into line. However other future changes might mitigate this.

2 - An IS2 shot will never bounce at any range on a StugE. Also, there is no side armor in this game.

3 - There is no such thing as side armor. A Panther will always penetrate the rear armor of an IS2, at all ranges. IS2s are super overpowered though, not defending the IS2, just the fact that you choose to mention this as an example of bad RNG. It's not.

4 - Mark Target does not have any affect whatsoever on penetration.

5 - Repeated abandons are funny, but yes, stupid.

6 - There is no RNG that goes into Grenades. They do fixed damage over the area, decreasing from the center of the explosion. It all depends on where the grenade is aimed and how much the squad is clumped up, and what cover they're in. No RNG.

7 - See above, no RNG with grenades.

8 - You're correct, flame crits are dumb.

9 - Rear armor on heavies is way too high across the board.

A lot of what you're mentioning aren't really good examples of bad RNG. Relic can take many easy steps to fix bad RNG, while keeping good RNG in the game.

6 - There is no RNG that goes into Grenades. They do fixed damage over the area, decreasing from the center of the explosion. It all depends on where the grenade is aimed and how much the squad is clumped up, and what cover they're in. No RNG.


A lot of what you're mentioning aren't really good examples of bad RNG. Relic can take many easy steps to fix bad RNG, while keeping good RNG in the game.

There is RNG in how your squad decides to clump up. This will be the case as long as there are no player-selected squad formations. Sometimes the crew of a set up maxim for example is spread out all over the place and sometimes the crew members are sitting right on top of each other. Sometimes even infiltration nades land right on top of team weapons and do virtually no damage, etc.

There is RNG in how your squad decides to clump up. This will be the case as long as there are no player-selected squad formations. Sometimes the crew of a set up maxim for example is spread out all over the place and sometimes the crew members are sitting right on top of each other. Sometimes even infiltration nades land right on top of team weapons and do virtually no damage, etc.

While you cannot fully control the specific formation of your squads, you can greatly influence them with proper orders. The game always shows you the preview of where the members will stand when you order them into a location. It's possible to issue multiple orders into the same area until you get the spread that you want.

It's not perfect, but it helps.