Login

russian armor

Remove abandonment.

21 Sep 2015, 17:08 PM
#21
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Abandoned should stay but:

-It applies engine damage at least. I'm in favour of heavy engine damage/inmobilize for tanks.
-Empty vehicles shouldn't roll for extra crits. Have you seen abandoned > engine damage > bounce > main gun destroy > bounce > engine destroy...

RNG should exist, but there should be limits to it. I'm playing COH, a strategy game, not hearthstone :P
21 Sep 2015, 17:11 PM
#22
avatar of warthog

Posts: 41

i proposed a no-rng mode years ago too, nobody liked that idea in those times.



It's not only with over extending :)

oowned, completely, its not a "punishing" mechanic



It leads to interesting scenarios were both sides are seeking an abandoned King Tiger in no mans land


interesting only to you, the outcome of that scenario is also luck-dependant, if someone happens to have a squad near the area and recapture the KT, is never because he predicted vehicle was going to be abandoned, what is "interesting" in watching both opponents right-clicking and the nearer squad to the KT capture it?
21 Sep 2015, 17:15 PM
#23
avatar of BlackHooligan

Posts: 150

yep abandoned tanks should stay in game is a great mechanic but additional clauses should be added (either engine total destruction, or immobilization etc) with only 100% repairs being able to aquire it back to your ranks
21 Sep 2015, 17:19 PM
#24
avatar of Swift

Posts: 2723 | Subs: 1

Make it toggleable in custom, remove it for automatch at least in 1v1 and 2v2. Our friends the 4v4 scrubs casual players can keep it because of course it naturally makes for hectic action, but in my 1v1 it has no place.

I am not trying to offend anyone who likes 4v4!
21 Sep 2015, 17:19 PM
#25
avatar of broodwarjc

Posts: 824

Leave it in, but add extra risk for taking it.
21 Sep 2015, 17:22 PM
#26
avatar of warthog

Posts: 41

Coh2 is not about knowing what will happen but about predicting it. There is never one outcome of the engagement: there is worst and best scenario instead with many in between. All players involved should be prepared for both of them. If they are, they are better players and will win in a course of best-of-three in a tournament. That means rng doesn't make a game less e-spots. It makes less predictable and thus much more interesting and challenging to watch or play, thats it. It also makes you #adapt to changing conditions you could not expect and that is a hell of a skill.


sadly that is only true in theory, risk-calculating everything is not humanly possible, even in grand finals, players will have succesful outcomes in luck-dependant events because of luck and not good play 80% of the time, it is time to accept reality.
21 Sep 2015, 17:54 PM
#27
avatar of Kamzil118

Posts: 455

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Sep 2015, 17:19 PMSwift
Make it toggleable in custom, remove it for automatch at least in 1v1 and 2v2. Our friends the 4v4 scrubs casual players can keep it because of course it naturally makes for hectic action, but in my 1v1 it has no place.

I am not trying to offend anyone who likes 4v4!
No offense taken.
21 Sep 2015, 18:01 PM
#28
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

Sigh... I would prefer to have things stay as they are, but instead of removing this wonderful feature, I'm begrudgingly on the "Make it more risky" boat. Only thing I can think of that's fair is to make an abandoned vehicle suffer from a guaranteed crit at the same time. Like a damaged engine or destroyed main gun. That will be enough risk.
21 Sep 2015, 18:26 PM
#29
avatar of squippy

Posts: 484

I’m a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work, the more I have of it.
- Thomas Jefferson

Diligence is the mother of good luck.
- Benjamin Franklin

The best luck of all is the luck you make for yourself.
- Douglas MacArthur

Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
- Seneca
21 Sep 2015, 18:26 PM
#30
avatar of What Doth Life?!
Patrion 27

Posts: 1664

Either get rid of it completely, make it a much lower chance, or add clauses IMO.
21 Sep 2015, 18:40 PM
#31
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

All it need is to have all crits (threads down , main gun down , mgs killed , engine damages) and only recovered after repairing to 100%.

Or just remove it. but i think the first one is better it can make some nice battles , not madrush on abanoned tank with nearest infantry.
21 Sep 2015, 19:18 PM
#32
avatar of Deca

Posts: 63

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Sep 2015, 17:22 PMwarthog


sadly that is only true in theory, risk-calculating everything is not humanly possible, even in grand finals, players will have succesful outcomes in luck-dependant events because of luck and not good play 80% of the time, it is time to accept reality.


THe point is skilled players will make quick risk-calculations which will prove valid in cases of many variables. Research has shown that good individuals will come quite close to the true risk % in these situations.
21 Sep 2015, 19:33 PM
#33
avatar of F1sh

Posts: 521

But abandonment wins games

21 Sep 2015, 20:19 PM
#34
avatar of jorsg
Patrion 14

Posts: 20

I think it's fine the way it is now, successful re-crew and repair really don't happen that often usually it's crewed and quickly destroyed or just destroyed. I think it's exciting and fun when an opponants vehicle is abandoned and your able to recover it and us it.
21 Sep 2015, 21:11 PM
#35
avatar of GLBZ

Posts: 54

sounds like it's mean 100% capture if hapend...
it's risky and you can lose more Wile try to take enemy KT
21 Sep 2015, 21:58 PM
#36
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

i like it
21 Sep 2015, 23:26 PM
#37
avatar of scarab
Donator 11

Posts: 10

One person earlier in this thread talked about using attack ground to destroy an abandoned vehicle, so I want to let anyone who doesn't already know that you can use the attack move command and click on the abandoned vehicle directly to make it a target. This is much more accurate than the other method, assuming that smoke isn't obscuring the wreck.

Personally I like the risk reward of abandoned vehicles but I would prefer that the vehicles would have mandatory criticals on recrew and cost a very small amount of fuel or something to prevent recrewing in a firefight.
21 Sep 2015, 23:43 PM
#38
avatar of HelpingHans
Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 1838 | Subs: 17

I would say allow it. It adds excitement and reward for good or poor play. All players know the risk of getting an abandonment. Therefore if they decided to rush their vehicle into the enemy then that's their own choice. If your unit get's stolen then that is your fault and you should be punished for it.

21 Sep 2015, 23:48 PM
#39
avatar of cr4wler

Posts: 1164

I would say allow it. It adds excitement and reward for good or poor play. All players know the risk of getting an abandonment. Therefore if they decided to rush their vehicle into the enemy then that's their own choice. If your unit get's stolen then that is your fault and you should be punished for it.



while true, there's a difference between just losing your vehicle and basically gifting it to the enemy. still think its a bad mechanic.
21 Sep 2015, 23:51 PM
#40
avatar of Corsin

Posts: 600

A need of 25% fuel cost to recrew abandoned vehicles. (Bit like in the ardenes campaign).

Fixed.
0 user is browsing this thread:

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

551 users are online: 551 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM