RNG

Don't misunderstand my point of view. Why do some people keep assuming that I don't like RNG when in fact I try to explain that much?

Of course, I did not have better ideal, and I say it at beginning. If anyone has better ideal, please elaborate or keep topic civil instead of bashing me without careful reading.

An LeIG killed a full health clumped up Soviet mortar squad of mine with one hit

Don't misunderstand my point of view. Why do some people keep assuming that I don't like RNG when in fact I try to explain that much?

Of course, I did not have better ideal, and I say it at beginning. If anyone has better ideal, please elaborate or keep topic civil instead of bashing me without careful reading.

That's the essence of having a TL;DR version,my friend.You should always a TL;DR version,cos normally ppl don't read the whole thing thoroughly.Also you should always make your key points perfectly clear,cos otherwise ppl would just certainly misunderstand and then theres no way you can fix it.

That's the essence of having a TL;DR version,my friend.You should always a TL;DR version,cos normally ppl don't read the whole thing thoroughly.Also you should always make your key points perfectly clear,cos otherwise ppl would just certainly misunderstand and then theres no way you can fix it.

Okay, next time I will make one. Thanks...

IF I wanted a game that lacked RnG I'd go off and play something else besides CoH 2. RnG is what makes Company of Heroes fun and while it can sometimes be infuriating it adds to the adrenaline Rush that defines CoH 2 especially at the tournament level. Sometimes RNG costs games but that means that even an underdog can beat a pro through blind luck something that can really get the blood racing for spectators and even the pro player.

I go over that in my video about what defines CoH as a game and it specifies why I love the balance and rng simulator that is CoH. For those interested it is here:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnE9rkvo8f4 

Suffice it to say that without rng CoH 2 would be just another WW2 RTS.

Your idea is horrible in my opinion and would encourage more rage than the current system, it would confuse new players and increase the skill ceiling needed to master the game as well as confuse intermediate players who may mistaking think that after a miss the next shot is a guaranteed hit. Further more the game is BALANCED on rng, to do what you suggest would throw the games balance into disarray even more than it is now and would essentially kill the game.

TL;DR All in all your idea is conceptually flaw because it raises the skill ceiling of the game and will throw the balance of the game into disarray.

-Cadian

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKlnjwzT1IruAZFb0EA-5pQ

You could implement it the way Dota 2 implements RNG, I think its called Pseudo random distribution?

You could implement it the way Dota 2 implements RNG, I think its called Pseudo random distribution?

You're talking about matchmaking or heroes?

Because there are heroes entierly based on RNG and random chances, all the crits, all the random autoattack stuns, all the RNG weapons.

That 'warning' thing is just ridiculous. Try and keep it a bit "normal" next time.

OT: I agree that there is too much RNG in this game on some domains. Actually, there is only 1 more thing I think needs to be toned down; Abandoned tanks. Tanks that get abandoned are a thing I get super irritated from. In the current state, it's horrible because of the impact it has on the game.

Imagine a push from the enemy and you are defending with your tanks in a very defensive way. Behind your infantry and in front of your AT's. Your tank receives a lot of damage cause of enemy fire and you start to retreat your infantry squads, your AT and your tanks. Suddenly, the enemies tank fires one last RNG bullet and your tank gets abandoned. Cause your AT guns are retreating or reversing, they can't shoot the abandoned tank OR they try but they keep bouncing. The enemy kills your AT guns, take a brand new abandoned tank et voilà, the game has swung completely in the favor of your enemy.

Tanks have a too big impact on the game to ne subject to the RNG god 'Lord Abandon".
It just ridiculously bad for competitive play.

RNG is important because otherwise there is low risk if you always know that an AT gun will keep getting closer and closer to penetrating a tank the more shots you take. You could mess with the code to make the RNG distribution smaller and have smaller std of deviation but that is about all that I would be interested in seeing.

The better player wins in coh2. Anyone who denies this is clueless.

RNG is part of the whole game design/concept... you cant remove it...

My suggestion: add some advanced penetration system (front, rear, side armor ,angle, range,...)
remove RNG based abilities like call in Vet troops (oh look got vet 3 Osttruppen with LMGs)

but as I said you cant remove it completely but less RNG more competitive elements. E.g Abandoned vehicles are a no go if we want to take this game to the esl

The current RNG system is relatively easy to size up precisely because every consecutive hit has the same chance to hit or miss.

Under your system players will have to count hits or misses in order to better predict their chances of success. What if you missed a hit because you're microing something else? It's just so unintuitive.

The goal of RNG in this game is to force players to constantly adapt to an ever changing situation. The only RNG we should remove is situations where RNG offers no room to adapt: like planes falling from the sky, projectile one-shots, etc.

The better player wins in coh2. Anyone who denies this is clueless.

This

play SC2
no RNG
always hit
always pen
always same reload
always same speed
no acceleration or turn speed
armor reduce damage so tank feel every bullet
everything have different HP (it's easy to say what have more helth Pz4 or t34)

The current RNG system is more an excuse of lack of design. I'm agreeing with the OP.

RNG is interesting when within control limit defined by the game designer, you know what is the maximum value (damage or deflect usually) you can have or lack with the RNG. Right now, there isn't any control limit so RNG is completely wide from Wipe to Miss, 100% damage to 0% damage.

Maybe you don't see it as an RNG issue, but let me remember you all the threads and subjects we had over the last months about squad wipe (grenade, tank shot etc...) and recently OP pak Howi and ISG. Those units are purely RNG, I have lost and win game only on the matter of a couple of crucial miss or hit from those two units. Simply because they can wipe you 2 or 3 squads in a single game or not. Ostheer sniper HP buff is purely a way to remove RNG for this unit.

When Relic decides to give a shitload of HP instead of a shitload of armor to Churchills, this is a attempt to reduce the RNG issue, there is no RNG by taking a portion of a unit hp each shot or so (only the usual hit and miss), Axis players would have been wiser to make sure its stay like that. It is far more comfortable to deal with a unit you know approximately how long time you need to take it out than a KT or a panther which you can take down really quick or not simply because you don't know how many shots it will deflect.

In my opinion, the concept of hit or deflect, hit or miss is not appropriate to an RTS game, you always need reliability in your actions.
Now it doesn't mean no more RNG, it means controlling the RNG, like in Dota2 (someone mention it as a comparison), in Dota2 the game mechanism, even for pure RNG heroes are within control limits. the 1st one is any heroes ability can be countered with an object, which remove completely the randomness of the hit or miss probability.

I really hope that in the next Coh3, they'll have enough game design maturity to innovate in this chapter.

It seems you are utterly wrong according to your own poll. I concur with the sentiment.

That 'warning' thing is just ridiculous. Try and keep it a bit "normal" next time.

OT: I agree that there is too much RNG in this game on some domains. Actually, there is only 1 more thing I think needs to be toned down; Abandoned tanks. Tanks that get abandoned are a thing I get super irritated from. In the current state, it's horrible because of the impact it has on the game.

Imagine a push from the enemy and you are defending with your tanks in a very defensive way. Behind your infantry and in front of your AT's. Your tank receives a lot of damage cause of enemy fire and you start to retreat your infantry squads, your AT and your tanks. Suddenly, the enemies tank fires one last RNG bullet and your tank gets abandoned. Cause your AT guns are retreating or reversing, they can't shoot the abandoned tank OR they try but they keep bouncing. The enemy kills your AT guns, take a brand new abandoned tank et voilà, the game has swung completely in the favor of your enemy.

Tanks have a too big impact on the game to ne subject to the RNG god 'Lord Abandon".
It just ridiculously bad for competitive play.

+1

In my last game agains sturmtigercobra i almost lost a game cause i lost kv8 , yes i got too agressive but that is everyone when game gets under 100 VPs , there is no time for conservative play

Concept is fine, people are just reading the title and the red text
As they said before add a TL;DR.
Although, i'm not sure if that system can be implemented on the game nor if it's gonna make a drastic difference.

Regarding RNG, +1 to Esxile post. You just need some limits to the results of RNG, which is what we have been doing for the last 2 years with the game.

In my opinion, the concept of hit or deflect, hit or miss is not appropriate to an RTS game, you always need reliability in your actions.

Even when it's such a big feature of the subject matter?

I acknowledge you can say that isn't directly pertinent to how a game's rules should be built, but IMO that would greatly detract from the game. A reasonably representative reflection of the subject matter is part of COH's charm; the very fact that deflection exists is one of the things that attracts me to it.

All this talk about abandoned vehicles is another case in point. If I were to guess, the main reason it's there is to drive home the fact that armour must, absolutely must, be supported by infantry. It's a way to encourage play that is both better, and more faithful to the realities of the theme. Being careless with armour will punish you with more than just losing the armour, and the very fact that it can happen forces you to think about it. You've been forewarned, and if it happens to you now it's your own fault.

IMO, this is a good feature, both in terms of play and game design. I really don't believe that pure RNG decides games; experts, as they say, make their own luck, and I think if you win a game through RNG, you probably already had it in the bag, and if you lose because of RNG you probably already lost.

Even if there are some cases where a turnaround is purely due to fluke, just, you know, brush yourself off, recognise that shit happens, and get over it.

The better player wins in coh2. Anyone who denies this is clueless.