Login

russian armor

How much impact on outcomes do you think RNG really has?

29 Oct 2015, 08:38 AM
#61
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819



Well no, the deciding factor of that game was tech choices and getting greedy on the Panther kill. As I said before, playing conservatively will prevent this sort of thing.

Three M4C Shermans isn't a very balanced force. Certainly sounds like the sort of composition that a Panther eats for breakfast, and depending on positioning (Front armour? Rear? Range etc.), penetration (Only ~40% chance to penetrate panther up close.), supporting units etc it's still a risky fight even with the overwhelming tank force. Maybe if you had a more well rounded arsenal with say, some tank destroyers and infantry based AT, it might have gone a bit better.

A t70 can kill a stug on a good day too, I'm sure the shermans had it in the bag.


But hey, I'm sure it was strictly the RNG's fault.



You absolutely have 0 clue about how RNG can change games.
It's also not a question about risk or greediness, it's about how a certain thing (RNG) is out of your hands and can seriously decide outcomes.
If a tank gets abandoned, it's not always the fault of the player.

But why am I ever trying to reason with someone you can not reason with?

29 Oct 2015, 08:58 AM
#62
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384



You absolutely have 0 clue about how RNG can change games.


RNG can change encounters.

A game is comprised of many encounters, and the overall outcome of a game is dictated by a lot more than a single encounter.

29 Oct 2015, 09:28 AM
#63
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7



But then the question is: what bone headed decision did you make with the tank that caused it to be in a situation where it could happen? (Overextended, under significant AT fire, running over mines or whatever.)


There's always a few tactical errors preceding these sorts of things.


The higher level of play the more players overextend their vehicles.

Just look at that match. panzer 4 overextended because it attacked and overextended centaur that need to overextend because brits cant win without them....

Go and tell DevM and OMGPOP something about overextending. I think they know the game better than you
29 Oct 2015, 09:29 AM
#64
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819



RNG can change encounters.

A game is comprised of many encounters, and the overall outcome of a game is dictated by a lot more than a single encounter.



That is very true, although one encounter can have a much bigger impact on the outcome than another. Also, the comment above me is very true. The game is not just about conservative play. You have to take risks in order to achieve outcomes. If the risk gets influenced by randomness that can change the outcome without you having any control over it or is not consistent (abandon), that's just bad game design.
29 Oct 2015, 09:33 AM
#65
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7



That's a calculated RISK.
Emphasis on the word risk.

You make the decision knowing that is a possible, if rare, outcome.

You can blame RNG for it happening, but if you play conservatively rather than take a risk going for the throat such a thing will never happen.


It's a high risk, high reward gamble and it's silly to blame the game when it doesn't go the way you wanted it to.

Moreover, even if your gamble fails, it's not like you're anywhere near out of the game. (Unless you ragequit.)










Calculated risk is something like i will wipe 4 squads with centaur or it will die.
Losing tank is enaught punishement. NOt giving it to enemy. Abanonemt is silly and you cant argue that.
29 Oct 2015, 09:42 AM
#66
avatar of samich

Posts: 205

1/10? Seriously? WHy would anyone vote for 1/10?
Every tenth plane is crashin on your troops and makes you lose a game?
Or every tenth vehicle is abandoned?
Yea, sure :romeoPls:


Apart from the fact that RNG determines the strength of every single one of your units in every single situation.
29 Oct 2015, 09:48 AM
#67
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384



The higher level of play the more players overextend their vehicles.

Just look at that match. panzer 4 overextended because it attacked and overextended centaur that need to overextend because brits cant win without them....

Go and tell DevM and OMGPOP something about overextending. I think they know the game better than you


Sometimes you can overextend a vehicle to take advantage of your opponent not being ready for it, but at that level you generally want to know where his potential AT is. It's still risky, seen a lot of games end when the centaur rush runs over a teller mine.







Calculated risk is something like i will wipe 4 squads with centaur or it will die.
Losing tank is enaught punishement. NOt giving it to enemy. Abanonemt is silly and you cant argue that.


I disagree, I think vehicle abandonment is great punishment for reckless use of a vehicle. If you don't have anything nearby to capture it/destroy it or force off your opponent to capture it more safely, then he very well deserves it. Vehicles get abandoned at such low HP that damn near anything can blow them up.

It's also fun and makes for more interesting matches.

Shall we also say the same about support weapons or weapon drops? If you're against vehicle abandonment for the reasons you stated, then surely just for the sake of consistency you should be against those too. Or is that exempt because it was in vCoH?

29 Oct 2015, 09:49 AM
#68
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Oct 2015, 09:42 AMsamich


Apart from the fact that RNG determines the strength of every single one of your units in every single situation.


I havent seen even once RNG god who could allow to to beat Tiger with Sherman, T34 or KV1.
So I hardly say RNG determinates strenght of a unit in every single situation.
No matter what, T34 or Sherman will never kill Tiger thanks to RNG.
29 Oct 2015, 10:07 AM
#69
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7



Sometimes you can overextend a vehicle to take advantage of your opponent not being ready for it, but at that level you generally want to know where his potential AT is. It's still risky, seen a lot of games end when the centaur rush runs over a teller mine.






I disagree, I think vehicle abandonment is great punishment for reckless use of a vehicle. If you don't have anything nearby to capture it/destroy it or force off your opponent to capture it more safely, then he very well deserves it. Vehicles get abandoned at such low HP that damn near anything can blow them up.

It's also fun and makes for more interesting matches.

Shall we also say the same about support weapons or weapon drops? If you're against vehicle abandonment for the reasons you stated, then surely just for the sake of consistency you should be against those too. Or is that exempt because it was in vCoH?



Droping weapons does not change the match so much but abanoned vehicle yes.
Also imagine other situation , vehicle shoud die but it get abanonemet and enemy will drive away with it while you loose tiger in that engangement but is 2 will go away.
BOth player play conservativly , but he incendiarited your paks and your tiger blow up , you send stuka but it attack at guns because is2 is not its target and he won the game even while you both played the same think.

IS this fair ?
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

600 users are online: 600 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49177
Welcome our newest member, michwishu56
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM