Fixing blob and random wipe

And what's is RANDOM wipe? Seeing that part of the map is under heavy fire and despite that going there with infantry just to get wiped?

Standing in front of tank?

Watching flying nade without trying to dodge it?

That's not random wipe. That's stupidity or being out-microed.

A random wipe, as far as I'm concerned, is a full-squad wipe in which the player losing the squad could NOT have prevented it. For example; you have a squad in green cover fighting an enemy, and hear a mortar fire (for the sake of argument, it's auto-firing; NOT manual). Knowing that the mortar is most likely targeting the squad in cover, you move the squad out of cover and get about 4m from where they were when the mortar hits.

The mortar hits your squad perfectly and wipes it, due to the mortar's inherent inaccuracy.

For the player who lost the squad, there was no 'correct' move. Staying in position would obviously result in being hit by the mortar, since that was the intended target. Moving away resulted in a squad being wiped ENTIRELY due to RNG.

The same can be said for when a squad's AI bunches it up while moving (bad pathing), and then is wiped entirely by an AT-tank in the FOW. Again, the losing player couldn't prevent this; the game's AI forced the models to group up. Furthermore, the squad was wiped by an AT-focused tank, not an AI tank.

Once per X game is not often.

If you would do this, you would kill the whole game.

It's not win-win situation. It's win situation for worse player.

Except it's not. The game isn't based entirely around RNG; yes, it has random elements, but the game isn't designed to be decided entirely by random factors. The better player SHOULD always win; not the one that was consistently lucky.

If I keep my squad in front of a tank and get wipe I should blame myself for not retreating.

If I couldn't dodge nade/wasnt aware of it, it's becasue my opponent out-played me.

Etc etc.

But these aren't random. These wipes ARE entirely preventable, so they aren't random. The ones I listed above, with no 'winning' move, ARE. This is what needs to be prevented.

Except it's not. The game isn't based entirely around RNG; yes, it has random elements, but the game isn't designed to be decided entirely by random factors. The better player SHOULD always win; not the one that was consistently lucky.

"Consistently lucky" should be a red flag statement; if you have to appeal to people being "consistently lucky", your argument probably doesn't make sense.

Unless you believe that 'luck' is some kind of abstract property assigned to people, there is no way for anyone to be 'consistently lucky'. Being lucky many times in a row is itself just another form of luck, and by necessity, all the more rare. 'Consistently Lucky' could well be the name of a super power.

The net result is that while a player may be lucky or unlucky from moment to moment, being consistently lucky is inherently rare and infrequent. And something that is inherently rare and infrequent is usually not of sufficient concern to warrant doing much of anything about.

..............
But these aren't random. These wipes ARE entirely preventable, so they aren't random. The ones I listed above, with no 'winning' move, ARE. This is what needs to be prevented.

And how often wipes you listed above happens? Once per X games? Plus they also happen in your favour.

By the way. If you are behind green cover with full health, why would you live cover? In cover you can't be wiped by mortar/nade. And if you here mortar shell coming it's up to you to decide if you want to stick to cover, wait for the shell and then move, or insta retreator move out of the cover before the shell hit, so you must consider that moving out of cover can mean that this shell will land perfectly on you, while your squad is still bunched just after leaving the cover.

If mortat was aiming at this squad and you decided to move, it's not random wipe.

I bet you just play allied factions and their big squad sizes.

You know that my PC is visible and you can check which faction I play?

But please, show us your PC so we can see how you play with all factions

"Consistently lucky" should be a red flag statement; if you have to appeal to people being "consistently lucky", your argument probably doesn't make sense.

Unless you believe that 'luck' is some kind of abstract property assigned to people, there is no way for anyone to be 'consistently lucky'. Being lucky many times in a row is itself just another form of luck, and by necessity, all the more rare. 'Consistently Lucky' could well be the name of a super power.

The net result is that while a player may be lucky or unlucky from moment to moment, being consistently lucky is inherently rare and infrequent. And something that is inherently rare and infrequent is usually not of sufficient concern to warrant doing much of anything about.

Firstly, I meant 'consistently lucky' within a single game; obviously no one can be 'consistently lucky' across multiple games. However, the possibility for a 'consistent luck' streak within a single game to massively influence the match just isn't acceptable in a competitive game.

For example, maybe early on you get that lucky mortar-RNG 'miss' that actually hits (per my description earlier). Maybe in mid-game, you get lucky and the faust misses your AEC/T70/etc. and hits the ground instead (I had this happen 3 times in a row in ONE game). Then maybe in late-game, you get lucky and the enemy AT misses 3-4 times in a row against your critically low tank.

Those 3 events in a single game would result in a MASSIVE advantage for the 'lucky' player, which the 'unlucky' player could do nothing to counter. For a competitive game, luck just can't hold that much power, even if it is an unlikely possibility. If in a game like 'Dota 2', the final match of a massive tournament was decided by a consistent string of "5% likely" events, people would be outraged. You can't give a team a $9m+ crowed-funded prize for being lucky - the donators demand that the game be dictated and decided entirely by skill; that's the point of the game.

And how often wipes you listed above happens? Once per X games? Plus they also happen in your favour.

In a team game (2v2), 'random' wipes probably happen a few times per game (even when I was a sub-200 player). And I'm aware they can happen in my favor; I just don't like it. It feels cheap to get an advantage by doing literally nothing.

By the way. If you are behind green cover with full health, why would you live cover? In cover you can't be wiped by mortar/nade.

It can absolutely happen, green cover is directional. IF the mortar lands on your side of cover, you'll take full damage. In addition, being in combat implies damage taken. That means you'll have less HP to 'tank' the damage from the mortar.

And if you here mortar shell coming it's up to you to decide if you want to stick to cover, wait for the shell and then move, or insta retreator move out of the cover before the shell hit, so you must consider that moving out of cover can mean that this shell will land perfectly on you.

By your own definition, standing there would be "stupidity"; but let's look at it anyway.

Firstly, a mortar can insta-wipe; the shell damage is enough to do that on a direct hit, and as I said before, green cover is directional. Secondly, hit probability increases as you get closer to the true target (the exact target point): being very far off is unlikely, being very close is quite likely.

Knowing that, we can do go through some simple logical steps to take:
1. A mortar is firing at my unit; hence the 'true' target is exactly where my squad is standing.
2. Hit probability is greatest at the 'true' target location, and decreases as I get further away.
3. I still want to project map presence in the current area.
4. I do not want to lose the squad.

Hence, the optimal choice is to move away. The sub-optimal choice is to retreat (keeps the squad). The least optimal choice is to stay (most likely mortar hit location).

In the case of the mortar-scatter-wipe, the most optimal and least optimal choice are literally inverted (with the bonus of the 'least optimal' choice reducing damage taken from the attack squad, due to green cover). This is bad. At a fundamental level, playing and winning games is based upon making the 'most' optimal choice.

Am I saying CoH2 needs to become a 'solved' game? No. But the most optimal and least optimal choices should never invert entirely due to RNG.

If mortat was aiming at this squad and you decided to move, it's not random wipe.

Scatter is a function of RNG, and that scatter dictates where the shell would land. If that landing point is both where my squad currently is, and is NOT exactly where the mortar was aiming at, it is LITERALLY a hit dictated by random chance.





With that said, I want to know: what would you classify as a 'random wipe', provided they even exist?

Don't forget that cover is directional based on where the weapon was fired from, rather than where the attack lands. If the mortar has flanked the unit in cover when it fires, then the unit will not receive the -50% damage bonus.

Instead of OP's solution which seems like an insane explosives nerf, my solution would be to have mortars / light artillery always begin a barrage at the outer radius of the scatter, and work inwards over time, increasing in accuracy. Similar to how mortars work in MoW. Off-maps can stay the same, but this progressive 'ranging' of artillery weapons would give the opposing player more time to react, but would make ignoring the barrage more punishing, and would mean the entire exchange is less dominated by RNG where the first round insta-kills a squad bunched up in a crater.

Unless that's how they work already, in which nvm , but in my experience any barrage means a random scatter inside the circle for the duration of the ability.

Show Spoiler

Cover is directional but green cover always cut % of damage from nade/mortar and it's impossible to wipe full health squad in green cover afaik. (not sure about bundle nades after recent change but even tho, I can't imagaine situation where enemy's mortar is shooting you from the back).

No stupidity is walking into area when mortars if firing. If you are already there, then you must consider what's better. Insta retreat, changing position before first shell drop, waiting for the first shell and the move etc etc.

Your steps don't consider one thing. You hear that shell was fired and it's gonna land in 2-3secs next to you. When consider scatter, it can land everywhere around you. What's better? Moving out of cover with chances for being hit? Or sticking to green cover, waiting for shell and then moving away? Plus, if you move the moment you hear sound of a mortar, it's very likely you will go out of the scatter safely befire hit. Point is to consider when you can move safely. Counting seconds, listening to sounds.

Imagine you are fightning with ISU. It shoots at you behind green cover, missed. What do you do? Insta move (becasue of 10sec reload) or do you wait 6 secs and then start to moving away so in those 4secs you are again in range of ISU and got wiped? That wouldn't be random wipe becasue you could prevent it.

Don't forget that cover is directional based on where the weapon was fired from, rather than where the attack lands. If the mortar has flanked the unit in cover when it fires, then the unit will not receive the -50% damage bonus.

It's based on the firing units location? I was under the impression it was based off the impact location, since that would make way more sense. Source?

Cover is directional but green cover always cut % of damage from nade/mortar and it's impossible to wipe full health squad in green cover afaik. (not sure about bundle nades after recent change but even tho, I can't imagaine situation where enemy's mortar is shooting you from the back).

The way I understand it is that the damage reduction only applies to small arms, not explosions. I could be wrong, but I can't find any information about it changing explosions; just small arms.

Also, the mortar would just need to land on your side of the green cover. That's not too hard to do; it wouldn't need to be behind you.

No stupidity is walking into area when mortars if firing.

Ok.

If you are already there, then you must consider what's better. Insta retreat, changing position before first shell drop, waiting for the first shell and the move etc etc.

Your steps don't consider one thing. (1) You hear that shell was fired and it's gonna land in 2-3secs next to you. (2) When consider scatter, it can land everywhere around you. (3, 4) What's better? Moving out of cover with chances for being hit? Or sticking to green cover, waiting for shell and then moving away?

I know. That's why I made the list:

1. A mortar is firing at my unit; hence the 'true' target is exactly where my squad is standing.
2. Hit probability is greatest at the 'true' target location, and decreases as I get further away.
3. I still want to project map presence in the current area.
4. I do not want to lose the squad.


Hence, the optimal choice is to move away. The sub-optimal choice is to retreat (keeps the squad). The least optimal choice is to stay (most likely mortar hit location).

Matches up fairly well.

Plus, if you move the moment you hear sound of a mortar, it's very likely you will go out of the scatter safely befire hit. Point is to consider when you can move safely. Counting seconds, listening to sounds.

Likely, yes. But it's still possible that the mortar shell would still lands on your squad, instantly wiping it - even if you give the move order at the exact millisecond the firing sound is played.

That's the problem. If it was always possible to escape, then I would agree with you - but it's not. At max range, the scatter radius is just so high that there just isn't enough time to get out of it.

Imagine you are fightning with ISU. It shoots at you behind green cover, missed. What do you do? Insta move (becasue of 10sec reload) or do you wait 6 secs and then start to moving away so in those 4secs you are again in range of ISU and got wiped? That wouldn't be random wipe becasue you could prevent it.

Obviously; but what about when the ISU one-shots the entire squad through the FoW because the squad AI decided everyone needed to stand behind one barrel? What if they only stand there for a split second before you move them away, because you don't want them to group up like that, but they get wiped anyway? Is that fair?



And I'm still interested in what you consider a random wipe to be, provided you think they exist.

Don't forget that cover is directional based on where the weapon was fired from, rather than where the attack lands. If the mortar has flanked the unit in cover when it fires, then the unit will not receive the -50% damage bonus.

Instead of OP's solution which seems like an insane explosives nerf, my solution would be to have mortars / light artillery always begin a barrage at the outer radius of the scatter, and work inwards over time, increasing in accuracy. Similar to how mortars work in MoW. Off-maps can stay the same, but this progressive 'ranging' of artillery weapons would give the opposing player more time to react, but would make ignoring the barrage more punishing, and would mean the entire exchange is less dominated by RNG where the first round insta-kills a squad bunched up in a crater.

Unless that's how they work already, in which nvm , but in my experience any barrage means a random scatter inside the circle for the duration of the ability.

i said double the aoe and if need buff the mortar fire rate

It's based on the firing units location? I was under the impression it was based off the impact location, since that would make way more sense. Source?

Sure, source: https://www.coh2.org/topic/36347/cruzz-s-the-more-you-know

Green cover reduces damage from all attacks that aren't flamebased, including grenades and mortars which people tend to consider counters to cover. Whether the -50% damage is applied to a weapon depends on where it was FIRED from rather than on where the attack lands.

Apologies to Cruzz if I'm misinterpreting this, but having directional cover from point of origin applied to mortars and grenades does tally with my experience that grenades can insta-wipe squads in cover if thrown from behind their cover, and my experience of mortar fire on units you've forced to reposition so that the mortar is flanking them.

i said double the aoe and if need buff the mortar fire rate

You said

make all explosive weapon , nade,and indirect fire deal less than 80 damage (40-50) while doubling the aoe.

I consider that an insane explosives nerf. For a start it would make Sturmtigers and AVREs completely useless, as others have pointed out.

I think reworking of the barrage ability would be a better way to counter the RNG.

Show Spoiler

And that's the thing, you can't always escape and it's good.

That's the problem with squad spacing, not unit which one shooted you. Tho I wouldn't call it random cause if shot came from FoW, enemy saw you and order to attack at that moment. But again, don't blame wiping mechanism. Blame squad spacing.

What's random wipe imo?

If you keep walking and then suddenly shell lands on you and wipes your squad - you couldn't forsee this.

If you just finished planting a mine and in that very second some shell lands on this mine and wipes you.

When AT gun snipes your sniper.

When first LeFH or ML20 shell lands and wipes your squad (since you didn't know where excatly enemy is aiming).

In other words, random is when you coudn't forsee or react

Sure, source: https://www.coh2.org/topic/36347/cruzz-s-the-more-you-know



Apologies to Cruzz if I'm misinterpreting this, but having directional cover from point of origin applied to mortars and grenades does tally with my experience that grenades can insta-wipe squads in cover if thrown from behind their cover, and my experience of mortar fire on units you've forced to reposition so that the mortar is flanking them.



You said I consider that an insane explosives nerf. For a start it would make Sturmtigers and AVREs completely useless, as others have pointed out.

I think reworking of the barrage ability would be a better way to counter the RNG.

I meant General aoe damage no t made to wipe kat,pwefer,strum,avre,priest and etc are unfased after all that their role
But tank mortar and nade are more for dislodging the enemy

And that's the thing, you can't always escape and it's good.

That's the problem with squad spacing, not unit which one shooted you. Tho I wouldn't call it random cause if shot came from FoW, enemy saw you and order to attack at that moment. But again, don't blame wiping mechanism. Blame squad spacing.

What's random wipe imo?

If you keep walking and then suddenly shell lands on you and wipes your squad - you couldn't forsee this.

If you just finished planting a mine and in that very second some shell lands on this mine and wipes you.

When AT gun snipes your sniper.

When first LeFH or ML20 shell lands and wipes your squad (since you didn't know where excatly enemy is aiming).

In other words, random is when you coudn't forsee or react

a tank turn a angle and Istant wipe squad in green cover

Those 3 events in a single game would result in a MASSIVE advantage for the 'lucky' player, which the 'unlucky' player could do nothing to counter. For a competitive game, luck just can't hold that much power, even if it is an unlikely possibility. If in a game like 'Dota 2', the final match of a massive tournament was decided by a consistent string of "5% likely" events, people would be outraged. You can't give a team a $9m+ crowed-funded prize for being lucky - the donators demand that the game be dictated and decided entirely by skill; that's the point of the game.

I think the more likely response would be utter astonishment. Because having a mere two 5% events would only happen about 1 time in 400, having three in a row would happen about 1 time in 8000, four in a row 1 time in 20,000 etc.

Of course, none of these events in any way precludes the other side from also getting a 5% event, so for the matter to really be decided by such a run of luck would be even more rare than just calculating the odds, above, might suggest.

It does not seem to me that this can possibly constitute a problem. Such a string of luck is by definition so unlikely that it just cannot happen often enough to matter, IMO. Even if a vanishingly tiny percentage of all games were decided by such luck - which I don't even accept as a premise, btw - it's difficult to see how this could be described as a serious problem, let alone warrant tampering with the game as it stands.

The assertion that this is a special problem for 'competitive' games remains as unconvincing as ever.

a tank turn a angle and Istant wipe squad in green cover

You mean by crushing? Is so, just retreat. Honestly, I can't remember when was the last time I lost a squad due to crushing. Maybe 10months ago or so?

You mean by crushing? Is so, just retreat. Honestly, I can't remember when was the last time I lost a squad due to crushing. Maybe 10months ago or so?

no cons are in green cover a bit bunched up the p4 pass near then it shoot and wipe the full health squad yes it happen more often then you think especially with engineers squad

no cons are in green cover a bit bunched up the p4 pass near then it shoot and wipe the full health squad yes it happen more often then you think especially with engineers squad

Often? Idk, maybe when you don't know what's happening around.

If P4 passed near to shoot from back at cons in cover, your opponent did it for purpuse to wipe a squad. Not random. You enemy knew that it's a way to wipe a squad.
Question, what did you do to prevent such move?

Often? Idk, maybe when you don't know what's happening around.

If P4 passed near to shoot from back at cons in cover, your opponent did it for purpuse to wipe a squad. Not random. You enemy knew that it's a way to wipe a squad.
Question, what did you do to prevent such move?

you really don't want to get it right ? A tank shell tend to over shot so although the green halve the damage it still 80 and if clumped up the squad will die

you really don't want to get it right ? A tank shell tend to over shot so although the green halve the damage it still 80 and if clumped up the squad will die

And explain me, what is wrong with wiping clumped squad? It's obvious that using cover makes a squad clumped ergo easier to wipe.