|
He's not wrong.
Allies have:
- Better tank destroyers
- Better indirect fire
- Better light vehicles
The firefly, jackson, and su85 will beat the shit out of the Germans if you are coordinated. Lets the allied tank blob to snowball and become unstoppable. |
HUGE SUCCESS!!! COH2 IS THE BIGGEST GAME AND BIGGEST ESPORT IN THE WORLD. THESE ARNT JUST ALTERNATIVE FACTS, THEY ARE REAL FAKES. DON'T BELIEVE THE FAKE NEWS OF COH2 BEING A SHITTY GAME & ESPORT. COH2 IS BEST. RELIC WILL MAKE COH2 GREAT AGAIN. IF YOU DISAGREE, YOURE A LIBERAL CUCK. IM NOT A FOOTMAN, YOU A FOOTMAN.
Lol wtf. Who is this even supposed to be a strawman of? |
See mortar example in that post. That would be what you could call "pure", not one shell landing on top of a squad and next one coming 10 metres away.
The game doesn't need perfect homing shells that strategically miss and hit the same every barrage. It's messy and incredibly exploitable.
The RNG is pure because you know that there is simply shells falling on this area, if you stand there you are in danger. It doesn't need magic homing shells to deal the perfect amount of not enough damage that you like. That's the least interesting and dull concept of a mortar i can imagine. |
Also in response to a point made in the video above. The idea that "no RNG=no tension" is simply false. Matches are decided by who makes the most/costliest mistake(s), and that is exactly the source of tension in any given CoH2 combat scenario. When two players of comparable skill go up against one another, it's a test of their micro/judgment skill, and you can't know for sure which one will prevail -- that is pure tension and unpredictability; and it's one based on merit, not developer meddling with code.
The RNG is pure, you are the one advocating meddling with the code to control chance. |
I dont think anyone is saying to get rid of RNG but instead make RNG a bit more predictable. As said above, if a sniper has 50% of hiting its target inside a building and misses the first shot (RNG) he should hit the secound shot instead of resetting the RNG everytime he is going to take a shot making him miss countless times.
That is statistically as likely to happen as hitting every shot in a row. You already know for sure that the follow up shot has a 50% hit too, why skew the odds? Do you want a guaranteed miss if you hit the first shot? |
|
Personally I love the RNG in this game, it is what sets it apart from most other strategy games.
You don't know for sure going into engagements exactly what is going to happen, you make educated guesses based on what you know. This is way more interesting that starcraft where you know exactly what is going to happen, the battle itself doesn't even matter because you already know the outcome. In coh2 staring at that one retreating model with no health running hoping one of the 8 5% chance to hit shots connects is exciting. You can play the odds, try to push your advantage even when you are behind. Straight up strength doesn't matter when there are so many ways to influence the RNG to give you an advantage. This is a game about strategy and tactics more than brute force; the ability to push the odds in your favor more than your opponents is way more important than intense micro in coh2. It also reflects actual fighting, where you don't know for sure what's going to happen next.
The game works perfectly fine with these RNG mechanics, there are only a few things that need to be tweaked to be more reliable. The super rare game changing occurrences like nuclear plane crashes have mostly been dealt with. They took away the bs heavy engine crit from mines and most of the crappy random vehicle debuffs. In my opinion abandons and weapon drops are fine, they work to punish over extension. It would be better if they made it more reliable to guess when an abandon would occur, but it's really not that big of a deal. If you are getting into fights where you don't have time to get in one more shot without losing then you were already gambling you were going to win.
Also wada I'm not sure you understand how probability works. You complain about missing 6 shots in a row, that's just a statistically really rare occurrence. There is no reason to bastardize the working system now to give players with bad luck an advantage. That would be incredibly exploitable, keeping it pure ensures a fair game between both players. You have just as much chance to miss 6 shots in a row as the other guy. |
For CoH3: dynamic player choiced squad formations. Or something as "simple" as a toggle between tight/spread formation. You want to put a 4 man squad behind green cover generated by a car? Tight. You only want 2 models covered? Spread. You don't want to be bothered? Automatic (as it's mostly now).
Can just set it to holding ctrl while giving orders sets them in a more spread out formation. Ctrl + click on map ez. |
Same guy accusing someone else of misquoting numbers in another topic, can you say irony?
You need to calm down with the passive aggressiveness.
Lay out some specific problems you have with the faction, and use the right names please.
|
|
Your main problems were playing way too passively and poor vehicle choices and usage.
You made 3 vickers in the beginning and just sat them defensively on your half of the map. You need to be applying pressure and pushing up, otherwise your opponent can just ignore them. After you make him retreat you need to move forward and take his territory. On the west side you never tried to take that cutoff or take the buildings on the east side. At one point your opponent was down to 2 units; if you had pushed up to his base he would never have been able to leave.
You also need to make better choices with your vehicles. The centaur is an okay unit, but you kept building them when the other player had armor on the field. 1 was enough, you didn't need to waste 3 of them. You need to make sure when you are using the vehicles you support them properly, or they will just get swarmed by the enemy. Driving up to that blob and all those at guns is suicide, there is no reasonable hope to do enough damage to justify that risk.
The firefly is also a tank destroyer, it will practically never hurt enemy infantry. It is best to leave it on prioritize vehicle so it does not waste shots shooting and never hitting. You also need to keep it as far away from enemy tanks as possible. Think of it for like a sniper than a real tank. You want it to outrange the enemy so they don't shoot back.
Some random tips:
- You built 3 vickers, and too much infantry before teching to t2
- you didn't steal the isg when you had a good opportunity
- made no engineers until after you needed them. They are a great close range squad, and cheap
- way, way too passive with mgs, never moved them
- made no Anti-Tank to prepare for enemy armor
- stop building centaurs ffs. You need a cromwell if there is enemy armor and you have no AT
- don't throw grenades at tanks |
|
3-4 kubels is not going to be a practical build order against a real opponent. Paula can get away with it because he's very good, not the kubel.
You leave yourself way too vulnerable to any form of at, and a light vehicle rush from the other player will shut you down entirely. The only time this would ever work would be against brits on a super open map like crossing in the woods. It is just way too risky to place all your starting manpower into units that are guaranteed to be wiped within the first 5 minutes of the game. |
1
United States
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
