Sorry, but that's exactly my point: Wehrmacht has 0 light tanks. They only have this scout car, which has do deal vs. LV AND LT.
And as I said, you have to look at this in reference to the new balance patch: Better AT squads for Svoiets and better Vickers for Brits. Both can easily counter 222.
Wher doesnt have light tanks but they get the strongest at mine(s) the strongest lv flamer, strong hh at, very strong ap rounds on mg42, a pak that can stun with vet, even the sniper can stun lv apprently, and the top dog of scout cars. Ost dont need a light tank, they got plenty of good at options, just not a light tank.
|
Sorry but I doubt you have ever played with 222.
- 222 needs 2 AT gun shots to get destroyed. Only with Vet3 it gets some additional HP to survive 2nd gun shot
- fastest build is 4:40 minutes. (good fuel income, T1 skip)
- Autocannon has pretty low penetration of 35 (vs. AEC 63%, T70 50%, Stuart 44%) with very low damage of 20
It's by far not the strongest LV in early game. You can deal with it with every squad because all weapons can penetrate its armor. And the only LVs you can "chase and kill" are Soviet clown car, Universal Carrier, WC51, M20 and all Halftracks.
But you go high risk if you try to kill USF Flak HT or Soviet ZSU. Most of the times, you loose your 222.
In conclusion, learn your facts.
He means light vehicles and not light tanks. The 222 counters all scout cars with ease, its the top dog in that catagory. Light tanks counter it as they are the next tier/phase. |
Ammo rack detonations exist in wargames. If you've played warthunder or any of wargamings titles you'll be familiar with them. Its a good example as the more competitive or performance based players dislike them as a mechanic while more casual players prefer the "realism".
The point was that if RNG like main gun destroyed or planes crashing into and destroying your troops is ok, at what point does it not become ok. Because its been said that RNG is what sets apart CoH from other strategy games, if this is the case why wouldn't relic double down on this strength?
I mean the bigger the RNG "payout" the bigger the impact, the more interesting to experience it. For that matter, why not have commander selection be random? It would force the players to adapt, and that would be good wouldnt it?
,
For me, rng like main gun crits or planes crashing is something entirely out of the player's ability to influence. That aspect of the RNG is something I have an issue with. But I dont have an inherent issue with rng in its entirety.
For example, its true that when you fire a katyusha, the shots are going to be randomly dispersed within the barrage indicator. But you can reduce the maximum shot deviation by moving the katyusha closer. This creates a risk vs reward scenario that adds depth and rewards player skill. This is an example of how rng can be implemented well.
Sorry i thought you where being sarcastic or was trolling.
I personaly love warthunder i have it on xbox and steam, i like it much more then world of tanks. With war thunder you have a bit more control over the rng. You can be more "lucky" if you know where to shoot wich tank and your type of ammo.
In bf1 and escape from tarkov i like the random bullet paterns and range you have to take into account. Not that point click kill confirmed style like cod series.
So yeah rng is a big thing for me. But it depends on the game to wich extent. Your rocket arty example is perfect for an rts like this, that is well done rng.
However i understand extra rng such as mgc dont belong in tournaments, when prize money and titles are involved. Mgc and plane crash however do have a place in the game and automatch. Mgc is being blown way out of prepoprtion by some, now (except with ptrs atm) mgc are quite rare to happen. They dont outright kill the tank there is still skill and rng at play to help save it or go for the kill. |
What about leaving them in but removing the random aspect similar to engine crits? Originally snares like panzerfausts were based on rng penetration, but were changed to be reliable, but only if the targeted vehicle was at 75% or less hp. This left the mechanic in the game but making them something you have to plan and create tactics before hand to access.
I guess for me, with something as impactful as main gun destroyed, if RNG in this style is so valuable, why not add Ammo rack detonations?
When shooting at an enemy vehicle, a small chance upon successful penetration at any HP that the "Ammo rack is hit" and the vehicle is blown up.
Or give all infantry a small chance to "snipe" another infantry model.
Or a chance that if your HQ is hit with a shell, there's a small chance it injures your commander thus locking out some abilities temporarily-or if it roles an even smaller chance, your commander is killed locking out your doctrine for the remainder of the match.
I would put the hp% for mgc at about 10 to 15 % of vehicles total health before it can even happen at another 10 to 20ish % chance per shot, but there is no damage taken when the main gun goes crit. This way the "victim" of this rng, esp axis with supirior armour values, can still have a decent chance to save the otherwise destroyed vehicle.
In the last part about ammo racks exploding, if your not trolling, what the hell?
A main gun crit, wich does not destroy the tank is the same as getting one shotted with ammo rack explosions how?
Again how is getting your commander wrecked for the duration of the game in any way simaler to a gun getting destroyed on a tank wich can be repaired?
|
One thing I'm not sure about is whether or not people like just having an RNG chance for something(anything) to occur, or if its just specifically main gun crits are cool.
Because If its just that you want rng of any type, couldn't you just swap out "main gun crit" for "chance to lock turret for 2 seconds" or "chance to knock out pintle gunner"-something that will be less impactful.
Or if its the semi realistic concept of Main guns being damaged that you like, why does it have to be attached to rng? Wouldnt a predictable but complex set of conditions to replace the rng actually increase the depth of the game, not water it down?
If main gun crits were replaced with a less punishing rng effect, It would be a fair compromise to me.
And if the main gun crits stayed but became a conditional and exploitable but predictable mechanic, I would also be ok with this as a compromise.
I do get a serious amount of joy/excitement seeing it happen to my opponent or in tourny if they happend there. Just with hit or miss pen or no pen. I absolutly love that about the coh series, random crits and all, even when it happens to me (a lil while after it happens ofcourse)
I am open to changing them so that they require a condition before they can happen, preferably still a tiny chance without the condions for heavies like the tiger. Just do not outright removing them ever, enough has been taken out already.
|
Why are you bringing up Unit Preservation, as though I have anything against that part of the game's design? You are outright refusing to argue honestly by trying to conflate these two things. RNG based combat is not what makes CoH stand out. Unit preservation, lack of economies, cover-based-combat, etc define CoH, not main gun crits.
There's already a compromise. Remove Main Gun Crits, other RNG in the game isnt being asked to be removed.
Also thank you, Hannibal.
The bit about the unit preservation i messed up. What i meant was (i disagree with @sander93 here) that it and rng including all the extra rng are the stapels of the series, no other series has the extra rng, that is why it defines coh, you cant name any other game that has them to this extent.
A lot has already been toned down or put into custom games etc. and more seem to like it (to an extent) then dislike it. you are not asking other rng to be removed but you also said: its unfortunatly to late to remove accuracy from the game, it shoudnt even have been put in in the first place.... its no wonder me and some others question if this is the right game for you.
you also need to look up what a compromise is "my way or the highway" is no compromise, not even close.
i am not against toning down rng crits such as main gun crits they, just dont remove them, air plane crash damage shoud be reverted so it actualy hurts btw. I also do like compremises such as sander has made, that certain threshhold need to be met for it to happen in most engagements.
|
RNG, and particularly random criticals, are not the core design principle of COH2, no matter how much you want to pretend that they are. Logical reasons have been given to you.
No you just gave your opnion and wishes nothing more.
You want not to change but outright remove what this game is best know for, what makes it stand out, unit presevation and rng based combat. Nothing logical about removing those stapels of the series.
If you would at least consider or discuss toning things down we can have a discussion. You seem to be unwilling to even try. |
I think this is a fair compromise if PTRS will still inflict criticals at a higher rate due to sheer volume of shots. Injured gunner or whatever it's called just temporarily increases reload time and isn't nearly as punishing as main gun destroyed. It's also a nice way to re-add back criticals and add additional flavor back to the game.
Indeed if a weapons chances are to high to roll main gun crit need some toning down. I like the less punishing in ptrs's case. But to certain this wont be enough |
I would point out that arguing that the Sov mortars barrage is "better" despite being able to re-locate due to the gaps between barrage shot is kind of odd.
That and when you factor that the Wher mortar fires faster in auto and barrage mode and is more accurate in auto fire makes having a flare about all the Sov mortar has going for it (this being preferable to the precision shot of old).
Been a solid wher strat since game launch to build a couple mortars and simply be in range of the opponent, no micro they just auto fire accurately. Least the barrage (as the flare) has to be requested by sov player to get results on any kind of "par".
The ost mortar auto fire has been brought down close to soviet mortar. The difference there is minimal atm. Since then double mortars from imo has dropped out of favor hard in 1v1 at least. |
I suppose there's the difference, because I find nothing particularly fun about random events I have no control over.
Coh2 is full of those events, accuracy scatter pen deflection damage, these also decide engagements quite a bit, ive had a single pgren model retreat through 3 4 model ppsh cons squads and he lived. Only dow2 and coh2 can have this. Irritating for me good for my opponent.
There is no logical reason to remove all that because you get frustrated by the core mechanics, aswell as that all the games you mentioned have all what you want in a rts. I am sorry the only logical thing is go play those if you dont want rng.
I dont go to a vegan restuarant if i want to eat steak or deer, there are other places that give me that vegans joint wont. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
