RNG... I play World of Tanks, so usually my skins crawls and my eyes start watering whenever I see RNG mentioned. I am of the belief it should be kept to an absolute minimum and only in certain conditions can it be acceptible, as long as talking 'stuff' on the battlefield. Reason for this is: Its simply never fun to lose due to RNG. In proper RTS games the effects are usually deminished because of how much is typically on the field at the same time, but when RNG is fully responsible for you losing an engagement, yeah no bueno. Some examples of RNG: - While one wouldn't think so, because its extremely minor, even Starcraft 2 has a tiny amount of RNG because there's a slight possible delay before a units weapon will actually fire. HOWVER this is litteral 1/100th of a second and therefore so insignificant its acceptible AND basically doesn't impact the battle between armies. - One case of RNG in Warzone 2100 is where any weapon can miss, and graduately you'd unlock upgrades to improve on the weapon's accuracy. HOWEVER, you usually have a rather big army and the change where a single vehicle would miss a shot is 1% at max. So given the scale and nature of how battle play out in Warzone 2100, its insignificant in the long run. - Heck, I'm gonna do it: In Starcraft 1 Goliaths and Dragoons had pathing RNG XD Yeah this one is just for trolls... Goliaths or Dragoons fcking up while pathing makes you pull out your hair. So NOT GOOD In short: RNG that plays out on the battlefield, especially the type as shown extensively in CoH2... TERRIBLE ! ! ! If you advocate for that being a good thing, you're a moron. Then there's the second type of RNG: where do you spawn on a map. quite the amount of games doesn't have controllable spawn locations, so that can affect how you will engage with a map. Starcraft (2) then however tried to 'balance' that by making it immaterial since either side of the map was always mirrored. CnC games in this respect are actually amongst the odd men out given they do provide this control, allowing you to setup matches where you start in a greatly favoured position versus your enemy(s).
Warcraft 3 had a small but influential amount of RNG. Units had variations in attack damage 13-17 for example, a very small amount of units had critical hits and item drops from creep camps being by far the biggest RNG factor. Also spawn locations (close cross map etc)
+xilosms Now that you mentioned, the RNG aspect of Warcraft 3 was one of reasons that I played that game so much. The creep Spawn and item drops helped to keep the maps fresh, and the damage variation Always kept me on the edge of my seat. The Orc Hero Blademaster was RNG incarnated. At max lvl it had a damage of 23-55 and a skill wich gave him 30% to crit for 4x the damage. That was awesome!
Usually i have heard people talk about "World in conflict" in RNG related discussions on how it was very balanced, but in reality the units in that game were just mirrors of eachother and the winner of the battle would usually be the guy who shot first
Great video, as always. I had a good laugh recalling that stream I watched with that Panther failing to penetrate that next to zero health IS-2, died from the same IS-2, just to see IS-2 being finished off by the Command P4. From the front. That moment just threw me off to lol, not to mention the whole chat. An not in a bad way, not for me personally. Its one of those moments that are making these games special, as this video tried to explain.
Do not EVER defend Relic please. They will never fix the game if you do. Also "If a player loses a unit due to RNG, it could usually be avoidable" Absolutely wrong. Ill give you an example: A pak40 misses 3 shots in row while shooting at a Sherman within its range. The Sherman then drives around the pak40, 1 shots it and continues to steam roll all other non AT units. I have seen this happen multiple times with my own eyes, and no this is not the only case shit like this happens. But it because of these moments that players get outraged, they had the AT gun at the right time and the right place, but RNG completely negated their skill and knowledge of the game and allowed the other player to brute force through.
Great video. Interesting and insightful point about the tension introduced by RNG- can agree that after watch your casts there are simply some clutch moments where RNG has you on knife edge. Again like you said - as long as it's designed and implemented well it will compliment enjoyable/good/fun/skillfull play instead of simply frustrate players.
Great video! Totally agree with pretty much everything you said. Nice to see some mild philosophy of gaming here ;) Didn't expect that when I subscribed to y'all because of your casts on DOW2.
nice for seeing this video to aid me into remembering why COH just didn’t work compared to SC: too many variables! I just remember missing so much gunfire... Otherwise, perhaps had the potential to be the greatest competitive RTS.
The way Coh2 uses RNG is just bad skill wise and competitive wise, yes it brings excitement, and gives a game some flavor to it but it fails to be attractive for pro players. You cant compare moba to rts game and usage of RNG in both. Like in dota 2 PA has skill blur that is ability "chance" to miss when you physicaly hit PA but it can be countered with items or another hero. Like crit chance, or other abilities in dota 2 they have their counter and RNG can be controlled, (in old dota you can actually count hits that dont RNG to time your RNG which was fine but they changed that). In Coh2 there are some situations where you just watch battle between two tanks that are 50/50 and you pray for RNG god, for pro player this is nightmare situation. RNG in FPS also cannot be compared to RNG in RTS cause of the diferantiation in genres. The only RTS game that used RNG very well to extend to be viable was Warcraft 3.
RNG needed to portray realism in the RTS? Why simply keep the health bar, but change animations to 'missing' for 'realism sake'? RNG may have its place 'to keep things exciting' but they are way more way better mechanics to do so. By using RNG IMO you are taking the easy way, that can fail REALLY HARD, and using RNG hardly ever brings something good, and is playing with fire. The games like hearthston or poker show skill because players can adapt to RNG, as the entire game is bascially 'playing your hand' (and bluffing/stuff). I would not want any esport being determined by RNG EVER. If this RNG is player spawn points in the game like SC2, then its already kinda bad (but they have fixed some of issues like this in LoTV as they have 'always cross-spawn' rules or show you the enemy spawn point from the start of the match, but this is RNG that is decided upon the beginning of the map, and players can adapt to it. In SC2 you can have a lot of exciting 'random moments' - just because players arent perfect, baneling chose this pathing over the other, just because 'he scouted 90% of enemy base but still failed to spot enemy tech', and this can be done exciting and 'random' without the RNG. Having the big cumulative battle or the swaying point determined by RNG (or almost anything that can snowball) can be really detrimental not only to audience, but to super competetive players as well. The concept of RNG stays directly in opposition to 'you could have played better', 'you could have seen it' and 'its mano o mano', 'skill vs skill' concept. Some of RTS top players are perfectionists, and after seeing RNG will just turn around and show middle finger to your game. And I actually have to agree with them. They came to play the e-sport, not Cassino-Stone (or Wizard-Poker).
Nobody here has mentioned the RNG in Age of Empires II, which is finally gathering speed in being accepted as an RTS eSport? What thoughts do you have on that if any @generalsgentlem? (and community) Just the GYI for those who maye not be aware there are two elements of RNG in AOE. The First is the random map generation so no two games are played in the same spot on the same map. We see this as playing your map is part of the skill. Forward golds exposed? Better idea to be agressive or build your base around it... Nice woodline placements? Could change your strategy to walling into a Fast Castle. Very rarely is it a map win, and in tournaments everyone has a re available for that reason. The other minor one is monk conversion, which means a monk can take somewhere between 3-7 seconds to convert I think the range is. Just because some troops were pretty commited to their faith :P
This argument is idiotic. RNG determines the outcome regardless of if you play good or bad. Especially when shots completely miss, which is feelsbad for most players. It takes away skill-expression, especially when it makes the difference between killing an army/tank instantly. I watched tank fights competitively, and never thought "wow that guy played better", he just had better RNG. Comparing to poker and card games...Card games by default are luck-based because they involve making casinos money.
What do you mean with “lack of visual intuitiveness on StarCraft 2” ? All three races are easy to distinguish from the others and every unit is easy to identify, especially with Team Color sliders, I don’t think that cartoony visuals necessarily mean poor visual intuitiveness
After reading this comment I had to watch and listen carefully to learn what this was about. My conclusion: The only conclusion that could warrant this poke is that the present races are more sci-fi/fantasical looking in comparison with a world war II style. But outside of that possible comparison, its a BS argument, and for someone who's supposedly engaged in RTS-design a really ignorant and dismissive one.
I would have to agree with Majka Strajka. Realism in an rts?! Where you can train not one but several soldiers from a tent you just erected in five minutes? Realism can lead to good things, like Relic's hard counter system, but it isn't a good thing in and of itself. Otherwise for games set before World War 1 having most of your units die of an infected toenail would be good gameplay. @ 2:28- Run away! Run away! What counts as sufficient influence over RNG? Taking a damage table how much of said table would need to be cut off from appearing for RNG to be properly influenced? I doubt taking away the bottom ten percent would be enough, but the bottom fifty percent might be too much. I would agree that some adaptability could be interesting, but having a semi random selection of units spawn in a relatively small scale game like COH2 seems dangerous, especially with its hard counter system. What if you desperately need an anti vehicle unit, call in the spawn and it doesn't include an AV? Oh, and then the enemy tank shows up.
+GeneralsGentlemen Good to find a connoisseur of RTS since our kind is sadly few and far in between D: Depressing facts aside, what are your thoughts on the RTS called StarWars: Empire at War? PLEEEEEAAAAASSSSEEE TALK ABOUT IT!!!!! :)
GeneralsGentlemen More so for the land battles which other than the pretty effects are as basic as you say. But hey that's what mods are for. Ever try using one? Still, it's the only game I know of that had both land and air(space) battles , with elements of turn based strategy and invasions. Know of nay other my good man?
Dawn of War 2. It's similar to Coh, but with Melee and more RPG elements. Here's the playlist with our Dow2 casts if you're interested. th-cam.com/play/PLQnCYzupbmdasDqaEwIqmBLVblCO0KFrj.html
+Jeremie Melanson Imagine Company of Heroes 2 re-skinned into the Warhammer 40K Universe. Where there are hero units and has a feature of melee into a strategy game.
+MajkaSrajka Spray patterns are exact opposition of what you are saying - they are pre-dermined and skillful. They can create 'random mechanics' just as much as random is movement of your palm. They are perfect example how to make things 'random' and 'exciting' without making things RNG.
+MajkaSrajka It does exist, the AK 47 wont always hit the same spot when you fire it from far away, just like the shotgun pellet can hit someone, even if your crosshair is not on target (im talking about CS GO here :D)
Toni kireE Lahtinen Yeah, i've heard that they have added some muzzle to spray patterns in CS:GO, but IIRC it isnt huge and hardly matter - especially on short distances. It basically added 'skill cap' to the burst-control, in order to stop people from long-bursting from across the map. This may seem like RNG, but it is 'avoidable' RNG that actually design the gameplay - as due to this RNG noone will never long-burst at the long range, thus RNG hardly exists in top level play anyway, and for them rule like 'in the bursts longer than 5 shots, your bullets disappear after flying for 100 meters" and pro-play would be exactly the same - people still would not burst at extreme ranges. This compared to total RNG fiesta in RTS, where matches dont last on average 2 minutes, but in 30+ minute tug of war that RTS is. Same works for Poker. Noone watches one game and poker and is done. You watch dozens of hands anyway. RNG that affect only the outcome, but doesnt affect the decision making is IMO bullshit and doesnt serve anything. In good party-rpgs you can calculate your crit chance, weigh your risk vs reward, know where you are so fucked that you have to try for that 5% clutch play or die anyway etc. - all this "RNG" mechanics changes the way you play, and test your skill. Having two tanks shoot at each other with outcome defined purely in RNG, or tank-engine 50-50% hits doesnt affect the play (decision making etc.), thus I call it bullshit. Spray patterns in most part in fact are not RNG (in hardly any FPS RNG actually matters - unless you treat spawn points as RNG, but they are map-dependent, AND you dont play 1 40 minutes round of any FPS anyway. The slight 'RNG' (muzzle) can be played around (and in fact - was created to discourage players from shooting at long range in bursts, not to create exciting RNG). If your game need RNG-RNG to became exciting, it most likely sucks at core mechanics ;P
That doesn’t mean that ots a bad game inherently (although I haven’t played it) I played irrelevant rts games and had fun with it all the same Battle for middle earth 2 is an irrelevant rts game but i still had fun when i played it
"Spray patterns in FPS"
Shows CS where gun has preset exactly same patterns.
RNG... I play World of Tanks, so usually my skins crawls and my eyes start watering whenever I see RNG mentioned.
I am of the belief it should be kept to an absolute minimum and only in certain conditions can it be acceptible, as long as talking 'stuff' on the battlefield. Reason for this is: Its simply never fun to lose due to RNG. In proper RTS games the effects are usually deminished because of how much is typically on the field at the same time, but when RNG is fully responsible for you losing an engagement, yeah no bueno.
Some examples of RNG:
- While one wouldn't think so, because its extremely minor, even Starcraft 2 has a tiny amount of RNG because there's a slight possible delay before a units weapon will actually fire. HOWVER this is litteral 1/100th of a second and therefore so insignificant its acceptible AND basically doesn't impact the battle between armies.
- One case of RNG in Warzone 2100 is where any weapon can miss, and graduately you'd unlock upgrades to improve on the weapon's accuracy. HOWEVER, you usually have a rather big army and the change where a single vehicle would miss a shot is 1% at max. So given the scale and nature of how battle play out in Warzone 2100, its insignificant in the long run.
- Heck, I'm gonna do it: In Starcraft 1 Goliaths and Dragoons had pathing RNG XD Yeah this one is just for trolls... Goliaths or Dragoons fcking up while pathing makes you pull out your hair. So NOT GOOD
In short: RNG that plays out on the battlefield, especially the type as shown extensively in CoH2... TERRIBLE ! ! ! If you advocate for that being a good thing, you're a moron.
Then there's the second type of RNG: where do you spawn on a map.
quite the amount of games doesn't have controllable spawn locations, so that can affect how you will engage with a map. Starcraft (2) then however tried to 'balance' that by making it immaterial since either side of the map was always mirrored.
CnC games in this respect are actually amongst the odd men out given they do provide this control, allowing you to setup matches where you start in a greatly favoured position versus your enemy(s).
Warcraft 3 had a small but influential amount of RNG. Units had variations in attack damage 13-17 for example, a very small amount of units had critical hits and item drops from creep camps being by far the biggest RNG factor. Also spawn locations (close cross map etc)
+xilosms Now that you mentioned, the RNG aspect of Warcraft 3 was one of reasons that I played that game so much. The creep Spawn and item drops helped to keep the maps fresh, and the damage variation Always kept me on the edge of my seat. The Orc Hero Blademaster was RNG incarnated. At max lvl it had a damage of 23-55 and a skill wich gave him 30% to crit for 4x the damage. That was awesome!
+xilosms I think Warcraft 3 was an example of RNG being almost perfectly implemented. I played that game to death.
Usually i have heard people talk about "World in conflict" in RNG related discussions on how it was very balanced, but in reality the units in that game were just mirrors of eachother and the winner of the battle would usually be the guy who shot first
Great video, as always. I had a good laugh recalling that stream I watched with that Panther failing to penetrate that next to zero health IS-2, died from the same IS-2, just to see IS-2 being finished off by the Command P4. From the front. That moment just threw me off to lol, not to mention the whole chat. An not in a bad way, not for me personally. Its one of those moments that are making these games special, as this video tried to explain.
Another well thought out video. Well done guys!
Do not EVER defend Relic please. They will never fix the game if you do. Also "If a player loses a unit due to RNG, it could usually be avoidable" Absolutely wrong. Ill give you an example: A pak40 misses 3 shots in row while shooting at a Sherman within its range. The Sherman then drives around the pak40, 1 shots it and continues to steam roll all other non AT units. I have seen this happen multiple times with my own eyes, and no this is not the only case shit like this happens. But it because of these moments that players get outraged, they had the AT gun at the right time and the right place, but RNG completely negated their skill and knowledge of the game and allowed the other player to brute force through.
Totally right! That's why I moved over to Men of War
Great video. Interesting and insightful point about the tension introduced by RNG- can agree that after watch your casts there are simply some clutch moments where RNG has you on knife edge. Again like you said - as long as it's designed and implemented well it will compliment enjoyable/good/fun/skillfull play instead of simply frustrate players.
Great way to explain the good ol RnG, thanks for the video!
The RNG in COH2 can be a little swingy. Especially for artillery.
Really great video! Love your insight on things.
Great video! Totally agree with pretty much everything you said. Nice to see some mild philosophy of gaming here ;) Didn't expect that when I subscribed to y'all because of your casts on DOW2.
nice for seeing this video to aid me into remembering why COH just didn’t work compared to SC: too many variables! I just remember missing so much gunfire... Otherwise, perhaps had the potential to be the greatest competitive RTS.
The way Coh2 uses RNG is just bad skill wise and competitive wise, yes it brings excitement, and gives a game some flavor to it but it fails to be attractive for pro players. You cant compare moba to rts game and usage of RNG in both. Like in dota 2 PA has skill blur that is ability "chance" to miss when you physicaly hit PA but it can be countered with items or another hero. Like crit chance, or other abilities in dota 2 they have their counter and RNG can be controlled, (in old dota you can actually count hits that dont RNG to time your RNG which was fine but they changed that). In Coh2 there are some situations where you just watch battle between two tanks that are 50/50 and you pray for RNG god, for pro player this is nightmare situation. RNG in FPS also cannot be compared to RNG in RTS cause of the diferantiation in genres. The only RTS game that used RNG very well to extend to be viable was Warcraft 3.
RNG needed to portray realism in the RTS?
Why simply keep the health bar, but change animations to 'missing' for 'realism sake'?
RNG may have its place 'to keep things exciting' but they are way more way better mechanics to do so. By using RNG IMO you are taking the easy way, that can fail REALLY HARD, and using RNG hardly ever brings something good, and is playing with fire.
The games like hearthston or poker show skill because players can adapt to RNG, as the entire game is bascially 'playing your hand' (and bluffing/stuff). I would not want any esport being determined by RNG EVER.
If this RNG is player spawn points in the game like SC2, then its already kinda bad (but they have fixed some of issues like this in LoTV as they have 'always cross-spawn' rules or show you the enemy spawn point from the start of the match, but this is RNG that is decided upon the beginning of the map, and players can adapt to it.
In SC2 you can have a lot of exciting 'random moments' - just because players arent perfect, baneling chose this pathing over the other, just because 'he scouted 90% of enemy base but still failed to spot enemy tech', and this can be done exciting and 'random' without the RNG. Having the big cumulative battle or the swaying point determined by RNG (or almost anything that can snowball) can be really detrimental not only to audience, but to super competetive players as well.
The concept of RNG stays directly in opposition to 'you could have played better', 'you could have seen it' and 'its mano o mano', 'skill vs skill' concept. Some of RTS top players are perfectionists, and after seeing RNG will just turn around and show middle finger to your game. And I actually have to agree with them. They came to play the e-sport, not Cassino-Stone (or Wizard-Poker).
Update: Mines in Coh2 no longer cause heavy engine damage criticals.
nice video.
By the way, are you planning to test Ashes of Singularity?
RNG in my opinion is what kept CoH 2 from being a great RTS game. I have always liked it but RNG prevents me from enjoying it consistently.
RNG is in real life. Random luck happens. It's part of what makes COH2 realistic. No one is going to get 100% hit or 100% miss.
One and maybe with the biggest community competative RTS is Starcraft II and thanks god there is COMPLETELY NO RNG system on anything and it is great.
Nobody here has mentioned the RNG in Age of Empires II, which is finally gathering speed in being accepted as an RTS eSport? What thoughts do you have on that if any @generalsgentlem? (and community)
Just the GYI for those who maye not be aware there are two elements of RNG in AOE. The First is the random map generation so no two games are played in the same spot on the same map. We see this as playing your map is part of the skill. Forward golds exposed? Better idea to be agressive or build your base around it... Nice woodline placements? Could change your strategy to walling into a Fast Castle. Very rarely is it a map win, and in tournaments everyone has a re available for that reason.
The other minor one is monk conversion, which means a monk can take somewhere between 3-7 seconds to convert I think the range is. Just because some troops were pretty commited to their faith :P
This argument is idiotic. RNG determines the outcome regardless of if you play good or bad. Especially when shots completely miss, which is feelsbad for most players. It takes away skill-expression, especially when it makes the difference between killing an army/tank instantly. I watched tank fights competitively, and never thought "wow that guy played better", he just had better RNG.
Comparing to poker and card games...Card games by default are luck-based because they involve making casinos money.
COH1 in between so clear graphic and Kreygasm
Well put together video, and well said!
Rise of Nations has good RNG, overall it is the best RTS too
What do you mean with “lack of visual intuitiveness on StarCraft 2” ? All three races are easy to distinguish from the others and every unit is easy to identify, especially with Team Color sliders, I don’t think that cartoony visuals necessarily mean poor visual intuitiveness
After reading this comment I had to watch and listen carefully to learn what this was about. My conclusion: The only conclusion that could warrant this poke is that the present races are more sci-fi/fantasical looking in comparison with a world war II style. But outside of that possible comparison, its a BS argument, and for someone who's supposedly engaged in RTS-design a really ignorant and dismissive one.
@@skorpion7132 yep
I would have to agree with Majka Strajka. Realism in an rts?! Where you can train not one but several soldiers from a tent you just erected in five minutes? Realism can lead to good things, like Relic's hard counter system, but it isn't a good thing in and of itself. Otherwise for games set before World War 1 having most of your units die of an infected toenail would be good gameplay.
@ 2:28- Run away! Run away!
What counts as sufficient influence over RNG? Taking a damage table how much of said table would need to be cut off from appearing for RNG to be properly influenced? I doubt taking away the bottom ten percent would be enough, but the bottom fifty percent might be too much.
I would agree that some adaptability could be interesting, but having a semi random selection of units spawn in a relatively small scale game like COH2 seems dangerous, especially with its hard counter system. What if you desperately need an anti vehicle unit, call in the spawn and it doesn't include an AV? Oh, and then the enemy tank shows up.
the spray pattern in csgo isn't random
tank vs tank with similar stats. King Tiger vs Comet tank.
Authenthic portrayal of world war 2? WTF? xD
Aesthetically, yes. Just not gameplay wise.
+GeneralsGentlemen Good to find a connoisseur of RTS since our kind is sadly few and far in between D:
Depressing facts aside, what are your thoughts on the RTS called StarWars: Empire at War?
PLEEEEEAAAAASSSSEEE TALK ABOUT IT!!!!! :)
I found it was cool and pretty because it's Star Wars, but the gameplay itself is basic and not particularly interesting.
GeneralsGentlemen
More so for the land battles which other than the pretty effects are as basic as you say. But hey that's what mods are for. Ever try using one?
Still, it's the only game I know of that had both land and air(space) battles , with elements of turn based strategy and invasions. Know of nay other my good man?
your videos are very informative thank you
Nicely put GG :)
What's the game at 4:18?
Dawn of War 2. It's similar to Coh, but with Melee and more RPG elements. Here's the playlist with our Dow2 casts if you're interested.
th-cam.com/play/PLQnCYzupbmdasDqaEwIqmBLVblCO0KFrj.html
+Jeremie Melanson
Imagine Company of Heroes 2 re-skinned into the Warhammer 40K Universe. Where there are hero units and has a feature of melee into a strategy game.
Dawn of War 2: Retribution - get it on sale (keep an eye on Steam), install Elite Mod, have fun. Shoot things, chop things up, or both.
Dawn of War 2: Retribution - get it on sale (keep an eye on Steam), install Elite Mod, have fun. Shoot things, chop things up, or both.
COH2 is just like chess ( yes a lot of varied tactics) with chances. The rest are ( might true ) unbalance, bugs and glitches.
Superb video, though I don't agree with RNG being good for competitive games.
2:58 that is sad,
Great video.
Good points
well said gentlemen!
Say that to plane crash!
uu mustache eyy? nice!
Esport crit chance is not RNG, if you have 40% crit chance it simply means 40% of attacks will crit
it really comes down to consistency. The player can't influence a lot of the rng in coh2 thus leading to no consistency in the game
SPRAY PATTERN IN FPS (CS) RNG?
YOU FUCKING WHAT M8?
+MajkaSrajka
Spray patterns are exact opposition of what you are saying - they are pre-dermined and skillful. They can create 'random mechanics' just as much as random is movement of your palm. They are perfect example how to make things 'random' and 'exciting' without making things RNG.
+MajkaSrajka It does exist, the AK 47 wont always hit the same spot when you fire it from far away, just like the shotgun pellet can hit someone, even if your crosshair is not on target (im talking about CS GO here :D)
Toni kireE Lahtinen
Yeah, i've heard that they have added some muzzle to spray patterns in CS:GO, but IIRC it isnt huge and hardly matter - especially on short distances.
It basically added 'skill cap' to the burst-control, in order to stop people from long-bursting from across the map.
This may seem like RNG, but it is 'avoidable' RNG that actually design the gameplay - as due to this RNG noone will never long-burst at the long range, thus RNG hardly exists in top level play anyway, and for them rule like 'in the bursts longer than 5 shots, your bullets disappear after flying for 100 meters" and pro-play would be exactly the same - people still would not burst at extreme ranges.
This compared to total RNG fiesta in RTS, where matches dont last on average 2 minutes, but in 30+ minute tug of war that RTS is.
Same works for Poker. Noone watches one game and poker and is done. You watch dozens of hands anyway.
RNG that affect only the outcome, but doesnt affect the decision making is IMO bullshit and doesnt serve anything.
In good party-rpgs you can calculate your crit chance, weigh your risk vs reward, know where you are so fucked that you have to try for that 5% clutch play or die anyway etc. - all this "RNG" mechanics changes the way you play, and test your skill. Having two tanks shoot at each other with outcome defined purely in RNG, or tank-engine 50-50% hits doesnt affect the play (decision making etc.), thus I call it bullshit.
Spray patterns in most part in fact are not RNG (in hardly any FPS RNG actually matters - unless you treat spawn points as RNG, but they are map-dependent, AND you dont play 1 40 minutes round of any FPS anyway.
The slight 'RNG' (muzzle) can be played around (and in fact - was created to discourage players from shooting at long range in bursts, not to create exciting RNG).
If your game need RNG-RNG to became exciting, it most likely sucks at core mechanics ;P
Nice! Good content :)
This video aged poorly. As it stands today, MOBAs have stagnated - and COH2 never became big at all: and is an irrelevant rts.
There really aren’t any relevant rts besides Starcraft
And maybe aoe2
That doesn’t mean that ots a bad game inherently (although I haven’t played it)
I played irrelevant rts games and had fun with it all the same
Battle for middle earth 2 is an irrelevant rts game but i still had fun when i played it