Profile of m3rc3n4ry

you already did p2p when you bought COH2

I believe you are now in p2p2w territory

(pay to pay to win, for those slower peeps)

but atleast you can rely on teammates to cover your mistakes.

rely on wut? lol that has never been my experience in 2v2s quite the opposite actually

A lot of these responses are acting like the OP said RNG should be removed from the game. Only morons ever suggest that idea. The title is "Lets fix RNG". At least as far as I get a feel from playing is, there is a lot more random outcomes of minor engagements that should just go one way. I think that is the point the OP was trying to make. Some engagements that even should be a roflstomp end up going the other way, and way more often than vCOH. This is what makes it seem more like making units, throwing them at other units, and watching while flipping a coin sometimes. Maybe my luck is just worse and this happens more to me, but meh. Cuz dat sniper video was mine, tell me that's happened to you. It's a perfect example of this as well.

This may also be from more of a lack of factors that contribute to the outcome of engagements. Like the cover system being less of a factor meaning positioning is less important, and the absence of units like bikes/jeeps/kettens pushing and other factors that the player can control to change the outcome of an engagement from one that might be a straight up loss. It was way more fun to watch a game in vCoh and have these tools at the players disposal to change the outcome of an engagement. These were required micro and skill. In COH2 it seems more like you either run in a building or gamble on your riflenade, nades, or moli's to turn an engagement, or pray on the rng coinflip. The lower raw infantry damage doesn't help here either. It may not really even need to be rng that needs to be addressed so much as these other factors taken a look at. Then rng would play less of a role on its own.

Random squad wipes from single mortar rounds and normal soviet mines also add to this frustration, however that is another issue slightly different.

@H S King
P.S. various moderators have previously stated to keep posts preferably small and efficient, because otherwise nobody is going to read it...

except I think he stayed on topic well and found myself agreeing through most of it. So it kept me reading through nearly all of it. Don't really agree about the needing the historical stuff. Otherwise pretty well thought out and thorough. Doubt it will make any influence though, unfortunately. If nothing else, nice job on the post layout.

Just saying, you don't have to buy all the commanders they release. I only liked 2 out of 4 of what they released so I bought them. And I definitely didn't buy any other content.

Don't look at it like 'oh god look how much this is in total!' Look at each DLC separately, decide which ones you actually want, and see how much that comes to.

Thank you for parroting the official relic response. The point was already made by someone else, but the commander you want today, may not be the same commander you want a month later when they patch it. There is an incentive to release OP commanders and then balance them later. I'll let you figure out what that is.

Maybe on the box of their next release they need to add
"Some commanders not included" and "Each sold separately" and maybe even "Commanders subject to change/balancing after initial sales"

at least people will know what they are getting into then.