How is abandon a series defining trait? You can't say it's so rare that it doesn't matter but also say it's series defining. Comparing abandon to sync kills doesn't make any sense
Its such a "Series defining trait" that it wasn't even present in CoH1, to my knowledge.
if you are a esport organizer, do you not like such excitement? do you not think this brings in more viewers?
No, obviously, because it puts players off of competing, which results in smaller and less profitable e-sports events. Viewers aren't more interested in random events than they are in genuinely impressive and skilful plays performed by competitors.
like football, a shot may have that slightly too much lift that it spins a few cm off and hits the post instead of the goal. nothing wrong with player qualities.
/shrug.
Yes it is due to player qualities. That's you kicking the ball incorrectly, a modern football is designed to fly predictably.
You're still trying to argue that a football being a "few centimeters off" is somehow comparable to handing an opponent a vehicle in CoH2 through a 5% chance, and I have no clue if you're intentionally being obtuse or not.
sometimes a tank round hits right at the turret critical point, bom turret down
other times the rounds hit the sides and bom your tank surviability goes down, but the turret still works.
in my example, you are the better team, dominating, leading 1-0, you decide to sub in an attacker to go for the kill. unluckily the ball hit the posts twice since your attacking change. and even worse luck, a long punt out by the opponent, your last defender, you captain slips, and since the rest of your team is in attack, and the opponent score, its 1-1.
what is the chance that happened to your reliable captain? poor guy.
~
Your ball didn't "unluckily" hit the post twice. The guy kicking the ball fucked up twice and missed. That isnt random, that is him not being good enough.
You are fundamentally misunderstanding what "Randomness" is.
"In chess you unluckily lost your bishops early" is analogous to what you're trying to argue.
i watched dozens of tightrope and ae casts. i played dozens of 2v2 rank 1000. i dont remember an abandon tank becomes an i win thing. it is still a p4, a tiger, a t34, a sherman, a cromwell, a whatever, it stills need to be recrew, it can still be countered even in enemy hands, just like any tank...
again, i feel like you are just arguing against the concept from an elitist pov discussion for sake of discussion, rather than something that has badly affected the game.
now to be fair, the OP may have just lost a rare abandon game, and felt the need to rant and started this topic.
Nobody cares about your anecdotes dude, nor do they care about your invented scenario of "someone losing because of abandon and being mad".
no the example in football is, you are leading 1-0, do you sub in an attacker for a defensive mid and go for the kill by losing your holding midfielder?
can you trust your defenders to make up the space left behind while your front men try to score more goals.
So your comparison in football to a 5% chance of a killed vehicle being handed to your enemy is... you subbing in the "wrong" player and the enemy then getting a goal because your entire team then somehow failed to then stop them?
Your team letting a goal through in football isnt random chance, that's being outplayed by your opponent. Are you even aware of what argument you're making?
But thank you for giving more on how you would like it to be implemented. Believe it or not but with most things related to balance or implementation i agree with your positions. Just not on these crits and what to do.
Having them be short range and it needing to be a killing blow for abandon is indeed as it should be if tied to abilities. The thing is you get to decide where you get your free tank (with no oppertunity cost/wich should be required) and when the enemy tank looses its gun wich is to powerfull imo. This goes beyond nades and snares easely.
A grenade has the ability to outright kill an infantry squad in one shot when used intelligently, and a snare when used correctly can guarantee a kill on a vehicle that would otherwise have easily escaped a situation. Both of these are comparable to MGC and abandon. Imagine if grenades were simply something infantry squads threw at random, and if they were thrown quickly and exploded immediately, and imagine if tank cannons or AT guns randomly snared opposing vehicles when firing. Both of these things would be exactly as impactful as random MGC and Abandons.
Nobody's suggested there be no opportunity cost to an ability-based abandon, nor to being able to knock out a tank's gun.
Honestly MGC should just be removed entirely, though, and an ability that might have caused an MGC instead cause the temporary "gunner injured" critical that stops a vehicle firing temporarily. Outright preventing a vehicle from fighting back until it's fully repaired is far too strong to be in the game at all. Abandon can be balanced through becoming an ability, but MGC really cannot be balanced.
i disagree, you can do everything about abandon. it is your choice to risk a dive or not.
some of you speak as if abandon is a game breaker. since when and which is a good example?
messi can train and have strong spatial awareness, but random factors during match may happens, the flight of the curve can be trained as much but still not perfect outcome like chess.
Uh-huh, and as I've already explained to you: "Don't dive" is not a good player's response to a 1-5% chance of an abandon, because in 95% of cases the dive would have helped you, rather than put you massively behind. Only a bad player is dissuaded from diving because of Abandon and MGC, everyone else is simply fucked by RNG in 1-5% of cases, and there is nothing they could do about it.
Give an example of a similarly impactful "Random" thing that might happen in Football, do you sometimes join the opposing team if you get tackled without any teammates nearby?
Edit: A decision made by the developers themselves.
Ok, and? You realise that the Balance team has taken over from Lelic for the game's "development", right? These things were removed in the name of balance, it doesn't matter whether Lelic themselves did it, or if the current Balance team does it, if it improves the game overall.
it is in fact a higher skills mechanic, you need to prep for the unexpected, you need to consider the risk and rewards
When you have a 1-5% chance of something happening you cannot "prep" for it without reducing your capacity in the other 95% of cases, which is what a bad player would do. A good player is forced to play as though the chance does not exist, as doing otherwise would make you less effective overall.
There's no skill involved in low-percentage high-impact RNG when you cannot influence it, and I have no clue why you constantly insist there is.
what? im open with tweaking abandon and randomness but against completely dropping it unlike pip
i don't see how you think im contrarian for the sake of it. do you even read what you wrote and think it may applies to pip and perhaps yourself?
im definitely against the elitist view that randomness is a low skill low effort mechanic
Randomness is factually a low-skill, low-effort mechanic. That isnt elitism, it's simply a fact that there is no skill involved in a random roll you cannot affect.
The balance team is supposed to balance the game, not to remove GAME MECHANICS.
Removing bad mechanics is part of balancing the game. Random flame crits, for example, were removed in the name of balance, because a random chance of an entire squad being wiped by a flamer burst or from stepping on a molotov is not actually a good game mechanic.