I give this example because if someone just walks away after the first game, skill has no effect anymore.
And that's not how any game is played. There's a reason COMPETITIVELY poker, each player has a certain pool of chips, so you can outplay people on the long run.
Why a RTS game have to be about flipping coins?
Because that's the essence and core of the franchise, which differentiates it from the other 3 biggest RTS titles. Starcraft (0 RNG, heavy macro/micro, scout/build/tech, paper/rock/scissor style), Age of empires 2 (HEAVY HEAVY economic/macro focus, adaptation to maps) and Warcraft 3 (more combat oriented, still plenty of capped RNG (items, crits, damage).
You don't headbutt flipping 50/50 coins, rather than take opportunity when you have favourable 80/20 or 90/10 situations.
There are times when AT shell bounces off 3-4 times in a row while opponent hits every time. With players having equal level of skill, sometimes this becomes the deciding factor. It should not be like this. How about a mortar wiping out a Grenadier squad with one hit, while your mortar do absolutely no damage to the enemy with 5-6 hits?
1- If the result of a whole game is decided by a single tank fight, on which none of each player is available to either soft retreat, use other AT sources, or been able to support it with infantry, then it must be one heck of a close game and YES, uncertainty is what makes this game interesting. IF you have no back up plan and you YOLO your units, then it's only your fault. Sometimes you have to take those risks, yes, but that's the beauty of this game.
2- A mortar wiping a squad with one hit, NOWADAYS, means that your unit was already damaged, you were using light cover (0 explosive dmg reduction) and your models were clump up together.
If your mortar doesn't hit shit, then you are using it against mobile units, you are not providing LoS, you are relying on autofire, etc.
This screams to me like: the enemy has pinpoint accurate shells while my indirect fire doesn't hit shit.
How do you know Coh will not be better without RNG? Did you try it? While in doubt just give options to turn it off. Those who want it can play with it, those who don't want can switch it off. And of course like you said there are other games without RNG, which means RNG is not a must for games.
Because anyone who wants to play without RNG, is playing other things like SC2? There's no such thing as removing RNG outside of making your own mod, which alters of profiles on all weapons, all unit models, everything. 0 RNG means a whole team of people working in remaking a whole different game. It would be easier to fund a whole new game studio than trying to make the game free from RNG.
- I have not played DOTA or WC3, so I don't have much idea about them.
- Map is not equal for Coh2 too. I wish maps were symmetric as well. AoE generated maps are far more fair than some of the Coh2 handmade maps.
- I think they should not be considered, it is too much for a single player game. For example, in Coh2 nobody has to worry about ammo stock. MG fires forever without supply, that is perfectly fine. If you consider each and everything then you will be playing as one member of squad or one crew member of a tank.
- Never heard of Hearthstone.
- PUBG is more like hide and seek game, rather than a skill game.
- I am sure there are many sports games without RNG, for example Tennis, Basketball etc.
I thought you were asking about COMPETITIVE E-Sport aspects/games.
-DOTA/LOL, kings of MOBAs, kings of esports ATM, have something called criticals. Basically you have say a 10% of having an increased damage output.
-Warcraft 3, game which set bases for DOTA, has damage been done in a certain range (say 6-10), some units having crits (blademaster) and most important, creeps (neutral minions on map) which provide items when killed upon. Those items are randomly chosen from a certain "bag tier". Sometimes you get items which are ideal for your strategy, sometimes you just have to sell them for gold.
-FPS = Shooters aka Counter, CoD, Battlefield, etc. When i mentioned recoil/spread/cone of fire, i mean that there's some desviation a bullet has from when it comes out from the barrel of the gun. Different games applies these concepts in unique ways, but to put it simple, even if your crosshair is perfectly alligned into the hitbox of the enemy, if you are using your weapon in a non practical way (say no ADS - aiming down sights, while moving/jumping, etc) you wont hit your target (or might with luck).
-PUBG: i guess people like Shroud (ex Pro CS player) are just "lucky".
-Hearthstone: Blizzard's "Wizard poker". AKA Magic The Gathering for dummies based on World of Warcraft.
-I'm talking about the E-Sports videogames which are based on real sports. Most if not ALL of them, have a certain degree of RNG on their base mechanics. Be it how accurate they kick the ball or how precise they throw it to the basket.
-PD: Maps on CoH2. That's is why on tournaments, people play on both sides of the map, with opposing factions and in case of a draw, whoever play more effectively (tickets) ends with the decision to choose later which faction/side he wants.
It is totally not historically accurate but I guess most people fail to even imagine how slow these things actually were so this "version" of history would suit coh better, just like it suits battlefield better.
0
Chukonoku
Ballrok
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
