The one moment where rng in BB is so strong that it can sometimes overwhelm a good and attentive player (mind you - not necessarily myself) is at the very beginning.
I have seen experienced coaches wrecked by a string of unlucky rolls. Experienced teams can make rolls more manageable, but you can't do much when you roll critical failures at worst possible moments.
Wait, what teams and coaches? We are still talking Battle Brothers, right?
Yes, in a way you can do much. How do YOU think people do several consecutive runs in roguelikes? Games with perma death AND rng AND no "team" - which makes it way worse than BB? I'll tell you - they minimise the risk. You are right that
sooner or later random numbers will be against you. It is inevitable. So you play so that even when this inevitably happen, it isn't fatal. In a manner of speaking there shouldn't be any "worst moments" at all. In BB the main way to achieve this, is not tactics but the strategic map. You do not fight if you do not know that you'll (easily) win. Or you are prepared to take losses. It is actually easier in BB because there is no single life that loses the game (except in Lone Wolf start). It is harder at the very beginning because you have little choice or options. In addition very early your bros might die from just 2 or 3 bad rolls in a row. That can happen easily and semi often so is impossible to counter*. But when they can virtually always survive a couple of hits, you just don't have to place them in a situation where they need to take even more. And yes, very extreme cases happen but there comes the reason why BB is in a way easier - one or even two bros of 16+ dies in such extreme case and you move on.
In my expert game most of the brothers i lost (
past early game) was because of:
a) lack of knowledge about an aspect of a game - the lindwurms vs my tank situation or the auto-retreat that i posted are exemples. I suspect that's one of the problems with Porky, except more often and in more basic situations.
b) me not considering all options - i could have saved a bros using a net or a smoke pot (that i always have on my bannerman) or in other ways but i was too lazy or inattentive to do it so i just let the game play hoping: "he'll live, he still can take a hit, enemy won't hit two difficult rolls in a row"
c) i simply was a bad at tactics and I caused the situation myself, situation where a string of bad rolls happened and where it was possible to happen at all
d) i choose a fight that was too risky for my company in the first place
Most of those deaths could have been avoided. Exception are some of the early deaths and some of the low level bros in late game deaths.
There were also some premature ends to a campaign very early, and one or two slightly later. I posted some. Cases a) , b) or d).
In short: I
sucked. Not rng or game being against me, but it was me = sucking. Hopefully i suck a little less now.
Someone better than me wouldn't even take those loses or setbacks. I saw on youtube a guy who played tactics considering almost every move like it was chess, including the risk of each move basically**. And you know what? He complained that the game (on expert/im) poses no challenge past very early game (where it's rng related of curse) anymore. And i believe him.
*except using decoy/sacrifice bros that is but it is not perfect either.
**i suppose some people on Codex would call him "autistic".