Jump to content
2012_PlayeR

Regarding RNG in Games, in general

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jaegaer said:

I didn't say it has - I said that this is the real problem of WoT and mostly also the real problem of the frustration players feel. That and the gamenot communicating your luck as well as your bad luck.

I agree, the power difference across tier gaps is a major problem of the game, but I thought we're talking about RNG vs skill...?

That being said, the MM is basically an RNG of its own. With 3/5/7 and soloqueueing (assuming sufficient players at each tier) you basically have 47% chance of being bottom tier, 33% mid and 20% top. Tiers 1-3, 9, 10 and stuff with pref MM have different probabilities, but the RNG in MM still stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, this topic is about how RNG "waters down" the display of skill. In WoT this means that even the best solo player will not go much over 65% winrate while even the worst tomato will usually still manage 38%+

Ofc this is also bc 15 vs 15 limits the maximum and minimum influence.

However the RNG servers two additional functions:

First of all it makes the game less static. If you play WT you know what I mean. Without aim/pen RNG every well placed shot is deadly and that means the stationary tank thats ready to shoot has a HUGE advantage and that makes the game static and stale and not at all casual.

And second it gives you brutally great games sometimes where you perform well ahead of your average skill at the cost of perform below your average skill sometimes - just because of RNG. And this too is why WoT is so successful. WG knows that in order for some players to have great games their opponents need to have bad games - it's unavoidable. But humans usually remember the fond and great things longer/more than the bad ones and RNG helps capitalizing on that.

SO discuss all you want about how WoT is too much RNG that hampers good players more than it helps them (which it does) but the game would be much less successful without it because 95% of all players benefit from the RNG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Archaic_One said:

Essentially, if you aim long enough that the aim circle stops shrinking, your shot should go where its aimed

Which would mean that the kemp bush @ base guys would always hit the pushing tanks where they want to hit them... That does not strike me as a good idea. Imagine that Type 5 full penning your cupola EVERY SINGLE TIME from 400m away because he sat still and was fully aimed when you poked around the corner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats doesn't change the fact that the stationary tank has a huge advantage. Just play WT and see for yourself and also notice how it is not even 1/50th as profitable as WoT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

First of all it makes the game less static. If you play WT you know what I mean. Without aim/pen RNG every well placed shot is deadly and that means the stationary tank thats ready to shoot has a HUGE advantage and that makes the game static and stale and not at all casual. 

By saying lack of RNG will make the gameplay static you imply the presence of RNG is in opposition of static gameplay. And yet even with existing RNG gameplay is still observably static. For example, staring contest on (old) Campinovka, old Province, Lakeville valley camp. And of course there's constant cover hugging to avoid arty, where arty is already affected by RNG much more than any other vehicle class.

If RNG makes the game less static, why do people camp all the way back and be useless? Why do frontally impenetrable tanks choose to sit BEHIND squishier allies instead of taking point? Why offer premium ammo that tends to defeat the entire purpose of RNG pen? Why doesn't arty presence make gameplay more dynamic?

Static gameplay primarily results from poor map design and poorly balanced gameplay mechanics, where the fear of getting punished makes people sit still in the most useless positions. RNG may have a role in promoting dynamic gameplay, but it's effects are relatively inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

13 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

And second it gives you brutally great games sometimes where you perform well ahead of your average skill at the cost of perform below your average skill sometimes - just because of RNG. And this too is why WoT is so successful. WG knows that in order for some players to have great games their opponents need to have bad games - it's unavoidable. But humans usually remember the fond and great things longer/more than the bad ones and RNG helps capitalizing on that.

See gambling and pleasure addiction.

13 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

SO discuss all you want about how WoT is too much RNG that hampers good players more than it helps them (which it does) but the game would be much less successful without it because 95% of all players benefit from the RNG.

I wonder where you got that 95% number from. Yes, RNG will theoretically allow a bad performing player to achieve results more rewarding than their low skill level would receive otherwise, but you failed to consider at what threshold does RNG start hampering the results of good performing players. For simplicity's sake I'll assume 50% win rate to be the threshold here, and that there is an equal distribution of players below and above the threshold. In this case the amount of players benefiting from RNG will be roughly equal to those who are hampered by it. I realize this is a gross simplification, but my point still stands.

9 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

Thats doesn't change the fact that the stationary tank has a huge advantage. Just play WT and see for yourself and also notice how it is not even 1/50th as profitable as WoT.

WT's lack of success is not entirely due to their lesser RNG mechanics. For one, consider that WT has predominantly been focused on planes, and that by the time they decided to put tanks in the game they already face stiff competition from WoT, just like how AW failed to compete. For an opposite example, see WoWP vs WT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2018 at 7:24 AM, Jaegaer said:

Thats doesn't change the fact that the stationary tank has a huge advantage. 

That only works if your opponent is also stationary.  Trying to pre-aim for where you hope a weak spot will appear is probably not going to work very often.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that was an extreme example thats nevertheless is quite valid, opponent needs to stop to aim and that gives the stationary tank a huge advanateg - even more if you load the gold and roflpen everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

Well, that was an extreme example thats nevertheless is quite valid, opponent needs to stop to aim and that gives the stationary tank a huge advanateg - even more if you load the gold and roflpen everywhere.

Your point is valid, though not relevant to RNG. Bush wookies and defender's advantage will exist regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RNG in PvP games is the vilest filth in the observable universe and serves no other purpose than to fuck up the better player. After all, this website contains years and years of guides, tips and analysis of data with the sole purpose of telling RNGsus to go fuck himself with a cactus.

It's never okay that some random guy gets to survive because your gunner decided to sneeze as he pulled the trigger and thus created a new impact site on the moon, nor is it okay that your 390 alpha gun can't kill a dude on 320 HP because someone forgot to load enough explosives into the shell that day and you rolled a cool 315. Similarly, it's dumb that you get a free kill on an ammo rack, fire or high damage roll.

RNG as a mechanic can work in a select few games that revolve around it, such as Roguelikes or other games revolving around constant restarts but you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who enjoys losing due to elements out of their control. Also, the profitability argument is dumb because that's completely unrelated to RNG and is a marketing issue.

The game is dying in the West because WG just can't stop adding extra layers of RNG. Now it's not only in-battle but also out of the gameplay in the form of their lootboxes, absurd mission requirements and arguably even the store itself since you already know you can save your dollaridoos for an OP tank once or twice per year - it's just a question of you having the stomach to wait it out and see if you won the store lottery that day.

WoT could have been a god tier tactical 3rd person shooter but they chose their Russian "daddies" over a wider longterm audience, largely thanks to their choice of game mechanics. People often refer to WG being stupid but the fact is that they just don't mind lying about their intentions - hence their absurdly slow work pace for an MMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This game is much more cerebral than twitch shooters.  This game design offers play to a wider segment of players to enjoy the game, as gaming rigs, super fast internet, and twitch reactions don't matter as much.

The RNG mechanics affect a small but critical part of the game (shot sigma, pen, damage, and module damage) but affect the less skilled in the same manner as better skilled and arguably model the shell ballistics fairly well.  The Hail Mary pass and goal line stand are exciting plays (also subject to random factors not pure skill) and there is nothing wrong with having that feeling in WOT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think it was a proper necro but it was the 3rd most recent below the stickies or something like that :doge:

@8_Hussars RNG mechanics are strictly designed to help less skilled players and hurt more skilled players, it's their entire raison d'être and a way for develepors to reach a more casual audience. The RNG also goes far beyond what you think it does, since it also applies to the Matchmaker and the +2 tier difference on vehicles. There's a virtual mount Everest of difference between being a top tier vehicle and a bottom tier vehicle in WoT, which is a huge part of why the game is dying. I tried playing again a little while ago but the even worse MM they had implemented stopped that shit after 20 games or so.

The reason it hurts skilled players more than less skilled ones is that the less skilled player is barely doing what needs to be done in any given situation (eg. just aiming somewhere on the tank and hoping it pens) while the more skilled player is looking for the optimal play within their skill range and objective (eg. tracking the tank so it's dead within 3 seconds and letting the team push up to flank). One shot requires significantly more precision and RNGsus intervention than the other, something that wouldn't be an issue if you were firing where you were aiming like in most shooters. There's a reason why everyone and their mother have always been drawn to RU hovertanks at higher skill evels, namely that they're fast, low profile and fire relative laser beams. Perfectly suited for abusing RNG against the opponents while reducing your own, despite the low alpha.

This is also not including RNG on crew members being disabled, RNG on modules being disabled, RNG on fires, RNG on tracking, RNG on bounces, RNG on arty strikes and their effects and in some tanks even RNG on grid position when starting the game since they're so slow. Look at how many times I typed RNG in that previous segment and then start tallying up how many more events in the game suffer from it. Would RNG on aim be a problem on its own? No. Would damage? No. Penetration with proper weakspots? No. But the dozens of layers of RNG stacking on top of each other makes it a clusterfuck, especially for those of us who've been there for a long time. Even the god damn map you get matters since there are some very clearly more suited to certain vehicles than others.

You get plenty of clutch moments and Hail Mary plays in heavily skill-based games, it's the entire foundation of Esports after all, something WoT also tried its hand at. Winning or losing at the will of a machine is garbage in a PvP game. PvE games can relatively easily be built around RNG and be super fun but they do not belong in a PvP game. After all, you're supposed to be fighting the player and not the machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...