Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Is RNG desirable in Crowfall?


Zerve
 Share

Recommended Posts

The way you prevent rare items is by making them hard to get and by making the resources take time to gather, not with RNG. I've had enough of RNG crafting in Archeage where 3/10 tries of making a piece of armour will actually work. It's a terrible concept. 

 

Yes they are trivial and yea it's mainly a pvp game, but there are still plenty of pve aspects (crafting, training skills, killing (not farming) monsters) in the game to make it not 100% pvp. I feel those that keep saying it's solely pvp will be slightly disappointed by release. 

 

Usually time to gather material also means RNG on whether a rare item drops.

 

RNG is part of MMO's its just a matter of how prevalent it is made to the public.

 

REQT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AA made RNG a nightmare for crafting, it was rediculous.  "Well controlled" RNG in both crafting and combat is fine...  crit chance is RNG and "magic" weapon proc is RNG, hit/miss should be skill and not RNG and neither should skill damage beyond crit chance.  In crafting there should be some RNG for tier outcomes based first on material tier and crafter skill level...  The highest tier gear should be VERY VERY rare made only by a TOP skill crafter using the very top tier materials and still needing a very lucky RNG to get that absolute best result...   I do not want to see top gear in this game before the first year of play is complete, that is how rare it should be...  and it will still decay and break so will the cost be worth it?  sure...   it is top tier!

 

Why do you want random crits and random weapon procs? I don't understand the desire for these types of mechanics. You can make the game infinitely more interesting by making critical hits and weapon ability procs based on actual tactical decisions. Flanking, knocking the opponent into a "vulnerable" state, ect...

 

Look at my post a few posts above to see more details about the game design concepts behind my reasoning for this.

 

 

I have to agree here.  Can't say I want any elements of RnG outside of that in combat.  Not sure if I want it in crafting or not....probably not.

Same thing here, why would you want any forced RNG in the combat?

 

 

 

For both of you, just to note, when I say "forced RNG" I mean things like random crit chances, random ability procs, random blocks, random evades..ect..

I don't mean more natural randomness like having some *slight* randomness in the pattern of a shotgun-esk ability or some ability that rapidly fires projectiles.

In practice, this randomness, when designed correctly, has barely any impact on the outcome of a fight and mostly exists for visual effect... and could even simply be a visual effect in some circumstances.. and the actual damage could be a cone with increasing damage toward the center of the cone so it's not random at all.

 

 

I just don't understand why anyone would want random crits to pop up when they could instead have major crits pop off when they hit their enemy in the back, or when tehy hit them while they're "vulnerable" after being staggered... or when tehy hit them while they're winding up or swinging with an  attack that can do counterattack damage (ala dark souls). It's just far more interesting..

 

I don't get why anyone would want their weapons to RANDOMLY apply special abilities when they could instead be based on actual mechanics such as if you do certain combos with the weapon, it will apply the ability during certain steps in the combo... OR you need to build up a status effect on someone to make it apply.

 

For example with a frost weapon that can randomly slow a target.. change that to.. does applies 10 frost. Frost is an effect that will slow you it is applied to you.... you need to have 100 of it built up onto you for it to apply. So the person needs to hit you 10 times with small gaps between hits (because the bar will drain when not having frost built up).

 

This is how status effects work in dark souls... and it works very well... to poison someone, it's not a random chance on a weapon... you need to hit the person with enough things that can build up the poison status effect, quickly enough, to build up that bar...

 

So now poison or whatever status effect depending on the specific details of how it applies, when it builds up, if it builds up even if you don't deal damage due to being blocked, how quickly it drains, ect ect ect.... now these things actually affect your playstyle and the person you're fighting's play style. You might not have done enough damage to put them at critical health, but you have filled their poison bar up to 90% and now they're terrified and trying to back away so you can't get the full status filled and poison them. This becomes apparent in their behavior.. so you can take advantage of it. It also changes how you fight because you'll want to be more aggressive and leave as little time between your attacks as possible so that the poison effect doesn't fade away.

 

It actually impacts the gameplay rather than just being some other stat that just flies around in the background and makes the combat convoluted without adding actual depth. It just makes it random and frustrating for those on the receiving end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually time to gather material also means RNG on whether a rare item drops.

 

RNG is part of MMO's its just a matter of how prevalent it is made to the public.

 

"RNG is part of MMOs" is not really a valid argument. It's part of a lot of MMOs.... but not because the games need it.. it's simply a pattern people are following somewhat habitually.

 

The origin of RNG in MMORPGs is actually based on the first RPGs that existed.. which were not video games. They were tabletop games. In a tabletop game, RNG was generally used to come up with a quick way to simulate the outcome of events. This was done for several key reasons.. here's a few:

 

1) Combat isn't the focus: Most tabletop RPGs were not focused on depth of combat and tactics, they were focused on story telling between the "players" and the DM. They were about roleplaying.. not playing a role in a fight.. but role playing as in acting and story telling. Roleplaying and story telling are great, and can continue into video games... but the reason that tabletop RPGs used RNG was simply because they didn't care that combat was deep and tactical, they just wanted it to be unpredictable so the "players" (story tellers and role players) could roll with the flow of the story... sort of like improv.

 

2) Alternatives are too difficult: Some concepts simply can't be managed reasonably in tabletop RPGs. For example, a few posts above I discuss how random weapon procs shouldn't be implemented because you can use a plethora of other mechanics to control how special weapon effects work rather than randomness. These mechanics work GREAT in a video game where the computer is tracking all the variables for these effects... but in a tabletop RPG, it's just too much effort.. especially when the combat isn't even the core focus. It's just way easy to roll some dice..rather than to have your entire table filled with tokens to represent different effects and mechanics to keep track of the game state.

 

3) DM Control and Fairness: In a tabletop RPG, the DM controls all NPCs and if combat was actually tactical and deep... it would be extremely difficult for the DM to be unbiased either against or for the players... it would also require that the DM is extremely good at the combat mechanics for him/her to be able to make any kind of difficult fight.

 

4) The Story is Everything: When playing tabletop RPGs, the most important thing is the story itself and how interesting, cool, funny it is. Things like critical failures can happen where you went to shoot a giant in the face with a fireball and hopefully knock him off a cliff... but instead you mess up and make the ground explode and the whole cliff collapses and everyone falls and then you roll for landing or something and the giant lands first, dies and everyone lands on him and it's hilarious. Or you can end up as a wizard, picking up your downed warrior's greatsword and attempt to throw it at a giant... you require an insanely perfect roll to manage to do anything... you roll criticals all around and throw it through his eye and defeat him. Hilarious things can happen... for better or worse... thats the point though in a tabletop RPG.

 

5) No Alternatives for Aiming and Reaction: Tabletop RPGs simply don't have any system that could possibly work for aiming and reacting other than making the characters work randomly. This is related to #2... but it's basically because there aren't any realistic alternatives that they cared to implement. They just wanted to get the roleplay experience of telling a story.

 

 

 

My point is simply that the origin of randomness in MMOs dates back long ago and it really never belonged in video games at all. The reason it formed into working as such was just the nature of the evolution of the genre over time. First people just looked to make it so they could do tabletop online.. then people started adding layers and layers of graphical fidelity and mechanics and real time gameplay.. ect ect... but never went and looked back at that nasty old RNG concept and thought about whether or not it was actually good or bad for the games they were making. They just kept it in there because it was there in all the games before it.

 

It's time to drop this concept from action RPGs. It adds nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need some RNG just to make sure everybody has a chance of winning now and then. A little gambling never hurts. Otherwise the game will lose player base faster. 

 

Well there's several problems with this statement.

 

-Assuming that forced RNG is required to have some RNG. People mess up.. and if the gameplay is based around mind games and prediction, there's natural RNG in the fact that you can't always predict someone 100% accurately, you don't need forced RNG for that.

 

-You assume that everyone needs to have a "chance" at winning.. and they should be given that chance via RNG. This has been tested before, and it's been proven to fail. Look at tripping in SSB Brawl. All that did was be annoying.. and it made better players win harder when it happened and rarely helped worse players because they're not good enough to capitalize on it. Also, not everyone needs a "chance" to win.... it's okay to lose to someone that's better than you almost every time. It will almost never be EVERY time simply because they can mess up too, even if they're really good. Chivalry: Medieval Warfare has no RNG and I still managed to beat people 10000 times better than me sometimes. It also feels CHEAP to win via rng.. you just feel like you got lucky.. it doesn't feel good. It feels cheap to both players... and causes arguments, if anything...

 

 

-You assume that if a player can't get gratification via random victory, that the game will bleed players faster. This is a pretty massive assumption. I don't see any basis for this claim. In fact, I see a lot of counter examples. Going back to super smash brothers... people still play melee and SSB for WiiU, but Brawl was by far the most hated of all smash games.. because it had RNG added to the combat. There's other examples of games lasting for a very very long time BECAUSE they had deep and RNGless gameplay. I've actually never seen a game where people said "yeah I'm still playing this because sometimes I can win because I got lucky... even though I'm not that good... at least it feels GREAT when I win due to no fault of my own.. and the enemy team never rages that I won because RNG blessed me during that fight yay!". That's never been the case. No one EVER feels GOOD because they won or lost due to RNG. At least, I've never met someone that feels that way.

 

There's a big difference between something happening naturally within the mechanics, albeit not planned by the player, that ends up being awesome. Like.. throwing a grenade at someone very far away, missing.. but then an enemy vehicle drives by and it lands on them instead and scores you an epic triple kill. Yeah, that feels great and is effectively "random" but it's not forced unnatural fake crits just flying off that suddenly made you win (or lose) a fight.

 

 

 

 

Also, while I'm here ranting again... I'd like to note something about RNG in bullet spread on abilities or guns in FPSes. One thing that people aren't considering when they claim that this RNG is okay, therefore crits are okay is the fact that this RNG is HEAVILY controlled. Someone mentioned that you can burst fire to control it but.. also important is the fact that this RNG changes with distance as well. The closer you are to a target the less the spread matters. The RNG on spread isn't an uncontrolled factor that has no tactics involving it. RNG crits and ability procs have no scaling based on player action. They simply happen or don't. There's nothing the player can do with their positioning or controlling their attacks to reduce the RNG to 0. Also, the RNG on bullet spread usually has a very very very small variance in terms of actual damage output. Like.. at distance X with burst control rate Y I'm going to end up having an average DPS Z with an EXTREMELY LOW standard deviation. The actual effective variance due to this mechanic is almost none. It will almost never change a fight's outcome randomly. it's mainly (effectively) a visual effect to make the game look nicer. You'll almost never win or lose a fight because the RNG blessed you or damned you or your enemy. There's so many more important factors with the range and burst control.

 

/rant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short-term RNG is fine with me. Things like critical hits and damage ranges. They make individual combat engagements interesting and varied.

 

Long-term RNG is where I usually find a problem if there are no mitigation mechanics. Things like a 10% chance when crafting to get a bonus on an item that you'll potentially be using for months. It means that the ramifications of being lucky or unlucky at one moment stick with you and continue to help/harm you for days or weeks of game time. Shadowbane's random prefix/suffix system was incredibly frustrating in this respect, as the chance of getting the exact item you need to complete your build was slim and arbitrary. However, once they made it so that you could use mined resources to force certain prefix/suffix combinations it was fine. You had the choice of either taking your chances or paying a little extra to get exactly what you needed.

Edited by recatek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short-term RNG is fine with me. Things like critical hits and damage ranges. They make individual combat engagements interesting and varied.

 

 

How does the RNG make the engagements interesting? They just do things randomly. As far as being varied, they CAN make it more varied.. but only if the core combat mechanics didn't make the gameplay naturally varied.

 

Look at BattleCon. It's a COMPLETELY 100% deterministic game in terms of ability resolutions and there's no random card draw or dice rolls or anything. Any action you take will always have the same result. It's also turn based... however since the game is SIMULTANEOUS turn based, you need to predict your opponent's tactics and strategy. This creates an extremely engaging and varied experience. You don't need artificial randomness (like crits, special effect procs, random misses/blocks/dodges/ect) to create a varied and interesting fight.

 

RNG doesn't even necessarily make a fight varied. A lot of RPGs have tons of unnecessary RNG but you still end up playing out the same ability cycles anyway. It doesn't really change anything in a lot of cases.

 

 

Simply putting enough depth and counterplay into the game will cause natural variation due to the player's choices.

 

This is the type of combat I want to see in Crowfall. RNG is just a crutch to make a fight "interesting" and "varied" when you failed to make the actual mechanics have enough counterplay to prevent obvious and consistently repetitive interactions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Crowfall's combat is to be skill based, it should not have RNG. Skill based combat means analyzing a situation and choosing the best course of action to turn that situation in your favor. To foster skill based combat, Crowfall should allow its players to learn from their past successes and failures and to apply that knowledge to future situations. This only works if players can clearly see what allowed them to succeed or fail in past situations, and if they can, to some degree, predict the consequences of their actions in future situations. RNG only obfuscates this learning process. For example, someone could blame a lost duel on a lucky crit his opponent had, rather than a mistake that he himself made.

 

One argument in favor of RNG in combat is that it adds variance to what would otherwise be repetitive fights. But Crowfall is a PVP MMO, where we will primarily be fighting players with their own customized characters and playstyles, instead of groups of identical monsters. There will already be a lot of variance from any particular fight to another even without RNG, such as gear and status interactions, along with the fact that no player can predict his opponents' actions completely accurately. Another layer of RNG explicitly coded into the game would make these carefully crafted, deterministic factors pointless.

 

One final argument in favor of RNG is that it gives less skilled players a chance to beat more skilled players, thus keeping the less skilled players interested in the game long enough to become good themselves. But a victory gained through RNG is less satisfying than a victory gained with the knowledge you spent effort to acquire. Besides, a less skilled player can still beat a more skilled player without RNG: we have all had times where, even as newbies, something clicks for a moment and we pull off something amazing. When we understand that something good happens purely due to our skill, unadulterated by RNG, we remember that experience and try to replicate it, becoming better players in the process. And even in defeat, no RNG is still better than RNG. When we lose because of RNG, the game feels unfair. But when we lose in a purely deterministic way, while we still feel frustrated, we understand the game is still fair and we retain our motivation to become more skilled at it. This is why I believe Crowfall's combat should not have any RNG.

Edited by Forest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If Crowfall's combat is to be skill based, it should not have RNG. Skill based combat means analyzing a situation and choosing the best course of action to turn that situation in your favor. To foster skill based combat, Crowfall should allow its players to learn from their past successes and failures and to apply that knowledge to future situations. This only works if players can clearly see what allowed them to succeed or fail in past situations, and if they can, to some degree, predict the consequences of their actions in future situations. RNG only obfuscates this learning process. For example, someone could blame a lost duel on a lucky crit his opponent had, rather than a mistake that he himself made.
 
One argument in favor of RNG in combat is that it adds variance to what would otherwise be repetitive fights. But Crowfall is a PVP MMO, where we will primarily be fighting players with their own customized characters and playstyles, instead of groups of identical monsters. There will already be a lot of variance from any particular fight to another even without RNG, such as gear and status interactions, along with the fact that no player can predict his opponents' actions completely accurately. Another layer of RNG explicitly coded into the game would make these carefully crafted, deterministic factors pointless.
 
One final argument in favor of RNG is that it gives less skilled players a chance to beat more skilled players, thus keeping the less skilled players interested in the game long enough to become good themselves. But a victory gained through RNG is less satisfying than a victory gained with the knowledge you spent effort to acquire. Besides, a less skilled player can still beat a more skilled player without RNG: we have all had times where, even as newbies, something clicks for a moment and we pull off something amazing. When we understand that something good happens purely due to our skill, unadulterated by RNG, we remember that experience and try to replicate it, becoming better players in the process. And even in defeat, no RNG is still better than RNG. When we lose because of RNG, the game feels unfair. But when we lose in a purely deterministic way, while we still feel frustrated, we understand the game is still fair and we retain our motivation to become more skilled at it. This is why I believe Crowfall's combat should not have any RNG.

 

 

I understand this point of view,in fact i also share it to a certain point;you and eluem make pretty valid arguments (far more valid than "it makes things interesting").

In an ideal world you would get critical hits only when you hit weak points,or craft something better only if you did it perfectly (though a minigame or something maybe) but i would like to reming you just how hard is implementing it.

 

A ranger critting someone with a shot on the head is reasonable,even encouraged from my point of view,but what about a guinecean who can barely see the head of that big heavy centaur? No crits for him cause he's smaller?And what about drops from resource nodes and mobs?

You could certainly make mechanichs complex enough to make it work (like fixed drops from specific mobs or nodes and then craft stuff with it) but its a time consuming process,much more so in MMORPGs.

I have no doubt it is possible,what i doubt is if its worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand this point of view,in fact i also share it to a certain point;you and eluem make pretty valid arguments (far more valid than "it makes things interesting").

In an ideal world you would get critical hits only when you hit weak points,or craft something better only if you did it perfectly (though a minigame or something maybe) but i would like to reming you just how hard is implementing it.

 

A ranger critting someone with a shot on the head is reasonable,even encouraged from my point of view,but what about a guinecean who can barely see the head of that big heavy centaur? No crits for him cause he's smaller?And what about drops from resource nodes and mobs?

You could certainly make mechanichs complex enough to make it work (like fixed drops from specific mobs or nodes and then craft stuff with it) but its a time consuming process,much more so in MMORPGs.

I have no doubt it is possible,what i doubt is if its worth it.

 

 

I fully understand the difficulty of creating such systems, I'm actually working on making a game myself (a top down PvP focused melee combat game heavily inspired by Dark Souls).. I agree that creating tons of mini game systems and such for gear can be quite difficult. Randomness in crafting and such isn't as important to me, personally.. However, I have a different feeling from most about vertical progression in general. I don't like it. I prefer diagonal with a heavy focus on giving capabilities/variety instead of raw power. This discussion doesn't belong here though lol so I'll stay off of that.

 

I need to refocus lol, I let myself go onto a bit of a rant. The main thing I wanted to address in your post was the statement about headshots.

 

I don't like headshots. They don't require a tactical or strategic decision (well they do a little bit.. but it can be mitigated by reaction and coordination. The decision is whether or not you want to spend the time and mental energy trying to focus in for the headshot or just go for the quick and easy body shot.. but I don't think it's enough.. especially with how heavily mitigated that decision can be with enough training.. it can get to be almost a non-decision).

 

I prefer "crits" or boosted damage to be based on actual tactics and decisions. Hitting in the back is meaningful. It means that you flanked them or that you evaded an attack and got behind them or something tactical. Hitting an enemy while they're in some vulnerable state.. like while they're winding up an attack and exposed or after they did some big attack like some spin move that leaves them vulnerable for a little bit or if they were hit with a status. Things of that nature.. decisions.. responding to the current state of the fight/predicting what your opponent might do so you hit them during a vulnerable frame.

 

That's key in general, though. Predicting, not reacting... tactics, not hand eye coordination. Those work better in an online game anyway, since there's always lag to deal with. Extremely tight reactions and extremely tight hand eye coordination don't really mean anything when lag is present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess at this point what you are talking about would be more damage multiplier in certain situations (the enemy being stunned for example);i don't dislike that,i love tactical plays and for preparation to be as important or even more important than execution,

I'd love a combat where unit cohesion is vital to winning group fights and while it is true that RNG doesn't really have a role in it the use of it simplifies things so much it becomes what can be called an indispensable tool.

 

On the other hand i'm against the absence of limb and head damage,if you take rng away you need to give lighter type players away to damage enemies withou having to circle over them;i'd love something like adding damage to a limb or body part that is attacked continuosly (something like +10% damage on that part if its been attacked 5 times).

In the end tough,i'm sure that this type of RNG elimination won't happen and even if the DEVs were favourable to it i think they have more than enough stuff on their platter.

I think that we're so used to RNG that by now we don't feel it too damaging to our play style,and as such we take it into consideration with everything we do.

In the end i'd prefer for RNG to stay because i feel that there are more important things to do that would make this game shine,and while something of this scale could make the game better it could also overcomplicate it way too much to be properly balanced.I feel like the trade off to go this way would be too much,thus i prefer RNG to stay in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The systems needed to replace randomness already exist in Crowfall. They're just putting randomness in on top of them instead of fully committing to their awesome mechanics and designs. Random critical hits, on hit procs, and on receive hit procs can all be replaced with simply baking them into the attack chains, relative positioning, cooldowns, resource systems, and other conditions to decide when they should occur.

 

If you really study what the randomness effectively means, you'll see that it doesn't actually add replayability at all. It just adds "static/noise" to the game. Also, if you look closely at what the Crowfall team has already implemented and what they're planning on implementing, you'll see that they ARE building the systems needed to do what I've suggested.... but they're simply throwing artificial randomness on top of it.... and I really don't get why.

 

Maybe, in the end, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this lol. The above text gets the point across just fine, though.

 

Read below if you want a giant rant about the stuff in more detail lol

 

 

There are options other than circling around to cause extra damage. For a lighter unit that has light damage per hit, and a high attack speed... instead of giving them RNG crits, you can make it simply that every 5th hit does extra damage... OR you can have rage-esk mechanics to build up a resource that can be spent on larger attacks.

 

There's just so many options and they're already implementing many of them into the core mechanics of some of the archetypes. I just don't see the value of RNG in the combat. It might be something that most classical mmo players are used to, but it will almost undoubtedly be the reason Crowfall ends up being a passing phase for me (and others that prefer for the interaction between their decisions and their opponent's decisions to be what decides the fate of the combatants) instead of a permanent game for me to hone my skills within indefinitely.

 

I must note, though, that I really think you overestimate the complexity of implementing the systems I'm talking about. They're all pretty straight forward mechanics that are either already in the game to some degree, or are planned on being added in some way or another. It's really just about how the levers and dials are tuned on them and whether or not RNG is just artificially added to muddle the gameplay.

 

They're already implementing status systems, different resource systems per archetype, attack combo systems, ect. All I'm asking is that they simply remove all RNG from the ability calculations and instead, use these systems to balance the archetypes.

 

 

Actually, lets step outside of everything for a quick second though. How is RNG used in combat in Crowfall right now? As far as I can tell it seems to be used in 3 major places:

-Random Critical Hits

-Random On Hit Proc Abilities

-Random On Receive Hit Proc Abilities

 

First, lets look at the random crits. This system is pretty trivially pointless and just reduces the depth of combat without adding anything, in my opinion. Random crits simply add an arbitrary variance to your damage that you're going to be dealing to your enemies. Having a high crit modifier and low crit chance means that you'll sometimes randomly win fights that you wouldn't otherwise. Having a low crit modifier and a high crit chance means that your crits don't really make a difference and sometimes they won't matter at all (since only threshold breaking actually matters... i.e. does it take 10 hits or 15 hits to kill the target.. if i crit every time but each crit only deals +8% damage, i didn't break any thresholds since after dealing 15 hits of crits the crits only added 23% of a hit. Effectively not doing anything for me). If have a low crit chance and a low crit modifier, the crits are really not doing anything at all and they're just there so random numbers can fly off and add nothing. Lastly, high crit chance and high crit modifier is just silly. I'm rambling now.

 

My point is that random crits might seem good because they're everywhere... but they literally only reduce replayability. They reduce the amount that your decisions matter and your decisions are your play. If your decisions matter less, less different plays are meaningful. Many people think that randomness inherently improves variance. It really doesn't automatically do that. It really depends on how you apply it. The static on a TV is random... but it all starts to look the same at some point. This is what critical hits do.

 

 

Now we can look at random hit procs. I'm going to take the random on hit and random on receive hit and bring them together into one, since they're very similar in effect and the solutions are similar. The random proc effects usually have some rather large impact that could potentially actually change the entire experience of the player on the given and receiving end. They can do things like stun/stagger/freeze/burn/ect the opponent. The thing is... these effects really should be handled similarly to the way crits should be. Instead of making them random, put them on specific abilities somewhere in the attack chains or make them require a resource or some build up mechanic.. .or some other conditions. Make them something that the players can play around.

 

 

Edited by Eluem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Eulem

 

Time invested translates into skill, thus people that spend more time in game will be by far inherently ress random in executing their actions than people that are casual. That means that "natual" RNG, resulting from mood, amount of belly fat and keyboard layout will be a significant factor only when two players of comparable skill fight each other.

 

The "arificial" RNG on the other hand will implement an element of gambling, giving even the least able players a chance to win, not big enough to completely offset the skill advantage, but probably significant enough to keep them motivated, read about Pavlov's dog on how that works.

 

Also, you should not compare Crowfall to Chivalry, there people take gratification in victory, here in lewtz and power. I can assurre you that when you get that lucky shot on somebody carrying a fortress deed (or something equivalent), you will have a feeling similar to winning a lottery. 

 

" No one EVER feels GOOD because they won or lost due to RNG. At least, I've never met someone that feels that way"

 

How about poker ?

 

add: Ideally RNG should be somehow implemented in such way, so it is not terrbily obvious.

Edited by rajah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time invested translates into skill, thus people that spend more time in game will be by far inherently ress random in executing their actions than people that are casual. That means that "natual" RNG, resulting from mood, amount of belly fat and keyboard layout will be a significant factor only when two players of comparable skill fight each other.

 

Actually, the natural "RNG" that I was talking about does not result from belly fat, keyboard layout, or any other such factors... I'm talking about the fact that a real time game like Crowfall naturally has simultaneous decisions that occur. Just like in Dark Souls, Chivalry, or any fighting game. In any game with simultaneous decisions to be made, players must predict each other. Top level players tend to attempt to be less predictable while attempting to still achieve a meaningful strategy and apply meaningful tactics. Being predictable in a game like that tends to cause loss... unless the mechanics are lacking so much that there's no way to counter obvious play and there's only a couple of "correct" decisions to make and no alternative strategies to work out due to emergent depth. If the game does have this depth, the natural "RNG" will occur indefinitely. BattleCon is the perfect example of this concept.

 

 

The "arificial" RNG on the other hand will implement an element of gambling, giving even the least able players a chance to win, not big enough to completely offset the skill advantage, but probably significant enough to keep them motivated, read about Pavlov's dog on how that works.

I'm going to split this "sentence" up. You used commas where you really needed periods.

 

"The "artifical" RNG on the other hand will implement an element of gambling"

No, it won't. At least not gambling in any meaningful sense... taking a "gamble" in a game normally means that you should be able to make a calculated risk. You should be able to control when you take the risk and have some decision involved in it. Random crits are something that simply happen when doing ANYTHING during combat. It's not something that you decide you're going to ante up on or fold on. It's just... each hit randomly does variable damage.. just because.

 

Beyond that, with simultaneous decisions between players, you don't need artificial RNG to cause randomness. Both players don't know what the other is going to do (unless the mechanics lack enough depth for there to be meaningful choices to make and there's only one right choice all the time)... so that automatically causes randomness.

 

"giving even the least able players a chance to win, not big enough to completely offset the skill advantage, but probably significant enoguh to keep them motivated"

Again, natural randomness will give bad players enough of a chance to get *close* to winning. That should feel good enough for them to enjoy the gameplay and want to try more and to learn from their mistakes.

 

"read about Pavlov's dog on how that works."

I know about Pavlov's dog experiments.. and this example is actually an invalid analogy. They're not similar concepts. Pavlov's experiments involved providing two separate stimuli, one that caused salivation naturally and another that normally wouldn't cause salivation. By *consistently* (not randomly.. though that's not even the point here.. because this argument was so off base..) providing the stimuli simultaneously, the dog's brain eventually associated both food and the arbitrary stimulus (a bell in his case) with causing salivation. Eventually, Pavlov was able to ring a bell and cause the dogs to salivate without having any food present at all.

 

This argument really has NOTHING to do with the topic. It's a completely invalid analogy.

 

 

Also, you should not compare Crowfall to Chivalry, there people take gratification in victory, here in lewtz and power. I can assurre you that when you get that lucky shot on somebody carrying a fortress deed (or something equivalent), you will have a feeling similar to winning a lottery.

Okay so... here you make three entirely invalid assumptions:

 

1) Crowfall players don't have any desire to take gratification in the intrinsic rewards of enjoying the actual gameplay...and the victories that come from it.. and only enjoy the extrinsic rewards

 

So this is a very silly assumption. If the combat in this game is built well, I'll enjoy winning for the sake of winning. The loot is just a bonus. At least in the PvP. In PvE, I'll most likely be motivated by the loot... but I've play Dark Souls 2 PvP for hundreds of hours and there's no loot to be gained from that and I still enjoy it... and that's an RPG as well. You can have both. You're basically setting up a false dichotomy...

 

 

2) Getting lucky shots to win huge rewards is something that I (and transitively, everyone else in the world) would enjoy

 

I can guarantee you that.. while I might feel a brief sense of excitement if that happened... it'd immediately be followed by a sense of disappointment that I didn't actually EARN my reward.. I just.. got it.. because lol rng... and the person that lost to the rng would feel like CRAP because they'll just be sitting there thinking "I just got SCREWED by the RNG... AGAIN! ...sigh..."

 

 

3) This one is related to a mix of assumptions between your statement above about how you need to be able to get lucky victories and the fact that you're saying that you need to get loot and vertical power progression for gratification.... You're assuming that it's impossible to have partial victories with rewards even if you lose and that you need to be able to win via RNG to be able to enjoy the game if you're bad... because if you always lose because you're bad, you'll never get loot and you'll never have fun (because the only fun is loot gain)

 

So, there are definitely options to allow for partial power progression rewards for fighting, even if you don't win. For example: xp rewards for taking part in a battle, partial xp for kill assists, special achievement rewards for accomplishing specific combat goals (hit two people with your cleave attack twice in 10 seconds)... and tons of other options...

 

 

" No one EVER feels GOOD because they won or lost due to RNG. At least, I've never met someone that feels that way"

 

How about poker ?

Poker is actually mostly about playing against your opponent... it's a common misconception that poker is all about luck. Poker tournaments are consistently won by top tier players. Now, it still has a lot of randomness, and I really don't enjoy it as a game myself.. it just has really dry and boring core mechanics.. but when you give people a set pool of "money" (points) to gamble with, it's mostly about reading your opponent's tells and making calculated risks between rounds. More importantly, though, that's an incredibly invalid analogy. I'm going to make an assumption here.... that you're talking about winning money playing poker, right? Gambling? That's silly... people enjoy gambling because.. well for several reasons.. one is due to an issue with people's inability to properly understand probability due to how counter intuitive it is.... but more importantly... when people gamble, they're specifically going out to do something that is very easy and can possibly, randomly, give them money. They're not going out to enjoy a challenging experience.

 

Poker CAN be a challenging experience, but only within a specific setting with specific rules in place.. and you're not winning or losing in high level poker DUE to the rng, you're winning IN-SPITE of it.

 

 

add: Ideally RNG should be somehow implemented in such way, so it is not terrbily obvious.

Then why even have it? Also, what's your suggestion for "somehow"? I'm providing suggestions for actual solutions. What does "somehow" mean?

 

 

From my perspective, all of your arguments seem to be ill-conceived or flat out logical fallacies, I'm sorry :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eluem makes excellent points. And, unfortunately, most (if not all) of the arguments in favor of RNG's use in player-action-related things keep claiming "RNG is needed because," then simply lost things that RNG does without explaining why it needs to do them or why a different way wouldn't work.

 

In the unconfirmed words of Henry Ford, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said 'faster horses'." (In regard to his development of the automobile). We're so used to random crits and such existing that we want to say doing away with them would be ridiculous. Even though they are measurably unnecessary.

 

I think after roughly 2 decades of MMORPGs, it's about time for an innovation in the ways of gemerating interesting happenings in combat. If the methods of using abilities and the circumstances of battle are complex enough, you can wind up with TONS of outcomes that can be perceived to be just as thrillingly random a an actually-random critical hit.

 

The main things that makes RNG effects exciting are actually just that:

 

1) They're rare. If you got a crit 90% of the time, it wouldn't feel much different than your character simply having a higher damage value.

2) They have an element of mystery. You may know that 1 in 10 of your attacks will crit, but you don't know which attacks.

 

Regarding number 1, if the conditions required for pulling off an effect (even deliberately) are tricky, the execution of that effect is going to be rare. Hell... If you wanted a 10% crit chance, for example, you could instead just give a character a guaranteed critical hit ability that only recharges after every 9 successful attacks. Boom. Same exact rarity, only actually controllable now, so that it could be used to some tactical advantage, deliberately, instead of proc-ing when you got that enemy down to 3HP. Who loves RNG when you've been hoping for a crit for the past 10 attacks, then you hit for 1,000 instead of 600 when your enemy has 3HP left? If the positive instances are doing the job of outweighing the negatives, then aren't we left with 0 net gain? "I punched you in the faceb but I also gave you some pain reliever." ... Great? Thanks?

 

Regarding factor 2 above, as Eluem said, you already don't know when someone's going to block or dodge, or exactly when they're going to give you an opportunity to flank them or apply an effect. There's a person making deliberate decisions for that enemy character, but to you they're functionally random. Look at rock-paper-scissors. Is your enemy gonna say scissors on the 7th go or the 5th? 3 times in a row? Never? Who knows. Do you need a computer to decide these things, or is it okay that it's a human choosing the exact same outcomes?

This post brought to you by...
Lephys. Because everything's better with a smile facepalm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Actually, the natural "RNG" that I was talking about does not result from belly fat, keyboard layout, or any other such factors... I'm talking about the fact that a real time game like Crowfall naturally has simultaneous decisions that occur."

 

My point stands true for any factors, influence of which on the outcome decreases as the amount of time invested by the player increases. People that invest more time will be less variable at making decisions and executing their actions and predicting their opponents in game, same as controlling the effects of their mood and learning to manage their belly fat.  In most games you have mentioned , there are matchmaking systems to compensate for that, so casual players do not meet hardcore opponents, in Crowfall most likely there will be none. Also in the games you have mentioned, gear loss is not a factor, here it will be. that will add signifincatly to the level of dissatisfaction of the significant portion of the player base that can only get "close to winning" but almost never actually win.

 

"No, it won't. At least not gambling in any meaningful sense... taking a "gamble" in a game normally means that you should be able to make a calculated risk."

 

 Gamble noun

6.
any matter or thing involving risk or hazardous uncertainty.
7.
a venture in a game of chance for stakes, especially for high stakes.
 
Yes, it will.
 
"I can guarantee you that.. while I might feel a brief sense of excitement if that happened... it'd immediately be followed by a sense of disappointment that I didn't actually EARN my reward.. I just.. got it.. because lol rng... and the person that lost to the rng would feel like CRAP because they'll just be sitting there thinking "I just got SCREWED by the RNG... AGAIN! ...sigh..."
 
The person that lost massive amount of value will be feel like crap regardless of whether there was RNG involved or not, he will find something lese to blame, be it crappy connection or poor game design. And if you are telling me that you will "feel disappointed" if you happen to acquire massive amount of value via a chance, I can honestly tell you that you are full of poorly made socks.  Irregardless of how weird your perception of reality is 99% of people would normally be very happy with that.
 
"Again, natural randomness will give bad players enough of a chance to get *close* to winning. That should feel good enough for them to enjoy the gameplay and want to try more and to learn from their mistakes."
 
By removing artificial randomness and thus making them lose constantly, you will condition them into negative perception of themselves in Crowfall combat, thus the Pavlov's dog effect. The game will eventually associate with nothing but pain in the ass and they will swiftly move to a game where they will feel themselves more able. I am a bit disappointed I have to explain the obvious.
 
"Poker is actually mostly about playing against your opponent... it's a common misconception that poker is all about luck."
 
Oh really, poker is really about luck, managing uncertainty and understanding of your opponent. randomness is the core element of poker, and if you try to argue that you are totally out of touch with reality.
 
Now really, most of your post is nerdoid shallow minded drivel, a poorly buit structure of pure theory. Bloodline champions removed RNG alltogether and they did not do very well compared to other MOBAs with more traditional mechanics, all other factors set aside absence of RNG is not good for long-term health of the game.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would like to add that most of the time people don't like the removal of RNG simply because they're not used to play without it,and after it is removed they feel bad about it missing,not because RNG is essential or a meaningful mechanic.

The only use RNG has is to simplify gameplay,nothing else.

 

Edit:

If you can't win without RNG,then off you go to another game please.Either get better or stop playing if that feels frustrating for you,don't you dare blame something like the lack of RNG for it.If you NEED RNG to win then clearly you're not playing the game properly.

Edited by Gonfalone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would like to add that most of the time people don't like the removal of RNG simply because they're not used to play without it,and after it is removed they feel bad about it missing,not because RNG is essential or a meaningful mechanic.

The only use RNG has is to simplify gameplay,nothing else.

 

Edit:

If you can't win without RNG,then off you go to another game please.Either get better or stop playing if that feels frustrating for you,don't you dare blame something like the lack of RNG for it.If you NEED RNG to win then clearly you're not playing the game properly.

 

 

There's another purpose to RNG that I didn't think of, actually. I was talking to my friend and he mentioned that it has value in making it so that stats can be more incremental and meaningful.

 

In his example:

If you're fighting something with 100 health, 40 and 45 damage are the same. It takes 3 hits. If you add random crits, depending on how you balance it, you can have some incremental increase in your RNG so that you will kill the enemy in 2 hits some small percentage of time more. So you can extremely gradually gain vertical strength.

 

This isn't ideal for a 90% PvP focused game anyway... the more incremental you make the vertical progression (not that there should be ANY perfectly vertical progression in a PvP game anyway...) The more difficult it will be for players to be fighting on an even basis, where skill is what matters.

 

This is one of the huge issues with Dark Souls 2 having their Soul Memory mechanic. It doesn't match you up based on your level.. but how long you've played (basically)... so eventually you're playing against people that are 200 levels over you. It's very difficult to fight people that have the same exact level as you... ideally in any dueling situation, players will have even stats.. so they can let their skill determine the victor.

 

 

I definitely would prefer for crowfall to have a much more "chunky" progression system with tiers rather than being as fine as possible so that players will be matched more evenly more often...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...