Incline Battle Brothers + Beasts & Exploration, Warriors of the North and Blazing Deserts DLC Thread

[MadMaxHellfire]

i installed legends mod, ranger and druid start, it's a cakewalk.
of course i'm doing something horribly wrong, if only i could discover what it is.

 

[HumanTotemPole]

MadMaxHellfire​

The best, classic so to speak, very early game is chasing thugs and eventually starting to kill small amount of raiders (sometimes mixed with thugs) using knives/daggers to get their armours. Once your party is (mostly) equipped with brigand level stuff - the game opens up, sky is the limit. It is even more important for difficult starting origins. If you played the game so long ago I suggest skipping origins like Cultists, Slavers or Anatomists for the first game in very long time. Take the basic start, "southern classic", Poachers (though they might be hard with low starting funds)... stuff like that. At least that's my advice.

Consider Deserters as a fresh spin on the classic start as well. Good early money to be made murdering trading caravans. You also get 1st turn in every battle and no mood penalty for retreating. Amazing abilities. Every ancient dead retrieve the artifact contract becomes free money with no downside.

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

since when the game cheats? old version didn't, i even beat the orcs invasion after all. here's the problem: my 75% consistently misses half of the time, my 50% is more like 25%, but i've been hit by a 30% four times in a row. multiple times. in the same battle.

 

[Strange Fellow]

Every time someone accuses a game's RNG of being rigged, a beautiful ray of incline pierces the clouds and shines down upon us. Revel in it.

It has returned, my brothers

It's back again. Blessed be, my brothers!

 

[Desmodus Rotundus]

since when the game cheats? old version didn't, i even beat the orcs invasion after all. here's the problem: my 75% consistently misses half of the time, my 50% is more like 25%, but i've been hit by a 30% four times in a row. multiple times. in the same battle.

You have to plan for those misses. Rng will screw you over from time to time, and then some brothers will die. Rotation saves lives, guys on flank need underdog and always expect 3-4 20%-30% to hit in a row. Not that rare. Today a damn wiederganger dodged 4 95% hits, had 3 95% misses in a row in another fight as well and got hit twice in a row on 5%'s. Of course that was with Legends and PTR, late game scaling beggar, I just shrugged and continued the devastation, since nothing hurts him. Had it been a tense fight, I would have called devs all sorts of names in a very angry voice.
But, if you're in a late game and have such low hit chance, then you have been retaining crap brothers. Check out the base stats of different backgrounds(on wiki) and lategame you really shouldn't have damage dealers without good starting stats and stars in the ranged/melee attack. Don't be afraid to fire bros with low potential if you have the funds. Of course now that you are in legends, you can see the stars by trying out brothers so don't hire melee guys that don't have good base stats and also stars in attack and defense as permanent brothes. They can work temporarily if you need fodder. If you have background with big roster size, you can afford to have some dedicated tanks so no need for attack for those, just high defense hp and fatigue. If you use melee in back line, those don't need stars in defense either. But front line damage bros should have stars in both.

 

[oasis789]

Every ancient dead retrieve the artifact contract becomes free money with no downside.

Why is that?

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

there's plenty of games which cheat today. my guess is they're the majority, after all it's a waaaaaay whole lot easier to load the dice than to balance the game. some of them are open with it, some others try to not have the word spread out. you might like a game all you want, but if it cheats it cheats.

 

[rojay]

Wouldn't it cheat like that for the rest of us too, though? Because it's not cheating like that for me.

 

[Modron]

90% of the time someone says a game cheats because they missed 4 75% shots in a row they are just being 'tarded and the math checks out when someone samples a proper amount of attacks. 10% of the time developers make the game cheat in favor of the player by adding bonuses for each subsequent missed attack because modern gamers only want the illusion they are being challenged.

Edit: See Mordheim where some autist went ahead and tested the RNG and it was in fact accurate despite a vocal minority being certain the game was cheating because they missed more than one 95% chance to hit attack in a row.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

there's plenty of games which cheat today. my guess is they're the majority, after all it's a waaaaaay whole lot easier to load the dice than to balance the game. some of them are open with it, some others try to not have the word spread out. you might like a game all you want, but if it cheats it cheats.

t. Gambler's fallacy

 

[HumanTotemPole]

Every ancient dead retrieve the artifact contract becomes free money with no downside.

Why is that?

The "get the item" part of the contract is completed when you enter the location, not after the battle. Means you can field a single bro and start manually retreating on your guaranteed 1st turn. Retreating would normally tank the company's mood but Deserters don't care. Only thing to watch is the renown loss (-15) but if you're in the early stages when you really need the money or aren't ready to fight skeletons then it's a no brainer.

Never try to pick up the addtional weapon if you get that event while doing this. Has a 50% failure chance after which you'll be forced to fight to get the contract item.

 

[Serus]

90% of the time someone says a game cheats because they missed 4 75% shots in a row they are just being retarded and the math checks out when somone samples a proper amount of attacks. 10% of the time developers make the game cheat in favor of the player by adding bonuses for each subsequent missed attack because modern gamers only want the illusion they are being challenged.

Exactly. Claiming that the developers made RNG cheats against the player on purpose is silly. They could make the game difficult in other ways and they don't have anything to win by doing it in secret, only to lose. The reason for RNG working against the player could be a bug. Which, in theory, is possible but unlikely*. OTOH, as you said, there are reasons to make RNG help players. The fun part is, I saw people in a multitude of games always claiming that the RNG is against them, never the other way around. Incidentally, those are always ones struggling with difficulty. It is different only when the knowledge is already in the open, devs admitting to screw with RNG.

I really suggest to read a book or two on human perception and something on probability too. Thinking that one can just casually observe a very limited amount of results selected by one's bias and then make any serious claims about them is nonsense.

*Even the problem with spawning of bros to hire some people reported (if it even exists for real) is most probably not with the RNG itself but with the way game uses it, in this particular case. Whether it is a bug or a feature - it doesn't seem to be aimed to work for or against the player. It says nothing about RNG in combat. That one would have to be: a) bugged and b) bugged in the way to only work against players. As i said before, very unlikely and no proof whatsoever was given. They never are.

 

[Serus]

Wouldn't it cheat like that for the rest of us too, though? Because it's not cheating like that for me.

Yep, that is one of my issues with the "cheating theory". And only strengthens what i said, this is all about bias and without some extensive data all those talks about RNG are always worthless. Just "git gud" or lower the difficulty. The lower ones are here for players too - it's not a Pathfinder game.

 

[vazha]

there's plenty of games which cheat today. my guess is they're the majority, after all it's a waaaaaay whole lot easier to load the dice than to balance the game. some of them are open with it, some others try to not have the word spread out. you might like a game all you want, but if it cheats it cheats.

quell yer butthurting and either git gud at this (admittedly pretty easy, unless you play ironman) game or gtfo. Its a freaking turn based game, doesnt require any hand & eye coordination, or reflexes. Its easy, just use your brain, instead of whining.
Thanks for your attention.

 

[Desmodus Rotundus]

90% of the time someone says a game cheats because they missed 4 75% shots in a row they are just being 'tarded and the math checks out when someone samples a proper amount of attacks. 10% of the time developers make the game cheat in favor of the player by adding bonuses for each subsequent missed attack because modern gamers only want the illusion they are being challenged.

Edit: See Mordheim where some autist went ahead and tested the RNG and it was in fact accurate despite a vocal minority being certain the game was cheating because they missed more than one 95% chance to hit attack in a row.

When it comes to Mordheim. All those people testing the rng did, was throw around thousand rolls into a program, and determined that yes, the average percentage comes to about the same as average projected. They didn't account for player side or the enemies. I did my own math, a bit biased, since I only took those missions where I felt the rng being unfair, to AI direction, but I wrote down every hit, dodge and parry chance for both teams calculated their average and every time, consistently it came up as my team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% worse than it sould and also, enemy team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% better than it should. If those percentages hadn't been so consistently around 10% I would have thought that I just had bad luck, but if it's so random, why was it always in the range of 9-11% on both sides, in all three categories? One would expect streaks of low or high numbers to fluctuate and even if you're hitting worse than projected, sometimes enemy is as well etc. When all you test is total rolls(like the person who's touted out as proof of rng fairness in Mordheim community) and don't account for which team is rolling, then you don't see that, since if enemy rolls get boosted and yours get malluses then it averages out when you lump both teams rolls into your algorithm without accounting for it.
A bit autistic of me but I don't care.

 

[Serus]

90% of the time someone says a game cheats because they missed 4 75% shots in a row they are just being 'tarded and the math checks out when someone samples a proper amount of attacks. 10% of the time developers make the game cheat in favor of the player by adding bonuses for each subsequent missed attack because modern gamers only want the illusion they are being challenged.

Edit: See Mordheim where some autist went ahead and tested the RNG and it was in fact accurate despite a vocal minority being certain the game was cheating because they missed more than one 95% chance to hit attack in a row.

When it comes to Mordheim. All those people testing the rng did, was throw around thousand rolls into a program, and determined that yes, the average percentage comes to about the same as average projected. They didn't account for player side or the enemies. I did my own math, a bit biased, since I only took those missions where I felt the rng being unfair, to AI direction, but I wrote down every hit, dodge and parry chance for both teams calculated their average and every time, consistently it came up as my team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% worse than it sould and also, enemy team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% better than it should. If those percentages hadn't been so consistently around 10% I would have thought that I just had bad luck, but if it's so random, why was it always in the range of 9-11% on both sides, in all three categories? One would expect streaks of low or high numbers to fluctuate and even if you're hitting worse than projected, sometimes enemy is as well etc. When all you test is total rolls(like the person who's touted out as proof of rng fairness in Mordheim community) and don't account for which team is rolling, then you don't see that, since if enemy rolls get boosted and yours get malluses then it averages out when you lump both teams rolls into your algorithm without accounting for it.
A bit autistic of me but I don't care.

So now some devs make their game harder in a secret. To make customers butthurt. Why not add a modifier openly? Who knows. But let's say that they did. They also, by accident, did it in a way needed to prevent discovery in case someone tests it - but only if tested in one particular way. Alternatively, a very smart bug did all that. Call me sceptical.

The method you used doesn't inspire confidence either. "Wrote down"? Like in manually? Unless you are a true autist and was doing it literally for hours that's worth very little. And that assuming there was no bias or error or lack of knowledge involved in the first place.

However, to be fair, the game was based on a tabletop that, in theory, might require balance different from what a computer version might need. People however want fidelity to source material. All that could lead to weird dev's decision, as unlikely as it is. In that case there really was a game with secret RNG changes - to make the game harder. Weird. Those circumstances don't apply to most games though.

 

[Desmodus Rotundus]

90% of the time someone says a game cheats because they missed 4 75% shots in a row they are just being 'tarded and the math checks out when someone samples a proper amount of attacks. 10% of the time developers make the game cheat in favor of the player by adding bonuses for each subsequent missed attack because modern gamers only want the illusion they are being challenged.

Edit: See Mordheim where some autist went ahead and tested the RNG and it was in fact accurate despite a vocal minority being certain the game was cheating because they missed more than one 95% chance to hit attack in a row.

When it comes to Mordheim. All those people testing the rng did, was throw around thousand rolls into a program, and determined that yes, the average percentage comes to about the same as average projected. They didn't account for player side or the enemies. I did my own math, a bit biased, since I only took those missions where I felt the rng being unfair, to AI direction, but I wrote down every hit, dodge and parry chance for both teams calculated their average and every time, consistently it came up as my team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% worse than it sould and also, enemy team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% better than it should. If those percentages hadn't been so consistently around 10% I would have thought that I just had bad luck, but if it's so random, why was it always in the range of 9-11% on both sides, in all three categories? One would expect streaks of low or high numbers to fluctuate and even if you're hitting worse than projected, sometimes enemy is as well etc. When all you test is total rolls(like the person who's touted out as proof of rng fairness in Mordheim community) and don't account for which team is rolling, then you don't see that, since if enemy rolls get boosted and yours get malluses then it averages out when you lump both teams rolls into your algorithm without accounting for it.
A bit autistic of me but I don't care.

So now some devs make their game harder in a secret. To make customers butthurt. Why not add a modifier openly? Who knows. But let's say that they did. They also, by accident, did it in a way needed to prevent discovery in case someone tests it - but only if tested in one particular way. Alternatively, a very smart bug did all that. Call me sceptical.

The method you used doesn't inspire confidence either. "Wrote down"? Like in manually? Unless you are a true autist and was doing it literally for hours that's worth very little. And that assuming there was no bias or error or lack of knowledge involved in the first place.

However, to be fair, the game was based on a tabletop that, in theory, might require balance different from what a computer version might need. People however want fidelity to source material. All that could lead to weird dev's decision, as unlikely as it is. In that case there really was a game with secret RNG changes - to make the game harder. Weird. Those circumstances don't apply to most games though.

When I said I wrote down, I mean I went over battle log, that gets created after every match, wrote down every roll one at a time under applicable category. As in, "my team attacks" got every attacks to hit % value and whether it succeeded(hit, dodge or parry), or missed, same with enemy team, same with both teams dodges and parries. Added all the hit% up and divided by the number of attacks to get average projected hit %. Then added up all the attacks hits and misses, divided by 100 and got 1% value of attacks, then divided total number of hits by value of 1% to get the percentage that actually hit. Same for dodge and parry for both teams.
Like I said I only looked into matches where I felt that percentages were off, in computers favor, not all of them. And this is the result I got. At least I checked into it, you just go, it doesn't make sense for this to be there, so it isn't. Feel free to believe what you want, I don't care, just typed up my experience.
I had time. It was either go back to playing angrily, making mistakes, or cool down and do some research into the rng out of curiocity.

 

[Strange Fellow]

Like I said I only looked into matches where I felt that percentages were off, in computers favor, not all of them.

 

[Desman]

90% of the time someone says a game cheats because they missed 4 75% shots in a row they are just being 'tarded and the math checks out when someone samples a proper amount of attacks. 10% of the time developers make the game cheat in favor of the player by adding bonuses for each subsequent missed attack because modern gamers only want the illusion they are being challenged.

Edit: See Mordheim where some autist went ahead and tested the RNG and it was in fact accurate despite a vocal minority being certain the game was cheating because they missed more than one 95% chance to hit attack in a row.

When it comes to Mordheim. All those people testing the rng did, was throw around thousand rolls into a program, and determined that yes, the average percentage comes to about the same as average projected. They didn't account for player side or the enemies. I did my own math, a bit biased, since I only took those missions where I felt the rng being unfair, to AI direction, but I wrote down every hit, dodge and parry chance for both teams calculated their average and every time, consistently it came up as my team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% worse than it sould and also, enemy team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% better than it should. If those percentages hadn't been so consistently around 10% I would have thought that I just had bad luck, but if it's so random, why was it always in the range of 9-11% on both sides, in all three categories? One would expect streaks of low or high numbers to fluctuate and even if you're hitting worse than projected, sometimes enemy is as well etc. When all you test is total rolls(like the person who's touted out as proof of rng fairness in Mordheim community) and don't account for which team is rolling, then you don't see that, since if enemy rolls get boosted and yours get malluses then it averages out when you lump both teams rolls into your algorithm without accounting for it.
A bit autistic of me but I don't care.

I can't believe people are so bad at Mordheim that they think the computer is cheating LOL.
The game is actually pretty easy if you don't bring your impressive in very hard/deadly missions with random deployment. And no the computer is not cheating you idiot.
Mordheim is way more easy than battle brothers. The real challenge is picking only deadly missions or PvP.

 

[Desmodus Rotundus]

90% of the time someone says a game cheats because they missed 4 75% shots in a row they are just being 'tarded and the math checks out when someone samples a proper amount of attacks. 10% of the time developers make the game cheat in favor of the player by adding bonuses for each subsequent missed attack because modern gamers only want the illusion they are being challenged.

Edit: See Mordheim where some autist went ahead and tested the RNG and it was in fact accurate despite a vocal minority being certain the game was cheating because they missed more than one 95% chance to hit attack in a row.

When it comes to Mordheim. All those people testing the rng did, was throw around thousand rolls into a program, and determined that yes, the average percentage comes to about the same as average projected. They didn't account for player side or the enemies. I did my own math, a bit biased, since I only took those missions where I felt the rng being unfair, to AI direction, but I wrote down every hit, dodge and parry chance for both teams calculated their average and every time, consistently it came up as my team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% worse than it sould and also, enemy team hitting dodging and parrying about 10% better than it should. If those percentages hadn't been so consistently around 10% I would have thought that I just had bad luck, but if it's so random, why was it always in the range of 9-11% on both sides, in all three categories? One would expect streaks of low or high numbers to fluctuate and even if you're hitting worse than projected, sometimes enemy is as well etc. When all you test is total rolls(like the person who's touted out as proof of rng fairness in Mordheim community) and don't account for which team is rolling, then you don't see that, since if enemy rolls get boosted and yours get malluses then it averages out when you lump both teams rolls into your algorithm without accounting for it.
A bit autistic of me but I don't care.

I can't believe people are so bad at Mordheim that they think the computer is cheating LOL.
The game is actually pretty easy if you don't bring your impressive in very hard/deadly missions with random deployment. And no the computer is not cheating you idiot.
Mordheim is way more easy than battle brothers. The real challenge is picking only deadly missions or PvP.

That wasn't because I felt that it was hard, just felt the rolls were off from the projected percentage. And every time I felt that, I was proven right. I didn't lose those missions, there were just more misses from me and hits from enemies than I felt was projected. And the interesting part was, that every time my rolls were about 10% worse and enemy ones about 10% better than the projections. If it had fluctuated more I would have just thrown that to rng being rng. But it was too damn consistent.

Oh and Serus, you asked why would dev do this. Just one simple possibility is that devs found in testing, that AI was too easy, so they nudged the rolls a bit. And people don't like to find out that rng cheats so in that case, knowing might drive away customers. Just a possible answer to your question.

 

[Desman]

Yea dude i will believe you because you have "wrote down every hit" when every veteran 1000+ hours player is saying that the game is fair lol.
The only guys i have seen complaining about the rng are the noobs who don't even understand the rules and are getting murdered by the brain dead AI.

 

[Serus]

Like I said I only looked into matches where I felt that percentages were off, in computers favor, not all of them.

Yep, this translated means the attempt was biased from the get go making any results, let's say less than reliable. Not that they would be worth very much anyway considering the obviously small sample. This is one is a huge lol. I don't even know why i bother participating in discussions about RNG being biased against the player.

I had time. It was either go back to playing angrily, making mistakes, or cool down and do some research into the rng out of curiocity.

The issue is that your "research" is not worth much for anyone who has any knowledge on how stuff like RNG, statistics, perception bias, and how research like that should be done to produce meaningful results. Or even anyone with a working brain.

 

[Reinhardt]

it depends, everyone remembers how that one time rng fucked you in the ass and you lost but no one remembers when rng is for you

 

[vazha]

Aint nobody gonna pay any attenshun to the fact that motherfucker had so much free time he sat his ass down and wrote down the percentages just to check his retard theory, instead of actually playing the game?
God I so envy the retards sometimes.

 

[Sarissofoi]

I for once am inspired by this.
It always amaze me that there are people who take everything that comes from 'position of authority' as holy truth without any questioning and it always amaze me that there are people who start notice things and then start digging things up(with the shovel straight to China) with great dedication and with no looking at cost in time and effort just to get the TRUTH(whatever it is).
Considering that I have my own doubts to the BB RNG I would not dismiss the guy claims. Especially that what BB RNG incidents taught me - it is that method of data collection matter a lot and so basis of this data collection and its interpretation. And of course that some data collection methods and its interpretation(even if they have no real connection to the question) can and will be used against you by midwits who don't even understand the question.

Spoiler

Anyway I bet we can safely assume now who get the Vax and who don't.