Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Community The New World Design Poll #2: RNG

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,734
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Tags: Iron Tower Studio; The New World; Vince D. Weller

Vault Dweller is running another community poll to help determine a design element of The New World. This one seems likely to be more controversial than the previous one. We've all seen clueless newbies complain about the random number generator in RPGs, especially when they miss an attack several times in a row. Vince is wondering whether he should do something to address such complaints. Before you call heresy, you might be interested to know that The Age of Decadence apparently already did this! But it could go even further. Here's the explanation:

"My THC was 70% but I missed 3 times in a row, which can only mean one thing – the game is horribly broken" is one of the most popular complaints, so let’s talk about it. Let’s start with what 70% THC really means. If you attack long enough, you will reliably hit 70 out of 100 times. It does NOT mean that you’ll reliably hit 2 out 3 times, but that’s what many players expect.

The solution seems to be simple: rig the RNG to deliver what the player expects (or at least avoid what everyone hates – missing 3 times in a row despite seemingly high THC), so I have two questions for you:

1) Should we rig the RNG to meet players’ expectations?
2) If yes, how? Meaning what should we aim it? What outcomes should never ever happen when your THC is 70-80%?

Keep in mind that both your party and the enemies will use the same system. Remember that awesome turn when your enemy missed you 3 times in a row? Well, if you won’t be able to miss 3 times in a row, neither would your enemy. Choose wisely.

While you’re thinking, here is how our RNG works. It draws numbers like cards from a deck, meaning you can’t draw the same card twice until the deck is out of cards and reshuffled. We round up, so if you draw 17, for example, you cannot get numbers 11 to 20 until the deck is reshuffled. This approach ensures that if your THC is 70%, you’ll miss 3 times and hit 7 times. If it's 63% though, you're not guaranteed to get 63 out of 100. Each 10 rolls you'll get 6 guaranteed hits, 3 guaranteed misses and 1 can go either way.

Ideally, your misses would be spread out evenly but as bad luck would have it, sometimes you’d line up your 3 misses in a row and then hit 7 times in a row. Nobody ever complains about hitting 7 times in a row, but missing 3 times does tend to agitate some folks.

To be fair, nobody wants to miss 3 times in a row IF your skill is high enough – this simply isn't fun, especially if the enemy hits you every time. So we can count consecutive misses and once you hit 3, the next roll is on us and it's a hit! The hit card will still be removed from the deck, so you won’t be able to draw it twice, i.e. we will simply spread out your misses evenly but won’t give you free hits or help you win.
So the question is, should the RNG in The New World be adjusted to represent to-hit chance probability more accurately? You can respond to the poll there or right here in our Iron Tower subforum.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,038
To clarify (from another thread):

70% means that if you play long enough eventually you'll hit 70% of the time. The question is how long. 100 attacks? 1000? If it takes a 1000 attacks to achieve that 70% probability, then missing even 100 times in a row is perfectly fine. Bad rolls, what are you gonna do? Needless to say, if a player misses even 20 times in a row with a 70% THC, he will rage quit and will never ever believe that the system worked as advertised (i.e. 70% THC).

We don't fudge rolls (and it's not news either, I explained how our RNG works many times before), we merely reduce the size of the sample to achieve a more or less even distribution of hits and misses. And still way too many people, including those posting on this prestigious site, bitch about missing 3 times in a row, holding that as the ultimate proof that the system is broken.

In The New World it all depends on whatever parameters we'll set. Let's say, if your THC is less than 50%, you can miss as much as you want. If it's 50-64%, you can't miss more than 3 times in a row (i.e. after the third miss you automatically draw a hit card, but it's not a freebie as this card is now removed from the deck). If it's 65-80, you can't miss more than twice, etc. These are random ranges for discussion purposes only.
 

frajaq

Erudite
Joined
Oct 5, 2017
Messages
2,416
Location
Brazil
go with "real" RNG honestly

I mean if some player's party miss like 10 times in a row in a critical fight it's obvious that The New World doesn't want him winning that fight and they should suck it up and reload or give up and refund the game
 

hivemind

Guest
Changing anything is blasphemy unto the church of AoD, and not even you, the prophets, are free from being burned for heresy; tread carefully.

Seriously tho, I think you might as well change it. I personally don't mind having "normal" RNG, but your proposal doesn't seem particularly haram either. For serious players that aren't gonna be butthurt about occasionally getting cucked by RNG nothing really changes and appeasing the borderline retarded that actually use "fake RNG" to complain might just be helpful in the end.
 

deuxhero

Arcane
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
11,494
Location
Flowery Land
Why not make it a character trait or options tick box? Shouldn't be too hard to have an option "Use two Random Numbers" with a tooltip that says "When a random number would be generated, roll twice and average the result. Improves likelihood of succeeding at 51% chance or higher, but increases chance of failure at 49% chance or lower .". It's a fairly simple way to "rig" an RNG that a few games have used (the most documented being a few of the Fire Emblem games.)
 
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
1,301
Grab the Codex by the pussy
Seriously tho, I think you might as well change it. I personally don't mind having "normal" RNG, but your proposal doesn't seem particularly haram either.
b4f.jpg
 

felipepepe

Codex's Heretic
Patron
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
17,285
Location
Terra da Garoa
If this is a problem, can't you just increase the overall THC and reduce the relevance of missing in combat?

People bitch about their characters missing ("OMG, RNG is fucking me!"), but I imagine they don't complain as much about enemies actively avoiding damage by blocking, dodging, having high armor, etc ("oh, this guy is tough!").
 

Sensuki

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
9,809
Location
New North Korea
Codex 2014 Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong A Beautifully Desolate Campaign
I actually don't mind 'rigged' RNG, it works pretty good in Warcraft 3 / DotA.

Eg, if you have a 33% chance to block something, the game will start you out at a lower percentage chance to block the very first time you are attacked, and then increase the percentage on consecutive hits, until the chance to block is 100%, and then return to the lowest value for the next attack. So out of say 100 attacks, you will have blocked ~33 of them.

Would that be good in a turn-based game? I dunno, maybe?

I'm okay with either, but looking at the poll, the Codex at large, says no.
 

Zed Duke of Banville

Dungeon Master
Patron
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
12,061
Two ELIZABETHANS passing time in a place without any visible character. They are well-dressed - hats, cloaks, sticks and all. Each of them has a large leather money bag. Guildenstern's bag is nearly empty. Rosencrantz's bag is nearly full. The reason being: they are betting on the toss of a coin, in the following manner: Guildenstern (hereafter 'GUIL') takes a coin out of his bag, spins it, letting it fall. Rosencrantz (hereafter 'ROS') studies it, announces it as "heads" (as it happens) and puts it into his own bag. Then they repeat the process. They have apparently been doing it for some time. The run of "heads" is impossible, yet ROS betrays no surprise at all - he feels none. However he is nice enough to feel a little embarrassed attaking so much money off his friend. Let that be his character note. GUIL is well alive to the oddity of it. He is not worried about the money, but he is worried by the implications ; aware but not going to panic about it - his character note.

GUIL sits. ROS stands (he does the moving, retrieving coins).
GUIL spins. ROS studies coin.
ROS: Heads.
(He picks it up and puts it in his money bag. The process is repeated.)
Heads.
(Again.)
ROS: Heads.
(Again.)
Heads.
(Again.)
Heads.
GUIL (flipping a coin): There is an art to the building up of suspense.
ROS: Heads.
GUIL (flipping another): Though it can be done by luck alone.
ROS: Heads.
GUIL: If that's the word I'm after.
ROS (raises his head at GUIL): Seventy-six love.
(GUIL gets up but has nowhere to go. He spins another coin over his shoulder without looking at it, his attention being directed at his environment or lack of it.)
Heads.
GUIL: A weaker man might be moved to re-examine his faith, if in nothing else at least in the law of probability.
(He slips a coin over his shoulder as he goes to look upstage.)
ROS: Heads.
(GUIL, examining the confines of the stage, flips over two more coins, as he does so, one by one of course. ROS announces each of them as "heads".)
GUIL (musing): The law of probability, as it has been oddly asserted, is something to do with the proposition that if six monkeys (he has surprised himself)... if six monkeys were...
ROS: Game?
GUIL: Were they?
ROS: Are you?
GUIL (understanding): Games. (Flips a coin.) The law of averages, if I have got this right, means that if six monkeys were thrown up in the air for long enough they would land on their tails about as often as they would land on their -
ROS: Heads. (He picks up the coin.)
GUIL: Which at first glance does not strike one as a particularly rewarding speculation, in either sense, even without the monkeys. I mean you wouldn't bet on it. I mean I would, but you wouldn't... (As he flips a coin.)
ROS: Heads.
GUIL: Would you? (Flips a coin.)
ROS: Heads.
(Repeat.)
Heads. (He looks up at GUIL - embarrassed laugh.) Getting a bit of a bore, isn't it?
GUIL (coldly): A bore?
ROS: Well...
GUIL: What about suspense?
ROS (innocently): What suspense?
(Small pause.)
GUIL: It must be the law of diminishing returns... I feel the spell about to be broken. (Energising himself somewhat.)
(He takes out a coin, spins it high, catches it, turns it over on to the back of his other hand, studies the coin – and tosses it to ROS. His energy deflates and he sits.)
Well, it was a even chance... if my calculations are correct.
ROS: Eighty-five in a row - beaten the record!
GUIL: Don't be absurd.
ROS: Easily!
GUIL (angry): Is the it, then? Is that all?
ROS: What?
GUIL: A new record? Is that as far as you prepared to go?
ROS: Well...
GUIL: No questions? Not even a pause?
ROS: You spun it yourself.
GUIL: Not a flicker of doubt?
ROS (aggrieved, aggressive): Well, I won - didn't I?
GUIL (approaches him - quieter): And if you'd lost? If they'd come down against you, eighty -five times, one after another, just like that?
ROS (dumbly): Eighty-five in a row? Tails?
GUIL: Yes! What would you think?
ROS (doubtfully): Well... (Jocularly.) Well, I'd have a good look at your coins for a start!
GUIL (retiring): I'm relieved. At least we can still count on self-interest as a predictable factor... I suppose it's the last to go. Your capacity for trust made me wonder if perhaps... you, alone...
(He turns on him suddenly, reaches out a hand.) Touch.
(ROS claps his hand. GUIL pulls him up to him.)
(More intensely): We have been spinning coins together since - (He releases him almost as violently.) This is not the first time we spun coins!
ROS: Oh no - we've been spinning coins for as long as I remember.
GUIL: How long is that?
ROS: I forget. Mind you - eighty-five times!
GUIL: Yes?
ROS: It'll take some time beating, I imagine.
GUIL: Is that what you imagine? Is that it? No fear?
ROS: Fear?
GUIL (in fury - flings a coin on the ground): Fear! The crack that might flood your brain with light!
ROS: Heads... (He puts it in his bag.)
(GUIL sits despondently. He takes a coin, spins it, lets it fall between his feet. He looks at it, picks it up; throws it to ROS, who puts it in his bag.)
(GUIL takes another coin, spins it, catches it, turns it over on to his other hand, looks at it, and throws it to ROS who puts it in his bag.)
(GUIL tales a third coin, spins it, catches it in his right hand, turns it over on to his loft wrist, lobs it in the air, catches it with his left hand, raises his left leg, throws the coin up under it, catches it and turns it over on to the top of his head, where it sits. ROS comes, looks at it, puts it in his bag.)
ROS: I'm afraid -
GUIL: So am I.
ROS: I'm afraid it isn't your day.
GUIL: I'm afraid it is.
(Small pause.)
ROS: Eighty-nine.
GUIL: It must be indicative of something, besides the redistribution of wealth.

A 70% chance of success should indicate a 70% chance of success, independent of prior outcomes.
 

Trashos

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
3,413
Just show a worse THC than the true one, and everyone is going to feel OK. I recommend you show -15% for 0-50 (so a THC of 40% shows as 25% in-game), -10% for 51-75, -5% for 76-90 and then gradually take it to -0%. THC 1-15 can be shown as 1-2%.

I am joking.

The AoD system worked well for me, btw. I never noticed the trick described in the OP, and never felt outrageously lucky or unlucky. However, I wish I didn't know, because now I can take advantage of it. Also, this whole thing means that in-game % are lies.
 

Niektory

one of some
Patron
Joined
Mar 15, 2005
Messages
808
Location
the great potato in the sky
To clarify (from another thread):

70% means that if you play long enough eventually you'll hit 70% of the time. The question is how long. 100 attacks? 1000? If it takes a 1000 attacks to achieve that 70% probability, then missing even 100 times in a row is perfectly fine. Bad rolls, what are you gonna do? Needless to say, if a player misses even 20 times in a row with a 70% THC, he will rage quit and will never ever believe that the system worked as advertised (i.e. 70% THC).

We don't fudge rolls (and it's not news either, I explained how our RNG works many times before), we merely reduce the size of the sample to achieve a more or less even distribution of hits and misses. And still way too many people, including those posting on this prestigious site, bitch about missing 3 times in a row, holding that as the ultimate proof that the system is broken.

In The New World it all depends on whatever parameters we'll set. Let's say, if your THC is less than 50%, you can miss as much as you want. If it's 50-64%, you can't miss more than 3 times in a row (i.e. after the third miss you automatically draw a hit card, but it's not a freebie as this card is now removed from the deck). If it's 65-80, you can't miss more than twice, etc. These are random ranges for discussion purposes only.

I have mixed feelings about this.

I don't like when a game is lying to me about the probabilities. I'm not fundamentally opposed to previous rolls influencing subsequent rolls. However, I'd prefer it to be an honest, explicit game mechanic instead of doing it behind the scenes and hiding it from the player, like you're ashamed that you're doing this.

That said, the way AoD does it is subtle enough to not really bother me that much. It's lying, but in a hard to notice way, and it does its job of preventing the worst case scenario. In theory you can exploit it for a small advantage if you know how it works, but you'd have to be fairly crazy to bother to do that. I'd rather not have any more behind the scenes tricks added on top of it though.
 
Last edited:

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,038
I have mixed feelings about this.

I don't like when a game is lying to me about the probabilities. I'm not fundamentally opposed to previous rolls influencing subsequent rolls. However, I'd prefer it to be an honest, explicit game mechanic instead of doing it behind the scenes and hiding it from the player, like you're ashamed that you're doing this.
So when are you being lied to: when your THC says 70% but your effective THC is 50% in your last fight because that 70% was based on a hundred attacks or so not twenty or when your THC is 70% and you know that you'll hit precisely 7 times out of 10?
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
2,071
Location
Siberia
I think the perception of BULLSHIT ARENGEE is mostly molded by how actions work in TB games, take Fallout (proper) as an example, even though there are different firing modes for guns, if the attack misses it misses completely, whether it was a single shot or spray of bullets. I think it would cause much less butthurt if chaining/multiple projectile attacks had their THC calculated for each part of it and not attack as a whole (a.g. you fire 10 bullets, 5 of the miss, but it still feels like a 'win'). Skills that combo suffer from the same issue, if you are not capped on hit chance it can get annoying really quick, D:OS games dealt with it quite nicely with their environmental system, even if you miss the main target with, say a fireball, and they are standing in an oil spill, shit still gets ignited and they still suffer even though the bulk of your damage has been avoided.

So it doesn't really matter how the RNG itself is rigged as long you can give a player (or AI) a lil something something for their troubles. Maybe if skill misses you still get to apply its detrimental effects, but at 50% effectiveness or something like that.
 
Joined
May 31, 2018
Messages
2,573
Location
The Present
You can solve the entire range problem with multiple dice, ala Deadlands. Roll ydx, take the highest.

The 'Y' represents skill/reliability and the 'X' represents ability/magnitude. It solves just about any complaint that can come from a dice system. It also gives you the opportunity for many conditions and dice manipulation. I cannot understand why nobody uses this kind of system.
 

Jaedar

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
9,925
Project: Eternity Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Pathfinder: Kingmaker
No rigging in RNG imo. Even mainstream games like firaxcom only do it on the lower difficulties. It even turned into a meme "miss 99%? that's xcom baby!".

I suspect people complaining about rng are actually complaining about the difficulty.
 

flabbyjack

Arcane
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
2,596
Location
the area around my keyboard
I'm pretty sure one of the RPG lectures hosted by Tim Cain addressed this topic. Part of one proposed solution was to let the first player attack always hit.

Your displayed To-Hit chance doesn't need to be perfectly mathematically accurate. Mathematics shouldn't trump psychology.



At about 25:00 onwards are stories about random to hit, shuffling songs, and random loot. Hint: It's not random.
 
Last edited:

Quantomas

Savant
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
260
Can only repeat what an earlier poster said, make it an option. This way people can form their own opinions and figure out what works for them.
 

Binky

Cipher
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Messages
453
No.

Make the game challenging and complex.

Provide a detailed (but optional) tutorial. Provide a combat testing arena (also optional). Same as in AoD.
Provide hints and tips. Make them visible only if a player checks a box in settings.
And finally, provide a list of console commands. For those who think the game is "unfair". Let them decide what "fair" is.
 

Trashos

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
3,413
So when are you being lied to: when your THC says 70% but your effective THC is 50% in your last fight because that 70% was based on a hundred attacks or so not twenty or when your THC is 70% and you know that you'll hit precisely 7 times out of 10?

Assume you group THC in sets of 10, and at the beginning I have 70% THC. After 9 attacks where I hit 7 and missed 2 there is only one result for the 10th attack: miss, because that's what's left. so the game is showing me 70% for my last attack, but my actual THC is 0% (which the player can calculate, if he knows how the system works).

This logic can be applied to all attacks except for the 1st one of the set. No THC is actually going to be 70% after the first attack, until the set reboots.

That's where the lie is.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
3,144
Your displayed To-Hit chance doesn't need to be perfectly mathematically accurate. Mathematics shouldn't trump psychology.

I have mixed feelings about this.

I don't like when a game is lying to me about the probabilities. I'm not fundamentally opposed to previous rolls influencing subsequent rolls. However, I'd prefer it to be an honest, explicit game mechanic instead of doing it behind the scenes and hiding it from the player, like you're ashamed that you're doing this.

I think a psychology-based approach inherently necessitates lying/obfuscation. The moment a player figures out that 70% means he should stop attacking after 7 consecutive hits because it's pointless to waste three more attacks, the game becomes a bit silly. if the game outright tells you that by displaying 0% for no apparent reason all that happens is that it becomes silly right away.

don't really see the point in bothering with these types of shenanigans, just make near-misses interesting somehow (though not by fudging the distinction between damage and THC via sawyerian "grazes" obvs).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Darth Roxor

Royal Dongsmith
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,590
Location
Djibouti
i heard a few good things about

f a t e p o i n t s

to rig the rng in your favour

just btw
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom