Community The New World Design Poll #2: RNG

[Tigranes]

If I miss, I miss, and if the system is transparent and consistent, then I know that any rage is my own failing, not the program's. Anybody who doesn't understand that should grow up, not demand fudgy rolls.

I do see the point about different ways to design the said consistent and fair system. I don't think it should be driven by "how many times in a row can I miss", that's just how probability rolls, and if I found out that every first hit, or every hit after 3 misses, is guaranteed to hit, that would set up some degenerate metagaming as well. I think it suffices to, say, get a 70% from rolling 10 times, not 100 or 1000.

 

[Trashos]

I agree that 10 might be too small a set. I was thinking 20 but 30 might work too.

The smaller the set, the more you avoid streaks of consecutive misses. But also, the smaller the set, the bigger the difference between actual % and shown %. So I guess you have to nail the perfect trade-off. Yes, 10 is too small, definitely so now that we know what to look for. (hint: 20 would certainly work, if we didn't know about this trick)

But do you also expect to miss 3-4 times in a row with a 70% THC while taking damage every time the enemies attack? The question isn't about statistic or probabilities but combat design.

Yes, I normally expect that this will happen at some point. The better my %, the less probable that it is going to happen. On the other hand, I won't necessarily notice it if it doesn't happen, as evident by my AoD experience. So I understand what you are trying to achieve.

Depends on what THC is. If we take it as your average from 10 or 20 attacks, it's deadly accurate. To have 70% THC, you MUST miss 30%, otherwise your effective THC is 100%. Consecutive misses are a separate issue here. The most important one is representing your THC is accurately. If there's no practical difference between 50 and 70% because "the only truly correct answer is infinite", then raising combat skills from let's say 3 to 4 becomes kinda meaningless, UNLESS it increases your batting average in the course of one fight not the entire game.

Well, you almost got it in your last sentence. Having a small/moderate increase in THC necessarily means that the effect is bound to be "visible" over the course of the entire game, and probably not in the next fight. That's how probabilities work (when they are non-conditional, ie when the result does not depend on previous results -and probabilities are supposed to be non conditional unless otherwise specified). So the goal of the player is to get his THC moving in the right direction, that's all he can do with small changes.

I understand that you don't like this in the context of combat design. OK, maybe I am not a huge fan of it either, which is why I also play deterministic games like chess, but it is what it is. And gamblers (which I am not, and apparently you are not either) love it.

I have never studied this problem deeply in the context of RNG combat design, but two solutions I have happened to come across are the following (in case you are interested):

1) the Baldur's Gate 2 solution. The combat is RNG but also puzzle-like. So the true solution to an encounter is having Plan A, if that fails then Plan B, if that fails Plan C etc. The wealth of options makes this possible, and it is also a lot of fun and very satisfactory (for a nerd like me) to study the system in order to come up with my plan... D or whatever. You do need a very rich system to pull this off.

2) the Legend of the Void 2 solution (flash turn-based game). The RNG is quite random in the beginning, but then you grow in levels and carefully design your builds, and by the end of the game the enemy cannot hit a well-designed party almost at all (by that point the enemy can only hit one of the tanks, but tanks can take a lot of punishment and they are not really in danger if the player knows what he is doing). The satisfaction here is that you have mastered the system, you 've built great defense, and then you enjoy the results. You still need to have your eyes open, because some enemies come up with weird offensive tricks that you need to reply to effectively.

PS. The reason why conditional probabilities are not an official thing, is that they are very hard to calculate for the layman. They are often hard to calculate for trained people too, mind you.

 

[Drowed]

You're having a shootout with a mobster and suddenly he runs away; you'd assume that has a reason and not just him sensing his "luck-fatigue" setting in.

You don't think that a mob running because of his "luck-fatigue" is interesting? I sure do. And it is a reason. I find it amazing and fun when the opponents in a game are as aware of the rules that govern the results as the human players. I mean, we always use the mechanics of the game in our favor, shouldn't the opponents do the same? When this happens, it's quite curious, causing that feeling of "I see what you did there, you smart bastard".

but they are more realistic on a psychologic level.

I wouldn't use the word 'realistic' here. I would say they are more 'pleasant' or 'satisfying', maybe. And for many people it must be like that, yeah, but not everyone. It all depends on what target audience VD is trying to reach.

 

[gaussgunner]

gaussgunner The point here is that each event has a different probability affected by the previous act. They are interconnected. Depending on the person, three misses practically ensure that the next attempt will be a miss.

Boxers don't give up after missing 3 punches. They give up when the other guy knocks them the fuck out. Lots of sports and fights are like that. It's hard to get a ahead but you only get demoralized when you're losing by a landslide.

Not that that's a good model for TB RPGs. Swinging and missing all the time does get boring. But don't eliminate randomness; that makes it a glorified chess match. Use status effects to model the effect of previous events on your current THC.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

If I miss, I miss, and if the system is transparent and consistent, then I know that any rage is my own failing, not the program's. Anybody who doesn't understand that should grow up, not demand fudgy rolls.

If I can't carry that weight, I can't. Developers shouldn't implement inventories that are like a wharehouse because people want to carry tons of loot.

If I don't have pen and paper, I can't take notes of quests and locations. Developers shouldn't implement journals and maps because players are too lazy to take notes on their own.

If this line of criticism against inventories, quest journals and maps is silly, what makes you think that yours is any different? Good game design also involves abstractions and simplifications intended to ensure quality of life.

 

[Mr. Hiver]

Changing consecutive misses into a sure shot on the next try would be dumb and contrary to what RPGs core features are.

All that needs to be done is lower or fudge possibilities of repeated consecutive misses at high THC.
Its not a problem if i miss three times in a row once or very rarely. But if it keeps repeating over and over - while it does not happen at lower THC then there is an fing serious problem somewhere.
In my experience, playing DoS (where it was most obvious) missing three times in a row was practically guaranteed at 71 or 73 % THC.
Over ten combat encounters where my THC towards enemies was at that level i would have such consecutive misses 6 or seven times out of ten. And thats not hitting 70% of the time.

While i would never have such consecutive misses at 60 or even 50-55%. And i especially didnt have repeated consecutive misses.

So... lets say, as you increase your THC you get a small boost of some kind that prevents repeated consecutive misses.

On the other hand, showing that the miss was actually caused by the enemy defense action would also help a lot. Because then its not "my miss" but enemies actively defending or dodging.

 

[Tigranes]

If I miss, I miss, and if the system is transparent and consistent, then I know that any rage is my own failing, not the program's. Anybody who doesn't understand that should grow up, not demand fudgy rolls.

If I can't carry that weight, I can't. Developers shouldn't implement inventories that are like a wharehouse because people want to carry tons of loot.

If I don't have pen and paper, I can't take notes of quests and locations. Developers shouldn't implement journals and maps because players are too lazy to take notes on their own.

If this line of criticism against inventories, quest journals and maps is silly, what makes you think that yours is any different? Good game design also involves abstractions and simplifications intended to ensure quality of life.

Listen, just because the words kind of sound the same, doesn't mean they're exactly comparable. I know it's difficult...

I would explain that I'm totally fine with pursuing alternative ways to design the system, and that I'm simply not a fan of the "but I shouldn't miss x times in a row" sentiment guiding that design... but, I said that already, didn't I?

 

[Drowed]

If I can't carry that weight, I can't. Developers shouldn't implement inventories that are like a wharehouse because people want to carry tons of loot.

If I don't have pen and paper, I can't take notes of quests and locations. Developers shouldn't implement journals and maps because players are too lazy to take notes on their own.

If this line of criticism against inventories, quest journals and maps is silly, what makes you think that yours is any different? Good game design also involves abstractions and simplifications intended to ensure quality of life.

I don't even know how you can say that these examples are all about the same thing. Apples and oranges here, dude, the hell.

In the example of the inventory you speak of an abstraction in the ability to store items (which is a matter of gameplay vs verisimilitude), in the second example of the journal you speak of a question of usability and practicality (something quite different in nature from the first example), and then you compare this with the mathematical question of THC (which is also of a completely different nature). I cannot even understand how you managed to mix the three issues in your mind.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

I don't even know how you can say that these examples are all about the same thing. Apples and oranges here, dude, the hell.

In the example of the inventory you speak of an abstraction in the ability to store items (which is a matter of gameplay vs verisimilitude), in the second example of the journal you speak of a question of usability and practicality (something quite different in nature from the first example), and then you compare this with the mathematical question of THC (which is also of a completely different nature). I cannot even understand how you managed to mix the three issues in your mind.

A: The THC formula is correct because is based on probability and any complaints are unjustified because that’s how these things work. Learn the system instead of crying about bad rolls.

B: But changing THC to make it less frustrating is an abstraction to improve quality of life. It is not different than adding an inventory that works like a personal warehouse or a quest journal. You make different choices to improve quality of life.

 

[Vault Dweller]

If I miss, I miss, and if the system is transparent and consistent, then I know that any rage is my own failing...

But it's not your failing because you aren't the one rolling the dice. If you missed because your skill is low and/or your character build is weak, that's on you. If you did everything 'right', raised your THC to 80%, then missed 3-4 times in a row, that's not your own failing.

I do see the point about different ways to design the said consistent and fair system. I don't think it should be driven by "how many times in a row can I miss", that's just how probability rolls, and if I found out that every first hit, or every hit after 3 misses, is guaranteed to hit, that would set up some degenerate metagaming as well. I think it suffices to, say, get a 70% from rolling 10 times, not 100 or 1000.

First, if your skill is low, you can miss as much as you want and then some. We're talking about adjusting streaks only for high THC rolls. Second, I don't see how you can metagame it. Let's say after 3 misses you know that you'll hit. If your THC is 70% or higher, you'd better fucking hit something after 3 misses. How are you going to exploit? You can't attack air. While you're missing left and right, you're taking damage. This 4th hit isn't some freebie to be exploited but a long overdue hit not because you're special but because your THC is high enough.

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

If your THC is 70% or higher, you'd better fucking hit something after 3 misses. How are you going to exploit?

maybe you were otherwise planning on doing a 40% aimed attack, or using items or whatever, but knowing that you have a 100% bonus card lying around you of course use that instead. It's not a huge leap from 70 to 100 but it's still a free bonus that gives it an obvious legs up over non-bonus options.

 

[Zed]

I'd be cool with sequential misses increasing hit%. for each time I miss an attack, I learn how the enemy moves, how he defends. to me it makes sense if it becomes easier to hit an enemy over time. 70% *miss* -> 75% *miss* -> 80% *hit* -> 70% again, repeat. this handicap should release on target change, though.
there's still a chance of very unlucky streaks, but they should be diminished quite heavily by the above logic.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Trashos]

If your THC is 70% or higher, you'd better fucking hit something after 3 misses. How are you going to exploit? You can't attack air. While you're missing left and right, you're taking damage. This 4th hit isn't some freebie to be exploited but a long overdue hit not because you're special but because your THC is high enough.

It is not a freebie, but it's still exploitable. Assume my health is low and it is my turn. I can retreat to reduce the opponents' attacks/round or can take a chance to try to kill him right away (assuming I can oneshot him). If I have 70% THC (and that's all I know), it is a difficult call and it depends on other options I have or don't have (drink health potion, escape, retreat behind my teammates etc). But if I know for sure that I am going to hit (due to knowing the previous rolls), the situation is entirely different and it's an easy call.

if 3 misses in a row frustrate player, imagine how much they should frustrate PC. Each miss in a row should decrease your hit chance

This is only going to lead to fights going continuously uphill/downhill depending on what happens on the first rolls. It is the exact opposite of what we are debating here.

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

I started feel like people who against rigged RNG is somekind BDSM cultist, who love blame themselves in any game design flaw, because it's make them feel "hardcore gamers"(C) while they suffer from misses 3 or more times in row.

I'd be cool with sequential misses increasing hit%. for each time I miss an attack, I learn how the enemy moves, how he defends. to me it makes sense if it becomes easier to hit an enemy over time. 70% *miss* -> 75% *miss* -> 80% *hit* -> 70% again, repeat. this handicap should release on target change, though.
there's still a chance of very unlucky streaks, but they should be diminished quite heavily by the above logic.

Now this solution of the problem much better and interesting, than just "dying because 3 misses with same possibility is more interesting, than playing game"

if 3 misses in a row frustrate player, imagine how much they should frustrate PC. Each miss in a row should decrease your hit chance

Yeah and sniper with most accurate riffle in game after miss on 95% should have 80% and then 70% etc on same distance. People what the fuck is wrong with you? Stop this posers bullshit, rooting for rng not make you hardcore gamers, it make you a pain enthusiast, who love suffer and dominated by computer analogy of dices.

 

[Vault Dweller]

If your THC is 70% or higher, you'd better fucking hit something after 3 misses. How are you going to exploit?

maybe you were otherwise planning on doing a 40% aimed attack, or using items or whatever, but knowing that you have a 100% bonus card lying around you of course use that instead.

First, you've earned this card with 3 misses despite your high skill, meaning investment and planning that didn't bear any fruits. Second, we'll use different decks for different attacks.

 

[Drowed]

But changing THC to make it less frustrating is an abstraction to improve quality of life. It is not different than adding an inventory that works like a personal warehouse or a quest journal. You make different choices to improve quality of life.

It is. It is completely different in every possible sense of analysis. I will assume that you are not doing a scarecrow on purpose, and that you just didn't think about it, and I'll try to explain why your comparison is completely misplaced.

• A) About the inventory

Inventory is a gameplay issue. The presence of an inventory capable of storing objects has a practical effect on the likelihood and setting of the game. It involves practical questions, which arise from doubts such as "where these objects are stored", or "who is carrying it and how". Because of this, different games offer different solutions for this. Some offer the famous solution of a "Tetris inventory", where each object occupies a certain size and number of squares, and all must fit within a specific space. Other games ignore this completely by considering only the weight of the objects.

In one way or another, the inventory question is an abstraction because of a simple matter of functionality: to create a realistic way of calculating the space occupied by objects would be an extremely complicated question to represent within a game and would add almost nothing productive to it. Nobody has ever found a solution that is both elegant and functional. So that's why it has changed little from the first CRPGs to modern iterations.

AKA: It's a gameplay vs believability issue.

• B) About the journal

The journals and "automaps" are essentially an interface choice. In most games, they don't represent something that actually exists within the game world, but rather are tools offered to the player. They usually exist out of the game itself. Just as the red circles representing opponents aren't really seen by enemies themselves, the journals on which the quests are written often don't quite represent what exists in the game. More than that, journals aren't tools that modify the gameplay of the game itself, but the interaction between player/world. The fact that your inventory is full forces you to make a practical decision in the game world: do you throw an object away, or do you ignore the new object found? There are practical decisions that need to be made that actually affect what you are playing directly.

In the case of the journal or a map, it's not a question of gameplay choice, but reducing the work of the player. The player could make maps manually or write in a notebook the details of the quests, as many did in the first RPGs that did not have such maps. But this doesn't directly interfere with the game world itself, direclty, it's something that exists in the interface. The existence or absence of these functions would only transfer the work to the player himself.

AKA: It's a interface/mechanics issue.

• C) About THC

The choice of how the game will handle THC is a matter of design. It directly alters the outcome of battles and actions, it literally represents the characters' ability to interact with the world around them. Also, there is a nomenclature question: calling it "70% THC" would be simply wrong if that percentage doesn't actually represent a percentage, but follows some kind of hidden decks mechanic. Expressing honestly the mechanics of the game is a matter of clarity.

AKA: It's a design and clarity issue.

----

The fact that you seem to be unable to realize the obvious difference between these three issues is, at least, disturbing. At best, it shows that you aren't someone who is really capable of analyzing issues logically and objectively, which is already bad. At worst, you are intentionally diverting the subject.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Delterius]

I don't see anything wrong with your actions, nor with the reactions thereof. Only a lack of confidence.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

bunch of irrelevant trivial shit

THC can also be interpreted as a gameplay vs believability issue, because people tend to have misconceptions about probability. The design of Inventory, maps and THC formula are all determined by quality of life of gameplay. That's self-explantory and I will not waste my time trying to explain this because of your ego.

 

[Drowed]

Ok, yeah, you're just dumb. Good to know.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

What exactly is the intent behind rigging the THC?

If it's about making the combat easier, then no, and go fuck yourself.

If it's about making the combat easier to understand? I don't have a problem with that at all. As long as you make the necessary adjustments to increase the difficulty on the enemy side, obviously.

THC has been a contentious issue since forever, and even experienced vets from this prestigious forum aren't immune to fits of rage when unlucky run of misses happens. Even if they have a decent understanding of probability and expected value and so on.

Might just as well do away with it entirely, it serves no purpose other than to piss people off.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

Ok, yeah, you're just dumb. Good to know.

Deluded and egocentric.

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

What exactly is the intent behind rigging the THC?

If it's about making the combat easier, then no, and go fuck yourself.

If it's about making the combat easier to understand? I don't have a problem with that at all. As long as you make the necessary adjustments to increase the difficulty on the enemy side, obviously.

THC has been a contentious issue since forever, and even experienced vets from this prestigious forum aren't immune to fits of rage when unlucky run of misses happens. Even if they have a decent understanding of probability and expected value and so on.

Might just as well do away with it entirely, it serves no purpose other than to piss people off.

As much as I can understand (If understood devs intentions incorrect, fix me later) it's about making combat more logical for people, with less retarded situations when you doing all according manuals/common sense/rules of game and it's not fucking work as intended because THC decided that you cannot hit target in 4m from you not because your build/gear/weapons or enemy's armor/immunitiy/cover, but because RNG algorithm decided that THESE 5 SHOTS will be miss 5 times in row.

Spoiler

 

[Raapys]

One way of approaching it would be to make every attack into multiple smaller attacks. You attack once with 70% thc, character strikes three times each with a 70% chance. You're gonna stay much closer to the average. Of course, this changes the balance quite significantly in cases of flat damage bonuses/reductions.

That's ultimately what it comes down to though, the importance of any single hit/miss. The more important it is, the more annoying a bad roll gets. If hitting once wins you the match, then your to-hit chance ~ your chance to win. And vice versa with taking hits and losing. On the other hand, if you just lower damage(or just increase hp) so much that it averages out anyway, combat becomes long and boring.

I think finding a good balance on this is a better solution than doing weird things with the RNG though.