I'm not really sure I follow the point of this video. It doesn't seem to be arguing in favor of or against RNG.
RNG in a game like dota exists largely because making most abilities proc every so many attacks gives you too much control over their interactions. In that case, the game (tends to) use pseudo RNG to add some degree of variance to the proc rate.
In general, RNG is perfectly fine in a competitive setting, as long as it doesn't frequently and routinely make calculating odds functionally impossible. Meaning, a good player needs to be able to go into a situation realizing that they might get fucked for their choice, but that the odds are on their side. If you are in the lead, you can force the issue because you aren't penalized for being a bully as badly. RNG lets the underdog have a chance in that situation, while still letting the guy in the lead dictate the terms of the fight.
Good examples would be games like dota 2. Bad examples would be something like bad rats.
I think dota 2 is a bad example of rng, some heroes rely on it to succeed (like in the video) which means lady luck will determine if they will win or not. You can mitigate it by analyzing if the risk is worth engaging in combat or not but the fact that it is a core mechanic on some heroes really makes it bad.
Just saying, but that sniper vs dro clip is an example of extremely low skill play. That has no bearing on competitive play at all.
There's hundreds of gifs and webms floating around of snipers doing crazy stunlocks with autos. That doesn't make the hero any good, and it doesn't make that type of play a routine occurrence. If you are against a hero like sniper, lone druid, etc, and don't play around their proc chances, you deserve to get destroyed by them.
This is something that lower end players consistently fail to do. They consistently make bad judgement calls, and the RNG just amplifies that because they fail to remember the times that it helped them win a fight. They just assume that they could have won it anyways.
Out of all the heroes in DOTA he chooses sniper? Why not chaos knight, who's everything is RNG?
[QUOTE=Tetsmega;46366774]Out of all the heroes in DOTA he chooses sniper? Why not chaos knight, who's everything is RNG?[/QUOTE]
You do not seem to know the prophet of the true RNG Ogre Magi.
[QUOTE={TFS} Rock Su;46366842]You do not seem to know the prophet of the true RNG Ogre Magi.[/QUOTE]What RNG? Ogre is nothing but Pure Skill.
Dota 2 is not a really good example when it mostly uses Pseudo RNG
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;46366696]Just saying, but that sniper vs dro clip is an example of extremely low skill play. That has no bearing on competitive play at all.
There's hundreds of gifs and webms floating around of snipers doing crazy stunlocks with autos. That doesn't make the hero any good, and it doesn't make that type of play a routine occurrence. If you are against a hero like sniper, lone druid, etc, and don't play around their proc chances, you deserve to get destroyed by them.
This is something that lower end players consistently fail to do. They consistently make bad judgement calls, and the RNG just amplifies that because they fail to remember the times that it helped them win a fight. They just assume that they could have won it anyways.[/QUOTE]
While that may be low tier play, it was just illustrating a point. It made it very obvious that sniper won that engagement purely on luck, even to audiences unfamiliar with dota. The point remains true all the same, through all levels of play. Even in professional games, a void dodging a laguna blade can swing the outcome of an entire game, and decide tournament winnings.
And while I have no problem with the RNG in dota, I don't think you can dismiss his arguments based on low tier play. While captains do draft Phantom Assassin knowing that they are going to rely on her crit to win fights, crazy unlucky things do happen. Perfectly winnable fights go disastrously when your carry gets Craggy'd right away, and it would suck to lose a major tournament because of that, and people do have valid reasons to be bothered by it.
And Dota isnt for those people. Games like League have removed most all RNG factors, and that's fine and I understand why that attracts a lot of people. But in Dota your mental calculations become much more complicated, giving you confidence intervals of success for every fight, and in my opinion it keeps the game very interesting and exciting.
Personally, I do not enjoy heavy use of RNG. For me, it is the kind of shit that would take a 5 minute encounter in Pathfinder, and turn it into a 4 hour test of constant fail-rolls, or it is the lucky headshot that you otherwise wouldn't get under normal circumstances. To me it just doesn't feel right to just have something not work when it should, or just have something outright given to me without investing too much effort or concentration. It's a loss of control.
While watching this video, I remembered how a recent update to Wargame: Red Dragon changed ATGM calculation. It made it so manual guided ATGMs would have to roll repeatedly until they reached their target. So say if it said you had a 40% chance of hitting, it would actually be much smaller, as it would keep rolling, requiring you to pass the 40% again and again and again until it either hit or failed. For many, SA ATGMs were ruined and rendered useless, and I don't remember if they ever fixed it or not.
This isn't to say that RNG doesn't entirely have its place. When used responsibly, it is a quick and easy way to simplify an otherwise complicated calculation which would have no visible difference between the two. Say you had to calculate a ballistic trajectory for a sniper round fired at a long range. You could take into account the range, speed, and drop, but there are still unseen factors, such as wind speed, or temperature, or even thermals, which could potentially lead your shot astray. The range, speed and drop could all stay as a constant value, but the windage and the rest could easily and painlessly dip into RNG territory while still allowing the player to feel like they are still in control.
There is nothing wrong with RNG in most PVP games, in moba's it just means you have to incorporate luck in your calculations, you have to include the rng in risk assessment before you engage a fight.
If you are in a situation where you lost because of RNG, it means you willingly took a risk, got the bad roll, and suffered from the results.
Although the rng in dota is so extreme, that you take a risk in pretty much every engagement.
Always a chance Faceless Void dodges every single thing you throw at them.
Couldn't it be argued that the effect of RNG in competitive games has the same effect of the way a deck is shuffled for a card game? You can get a much better hand based on luck alone, but that doesn't win you the round.
In my thousands of games of dota I have only witnessed a handful of moments where RNG won someone a fight, and I've never seen it win someone a match. In most of those engagements the hero is balanced enough to have that risk in check. Faceless Void definitely does not hit the hardest as a Carry. Because of that, it doesn't necessarily feel so horrible when he gets those slim, RNG Backtrack escapes.
Probability should generally be avoided like the plague in any multiplayer competitive game.
That said probability, when repeated enough, kind of ceases to be probability and just becomes statistic. For example, you know not all the bullets of a machine gun will hit your target but you know at least x% will because that's what your experience with the game tells you, therefore you can reliably predict the outcome regardless of random factors.
It's the all-or-nothing kind of probability that's really bad, the ones that can dictate the result of a game over a relatively few arbitrary dice-throws.
[QUOTE=ashxu;46366670]I think dota 2 is a bad example of rng, some heroes rely on it to succeed (like in the video) which means lady luck will determine if they will win or not. You can mitigate it by analyzing if the risk is worth engaging in combat or not but the fact that it is a core mechanic on some heroes really makes it bad.[/QUOTE]
they don't even rely on rng they use pseudo rng where for example axe spinning will occur more if he hasn't spun in a while, and becomes less likely if he spins more to force the intended spin chance
Dota isn't pure RNG anymore since it bumps up the odds of a proc if it doesn't activate. a much better example is X-com who just shits all over you with RNG being complete ass at times.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;46368864]Dota isn't pure RNG anymore since it bumps up the odds of a proc if it doesn't activate. a much better example is X-com who just shits all over you with RNG being complete ass at times.[/QUOTE]
Occasionally-more-favorable RNG is still RNG.
Rather than just arguing about the balance of such an element in a competitive game I think it's best to just remove it entirely and leave everything up to the players and their skills. LoL for example only has one case of RNG IIRC (Twisted Fate's passive, not counting critical hit mechanics), and even that is pretty minimal and only benefitial if the player doesn't suck at lasthitting.
[QUOTE=Manibogi;46369113]Occasionally-more-favorable RNG is still RNG.
Rather than just arguing about the balance of such an element in a competitive game I think it's best to just remove it entirely and leave everything up to the players and their skills. LoL for example only has one case of RNG IIRC (Twisted Fate's passive), and even that is pretty minimal and only benefitial if the player doesn't suck at lasthitting.[/QUOTE]
No RNG is like mashed potatoes without butter.
Sure you can make it good, but you´re missing something essential.
worst part is in competitive melee where peach players pull a fucking bob-omb
fuck you
Real life is too random, we need to raise athletes in the same environment with the same genetics to make everything equal so that only skill is a factor in competitions.
RNG isn't a bad gameplay mechanic, but RNG is a bad mechanic when you're trying to build a competitive multiplayer game.
RNG is the singular reason why games like WoT that rely on RNG for almost everything will never be true competitive games with a big E-sports following. Theres a very low skill ceiling for games like this, and rather than requiring skill, they just require knowledge of the games and it's mechanics rather than talent for the game itself.
I remember the biggest 'RNGesus take the wheel' moment in a game for me was when I was playing Dota 2 as Axe and I was trying to teleport away from a Nyx Assassin gank. He had an ability on that would stun me back(and cancel my teleport and get me killed) if I damaged him and I have a passive ability that can make me automatically counter attack him every time he attacks me. The teleport has a cast time of a few seconds and I was just waiting the duration shouting "Please don't hit him, please don't hit him!"
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;46366654]I'm not really sure I follow the point of this video. It doesn't seem to be arguing in favor of or against RNG.
RNG in a game like dota exists largely because making most abilities proc every so many attacks gives you too much control over their interactions. In that case, the game (tends to) use pseudo RNG to add some degree of variance to the proc rate.
In general, RNG is perfectly fine in a competitive setting, as long as it doesn't frequently and routinely make calculating odds functionally impossible. Meaning, a good player needs to be able to go into a situation realizing that they might get fucked for their choice, but that the odds are on their side. If you are in the lead, you can force the issue because you aren't penalized for being a bully as badly. RNG lets the underdog have a chance in that situation, while still letting the guy in the lead dictate the terms of the fight.
Good examples would be games like dota 2. Bad examples would be something like bad rats.[/QUOTE]
dude, fuck RNG and dota
you do not know what RNG is when you play PA vs void
Void has 2 abilities that give him each 25% chance, which in reality is like 24% or something because of calculations.
PA also has 2 abilities that are based on chance, one of them has 50%, so you can expect it to be a real pain in the ass, and the other has only 15%.
One of void's abilities gives him the chance to evade ANY kind of damage (except if he is scepter doomed or suffering from poison sting damage) and the other gives him a chance of stunning whatever he right clicks on for one second, also dealing extra damage.
One of PA's abilities also works the same way as void's dodge, except it supposedly has a bigger chance of effect (25% vs 50%) and only works against physical hits, so any magical attack will go through her hp easily.
The other ability that PA has is a gigantic critical hit multiplier that goes all the way up to 450%, but only has 15% chances of activating on a right click attack.
What I mean with this is...
I've seen void at lv.2 stunning me RIGHT when he needed (do remember, at lv.2, he can only have 10% probabilities of stunning), just like I've seen him evading [b]5 different attacks on him in a row, physical or magical[/b]
Just like I've used PA, got her evasion ability to the max, and STILL had void hitting me with physical damage, as if I did not have the ability on. He also did not have mkb which negates evasion.
I've also had the not so amazing luck of striking someone 10 times in a row, and not a single critical showing up as PA, and if you don't crit as PA, you're fucked, since its your main source of damage.
In comparison, wraith king also has a critical chance ability, with also 15% chance, and he seems to proc his criticals WAY more times than PA.
RNG is SHIT.
Hell, CS:GO has a load of RNG. You can get those 99 in 1 shots and then get something like 43 in 5 with the same gun later. Plus the 64 tick servers have somewhat of an RNG system if you even hit them or not because you can see your bullets hit on your screen but they don't even register.
[QUOTE=Kentz;46369151]worst part is in competitive melee where peach players pull a fucking bob-omb
fuck you[/QUOTE]
Well the first mistake you did was to play smash competitively :v:
[QUOTE=kiloy;46369449]Hell, CS:GO has a load of RNG. You can get those 99 in 1 shots and then get something like 43 in 5 with the same gun later. Plus the 64 tick servers have somewhat of an RNG system if you even hit them or not because you can see your bullets hit on your screen but they don't even register.[/QUOTE]
That's definitely what it feels like, but I wouldn't say it's actually random.
[QUOTE=kidkiller745;46366859]Dota 2 is not a really good example when it mostly uses Pseudo RNG[/QUOTE]
Why not? It's still RNG. It's just that it's not pure chaos. You can fairly accurately asses your chances of winning a shin kicking contest against another hero at any point. If it's close, you have to make the call as to whether or not it's worth the risk.
Without RNG, you'd be able to determine who wins a fight in far more situations. That discourages risk taking when you are behind, and encourages aggressive snowballing type play when you are ahead, which tends to favor more stagnant gameplay.
I'd say that's RNG done right. Sure there are a few edge cases where it can completely flip the game state, but those are very, very rare.
[QUOTE=kiloy;46369449]Hell, CS:GO has a load of RNG. You can get those 99 in 1 shots and then get something like 43 in 5 with the same gun later. Plus the 64 tick servers have somewhat of an RNG system if you even hit them or not because you can see your bullets hit on your screen but they don't even register.[/QUOTE]
thats not rng, thats bad netcode/latency/tick rate
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46369839]thats not rng, thats bad netcode/latency/tick rate[/QUOTE]
I know that end part about the shitty servers isn't rng but the fact that you can do something like 68 damage in 4 to a guy hitting his torso then when he is using the same loadout as you can do 102 in 3 to you without headshots
[QUOTE=kiloy;46369449]Hell, CS:GO has a load of RNG. You can get those 99 in 1 shots and then get something like 43 in 5 with the same gun later. Plus the 64 tick servers have somewhat of an RNG system if you even hit them or not because you can see your bullets hit on your screen but they don't even register.[/QUOTE]
that's the exact opposite of RNG
[editline]30th October 2014[/editline]
damage values in CS:GO are pre-determined. what is RNG in CSGO is bullet spread (not pattern)
He says FPS games use RNG in their firing, but most FPS games haven't used cone based RNG spread since Battlefield 2. In CSGO, Battlefield, and Call of Duty all weapons have distinct firing patterns which you can learn and get used to. That's not to say they have the exact same recoil every time, but if you sprayed in to a wall ten times it would look extremely similar nine of those times, with the tenth only being slightly different.
Then there's also fighting games, which he didn't bring up, where RNG is to be avoided at all cost.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
