Jump to content


Remove RNG.


  • Please log in to reply
217 replies to this topic

Axelfoley666 #1 Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:01 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21941 battles
  • 413
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

If they removed RNG would it just not come down to player skill? Why do we need the random shot hitting the moon even though you may have the most accurate gun in the game and a 6 skill crew with a perfectly aimed shot?

 

Discuss. 

 

Tin foil hats optional. :deer:



OreH75 #2 Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:07 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 46889 battles
  • 1,963
  • [RANGR] RANGR
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013
So we all get  a chance to carry sometimes...

Enforcer1975 #3 Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:11 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20480 battles
  • 10,537
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
We need rng so bad players have a chance against better players...not the other way around.

TungstenHitman #4 Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:26 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20662 battles
  • 3,804
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostAxelfoley666, on 09 January 2018 - 09:01 PM, said:

If they removed RNG would it just not come down to player skill? 

 

When I press the 2 key it definitely takes skill.



Slyspy #5 Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:28 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14193 battles
  • 16,542
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011
Without RNG the game would lack jeopardy. 

_T_1_T_4_N_0_ #6 Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:32 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28997 battles
  • 1,114
  • [SQCI] SQCI
  • Member since:
    02-17-2015
I would like to see RNG reduced at battle tiers 9, 10 & 11.

Currently its so high it negates the fairly close dispersion values of higher tier tanks where actual pens of T9 & T10 has much less correlation to high accuracy.
When your disp gets near to the .25 RNG it becomes often about RNG than accuracy.
Maybe even if its only +-20% RNG

Edited by DumbNumpty, 09 January 2018 - 10:35 PM.


fighting_falcon93 #7 Posted 09 January 2018 - 10:44 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 29733 battles
  • 3,429
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostAxelfoley666, on 09 January 2018 - 10:01 PM, said:

If they removed RNG would it just not come down to player skill? Why do we need the random shot hitting the moon even though you may have the most accurate gun in the game and a 6 skill crew with a perfectly aimed shot?

 

Discuss. 

 

Tin foil hats optional. :deer:

 

Because in WGs vision of the game, the n00bs need to be able to win sometimes aswell. So instead of getting better at the game, they just continue running around like zombies and eventually RNG smiles at them and give them an epic victory, and then they feel proud of themselves and continue to play like crap for another 500 battles.

 

I fully agree with you that RNG should be removed or atleast greatly decreased, but since WG insists on the above, I doubt it will ever happen :(



Agent_327 #8 Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:02 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16591 battles
  • 393
  • [CAF] CAF
  • Member since:
    09-20-2010
RNG should not be removed from the game as it represents the stress the gunner is under, imperfections in the gun and sighting equipment.

fighting_falcon93 #9 Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:12 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 29733 battles
  • 3,429
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View PostAgent_327, on 09 January 2018 - 11:02 PM, said:

RNG should not be removed from the game as it represents the stress the gunner is under, imperfections in the gun and sighting equipment.

 

:facepalm:

 

- The stress of the gunner is YOU. It's up to the player to aim better, not some dumb RNG.

- Imperfections in the guns are so small that you'll hardly notice it at 300-500 meters. It's not like imperfections in your gun make your shell miss the entire tank at 300-500 meters...

- Sighting equipment where quite decent during WW2, look up at what distances Tiger tanks landed kills from, and compare that to the distances in this game...


Edited by fighting_falcon93, 09 January 2018 - 11:14 PM.


Agent_327 #10 Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:20 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 16591 battles
  • 393
  • [CAF] CAF
  • Member since:
    09-20-2010

There is a gunner in most tanks in wot. He apparently does not always shoot as precise as most players do. That precision can be improved by increasing his skill but he still misses from time to time. Wot is not a simulation game so what sighting equipment and quality of guns where at any point in history is hardly relevant to the game. (I was simply stating what meaning I think RNG has in the game)

I think that the skill of your gunner should stay relevant and are therefore not positive towards removing RNG. I think it evens out much of the difference in skill that players have and that is all in all healthy for the game.

 

 


Edited by Agent_327, 09 January 2018 - 11:23 PM.


YuSless #11 Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:24 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 28145 battles
  • 76
  • Member since:
    01-31-2014
Is RNG distance dependent? It seems to me that a curve of some sort could be applied so that over a certain far distance is max RNG and under a certain close distance (maybe 50m) it's decreased to whatever minimum value is set, so that you don't get hose silly scenarios of shooting point blank and it still shoots high/low.

Archaean #12 Posted 09 January 2018 - 11:27 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14990 battles
  • 1,167
  • [S4LT] S4LT
  • Member since:
    04-25-2015

can't they just decrease rng at fully aimed guns? 

for example:

leopard has 0.3 dispersion at 100 m - increase it to 0.35 while moving (turret or tracks) but reduce it down to 0.15-0.2 while fully aimed.

 

Similar with other tanks.



call_me_ShockZz #13 Posted 10 January 2018 - 12:00 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16920 battles
  • 262
  • [WEBAN] WEBAN
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

removing it entirely wouldnt be that great because -> take a Caernarvon and a KV-4, that would be 280x6 and if you get the same dps all the time you would leave the KV-4 on 20 hp all the time.. annoying right? 320x5 is exactly the amount of HP the Caernarvon gets.. Now tell me wouldnt you prefer some RNG in this situation? They should reduce it but not remove it entirely thats for sure

 

 

 



malachi6 #14 Posted 10 January 2018 - 12:33 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 49222 battles
  • 3,232
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
It's a form of gambling.  RNG gives us a chance to succeed when we should fail and a chance fail when we should succeed.  Problem being of course, that positive RNG is seen as skill.  While negative is the game out to get us.

Edited by malachi6, 10 January 2018 - 12:33 AM.


znapper74 #15 Posted 10 January 2018 - 12:43 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 10681 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    02-20-2016

Pf, RNG gives you a randomized hit/miss and thus it remove everything that is related to skill and hands it to chance.

 

Remove RNG and fix the MM, then it would be skill-based

 

Edit: This goes for fully aimed shots.


Edited by znapper74, 10 January 2018 - 12:50 AM.


fighting_falcon93 #16 Posted 10 January 2018 - 12:46 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 29733 battles
  • 3,429
  • Member since:
    02-05-2013

View Postcall_me_ShockZz, on 10 January 2018 - 12:00 AM, said:

removing it entirely wouldnt be that great because -> take a Caernarvon and a KV-4, that would be 280x6 and if you get the same dps all the time you would leave the KV-4 on 20 hp all the time.. annoying right? 320x5 is exactly the amount of HP the Caernarvon gets.. Now tell me wouldnt you prefer some RNG in this situation? They should reduce it but not remove it entirely thats for sure

 

I agree with you regarding the HP. HP could be something like +/- 10%. But penetration and accuracy should be completely or atleast mostly removed :great:



Enforcer1975 #17 Posted 10 January 2018 - 09:03 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20480 battles
  • 10,537
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

Here's an old video explaining why there is RNG on penetration. Jump to 0:50


Edited by Enforcer1975, 10 January 2018 - 09:05 AM.


Axelfoley666 #18 Posted 10 January 2018 - 09:49 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 21941 battles
  • 413
  • [TWD] TWD
  • Member since:
    04-17-2012

Some really good pro and con arguments there. One point is that if a player plays for a long time, hones his skill, gets a top tier tank, max skill crew and generally puts time and effort into a game should he be punished by some random calculation that decides "today you will be crap, you will miss most of your shots, the ones that hit, most will not pen, and you will put 15 holes in the moon" or we will put you in the team that will get nuked in 2 minutes and you will lose 15-1 and be on a losing streak all day.

I can see the point as well for the "noob", average player or the part time, occasional player being able to enjoy the game or have fun (as it is a GAME after all), so maybe as has been said, maybe reduce RNG for higher tier vehicles and put it down to skill as a reward for being a dedicated player that took the time and effort to grind through to the top. Each battle contains 15 players per team and as we have seen, some times one player can carry an entire team with 8+ kills on his own. Does that mean that player has good skill or did RNG roll the dice positively in his favour?

Now I am by no means any where near Unicom status but I do try to improve, watch the minimap, watch YouTube vids and so on, but it is very disheartening when after all that effort you get one shot by an RNG lucky arty or you can not hit or pen a light tank 2 tiers lower because RNG decides to put all your shots into some part of the enemy that is the toughest part of the tank.



Balc0ra #19 Posted 10 January 2018 - 10:13 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64335 battles
  • 15,403
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostAxelfoley666, on 09 January 2018 - 10:01 PM, said:

If they removed RNG would it just not come down to player skill? Why do we need the random shot hitting the moon even though you may have the most accurate gun in the game and a 6 skill crew with a perfectly aimed shot?

 

 

That's what most thought when they asked AW to do it... and then AW removed it during closed beta. And it was a mess. As then it would not be based on skill in most fights. It's based on your pen or damage exactly. As it's 100% the same regardless. And on some tiers, and considering how ammo works here vs AW. All the skill in the world won't make you pen a VK 100.01's cupola, or any of it's weakspots head on, if your pen is less then 220. And if people complain about the gold spam now, some would run even more of it with no RNG in the current age of super heavies. Just imagine how tier 8 would be with all the premiums there now vs a free player.

 

And during the closed beta of AW when they tested zero RNG. You ran more then you fought if you were outgunned or out tiered. RNG, on a high roll in WOT gives you a risk = reward chance. As in if your pen is 217, and your alpha is 390. But he has 220 weakspot armor and 420 HP. Do you risk a high roll and take him out in one shot, or bounce and hope he does the same? Or... do you run, as you lack both alpha and pen to deal with it? If RNG was gone. I would do the last one more so then the first. And since you can play on RNG. The only skill you can use is luck, as in hoping he follows you into the open or goes down that lane vs yours after you beak LOS so you can get up behind him and manage a pen. And mobility is not something you always have either tbh to pull that off.

 

25% on a high roll is somewhat needed. But arguably you can say that it's not for a low roll. As when AW removed RNG, and later made it to 10%. And that did not work to well, but at the same time it did prevent you from getting screwed to much when you had enough pen. As 25% low on 260 pen is a big drop vs a super heavy. So I'm arguing against having to much of a drop on a high roll, but at the same time don't see the need for it to drop equally much on a low roll if that makes sense.

 

But you can also argue that a zero RNG factor would punish bad players and new players even more. Even more so if they can't afford to press 2 that often. 



Phobos4321 #20 Posted 10 January 2018 - 10:17 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 43087 battles
  • 8,202
  • Member since:
    09-27-2011

you dont even know what your talking about

 

accuracy of the gun isnt a RNG based machanic

 

acc got a gaussian distribution

while the RNG  is just something between +/- 25%  but only on penetration and damage ...

 

so removing RNG would have zero impact on hitting or missing your shots






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users