Misses, resists and other combat RNG

What are people's thought on the topic of RNG in combat?

1) My impression is that there will be no RNG misses or resists of damaging attacks. Same goes for effects from attacks like DoTs, CC or debuffs. If someone sends it your way, and you don't have a specific effect that keeps from landing, it's going to stick. You may be able to reduce the damage with resists/armor stats, but it won't just be completely nullified. I bring that up because after the mage preview I've been seeing a lot of comparisons to systems where you just stack resists to a specific element to not get hit by it.

2) RNG blocks, dodges or parries. My understanding is that the default level of evade/block/parry will be 0%. I don't think we've seen anything official related to this from the Devs other than active block showcased in the tank preview. There are a lot of options .Tank and rogue are the most likely classes to have something like this. Either as a passive X% chance to block/evade damage, or as an active buff that gives an X% chance. But since all classes could have rogue/tank/other

#1: IMO for a modern MMO, RNG missing/resists are not needed. It's just too huge of a benefit for an attack to completely miss, especially in a cooldown based system.

For #2, I'm also not a fan of anything passive. But a moderate-to-long-cooldown RNG-based defensive buff would be ok (Ex: gain 30% evade chance for the next 5 seconds). Even better would be a cooldown based buff that negates the next attack against you. I'm more interested in having active block or iframes incorporated into the dodge roll

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Solvryn

This thread is worth a thousand chuckles.

Korela

JamesSunderland wrote: »

You simple don't consider "Adapting to the possibilities/outcomes of RNG" or
"Playing around the hand you are dealt with" a skill, without recognizing that your concept of skill is just limited.

It is a skill. To some extent. Very limited. For me it is less interesting and way less valuable. I like to play vs other player's clear actions without any unnecessary additions. I don't like to play vs bunch of random() returns.

RNG devalues player actions. RNG forces player to act statistically: "Idc if I lost now. I can bother that dude 10 more times by clicking my RNG debuff buttons and pray for crits and eventually win anyway haha". I think it is just a disgusting combat design. That player should be annihilated 10/10 and forced to teamup with friends / git gud by remebering CDs and manage resources more effectively / get better gear / find less contested place / etc.

Lodrig

NiKr wrote: »

Ok, great. This is all semantics that we should not give a shit about at this current moment.

Do you agree with Neura's point or do you want literally any and all points of rng in combat gone?

I've been defending randomness this whole thread not attacking it. What I'm attacking is Neurath's total misunderstanding of the terminology he is using. He has repeatedly said he wants no "output randomness" which would under the proper meaning of the word be equivalent to your "remove all points of RNG in combat", aka it would be like an FPS game in which nothing but your cursor location and click timing determines if you hit.

But what he actually wants is not clear because he seems to be railing against something that RPG games have never actually had, some kind of 'no cause' randomness which has no from any stat.

MY desire is for the normal RPG stat driven randomness which has existed for the entire history of the genre and is clearly already in the game per the character stat page show. In addition, I specified that a distance modifier for ranged attacks is essential so that chance to hit drops with distance.

Noaani

Korela wrote: »

JamesSunderland wrote: »

You simple don't consider "Adapting to the possibilities/outcomes of RNG" or
"Playing around the hand you are dealt with" a skill, without recognizing that your concept of skill is just limited.

It is a skill. To some extent. Very limited. For me it is less interesting and way less valuable. I like to play vs other player's clear actions without any unnecessary additions. I don't like to play vs bunch of random() returns.
RNG devalues player actions. RNG forces player to act statistically: "Idc if I lost now. I can bother that dude 10 more times by clicking my RNG debuff buttons and pray for crits and eventually win anyway haha". I think it is just a disgusting combat design. That player should be annihilated 10/10 and forced to teamup with friends / git gud by remebering CDs and manage resources more effectively / get better gear / find less contested place / etc.

Learning how to make the most of RNG is a player skill.

A player can't win or lose a fight with RNG alone. It's like luck, it favors the prepared. If you are good at the game and come up against someone every so slightly better, or with ever so slightly better gear, RNG may well be a factor. But that is only after both players have learned the game, got good at it, got decent gear etc.

If you are a reasonable player with reasonable gear, you are not going to lose a fight to a scrub due to RNG. If you think you lost to a scrub due to RNG, you actually just lost to a scrub.

Ludullu

Lodrig wrote: »

But what he actually wants is not clear because he has seems to be railing against something that RPG games have never actually had, some kind of 'no cause' randomness which has no from any stat.

Unless I misunderstood him, he wants standard rng. And doesn't want the design choice of "your attack could miss at any random point, even if you're a lvl100 dude attacking a lvl1 mob".

Imo it's utterly pointless to discuss (and especially argue) semantics, when you agree on the point that's being made by either side. At least as long as those semantics don't stand in the way of making the point. I guess you misunderstood Neura's point which is why you argued about semantics. You could've instead just asked to clarify the point. Woulda saved both yours, Neura's and the forum's time

JamesSunderland

Korela wrote: »

JamesSunderland wrote: »

You simple don't consider "Adapting to the possibilities/outcomes of RNG" or
"Playing around the hand you are dealt with" a skill, without recognizing that your concept of skill is just limited.

It is a skill. To some extent. Very limited. For me it is less interesting and way less valuable. I like to play vs other player's clear actions without any unnecessary additions. I don't like to play vs bunch of random() returns.
RNG devalues player actions. RNG forces player to act statistically: "Idc if I lost now. I can bother that dude 10 more times by clicking my RNG debuff buttons and pray for crits and eventually win anyway haha". I think it is just a disgusting combat design. That player should be annihilated 10/10 and forced to teamup with friends / git gud by remebering CDs and manage resources more effectively / get better gear / find less contested place / etc.

I see, you atleast recognizes it as a skill, even tho you do have little regard for it and see it as an obstruction...
RNG values players adaptability skills, RNG forces player to act with an extra layer of possibility to deal with in mind, and as such it works on top of all other skills as an additional layer of skill.

Lodrig

Neurath wrote: »

The results of input rng aren't so random. You should know that if you have a higher stat than another then you will be much more successful if you've ever faced an Evasion Build and you couldn't touch them at first. In fact, the debate rages on because Evasion Builds want the randomness of RNG whilst those who oppose them want the certainty of build mechanics. Input RNG can literally make an evasion build obsolete, and Output RNG can make an Accuracy build obsolete.

The literal dichotomy of accuracy verses evasion is input rng at it finest. Output RNG is not related to accuracy or evasion, its literally just an extra calculation which determines whether an attack is successful or not. I explained you have some games with 100% accuracy but you still miss due to Output RNG. You seem to either not read my input or you have random output. The input RNG has already determined the effectiveness of the attack yet output rng does the same thing again with a randomised outcome.

Don't accuse me of not reading your posts when you have clearly not done the homework to correct your misuse of terminology. The video was posted on the first page but I will put in another link here

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dwI5b-wRLic&t=229s&pp=ygUMR210dGsgcmFuZG9t

Please do not reply further until you have grasped its contents and can coherently describe what you actually want or do not want.

Songcaller

I can't be more explicit in input and output rng. Input rng is not random, it is by preset dynamics and predetermined variables. Hell, input rng can even have modifiers, multipliers, subtractions and additions.

Output rng is just a dice roll with a chance to fail. I've played enough Warhammer and DnD to know I am correct.

Furthermore, this article https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2020/1/16/21067906/random-number-generator-rng-probability-xcom-spelunky-input-output

Explains that the references were specific games. I'm talking about the actual fundamentals of mmos and the core principles between the functions of input and output rng. I even said before input rng can be environment or inherent.

Korela

Noaani wrote: »

I see, you atleast recognizes it as a skill, even tho you do have little regard for it and see it as an obstruction...
RNG values players adaptability skills, RNG forces player to act with an extra layer of possibility to deal with in mind, and as such it works on top of all other skills as an additional layer of skill.

RNG combat:
1. if target can stun - buff 60% stun resist and pray that it works. If it didn't worked, but you've survived - heal up by 100 HP (or 200 HP with 30% chance).
2. spam X and Y until [X or Y procs by chance] and then do Z to deal 1000 dmg (or 2000 with 10% chance).
3. Repeat until someones RNG is low enough to lose.

Non-RNG combat:
1. if target can stun - use 100% stun resist right before it stuns. If you messed up, but survived - heal up by 160 HP.
2. spam X and Y until [idk, some non-rng condition met like 3 stacks of X and Y are not cleansed / <50% HP not healed / spell casting state / etc] and then do Z to deal 1200 dmg.
3. Repeat until someone messes up enough to lose.

Where is adaptabillity? In spamming until some thing randomly procs?
Where is extra layer? In dividing every action outcome to proc-or-not and getting the upper/lower hand from it?

Isn't it more fair to give players full control of their action results rather then just add tons of RNG layers?

The one situation when RNG is good is in statistically broken balance. It works as averaging factor and game looks better in general by raising the hell low floor and lowering the sky-high ceiling. Lazy solution btw.

Songcaller

Some people prefer the illusion of skill rather than the application of actual skill when it comes to rng.

Noaani

Korela wrote: »

Isn't it more fair to give players full control of their action results rather then just add tons of RNG layers?

In a game that is just supposed to be player vs player, sure.

However, an RPG is supposed to be character vs character.

Again, this is the point of an MMORPG as opposed to a lobby game.

You are supposed to build your character in an RPG. That is why the world is persistent.

Songcaller

I hate to bring up BDO but there is a reason people love the combat. That's because of the immunities and resists in output rng. Its reliant entirely on dodges, blocks and accuracy. I feel ashes should be the same.

I've longed asked for less static combat. In my mind, output rng goes hand in hand with static combat.

Korela

Noaani wrote: »

Korela wrote: »

Isn't it more fair to give players full control of their action results rather then just add tons of RNG layers?

In a game that is just supposed to be player vs player, sure.

However, an RPG is supposed to be character vs character.

Again, this is the point of an MMORPG as opposed to a lobby game.

You are supposed to build your character in an RPG. That is why the world is persistent.

Thanks! I think this is the core thing I am unable to understand yet. In my mind MMORPG is just an unlimited lobby game with thousands of players, way deeper lore, variety of gameplay, rp, etc. Characters exists inside a game and their restrictions are defined by archetype, class, equipment, etc. Player cannot create new game mechanics, skills or items - they choose them from coherent pool created by devs. Same with activities and goals. Players choose how to build their characters by game rules and acts accordingly. That's why the world is persistent. Where do we need RNG here?

Mag7spy

BDO has rng for all elements of combat, evasion / accuracy, cc resist, cc proc, other skill procs and that is a heavy action mmorpg. I though they missed the mark on some designs rng is just part of mmorpg combat. Your skill to dodge adds another element to avoid things which you can to some moves that are action based.

Asking for all rpg combat elements be removed would make a game stale. There is a reason a lot of action games add that into their gameplay, it is ironic some mmorpg players are now asking to remove it, that is a step back towards a bad game.

Songcaller

You can have input rng in an action mmo. You described better why bdo's input rng in combat is good. The debate is about output rng and more specifically rng miss. I wanted bdo combat considered as ghe model for the hybrid system because of the way it feels. Not so much the branch of rng.

On a side note, bdo also has too much output Rng on enhancements and the whole social side of the game so thank you for not advocating for that.

Mag7spy

Neurath wrote: »

You can have input rng in an action mmo. You described better why bdo's input rng in combat is good. The debate is about output rng and more specifically rng miss. I wanted bdo combat considered as ghe model for the hybrid system because of the way it feels. Not so much the branch of rng.

On a side note, bdo also has too much output Rng on enhancements and the whole social side of the game so thank you for not advocating for that.

Ashes of creation might have BDO (light) enhancement. Though this disccusion isn't really about enhancement so my comments and thoughts aren't thinking about that until i see it.

Songcaller

Yeah there will be output rng for over enchant. We'll leave it at that

Mag7spy

Neurath wrote: »

Yeah there will be output rng for over enchant. We'll leave it at that

ill just throw my wallet at it ;o

Lodrig

Neurath wrote: »

I can't be more explicit in input and output rng. Input rng is not random, it is by preset dynamics and predetermined variables. Hell, input rng can even have modifiers, multipliers, subtractions and additions.

Output rng is just a dice roll with a chance to fail. I've played enough Warhammer and DnD to know I am correct.

Furthermore, this article https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2020/1/16/21067906/random-number-generator-rng-probability-xcom-spelunky-input-output

Explains that the references were specific games. I'm talking about the actual fundamentals of mmos and the core principles between the functions of input and output rng. I even said before input rng can be environment or inherent.

What you have is enough Ego to refuse to do the basic homework I asked, and the Gaul to keep pounding your fist insisting that your right. As you seem fully incapable of self-study or self-correction, I will lay it out for you one last via a simple D&D scenario.

My fighter has attack bonus of +3, I announce to the GM that I am attacking a Goblin that I know has an AC of 12. I will roll a d20 and add my +3 modifier to it. Let's say I rolled an 11 which is then modified to 14. The 14 is higher than the 12 AC of the target therefore I hit. Had I rolled 8 or less I would have missed. Thus, I can calculate the probability of hitting as 12 in 20 which is 60%. I know that probability before rolling because I know all the relevant modifiers, what I do not know until the die is rolled is IF I will hit or not.

This is called OUTPUT randomness because I do not know the ultimate output of my attack attempt until I perform it and view the result. If I knew with certainty what would happen before the attack, then there would be no randomness at all. These are the only options, there is no world in which my character stats and the outcome of actions I take with them are ever 'input' randomness. What you seem to have done is confused the concept of mathematical inputs to a formula with input randomness.

EVERY dice roll that a player in D&D makes using stats on their character sheet is output randomness. The only source of input randomness in D&D is the GM's design of the scenario and the unknowability of what the player will face, such as when you kick in a door and either find monsters or not. In an RPG videogame the choices that would otherwise be made by a human and made by a machine using rng and what are essentially huge encounter tables of what mobs to present the player with. If it's a PvP situation the input randomness is what the opponents are bringing to the table in terms of numbers, builds and tactics.

Songcaller

You keep mixing input rng with output rng. There are no stats associated with output rng. Stats only apply to input rng. If a have a d6 roll for damage, its an output rng roll. If I have to straight roll a d6 and get higher than a value, say 2+ it is input rng because the stat is being weighed against.

You can keep arguing that random encounters and environment are input rng and that is fine, however, I am talking about input rng from an actual toon. In input rng you weigh one stat against another stat to come to the conclusion. In output rng you roll to get the outcome.

It's called output in DnD because the toon calculations are combined for the output of the toon. If I roll 3d6 then it is output rng too because these values are combined for the output.

Child Item