|
Post by frunobulax on Apr 21, 2018 13:05:59 GMT -5
Randomness is antithesis of skill. It destroys game balance and design...[...] Good game design makes games fun. In order to do make games fun, you have to give players control, so their actions matter and are predictable, so they feel like they are mastering something. Randomness has been shown to lead to frustration, the opposite of fun. This is a known, and makes perfect sense because chance takes away control, makes it so their actions aren't predictable, and doesn't give them a feeling of mastery.Energized ammo will dominate this game, unless it is so underbuffed no one uses it . They'll end up nerfing the ammo or making it only usable for certain weapons, and those weapons will then dominate. And all that time, money and player frustration could be avoided simply by having a solid understanding of game design. And that's really the crux of the biscuit. Pixo developes the game as if they don't understand their game at all. They make extremely stupid decisions all the time, and the game gets worse. If BoT is in beta, it will hopefully be only a matter of time until we have a viable alternative to War Robots, and eventually the one thing that keeps War Robots standing will be gone: The fact that there is no similar game that is even remotely as good as War Robots.
|
|
|
Post by frunobulax on Apr 21, 2018 13:07:38 GMT -5
Or they double down on squeezing every last penny out of their fleeting userbase. No, that is already going on in full force. How many new robots and weapons did we have in this year?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2018 14:04:22 GMT -5
Or they double down on squeezing every last penny out of their fleeting userbase. No, that is already going on in full force. How many new robots and weapons did we have in this year? And now component based modules, a game mode where you spend Au for a definitive advantage(FFA) that pushes yet another undesirable game mode (Koth) into random, more dilution of currencies in favor of gambling, more weapons that are just different hardpoint versions of other weapons, and the bots/weapons won't slow down until there is a light/medium/heavy for every type and they hit their next spectre/shocktrain cash grabber.
|
|
|
Post by zer00eyz on Apr 21, 2018 15:59:55 GMT -5
zer00eyz talked about choice, not chance in terms of acquiring equipment, but now it has made its way into gameplay itself. What's funny is that Pixonic just keeps on reusing old ideas from years ago that aren't used in modern game design because they don't offer the players control. In this case, a chance to immobilize a target is being offered. A chance... it isn't a guaranteed after a certain amount of damage is done that you'll immobilize a target, it's just a chance. Chance doesn't offer players control, and the seemingly randomness that will result in players in being immobilized is going to be frustrating because it isn't predictable. Fights will be won and lost not off player skill, but because one player got lucky and immobilized his opponent but the other didn't get lucky. That is terrible game design that frustrates players. Furthermore, the chance to immobilize a target itself is bad game design because immobilized target no counterplay opportunities, not being able to move. And naturally, energized ammo will likely be an expensive addition that will allow whales to immediately immobilize the Dash robots of free to play players. Hopefully Pixonic changes direction. My approach is quite different. With a small closed set deterministic variables you have a small tree of fully predictable outcomes, easy to learn with practice. The more variables and randomness you have the more skill it takes. What's easier? Firing in a arrow in a fully secluded environment with every variable fixed or out in the open? Take the same archer and put him in a sterilized environment and then out in the open with very very weak wind. What's easier for him? Out there he has less control of the situation. There are variables he can't completely predict. There is the element of chance;a small burst of wind and it will affect the arrows course. I don't think less control on a large set of outcomes produced by stochastic variables, demands less skill than full control on a small set of deterministic variables. On the contrary. Just my view of things. Also, perhaps they can help. I'am following a 0 dash 0 shock approach and trying hard not to give in, by using stealth. Perhaps spy which is a watered down version of stealth could help my Inquisitor. Freezing the chickens is also welcome. In fact I believe many older weapons will get a major buff out of this. Each time you fire that thunder or tulu that huge area covered may not be damaged significantly.by it will count as a hit. This means they are subject to a probability of getting freezed. Noricum ? Oh yeah !!! You cover that area in front of me with your noricum and each chicken passing may get freezed. Splash and AOE weapons will be buffed indirectly immensely. You can argue that shock traverses but it's one hit. One roll of the die. Splash and AOE are many minor ones all the time. Many roles of the dices Perhaps we can look into it from a positive angle. It is an interesting line of thinking... > I don't think less control on a large set of outcomes produced by stochastic variables, demands less skill than full control on a small set of deterministic variables. On the contrary. Just my view of things. I get where your coming from, but honestly rich systems don't really have to work like this. Because the outcome isn't always clear even with a small, limited deterministic system. Take for example Conway's Game of Life - one would think that with such a simple set of rules and outcomes that we would have "discovered" all the "plays" by now. The reality is that we aren't even close - and people make new discoveries all the time. Your intuition isn't wrong, but it isn't complete either - simple systems can be as rich as complicated ones - it just depends on what the rules are and how they play against each other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2018 17:12:14 GMT -5
My approach is quite different. With a small closed set deterministic variables you have a small tree of fully predictable outcomes, easy to learn with practice. The more variables and randomness you have the more skill it takes. What's easier? Firing in a arrow in a fully secluded environment with every variable fixed or out in the open? Take the same archer and put him in a sterilized environment and then out in the open with very very weak wind. What's easier for him? Out there he has less control of the situation. There are variables he can't completely predict. There is the element of chance;a small burst of wind and it will affect the arrows course. I don't think less control on a large set of outcomes produced by stochastic variables, demands less skill than full control on a small set of deterministic variables. On the contrary. Just my view of things. Also, perhaps they can help. I'am following a 0 dash 0 shock approach and trying hard not to give in, by using stealth. Perhaps spy which is a watered down version of stealth could help my Inquisitor. Freezing the chickens is also welcome. In fact I believe many older weapons will get a major buff out of this. Each time you fire that thunder or tulu that huge area covered may not be damaged significantly.by it will count as a hit. This means they are subject to a probability of getting freezed. Noricum ? Oh yeah !!! You cover that area in front of me with your noricum and each chicken passing may get freezed. Splash and AOE weapons will be buffed indirectly immensely. You can argue that shock traverses but it's one hit. One roll of the die. Splash and AOE are many minor ones all the time. Many roles of the dices Perhaps we can look into it from a positive angle. It is an interesting line of thinking... > I don't think less control on a large set of outcomes produced by stochastic variables, demands less skill than full control on a small set of deterministic variables. On the contrary. Just my view of things. I get where your coming from, but honestly rich systems don't really have to work like this. Because the outcome isn't always clear even with a small, limited deterministic system. Take for example Conway's Game of Life - one would think that with such a simple set of rules and outcomes that we would have "discovered" all the "plays" by now. The reality is that we aren't even close - and people make new discoveries all the time. Your intuition isn't wrong, but it isn't complete either - simple systems can be as rich as complicated ones - it just depends on what the rules are and how they play against each other. A proper subset of an infinite set can have under conditions the same cardinality with the original set but this doesn't apply to proper subsets of a finite set. Given the discretization of the the random generator, the paired set created is a finite set, thus such a subset can not be found. This means that the cardinality will differ and given the multiplication law it will be greater. Rich they may be, yet smaller in cardinality they are for our case . Does this contribute anything ? No haha. In a nutshell you are right and math won't save my bot against freezing by chance. I will give it 2 -3 months and if the cretins 「fluffernutter」 it up as they usually do , then another game another life . 「fluffernutter」 them . We are meat to them anyway.
|
|
|
Post by sm94 on Apr 21, 2018 17:33:21 GMT -5
**interupting the hate pix circlejerk** Guys....this is the first we heard of them. CHILL OUT. They'll go through changes before they hit live server. Stop with the "pix nails in the coffin just got six inches longer, grave got __ deeper" its so repetitive and you sound like 「fluffernutter」ing trump with his "wall just got 6 feet taller". Lets be honest.. either way you guys will complain, it doesnt matter what Pix does. Stop "threatening" to uninstall or go to BoT.. and just do it.. no one cares, snowflakes.
|
|
|
Post by frunobulax on Apr 21, 2018 17:34:27 GMT -5
With a small closed set deterministic variables you have a small tree of fully predictable outcomes, easy to learn with practice. The more variables and randomness you have the more skill it takes. Your intuition isn't wrong, but it isn't complete either - simple systems can be as rich as complicated ones - it just depends on what the rules are and how they play against each other. I always felt that the high skill in gameplay design is to have a game with simple rules that can be explained in just a few minutes, and few randomness except for player choices, but that still allows for a rich set of strategies. One of my favorite board games is 1830, where there is no randomness at all except for the order of players, and yet no 2 games are alike and every game is a challence. (Chess OTOH was always a bit dry for my taste and is best left to computers.) I found the old War Robots was a very good example of that. 2 basic paper-scissor-stone dimensions (energy/rockets/bullets and range) and the different maps made a very compelling game. Introducing modules in the way as explained break the basic paper-scissor-stone nature of the game, thus removing skill and strategy.
|
|
|
Post by bronzeknee on Apr 21, 2018 19:20:08 GMT -5
**interupting the hate pix circlejerk** Guys....this is the first we heard of them. CHILL OUT. They'll go through changes before they hit live server. Stop with the "pix nails in the coffin just got six inches longer, grave got __ deeper" its so repetitive and you sound like ?falafel?ing trump with his "wall just got 6 feet taller". Lets be honest.. either way you guys will complain, it doesnt matter what Pix does. Stop "threatening" to uninstall or go to BoT.. and just do it.. no one cares, snowflakes. You should ask some of the old regulars about what happens you wait and see. When I first said the game was going in the crapper, they all said wait and see. This will be a good lesson for you of why random chance is bad for games. You'll get immobilized by Hydras someday, lose control of your robot and realize that not being in control isn't fun, it's frustrating. Enjoy it. And no, being honest, I won't complain either way. I gave them credit for the Bulwark which is going to change the meta in very good way. I gave them credit for giving away more stuff. Part of being credible is being able to be both critical and congratulatory.
|
|
|
Post by bonegnasher on Apr 21, 2018 19:51:51 GMT -5
Dashes having a chance to be locked down is good....talk about skill? Dash v a non dash let's a skill-less pilot win easily. I'm all for this!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2018 20:10:39 GMT -5
Dashes having a chance to be locked down is good....talk about skill? Dash v a non dash let's a skill-less pilot win easily. I'm all for this! If dashes can equip this module (which is highly LIKELY) especially if they can equip multiples (also HIGHLY likely) than anything that can't dash dies to dash, period.
|
|
|
Post by mechagodzilla777 on Apr 21, 2018 20:12:36 GMT -5
Dashes having a chance to be locked down is good....talk about skill? Dash v a non dash let's a skill-less pilot win easily. I'm all for this! If dashes can equip this module (which is highly LIKELY) especially if they can equip multiples (also HIGHLY likely) than anything that can't dash dies to dash, period. I watches Pixonic's livestream today. They straight-out said, "Yes, all bots, old and new, will be able to equip modules, up to four of them." So yes, dashes and Spectres can and will have up to four module slots, and will be able to be upgraded for better effects.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2018 20:15:43 GMT -5
If dashes can equip this module (which is highly LIKELY) especially if they can equip multiples (also HIGHLY likely) than anything that can't dash dies to dash, period. I watches Pixonic's livestream today. They straight-out said, "Yes, all bots, old and new, will be able to equip modules, up to four of them." They also said the slots for each bot will have predetermined categories. With their example, Patton and Lance had Offense:1, Defense:2, Special:1, all it takes is bulg or Haechi having 2:1:1 and that's double the chance to stun, on top of the burst 3 mediums have. Their statements of balance and diversity are a cruel joke, all this does is make what's already meta less precictable.
|
|
|
Post by T34 on Apr 21, 2018 20:40:01 GMT -5
This modules thing is stupid. I agree with those who say chance will reduce the need for strategy and tactics as a result of uncertainty.
This game is supposed to be like a sporting contest. Two wrestlers fighting each other, two boxers in the ring, two judo players trying to throw each other and so on. This game is not like a board game with dice involved. Luck in the former set of sports manifests itself by how events unfold as a result of conscious actions or actions by players which bring unexpected outcomes (good or bad).
These sports as well as many others also have weight classes in order to promote strategy and tactics. There are rules involved in order to set boundaries in relation to permissible conduct in order to enhance strategy and tactics.
What Pix is doing with modules is like giving a boxer and a wrestler judo suits and pitting the contestants agains each other while not declaring what rules they are to abide by. And the more money one contestant has the more steroids he can use and the heavier he gets in an arena with no weight limits.
There is no sports like that. None would be interest in participating or spectating such events in the long run.
The only thing Pix has going to get away with this is unitiated players coming into the game and the valet warriors remaining as a result of utterly huge advantage provided to them and hence getting the kicks from clubbing ones with a smaller investment.
|
|
|
Post by Cdr. Crimmins on Apr 22, 2018 1:13:12 GMT -5
**interupting the hate pix circlejerk** Guys....this is the first we heard of them. CHILL OUT. They'll go through changes before they hit live server. Stop with the "pix nails in the coffin just got six inches longer, grave got __ deeper" its so repetitive and you sound like ?falafel?ing trump with his "wall just got 6 feet taller". Lets be honest.. either way you guys will complain, it doesnt matter what Pix does. Stop "threatening" to uninstall or go to BoT.. and just do it.. no one cares, snowflakes. Sure... worked great with the Dash release, Pix totally removed the second dash. And the Shocktrain was reined in nicely before they released it. So everything is in good hands and we live in the best of all possible worlds.
|
|
|
Post by bronzeknee on Apr 22, 2018 1:18:50 GMT -5
The biggest problem with all of this is that the whales will instantly and shamelessly max the most powerful modules on their robots and then not only will have multiple hangers, Dash Robots, components weapons and MK2, they'll have extremely powerful modules. It's just more crap they want people to buy, so they continue to sell more power.
It is fast getting to the point where it hard to even consider it a competitive game for a free to play player.
|
|
|
Post by moses on Apr 22, 2018 1:30:37 GMT -5
Randomness is antithesis of skill. It destroys game balance and design...[...] Good game design makes games fun. In order to do make games fun, you have to give players control, so their actions matter and are predictable, so they feel like they are mastering something. Randomness has been shown to lead to frustration, the opposite of fun. This is a known, and makes perfect sense because chance takes away control, makes it so their actions aren't predictable, and doesn't give them a feeling of mastery.Energized ammo will dominate this game, unless it is so underbuffed no one uses it . They'll end up nerfing the ammo or making it only usable for certain weapons, and those weapons will then dominate. And all that time, money and player frustration could be avoided simply by having a solid understanding of game design. And that's really the crux of the biscuit. Pixo developes the game as if they don't understand their game at all. They make extremely stupid decisions all the time, and the game gets worse. If BoT is in beta, it will hopefully be only a matter of time until we have a viable alternative to War Robots, and eventually the one thing that keeps War Robots standing will be gone: The fact that there is no similar game that is even remotely as good as War Robots. I read on the developer live stream thread that the modules (or at least some of the abilities - orbital strike for one) have been copied from BoT and it has a lot more complicated mechanics. If that is the case, not sure BoT is the answer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2018 1:54:00 GMT -5
And that's really the crux of the biscuit. Pixo developes the game as if they don't understand their game at all. They make extremely stupid decisions all the time, and the game gets worse. If BoT is in beta, it will hopefully be only a matter of time until we have a viable alternative to War Robots, and eventually the one thing that keeps War Robots standing will be gone: The fact that there is no similar game that is even remotely as good as War Robots. I read on the developer live stream thread that the modules (or at least some of the abilities - orbital strike for one) have been copied from BoT and it has a lot more complicated mechanics. If that is the case, not sure BoT is the answer. BoT had less auto aim, bots have more durability in comparison to firepower compared to War Robots, and every part of a Titan has actual HP, while only the bot in War Robots has health, and parts break at random. Lock on can be broken in BoT by breaking line of sight, doesn't happen in War Robots. The built in complication of BoT makes several concepts that can be implemented in a balanced manner there, a balance nightmare in War Robots.
|
|
|
Post by T34 on Apr 22, 2018 1:56:36 GMT -5
And that's really the crux of the biscuit. Pixo developes the game as if they don't understand their game at all. They make extremely stupid decisions all the time, and the game gets worse. If BoT is in beta, it will hopefully be only a matter of time until we have a viable alternative to War Robots, and eventually the one thing that keeps War Robots standing will be gone: The fact that there is no similar game that is even remotely as good as War Robots. I read on the developer live stream thread that the modules (or at least some of the abilities - orbital strike for one) have been copied from BoT and it has a lot more complicated mechanics. If that is the case, not sure BoT is the answer. You are right to some extent. We don’t know how BoT will turn out. It really comes down to a balance between game play and monitization. Unfortunately with Pix the monetisation aspect was heavily favoured at the expense of game play and atm I see this as another initiative to move more into P2W at the expense of game play. Pix has a clear track record imo.
|
|
|
Post by anjian on Apr 22, 2018 2:29:09 GMT -5
The more I read into this modules thing, the more I am convinced that this entity you call the current Pixo doesn't know how to design a game.
Hard to explain what I really feel about it, but this comes close.
|
|
|
Post by Replicant on Apr 22, 2018 3:05:02 GMT -5
More variables, more skill? To an extent yes... until there becomes so many no one can manage them, and then managing them becomes the functional equivalent of luck. The oddest thing about you argument is that abilities and weapons that introduce randomness, actually remove controllable variables from the game due to the way they have to be balanced... let me go on... Randomness is antithesis of skill. It destroys game balance and design... I'll let the League of Legends game designers explain (and it is why they have removed nearly every chance item/ability from the game): Overpower them a lot more. Random chance on a passive ability creates power without gameplay problems (players don't get to pick when to use an ability, they just hope it happens). They have to be overpowered to be usable, and then everyone ends up using them. There are thousands of well documented examples of this... Again, League designers explain: Overbuff the mechanic? So not only does this ability need to be really strong because it is random, it will need to be really strong because it is a passive. This is going to be a trainwreck. This is why game designers need to design games, not coders. I'll tell you what will happen right now, go on the record for this because it is extremely easy to predict. Pixonic will put energized ammo into the game, thinking it will help people chase down mid-range Dashers. But t he percent chance of anyone being disabled has to be relatively high (at least 15%), because that is how non-reliable skills have to be balanced. That is an inescapable known in game design. So with the mid-range weapons dominating, it will do the opposite, it will be primarily disable knifers trying to catch the mid-range robots. They'll end up nerfing the ammo or making it only usable for certain weapons. And all that time, money and player frustration could be avoided simply by having a solid understanding of game design. I agree with you and taniel , regarding it can go south. Full luck or overpowered. I will not agree that it has to go that way or that it's pointing to bad game design and please let me offer a simple counter example. The role playing genre. . It is colossal, with thousands of games, millions of players for so long and it's full of dice. Chance blended with skills and rules. You attack and you roll the die so you have your base stats + xd4 xd6 , depending on what you roll. I don't think all these games are bad designed, unbalanced, killing the role playing community skills, but again that's my perspective. The role-playing analogy is a poor one for your cause. The probabilities in an RPG are slanted strongly towards the player, and a competent GM plays the numbers. A warrior type has to be able to reliably hit things. Otherwise he's not living his fantasy. Your proving bronzeknee 's point.
|
|
|
Post by Replicant on Apr 22, 2018 3:11:34 GMT -5
The biggest problem with all of this is that the whales will instantly and shamelessly max the most powerful modules on their robots and then not only will have multiple hangers, Dash Robots, components weapons and MK2, they'll have extremely powerful modules. It's just more crap they want people to buy, so they continue to sell more power.It is fast getting to the point where it hard to even consider it a competitive game for a free to play player. This game hasn't been competitive for quite a while. I tend to approach it like an 80's coin-op bullet hell scroller. Its not about fair.
|
|
|
Post by frunobulax on Apr 22, 2018 3:21:37 GMT -5
And that's really the crux of the biscuit. Pixo developes the game as if they don't understand their game at all. They make extremely stupid decisions all the time, and the game gets worse. If BoT is in beta, it will hopefully be only a matter of time until we have a viable alternative to War Robots, and eventually the one thing that keeps War Robots standing will be gone: The fact that there is no similar game that is even remotely as good as War Robots. I read on the developer live stream thread that the modules (or at least some of the abilities - orbital strike for one) have been copied from BoT and it has a lot more complicated mechanics. If that is the case, not sure BoT is the answer. I'll reserve judgement on BoT for the time I can actually play it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2018 8:55:14 GMT -5
Don't forget, it's not just shocktrain. Walk into a punisher, how often will the stun proc? Molots, stunned from 800m away? Orkans and getting stunned by splash?
Missiles are even worse, working your way round to gank the missile monkey, stun stun stun dead.
Obviously, we don't know the mechanics of it yet, however, it is Pix.
|
|
|
Post by moses on Apr 22, 2018 8:58:31 GMT -5
I read on the developer live stream thread that the modules (or at least some of the abilities - orbital strike for one) have been copied from BoT and it has a lot more complicated mechanics. If that is the case, not sure BoT is the answer. I'll reserve judgement on BoT for the time I can actually play it I live in Russia and just downloaded it. First impression is that it seems quite complicated - everyone bot seems to have 4 types of different slots for weapons, armour, legs and something else and there is no intro, just dropped into a hangar with a couple of bots. It might be a cool game and I will give it a try, but it seems to be a different breed to war robots. as pointed out above the complexity may add some opportunities for balance, but it is not one to just dip your toe into and I don’t really have the time to play something else. I will wait and see how badly War Robots gets maimed with the modules, etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2018 10:05:08 GMT -5
I agree with you and taniel , regarding it can go south. Full luck or overpowered. I will not agree that it has to go that way or that it's pointing to bad game design and please let me offer a simple counter example. The role playing genre. . It is colossal, with thousands of games, millions of players for so long and it's full of dice. Chance blended with skills and rules. You attack and you roll the die so you have your base stats + xd4 xd6 , depending on what you roll. I don't think all these games are bad designed, unbalanced, killing the role playing community skills, but again that's my perspective. The role-playing analogy is a poor one for your cause. The probabilities in an RPG are slanted strongly towards the player, and a competent GM plays the numbers. A warrior type has to be able to reliably hit things. Otherwise he's not living his fantasy. Your proving bronzeknee 's point. Your approach is fundamentally different and so is bronzeknee's but that's taste in gaming. I play the mage class. There is always the probability of miscast . So there is a case I won't be able to reliably hit . I welcome this and I find it more interesting. Iam saying weapons jam. You are saying weapons never jam . Iam saying that a weapon jam is something I can't control in the midst of a battle and there is chance of happening. Hence the die roll. You are saying, no it will never jam, it will always fire and you will reliably hit the target, so no need to roll any dice. No problems. Each one chooses the simulator he wants. I have friens who tried playing RPG and got really frustrated ( especially warriors ) by not knowing exactly what will happen . They told me that they want to be able to plan exactly and that it takes away skill. Other warriors love it and say that when swinging a huge hammer in the midst of a storm on a head of a dragon something can go wrong hey]I always say : Weapons jam, we must simulate it and this makes me create richer and more diverse plans cause Iam not sure of the outcome. I think it's more challenging and requires more skill. . For War Robots if I could choose I would not have probabilities involved. It's a bloody 7 min on average game. My back up plans and strategy to reverse a bad roll go down the drain. So I agree with bronzeknee and with you for what's best in this type of gaming. My objection was simple. The fact that probabilities dont fit war robots or lol doesn't mean that in general randomness removes skills from gaming. This is a leap in logic. The fact that deterministic environment are very rich doesn't mean that such spaces paired with probabilities aren't richer . That's all. This is a gamers forum so I put forth this approach because we are gamers I should have put it in another thread and made it more clear.
|
|
|
Post by bronzeknee on Apr 22, 2018 11:16:18 GMT -5
My objection was simple. The fact that probabilities dont fit war robots or lol doesn't mean that in general randomness removes skills from gaming. This is a leap in logic. Well, you've misrepresented what I said, and your argument isn't consistent. I didn't argue that random chance remove skills or has no place in gaming. It certainly does, and this is what I said: Wherever random chance can be replaced with actual play, it should be. Obviously, it can't be in games like Battletech, you don't actually control and play each individual Mech so whether they miss or hit can be determined by chance. But we actually play the individual Mechs in War Robots, so chance shouldn't be involved, and its involvement can only serve to frustrate. We play competitive multiplayer games for fun, elements that are completely out of the control of players should be avoided at all costs if they can affect the outcome of an interaction. Research has shown that the negative feelings players have when adversely affected by random chance far outweigh the positive feelings players feel when positively affected by random chance. And that makes perfect sense, people want to be responsible for the positive outcome, and they don't want to lose because of something random, they want to be outplayed so they can learn from. Realism can be built into games without randomness. Barrels overheating guns if you fire too fast is a good example. It gives the player control, choice and offers counterplay options. The barrel only overheats if the player allows it. Also guns jamming if you fire too fast after X number of bullets is another. Good players will go right up to the limit, it becomes a learned skill. And they know the limit on their opponents weapon too, so they know exactly when they will stop firing. Those mechanics build skills for people to learn and master into the game. If those events were random, it wouldn't allow for that skill development. That example makes it clear than randomness has no place. Think about that in relation to this energized ammo. If I knew the 8th shot of a Taran was going to disable me, I could play around that. But if I don't know which shot is going to disable me, there is no counterplay. There is nothing to control, nothing to learn, nothing to master. Only poorly designed games offer this kind of garbage these days. But, you've gone from arguing that randomness was good in War Robots to agreeing it has no role, so I'm not sure what your arguing, I just wanted to make sure you knew your argument was a strawman.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Karma:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2018 11:29:49 GMT -5
There's a difference between rolling the dice in Guild wars or Wow than rolling the dice in Armored Core or Mechwarrior. Actually, in all cases, the enemy has resistances or saves against the RNG, as a defacto, the RNG of the attackin player or avatar is measured against the RNG of the defending player or avatar. What pic is implementing is a one-way takeaway.
|
|
herbalmilitant
Destrier
Posts: 77
Karma: 70
Platform: Android
Server Region: North America
Favorite robot: Jesse
|
Post by herbalmilitant on Apr 22, 2018 11:30:36 GMT -5
So... moral of the story is don't get hit. That will make dashers more important because you will want to go from zero to gtfo of here asap. It will make hydras more prevalent. Being able to lock on and not need LOS will be a nice perk.
|
|
|
Post by Replicant on Apr 22, 2018 11:41:39 GMT -5
The role-playing analogy is a poor one for your cause. The probabilities in an RPG are slanted strongly towards the player, and a competent GM plays the numbers. A warrior type has to be able to reliably hit things. Otherwise he's not living his fantasy. Your proving bronzeknee 's point. Your approach is fundamentally different and so is bronzeknee's but that's taste in gaming. I play the mage class. There is always the probability of miscast . So there is a case I won't be able to reliably hit . I welcome this and I find it more interesting. Iam saying weapons jam. You are saying weapons never jam . Iam saying that a weapon jam is something I can't control in the midst of a battle and there is chance of happening. Hence the die roll. You are saying, no it will never jam, it will always fire and you will reliably hit the target, so no need to roll any dice. No problems. Each one chooses the simulator he wants. I have friens who tried playing RPG and got really frustrated ( especially warriors ) by not knowing exactly what will happen . They told me that they want to be able to plan exactly and that it takes away skill. Other warriors love it and say that when swinging a huge hammer in the midst of a storm on a head of a dragon something can go wrong hey]I always say : Weapons jam, we must simulate it and this makes me create richer and more diverse plans cause Iam not sure of the outcome. I think it's more challenging and requires more skill. . For War Robots if I could choose I would not have probabilities involved. It's a bloody 7 min on average game. My back up plans and strategy to reverse a bad roll go down the drain. So I agree with bronzeknee and with you for what's best in this type of gaming. My objection was simple. The fact that probabilities dont fit war robots or lol doesn't mean that in general randomness removes skills from gaming. This is a leap in logic. The fact that deterministic environment are very rich doesn't mean that such spaces paired with probabilities aren't richer . That's all. This is a gamers forum so I put forth this approach because we are gamers I should have put it in another thread and made it more clear. Just to be clear: I'm not trying to pick a fight here, but you're conflating different types of skill. In most RPGs, casters have less RNG, not more. The number of effective actions a spell-caster can take is limited by his mana-pool, spells per day, or similar effect. It becomes that much more vital that the action he can take are reliable. Chance-mitigation is a skill, it is not "skill". Call it an "Analytical" skill. Being able to effectively intuit or model the random qualities of a game does reflect on your skill at mitigating the impact of randomness, but it also has a negative impact on the overall skill-level of a game. This is because while the skill-cap on risk-mitigation goes up with every additional random factor, the skill-cap on all the more technically oriented skills (targeting, placement, cover-usage, etc.) all go down. I'm not saying "guns never jam" I'm saying a gun needs to not-jam reliably or its not really a gun. If I design a gun that does more damage than the combined health shield and Ancile on the toughest bot in the game, I could "balance" it by giving it a chance successfully fire equal to 1/(the number of shots the next best weapon would take to kill same bot). The weapon would be mathematically balanced, but in the process I've reduced all the piloting and gunnery skill impact to how effectively can I peak from cover, and replaced that no-longer relevant technical skill with the chance of a miss-fire. There is a reason games of chance are separately categorized vs. games of skill.
|
|
|
Post by Forumite on Apr 22, 2018 12:10:07 GMT -5
**interupting the hate pix circlejerk** Guys....this is the first we heard of them. CHILL OUT. They'll go through changes before they hit live server. Stop with the "pix nails in the coffin just got six inches longer, grave got __ deeper" its so repetitive and you sound like ?falafel?ing trump with his "wall just got 6 feet taller". Lets be honest.. either way you guys will complain, it doesnt matter what Pix does. Stop "threatening" to uninstall or go to BoT.. and just do it.. no one cares, snowflakes. I just love this kind of comment- Ya know- first the insults. Then the admonition to chill out. The gratuitous "Trump " comparison / slam. Then point out that your (we're) just a bunch of malcontents. Almost UNIVERSALLY followed by the "if you dont like it, just go ahead and quit" line. Hey Bub, did you bother to actually read the comments about WHY this sort of thing is a BAD CONCEPT? FOR ANY GAME?? Did it ever OCCUR to YOU that these people actually KNOW what they are talking about? Tell Your Masters that people aren't 「female dog」ing here because it's fun. They are doing it because the car PIX is driving is headed for a cliff and they are to busy messing with the radio to see where they are going. Here's an idea, instead of our quitting the game, why don't YOU quit making 「dookied」 statements about posts you haven't read, don't understand and seem incapable of contributing anything useful to.
|
|