|
Generally in a game like EVE, RNG is a bad thing. EVE thrives on controllable variables. Prudent planning in PVP, precise fits, setting up a good transversal for damage, etc. That includes the success of snatching players in a camp or in a bubble, or producing products. A lot of the content is controlling the environment and as many variables as possible, with the human element being the only truly unknown (to a degree). RNG is frustrating because outside of those environmental variables, it is very annoying to win or lose based on a hidden dice roll. When you begin to add and rely on RNG mechanics, it takes something away from the satisfaction of a well laid plan, or a well researched activity. Two mechanics players hate in games like this the most, in my opinion, are RNG and time-gating "mana" mechanics. They should not be encouraged.
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 20:48 |
|
|
If you're looking at "this RNG has a significant chance to completely gently caress you over and cause you to lose everything", the only way you can compare that to Diablo is back when playing inferno hardcore would randomly tee you up Invulnerable Minions + Vortex + Arcane + Jailer and you're hosed now, goodbye hero That was not a popular feature in that game and was removed for a reason
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
RNG is also why jammers were universally hated
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 03:06
|
|
|
RNG is often not good but we're talking about a game with full second long ticks here. The skill ceiling is not so high. RNG is bad in games with high skill ceilings because it takes elements out of play that are necessary for top tier players to really shine. An entire chorus of people is about to burst out and say "in Eve the real PvP is choosing your engagements and everything being predictable is what lets you do that" but that's not really what the real thing is at all because you don't actually get to pick your engagements - your choice is "play the game and risk getting dropped" or "don't play the game." People who can take the risks, do, and people who can't just log off entirely. New players are not invested in the game, you have to get them invested in the game. You don't get them invested in the game by going "welp you got pointed so you 100% are dying now, learn to not get pointed." That player isn't gonna learn how to avoid points, they're gonna log off forever. RNG in bubbles and points and all that poo poo might be frustrating to the players who are already super established and who are attacking others, but it's a lot less frustrating than being pointed by an assfrig in your first typhoon or whatever. Basically it comes down to the kind of interactions you want players to have. Having an RNG would barely affect strategic null PvP because you'll still be able to average, and it would make "small gang" PvP a bit more dynamic. If that is making you upset, it's because you only do "small gang" PvP when you know you can win - which is fine, but there would probably be more fights if there were less certainty in fights and you have to choose design priorities. "Don't take the fight if you can't win" punishes new players a lot more than old players and so it's probably a bad design decision to emphasize if the goal is to retain new players. I am Pro RNG In Spaceships.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 03:39
|
|
|
See the comment above yours. Jammers were a direct-RNG dependent module, and people, universally, both the people using it and getting hit by it, hated it. Its function is totally out of place in EVE.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 03:45
|
|
|
Randomness of loot drops, randomness of missions given by agents, and randomness of wormhole generation are features that add more to the experience. Just saying "RNG BAD" is missing the point, some RNG is bad and some is good, it has nothing to do with RNG itself, but rather on how it's implemented, the effect it has, and what it aims to accomplish.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 04:28
|
|
|
RNG got a lotta issues but I'll admit I am way more pro-RNG than pro-EVE
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
In 2010, Bungie released Halo: Reach, and with that they added significant crosshair bloom to the primary marksmen weapons in the game. The effect ended up being a massive loss in accuracy and a randomized spread that was very penalizing. It was intended to incentivize players to have trigger discipline, to pause between their shots to insure accuracy, but mathematically it was better to just SPAM AND HOPE rather than wait through the forced absurd pauses between shots to gain acceptable accuracy (This was a failure of execution, but arguably any bloom would reduce the skill gap, just not nearly as significantly). This effectively killed the Halo: Reach pro scene until people hacked in a map without bloom, and Bungie later added in no-bloom playlists, but the damage was already done- interest in competitive Halo was a fraction of what it was during Halo 3. This kind of RNG is generally bad because it directly reduces the effect a skillgap would have, reducing a player's desire to become better, and reducing the satisfaction from being better. In Halo: ODST, there was a game mode called 'Firefight' where people fought against waves and waves of increasingly difficult AI Aliens that tried to kill the defending players. Each wave was randomized in which types of Aliens attacked, and in turn, didn't allow players to have the optimal immediate strategy to defeating said alien wave. (e.g., it was impossible to predict that the next wave would include aerial vehicles, so players wouldn't be pre-setup in positions easily able to focus down aerial vehicles.) This incentivezed players to adopt generalized strategies and adapt as quickly as possible and rely on their skill to carry them through the gameplay instead of gamey solutions (e.g. pre-firing rockets at enemy spawn locations, moving powerful but vulnerable vehicles into optimal positions when you know they'll be safe, etc). This kind of RNG increases the importance of a skillgap, incentivizes players to actually play the game as it was intended, and removes the feeling that the content they're playing is scripted and is more fluid. Everyone knows exactly how Diablo and Path of Exile work, but imagine how dogshit those games would be if instead of randomized drops, the only thing that drops is gold and you just purchase the items you want in a shop. RNG in PvE situations can add significant replayability, and giving players the ability to influence that RNG can also add a lot of replayability. If it didn't then the entire genre of RPGs wouldn't exist. A system in Eve where anomalies and missions could spawn with a bunch of random modifiers that could increase the payouts (Bounties and/or Loot), increase the number of/durability of/damage of rats (but such that you can see exactly what those modifiers are before you enter the site), and other factors (Faction type, Faction/Officer Spawn) could make the PvE in eve much more engaging and incentivize players to want to adapt on the fly and quickly their strategies to optimally solve each anomaly or mission. This wouldn't have a negative impact on a skillgap or information gap, in fact it would increase the effect of an information gap between players as the more knowledgeable players could adapt better, quicker, and make more ISK. There are many ways to make a game utilizing RNG or randomness in a positive way it's really silly to say "all RNG reduces skill gap" or "all rng is bad." iospace posted:RNG is also why jammers were universally hated it's mostly because it was randomly used, and when it was it was very cheap, very effective (for how cheap and easy to use it was) and it's effect was significant in many encounters. It's easy to fit your ship without taking it into consideration and scream "loving RNG GOD DAMNIT" when you get jammed, but skills and a single overheaded ECCM sebo will reduce your chance of getting jammed by 65%. This isn't to say it's a GOOD mechanic, but most of the 'gently caress ecm' camp are from people who got unlucky and don't think their poo poo through.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
Eve already has diablo-style loot rng, you can see this any time some shmuck does a 10/10 and gets overseer effects Changing anomaly parameters in a fully-RNG way seems like the exact opposite of what an Eve pve grognard would want. OK this complex only allows up to battlecruisers, oh no the affixes are capacitor drain and explosive damage and the two random spawns are both webbers and I'm scrammed and my billion isk pve yacht is about to get loving dumpstered, thanks random affixes, see you next time Incursions were supposed to introduce moderate pve RNG and the very first thing the players did was hammer out a precise uniform formula on what to bring every time so that they could eliminate their chance of losing ships
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 05:52
|
|
|
Ad by Khad posted:Changing anomaly parameters in a fully-RNG way seems like the exact opposite of what an Eve pve grognard would want. OK this complex only allows up to battlecruisers, oh no the affixes are capacitor drain and explosive damage and the two random spawns are both webbers and I'm scrammed and my billion isk pve yacht is about to get loving dumpstered, thanks random affixes, see you next time read: " could spawn " and "but such that you can see exactly what those modifiers are before you enter the site". Some people just want afkable pve, which is fine and all, but it should clearly be less effective and profitable than active pve, hence making some sites be harder and require some forethought for much better rewards. Properly implemented it would be a good middleground and way to push better players/active players ahead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:00
|
|
|
arent incursions basically the "active pve" you are asking for we used to have incursions occasionally spawn in goonspace and for a long time unless you were in that specific small group it was pretty fuckin rare for anyone to even go near them unless they blocked a major jump bridge and then the directorate would yell at us to the most common reason i remember for no one being interested in them was no one really had the right ships ready to go, and a random-affix pve situation in eve is going to mean that if you haven't invested the potentially large sums of money it would require to set yourself up right for that instance, you aint doing it
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:05
|
|
|
people do incursions in nullsec all the time huh what a weird derailment
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:13
|
|
|
all the more reason my question stands, then if people do nullsec incursions now that's fine, i haven't played in a year since i got tired of how frequent the racial slurs were, i don't know what the current universe is like
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:16
|
|
|
what question? how do you get so hung up on some comparison of random affix anoms and incursions when we're talking about RNG overall in game design it was an example of how RNG can increase the skill gap of players, when other posters simplified it only being able to do the opposite.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:20
|
|
|
1001 Arabian dicks posted:what question? Ad by Khad posted:arent incursions basically the "active pve" you are asking for
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:21
|
|
|
you can't just 'do' incursions, they're of limited availability and limited by region, they're different than what i proposed, and incursions don't have effective randomness which is also completely beside the point, that RNG can cause a skill gap to widen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:26
|
|
|
o ok excuse me for the faux pas of not posting about exactly what you want to talk about, i wasn't really paying attention
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:29
|
|
|
Ad by Khad posted:excuse me i wasn't really paying attention you are excused
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:36
|
|
|
The fastest way to kill an incursion was to have it inconvenience Theta. Or GSOL, who then asked Theta to kill it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:37
|
|
|
yeah i scrambled up a guardian to help GSOL kill an incursion quick a few times they deal with enough bullshit already without having their lifelines go offline, least i could do
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 06:40
|
|
|
causticBeet posted:While CCP is taking wild stabs in the dark in an attempt to make their game bearable to play again, they should look into reworking nullification and warp disruption. I hate this idea. Good gate campers already have a chance to bump my nullified Proteus if they are quick. If they just had a straight up percentage chance to kill me outright I would never fly such an expensive ship. The attrition would be too costly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 08:17
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Good gate campers already have a chance to bump my nullified Proteus if they are quick. If they just had a straight up percentage chance to kill me outright I would never fly such an expensive ship. The attrition would be too costly. impossible, fit more istabs
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 08:40
|
|
|
how is this game still alive and im dead
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 07:28
|
|
|
1001 Arabian dicks posted:RNG can make a game more fun: see path of exile RNG can make a game insufferable: See World of Warship
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 13:31
|
|
|
Dalael posted:RNG can make a game insufferable: See World of Warship Don’t speak that evil here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 14:41
|
|
|
RNG adds to a game where: 1) it adds a gambling aspect that keeps people coming back (e.g. diablo loot) 2) it adds a certain amount of variance to a competitive game so that (a) newer players can win sometimes and feel like they have a chance against better players and (b) people can blame their losses on bad luck instead of being bad at the game while their victories are all purely their skill (this is also important for newer players so they don't feel bad about losing). note that, especially for (b) nobody is ever going to say they like that aspect or usually even notice it. it's all about self-deception so you're having fun. 3) it adds variation to the game so that it stays fresh and complex instead of getting boring quick (e.g. diablo randomized dungeons) as applied to EVE the game is absolutely crying out for its PVE activities to get a whole lot of RNG both (a) to have good loot again (most loot is out of date trash or barely better than normal) and (b) to make it much more interesting for PVP you could see there being some value in breaking up the nearly absolute deterministic nature of eve pvp in 95% of circumstances (as in, #2 above) - gang A will beat gang B because of its size/composition unless gang A mass disconnects for most types of fleets you might see in small gang pvp. you really only get the random element when it gets so huge that being able to execute your plan is an iffy preposition due to the server. elite players will rage about it, but if done properly (and i realize this is the "assume a frictionless world with no gravity" assumption w/r/t ccp) it could make eve pvp more fun for the people who are worse at it, which will actually get them to undock and risk it. that said, most randomized elements of eve pvp sound agressively unfun. a bubble that only mostly catches people does not seem like it's gonna do anything to make things more fun for the winning side or the losing side. it just means a few of the people on the losing side will escape.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
The EVE thread has turned into the boardgameing thread! This argument is pretty regular. Dice rolls can be good and they can be bad, but there is an easy rule of thumb to decide which one it is. Does the dice roll come before or after the players decision? For example dice rolls can be used to make a random game map, this happens before anyone makes any decision and is good randomness as a result. The opposite is "roll to hit", the player decides what they want to do (hit an opponent) and the dice decide if that happens or not. This is bad randomness and reduces the game to Craps. Decisions should be meaningfull.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:2) it adds a certain amount of variance to a competitive game so that (a) newer players can win sometimes and feel like they have a chance against better players and (b) people can blame their losses on bad luck instead of being bad at the game while their victories are all purely their skill (this is also important for newer players so they don't feel bad about losing). note that, especially for (b) nobody is ever going to say they like that aspect or usually even notice it. it's all about self-deception so you're having fun. This type of randomness is just as likely to frustrate new people when they lose to it. It's a zero sum.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:This type of randomness is just as likely to frustrate new people when they lose to it. It's a zero sum. wrong. it's not zero sum, that's the entire point. new players can feel frustrated they lost to variance or frustrated they lost to getting steamrolled by someone better at the game than they are. they prefer the former and so they tell themselves that's what happened even when what actually happened was the latter the fundamental thing they don't like is losing, but you can't have winners without losers, so you need to make the losers feel better about losing and willing to keep playing until they're good at it
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
"dice roll before player decision" is basically exactly how diablo inferno hardcore worked, and once you stumbled into the wrong section of your screen your decision was which class you want to re-roll now that you've lost this character you spent dozens of hours on
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:wrong. it's not zero sum, that's the entire point. That's true to a point, but I don't think it would work as well in the context of Eve. Magic the gathering for example has mana screw (drawing all lands, or no lands) which means you are going to lose at least 10% of your games just due to chance. That means new players can always blame their land draws for losses and keep playing. It works great in Magic because it's (mostly) a one on one duling game. Most of the time when you get into PvP in EVE it is a completly unfair fight. You are going to lose anyway (RNG or not) when you get jumped 10 to 1. The RNG can be overcome by throwing more bodies at the problem, which organized groups can do and new players can not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 16:25
|
|
|
Here's my way to fix PVE in Eve: Don't just have a list of 40 pre-scripted encounters that you can read the exact drops from including what triggers the next waves from a website like Eve Survival. Instead, have stuff you actually have to respond to and like, interact with. It won't save anom grinding with supers but that's actually active play anyhow at least, since you have to click on things and press the murder button. Like since we're doing the tabletop talk, even loving garbage tier tabletop games will give you encounter tables so that it's not the same thing every time lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:RNG adds to a game where: I think a key part of this is also how the player hedges against the RNG. In a tabletop game, this might mean stacking bonuses to make it more likely that you succeed. The magnitude of specialization toward defeating that particular RNG determines if the thing you are doing is a hail-mary gimmick (the wizard smacking someone with his staff), or something you are actually specialized in (the fighter smacking someone with his sword). If you are specialized in something, it should be entirely possible to trivialize the RNG related to that something. And that specialization should be about tradeoffs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 16:36
|
|
|
Any game that claims, in any way, to be attempting to “simulate” something requires some RNG—because everything boils down to probability. For example, just look at eve’s gun damage model. Tracking, signature, speed, etc go into the calculation; however at the end of the day, there is an dice roll to see the actual damage within a specified range a turret does. RNG is all the gently caress over games like eve at a very fundamental level, so you cannot really say “I totally hate RNG content in eve,” because it is a necessary part of the game; however, I get it... when something like a bubble has a massive and visible RNG component, the player experience is going to mostly suck.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
What you just described, especially wrt turrets, isn't really "RNG" because it's not truly random. There are a ton of controllable variables. The random portion of the RNG is extremely limited. Having a bubble fail to catch someone based on a hidden dice roll, however, IS purely random, and I think there is a difference between the two, and most people don't care as much about the former as much as they hate the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 18:23
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Any game that claims, in any way, to be attempting to “simulate” something requires some RNG—because everything boils down to probability. For example, just look at eve’s gun damage model. The RNG in weapon damage may as well not exist. You are shooting your gun enough times in any particular fight that the volume of dice rolls will just average the damage out. That's why the game provides a DPS number.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
CCP Falcon made a reddit post wrt to capitals, and it's probably the first thing said by someone at CCP I've agreed with in years:quote:I really miss battleship slugfests and dread slugfests too. That's my kinda fighting. Flying in and punching each other in the face until one side falls over or pulls out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
15 sentry drones? Lol please CCP make carrier ratting even more mindless. Edit: I read that too fast, he wants to prevent capitals from warping to annomalies at all. Oh wow, that's going to be popular. Rutibex fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Jul 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
I'm amused to see that after winning EVE for five years because I got sick of every subcap fight ending when one side dropped 20 titans on the other, CCP still haven't managed to solve supercapital proliferation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 20:48 |
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:I'm amused to see that after winning EVE for five years because I got sick of every subcap fight ending when one side dropped 20 titans on the other, CCP still haven't managed to solve supercapital proliferation. See what they need to add is an even bigger ship which launches super carriers as fighters, and carriers as drones. That'll fix everything I'll take my paycheck now ccp
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2019 21:12
|
|