Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

## Forcing RNG into Aspects of the Game. What's the Philosophy behind ?

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

R3per_Inc

Unregistered

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 3:49pm

### Quoted from "R3per_Inc"

Alone this goes against everything I learned in automata theory and discrete mathematics:

Hmm what's the argument against that quote? I can see the problem with part "...is not deterministically linked anymore...". While yes, your action+"miss" lead to the state where the other guy killed your unit is not deterministically linked due to dice, it's not linked deterministically backwards either unless your action+"miss" was the only path to the state.

His examples of a match could be described as a non-deterministic automata, which in turn can be transformed in an equivalent deterministic automata. Since a match has a clear start and end state, we don't have an omega automata, so the inputlanguage is also equivalent. in the end we can describe the match in the same way like he claimed we couldn't for games with random factors.

Can't get a title

Posts: 1,531

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 13

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 3:55pm

To play devil's advocate:

Whilst the Sirlin.net article is as always, excellent, I don't see how it answers ARE5R06's question. As he states himself:

### Quoted from "ARE5R06"

Actually then the only Factor to test the adaptability is the enemy player and his options.

RNG in weapon spread/recoil is not a flexible system. In BF, it has always acted as a hard cap on your effective engagement range. There is no real "adaptive solution" in controlling spread/recoil, rather, there is a "fixed solution," as there is always an optimal burst length for every range.

I think Miffyli's post is probably the best answer we have: there are more variables to work with when balancing weapons. However, this feels like a shallow reason to me, and it doesn't nearly satisfy my curiosity.

So is there a deeper reason for random spread/recoil? What am I missing?
something something Model 8 bestgun

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

Next, wanna try adding a guy that you KNOW is bad, and just testing to see that? Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

PP-2000 added. Y'know, it's not that bad....

Yes, it comes in last so far, but that is mostly because I'm making it shoot at 100m ADS - Not Moving as one of the criteria. Even then, between 50-100m Not Moving, when you include Useability, it is only 1.37% worse than the MTAR-21. Within 50m then it even beats the A-91.

Have a look, vs. the A-91 Carbine:

Using it with Muzzle Brake and Compensator is a wash in terms of overall performance. Comp is SLIGHTLY more accurate, while MB is SLIGHTLY more easy to use. Their overall scores are basically tied, with MB just ahead. I guess either can be recommended.

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

But... You can't be counting for the fact that it takes 9 bullets to kill at "long" range... Don't you dare tell me my A-91 is worse than a 9 BTK 650 RPM mediocre PDW.

Also. Just go heavy barrel. The recoil is low enough.

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

Well, technically...

Comparing a PP2K with HB and an A-91 with comp and stubby (as you suggested in an earlier post), at 50m not moving, the A-91 is only better by 4 damage per hitrate. While at 75m and 100m, surprisingly the PP2K does better than the A-91 (I'm pretty damn surprised as well).

And 10m and 50m moving the PP2K also does more damage per hitrate than the A-91. At 25m the A-91 is only better by about half a bullet's damage as well.

In addition, the PP2K has a much larger mag size and substantially less recoil. And it looks hella awesome. So comparing the A-91 to a PDW is of some worth after all, as the PP2K is better (technically, not practically) than the A-91.

Mind blown.

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

### Quoted from "Veritable"

Zer0Cod3x explained it very well. If you look at the raw numbers right here on Symthic Comparison, you can see how that happened:

A-91 vs PP-2000 | BF4 Weapon Comparison | Symthic

A-91's "23%" RPM advantage only afforded it 1 extra round.

Reload times are wash.

Velocities are wash.

V-Recoil are wash (and this is HBar on PP2k vs. A-91 without).

Hipfire and ADS - Moving are better on the PP2k, but it's a PDW and not the surprising part.

The surprising part is that, as equipped (and we see above that PP2k HBar has almost same V-Recoil as A-91 without HBar so why not?), the PDW performs better at 50 - 100m than a bloody Carbine. Why?

H-Recoil Spread, 0.525 vs. 0.45, advantage PP2k.

SIPS, 42% better on the PP2k.

And here is the most important part. ADS - Not Moving Spread, 0.35 vs. 0.2, 43% improvement.

Without HBar then of course the PP2k loses, which is why when I add all the attachments together for an Overall Ranking, it would slot below the A-91. Run HBar on it, though, then... I'm sorry

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

@Veritable
@Zer0Cod3x
I... I...
But...
Wha...
I AM HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS IN SCHOOL BECAUSE OF YOU TWO.

FUCK YOU NERDS AND YOUR FANCY NUMBERS

SEXY RUSSIAN BULLPUPS FTW.

In all seriousness, thank you both so much for giving me the numbers. I still don't want to accept them. You have led the horse to water. I still need to drink.

Posts: 940

Date of registration
: Dec 14th 2014

Platform: PS3

Location: The Heart of Europe

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 4:05pm

### Quoted from "Miffyli"

If the pellets were fired in fixed pattern the distribution of the pellets wouldn't be the original "anywhere in this area but focus on middle"

Does it need to be "anywhere in this area but focus on middle" ? That's exactly the contradiction in the RNG approach I was talking about in the Original Post. Random pattern generated -> increase pellets -> random effect decreased.
The pattern might as well just look like the following example picture and consistency is reached as well.

### Spoiler

I know these are many pellets, but the number can decrease while keeping a non-random-pattern

still playin' Motorstorm

Pinkie

Posts: 7,809

Date of registration
: Feb 25th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: italy

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 4:37pm

### Quoted from "Miffyli"

Big breasty anime characters from one of those roleplay games? I dunno exactly what to call it but like I said, I wouldn't want to open such stuff at work (or at least I would like to be warned about the contents beforehand) :v

oh come on now, "big breasted" they don't even have 3rd/C size!
: P

### Quoted from "ARE5R06"

Players are forced on adaptability by the map and even the maps have just a few tactics.

e.g. Dragon Valley 2k15: Backcap flags and keep/get the IFV flag.

But oh wait, that's basically the strategy of every map.

i mean, i don't want to be that guy(no i'm lying, i want to), but there are other modes, and conquest has been proven multiple times to not be the most balanced gamemode, especially after a couple minutes due to flag assets, that is why i think metro and locker are so poopular aside from their meatgrinder nature, in their stupidity, they are actually -coneptually- the most balanced maps in the game for conquest as they have pretty much no flag assets, aside from hmgs on locker which can be taken down and high ground on metro(but that applies only for the RU side)
"I'm just a loot whore."

### stuff mostly unrelated to BF4 that interests nobody

bf4
on 13/05/2016
23rd M320FB user on pc(13/05/16)
rush mode score RANK:2794 TOP:2% OUT OF:215398
obliteration mode scoreRANK:994 TOP:1% OUT OF:159466
handgun medals RANK:2236 TOP:2% OUT OF:143874
longest headshot RANK:9512 TOP:4% OUT OF:257589
recon score RANK:10871 TOP:4% OUT OF:274899
general score per minute RANK:10016 TOP:4% OUT OF:294774

bf3
31/3/2012 4:58:

Headshot distance RANK:493* TOP:0%
Revives per assault minute RANK: 6019 TOP: 3%
Headshots / kill percentage RANK:25947 TOP:13%
MVP ribbons RANK:18824 TOP:11%

*= 6 if we not count the EOD BOT headshots

### Quoted from "CobaltRose"

@kataklism

ARGUMENT DESTROYED 100

ENEMY KILLED [REASON] JSLICE20 100

WRITING SPREE STOPPED 500

link to full-size old avatar:
http://i.imgur.com/4X0321O.gif

Symthic Developer

Posts: 3,719

Date of registration
: Mar 21st 2013

Platform: PC

Location: __main__, Finland

Reputation modifier: 17

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 4:57pm

@R3per_Inc
Ah yes of course! I am bit dumb when it comes to automata stuff .
I figure the writer didn't mean the automata deterministic, instead he was trying to say "we can't tell which action led to this situation". I didn't read the whole text so I am not sure if he was using automata to describe that situation.

@ARE5R06
Actually in this case the "more randomness" leads to more consistency you can learn, but yeah I get what you mean. Personally I would just stick with RNG simply because it's easier to implement instead of generating list of vectors that point where which pellet should be fired at.
Links to users' thread list who have made analytical/statistical/mathematical/cool posts on Symthic:
• 3VerstsNorth - Analysis of game mechanics in BF4 (tickrates, effects of tickrate, etc)
• leptis - Analysis of shotguns, recoil, recoil control and air drag.
• Veritable - Scoring of BF4/BF1 firearms in terms of usability, firing and other mechanics.
• Miffyli - Random statistical analysis of BF4 battlereports/players and kill-distances. (list is cluttered with other threads).
Sorry if your name wasn't on the list, I honestly can't recall all names : ( . Nudge me if you want to be included

Up and down. Bounce all around

Posts: 3,100

Date of registration
: Apr 15th 2013

Platform: PC

Location: Sweden

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 5:05pm

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

RNG in weapon spread/recoil is not a flexible system. In BF, it has always acted as a hard cap on your effective engagement range. There is no real "adaptive solution" in controlling spread/recoil, rather, there is a "fixed solution," as there is always an optimal burst length for every range.

I think Miffyli's post is probably the best answer we have: there are more variables to work with when balancing weapons. However, this feels like a shallow reason to me, and it doesn't nearly satisfy my curiosity.

So is there a deeper reason for random spread/recoil? What am I missing?
You are missing that in BF weapons aren't balanced by "cost" or "rarity" like in CSGO (barring Battle Pickups). Guns in BF are balanced through opportunity cost.

The "adaptive solution" in BF is to adaptively pick your class, weapons and gadgets and adapting throughout the game to get the most out of your gear and preventing the enemy from getting the most out of their gear.

Without random deviation (both spread and recoil) it would be possible to learn how to get 100 % accuracy with any weapon (even worse, it would make macros incredibly powerful, potentially removing the "skill" in aiming/shooting altogether). You would always be best of picking the highest DPS weapon and learning the recoil of that gun. Increasing the recoil to ridiculous levels wouldn't do anything either, people would just tie a DPI toggle to LMB and/or RMB + consoles would get boned.

Sure, it's possible to have "the highest DPS weapon" vary with range using ROF and damage curves, but it wouldn't be possible to meaningfully balance the amount weapons that we see in BF games against each other using only those variables.

TL;DR would be: RNG elements adds more balance variables. Guns in BF aren't balanced by "cost"/"rarity", BF has more guns to chose from than most other FPSes and combat is very diverse and happens over a vast range of ranges (*harhar*) -> lots of variables are needed. More variables also leads to more unique feeling guns -> more interesting gunplay.

### Quoted from "NoctyrneSAGA"

It really is quite frustrating when Helen Keller sets up her LMG in the only doorway in/out of an area.

### Quoted from "Watcher-45"

What kind of question is that? Since when is cheese ever a bad idea?

### Quoted from "LeGarcon"

Hardline is a fun and sometimes silly Cops and Robbers sorta thing and I think that's great. Or it would be if it didn't suck.

Posts: 258

Date of registration
: Jun 5th 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Hoth

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 5:56pm

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

RNG in weapon spread/recoil is not a flexible system. In BF, it has always acted as a hard cap on your effective engagement range. There is no real "adaptive solution" in controlling spread/recoil, rather, there is a "fixed solution," as there is always an optimal burst length for every range.

I think Miffyli's post is probably the best answer we have: there are more variables to work with when balancing weapons. However, this feels like a shallow reason to me, and it doesn't nearly satisfy my curiosity.

So is there a deeper reason for random spread/recoil? What am I missing?

Without random deviation (both spread and recoil) it would be possible to learn how to get 100 % accuracy with any weapon (even worse, it would make macros incredibly powerful, potentially removing the "skill" in aiming/shooting altogether). You would always be best of picking the highest DPS weapon and learning the recoil of that gun. Increasing the recoil to ridiculous levels wouldn't do anything either, people would just tie a DPI toggle to LMB and/or RMB + consoles would get boned.

Sure, it's possible to have "the highest DPS weapon" vary with range using ROF and damage curves, but it wouldn't be possible to meaningfully balance the amount weapons that we see in BF games against each other using only those variables.

Pretty much what I wanted to say.

Also, even if a model without random deviation could meaningfully balance Bf4's arsenal, it would be very unintuitive compared to the combination of damage dropoff and spread currently in use, as it would have to include "invisible" variables such as damage sweetspots and damage increase per shot/decrease per second.

Things I support

ammo regen pls

_____

### Quoted from "Skanic"

When I play with it [Autoloading 8] I feel like I am batman taking out 1 after 1 baddie while they feel helpless and don't know who is talking out their mates.

### Quoted from "TheSkillCommittee"

Remove 3D spotting. It’s a mechanic that rewards bad eyesight.

### Quoted from "Rezal"

Wanna help your team by sneaking through enemy territory to provide spawns? THIS IS NOT TEAMWORK FGT I HOPE YOU RUN OUT OF MOTION BALLS TOO EARLY TO BE SUCCESSFUL
Wanna be Javelin squad but only have two guys? BETTER NOT GET YOUR SOFLAM KILLED FGT THIS IS NOT TEAMWORK WITHOUT A SUPPORT DUDE DROPPING AMMO ON YOU EVERY 2 MINUTES

### Quoted from "Hau_ruck"

Please post your best M1916 clips Magazines *fixed*.

### DICE pls

Squadmate Healthbars in the HUD
Minor console QoL improvements
Ping Tool idea
"Wants to talk" tag for squad menu
Spotting suggestions

Posts I should finish sometime:
Squad priority vehicle system (and anti stealing suggestion)
Scoring system flaws (and concept)
Battlefield definition
New helicopter idea
Suppression rework
Flow, immersion and fun in battlefield
Specializations: ideas and system rework
Gadget reworks and ideas
Why limited infinite ammo would be awesome
Other bitesize ideas

### Cool/Useful Links (never updated)

Posts: 940

Date of registration
: Dec 14th 2014

Platform: PS3

Location: The Heart of Europe

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 6:20pm

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

RNG in weapon spread/recoil is not a flexible system. In BF, it has always acted as a hard cap on your effective engagement range. There is no real "adaptive solution" in controlling spread/recoil, rather, there is a "fixed solution," as there is always an optimal burst length for every range.

I think Miffyli's post is probably the best answer we have: there are more variables to work with when balancing weapons. However, this feels like a shallow reason to me, and it doesn't nearly satisfy my curiosity.

So is there a deeper reason for random spread/recoil? What am I missing?

Without random deviation (both spread and recoil) it would be possible to learn how to get 100 % accuracy with any weapon (even worse, it would make macros incredibly powerful, potentially removing the "skill" in aiming/shooting altogether). You would always be best of picking the highest DPS weapon and learning the recoil of that gun. Increasing the recoil to ridiculous levels wouldn't do anything either, people would just tie a DPI toggle to LMB and/or RMB + consoles would get boned.

Sure, it's possible to have "the highest DPS weapon" vary with range using ROF and damage curves, but it wouldn't be possible to meaningfully balance the amount weapons that we see in BF games against each other using only those variables.

Pretty much what I wanted to say.

Also, even if a model without random deviation could meaningfully balance Bf4's arsenal, it would be very unintuitive compared to the combination of damage dropoff and spread currently in use, as it would have to include "invisible" variables such as damage sweetspots and damage increase per shot/decrease per second.

The RNG is still a balancing tool then. (Actually it makes a lot of sense to implement it then from a developer perspective, so cheating/makro becomes more difficult)

However, the way the RNG system is implemented still doesnt contribute to the "Solveability" or better said "Un-Solveability" of the game.

In this case its for balancing/anti-cheat purposes only.

Would explain, why developers do it, but it doesnt create more "depth", if that is their goal.
still playin' Motorstorm

Pinkie

Posts: 7,809

Date of registration
: Feb 25th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: italy

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 6:31pm

maybe i'm just too dumb and not looking too much into it, but isn't variety+situation-based choices=depth? that would be enough for me to say that it has more depth than something which is purely basic either in terms of choices and/or playstyle...
"I'm just a loot whore."

### stuff mostly unrelated to BF4 that interests nobody

bf4
on 13/05/2016
23rd M320FB user on pc(13/05/16)
rush mode score RANK:2794 TOP:2% OUT OF:215398
obliteration mode scoreRANK:994 TOP:1% OUT OF:159466
handgun medals RANK:2236 TOP:2% OUT OF:143874
longest headshot RANK:9512 TOP:4% OUT OF:257589
recon score RANK:10871 TOP:4% OUT OF:274899
general score per minute RANK:10016 TOP:4% OUT OF:294774

bf3
31/3/2012 4:58:

Headshot distance RANK:493* TOP:0%
Revives per assault minute RANK: 6019 TOP: 3%
Headshots / kill percentage RANK:25947 TOP:13%
MVP ribbons RANK:18824 TOP:11%

*= 6 if we not count the EOD BOT headshots

### Quoted from "CobaltRose"

@kataklism

ARGUMENT DESTROYED 100

ENEMY KILLED [REASON] JSLICE20 100

WRITING SPREE STOPPED 500

link to full-size old avatar:
http://i.imgur.com/4X0321O.gif

PvF 2017 Champion

Posts: 7,160

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

Thursday, July 21st 2016, 7:54pm

### Quoted from "ARE5R06"

Shotguns in BF4, use RNG to distribute the pellets. But in order to fight their inconsistency, DICE LA increased the pellet count. Why to use the RNG element in the first place, if steps need to be taken to counter the Random Element. A pre distributed Area of Pellets would have had the same effect to fight inconsistency.

IIRC this was to bring the damage you dealt closer to what it should have been.

Low pellet count with high damage means that there are big "steps" that leave huge gaps between what damage you should have done.

Just as an example, 8 pellets that do 16 damage. You fire and should be dealing 75 damage. The two closest numbers are 64 and 80.

By increasing pellet count and reducing damage, your damage can wind up much closer to the intended damage than before.

At least this is what I remember.
Data Browser

Passive Spotting is the future!

With this, I'll rid MGO3 of infestation. Sans bad gameplay MGO3 will be torn asunder. And then it shall be free. People will suffer, of course - a phantom pain.

Reddit and Konami will rewrite the records... And I will be demonized in human memory. But... The thirst for good gameplay that I have planted will infest MGO3. No one can stop it now. The Rebalance Mod will unleash that thirst unto the future.

Are you a scrub?

### Quoted from "blahdy"

If it flies, it dies™.

2 guests