Style:    Language:

Author Topic: sportmanship and random imba luck  (Read 3890 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AP3

  • League Executioner
  • Chariot
  • ****
  • Posts: 318
  • Gender: Male
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #30 on: March 05, 2010, 12:17:44 PM »
I have seen this done in another game, and lots of people liked it.  I personally hated it, made the game too predictable.

Axis and Allies has an online version where the dice roll is removed.  The results are known before the attack is done.  You can preview each attack round to decide if you continue your attacks.

Anyway I am too lazy to explain the whole concept for A&A.


Offline gabriel

  • Keshik
  • *****
  • Posts: 357
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #31 on: March 05, 2010, 03:53:49 PM »
I guess random factor reflect history and put more realism in game.
Some times few man stood agains many and won just from being better that day or being more motivated to win.
Some times the general would fall from horse and let his army in panic and lose 5v1 ratio.Some times few attacked massive forces from surprize and create panic and instead of suiciding they put huge armies on run.
Most of times who used army better was winner,we don't have that in civ,if u have a lot of shit dosn't matter how you use them.There they should work i guess.

So i guess random is ok.

Offline SirPartyMan

  • Head Tournament Director
  • Global Moderator
  • Ironclad
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #32 on: March 05, 2010, 04:18:21 PM »
Some games have no luck (i.e. chess) - some games are *ALL* luck (i.e. LOTTO).  The best games in my opinion, are a mixture of skill and luck (e.g. poker, backgammon to name just two).

Anyone who's played CIV over the years knows that RNG has been a factor since CIV1.  How boring if we always knew the outcome of a battle, and as Gabriel points out, how unrealistic.  There is luck in many other aspects of the game as well (e.g. random maps, random civ/leaders, random events, ties on Wonders, shuffle teams, start separately team distribution, and more). Yet we play with most of these options turned on all the time.   

It seems in this thread, which I think is pretty interesting, actually, a few "elite" players are annoyed when they lose a battle they think they should win based on their superior skills, when the odds strongly favor them.  Of course this doesn't happen often, but it does happen.  To me, that's one of the factors that makes the game interesting, and battles exciting.  If all battles were pre-determined, how boring that would be. 

Sid Meier is a genius in my opinion.  And I respect his fundamental decision that RNG should be an essential part of the battle system, just as luck and other variables enter into real life battle as well.  The winner in a battle or war cannot be 100% accurately predicted in real life either.  Sometimes David does conquer Goliath, against all odds.

I realize it's fun for people to speculate about ways the game could be different, and that's fine.  Game players for years have been complaining about their bad luck. That's normal and expected also. 

88.9% odds are just that. How is it fair to lose a battle which is 50-50 half the time, but it isn't fair to lose a battle that is 20%-80% every 5th time, or 2%-98% every fiftieth time?

What's amusing to me, is these same elite players when they benefit from luck, never say, "I didn't deserve to capture that city -I was just lucky".  In those cases, it was their skill, that made the difference, of course (LOL).

Best, SPM 
« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 06:01:04 PM by SirPartyMan »

Offline Atomation

  • Infantry
  • *********
  • Posts: 1434
  • Gender: Male
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #33 on: March 05, 2010, 07:50:32 PM »
I guess random factor reflect history and put more realism in game.
Some times few man stood agains many and won just from being better that day or being more motivated to win.
Some times the general would fall from horse and let his army in panic and lose 5v1 ratio.Some times few attacked massive forces from surprize and create panic and instead of suiciding they put huge armies on run.
Most of times who used army better was winner,we don't have that in civ,if u have a lot of shit dosn't matter how you use them.There they should work i guess.

So i guess random is ok.

This is nonsense.  In real life, there isn't any randomness - just unknowns.  Just because you aren't privy to all the information doesn't make it random.  And there's always the option to go out and find more information to make more informed decisions.  But randomness doesn't exist (at least not on the macro scale, of which we are talking).

So if you want to make things more realistic, you just need to add more variables and more opportunities for people to make decisions.  This way the "randomness" lies in how players make decisions, which adds more flavor to the game in that players can attempt to accurately predict other player's actions.  When you add a completely random system such as an rng to the game, there is absolutely no strategy involved whatsoever (probability isn't a strategy, because there are too few outcomes for it to be accurate).
"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion." -Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations

"I like free workers."
-corporate ceo

“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent” ~ ~ Eleanor Roosevelt

"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite." -John Kenneth Galbraith

Offline Atomation

  • Infantry
  • *********
  • Posts: 1434
  • Gender: Male
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #34 on: March 05, 2010, 07:51:37 PM »
Some games have no luck (i.e. chess) - some games are *ALL* luck (i.e. LOTTO).  The best games in my opinion, are a mixture of skill and luck (e.g. poker, backgammon to name just two).

Anyone who's played CIV over the years knows that RNG has been a factor since CIV1.  How boring if we always knew the outcome of a battle, and as Gabriel points out, how unrealistic.  There is luck in many other aspects of the game as well (e.g. random maps, random civ/leaders, random events, ties on Wonders, shuffle teams, start separately team distribution, and more). Yet we play with most of these options turned on all the time.   

It seems in this thread, which I think is pretty interesting, actually, a few "elite" players are annoyed when they lose a battle they think they should win based on their superior skills, when the odds strongly favor them.  Of course this doesn't happen often, but it does happen.  To me, that's one of the factors that makes the game interesting, and battles exciting.  If all battles were pre-determined, how boring that would be. 

Sid Meier is a genius in my opinion.  And I respect his fundamental decision that RNG should be an essential part of the battle system, just as luck and other variables enter into real life battle as well.  The winner in a battle or war cannot be 100% accurately predicted in real life either.  Sometimes David does conquer Goliath, against all odds.

I realize it's fun for people to speculate about ways the game could be different, and that's fine.  Game players for years have been complaining about their bad luck. That's normal and expected also. 

88.9% odds are just that. How is it fair to lose a battle which is 50-50 half the time, but it isn't fair to lose a battle that is 20%-80% every 5th time, or 2%-98% every fiftieth time?

What's amusing to me, is these same elite players when they benefit from luck, never say, "I didn't deserve to capture that city -I was just lucky".  In those cases, it was their skill, that made the difference, of course (LOL).

Best, SPM 

Chess actually does have luck, at lower levels of skill.  You can bumble into a winning position if both players really haven't thought enough about what will happen down the road.  Civ could easily be similar to this, but better.
"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion." -Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations

"I like free workers."
-corporate ceo

“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent” ~ ~ Eleanor Roosevelt

"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite." -John Kenneth Galbraith

Offline GEFORCED

  • Warrior
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #35 on: March 05, 2010, 07:58:54 PM »
lol spm, how can you compare an inside straight draw to a 10% warrior rush?

i WANT my opponent to go all in with a 10% chance of winning, they can do it to me 24/7, that's fucking awesome return on my money.

For the same respect in your civ description the losing 10% should be removed from the game. but they don't they lose free/10 hammer warrior. Don't you see the costs are different in those scenarios?

civ was gg'd when weak players thought they were good for taking 10% on warrior (respectable players never did such bullshit) i remember one game gc nero 2-3 archers lost to mine on flat, i didnt capture the city. Why, because it's bullshit.

i use to fucking start shouting DON'T KILL to team mates when such bullshit happens in games - and it did happen, i consider it game ruining to take 10%. When players did that shit i booted them from games for wasting 1 hour or so. Of course i played most days and had won the heart and minds of the people -_-, now people are like geforced who?

Yes well done for killing with warrior start dec, my fuking hero. Doesn't take a genius to figure out taking 10% odds with all 5 team mates = 50% to win the game right there and then.

I would like to see civ5 with no unknown variables (RNG). It limits the ability to plan ahead, your limited to only the known variables and constants which constraints players vision and skill.

How far can you go into plotting and predicting enemies reactions and moves in chess if pieces have to roll a dice and hit even numbers to capture a piece. The strategy would be vastly limited.

btw, poker needs those bad beats to survival, if a poorer players cant win even when making mistakes, he won't play - and the economy would collapse completely.

What would the ancient warrior rushing newbs do if they couldnt win with a bit of RNG - they might actually have to learn the game..

Offline GEFORCED

  • Warrior
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #36 on: March 05, 2010, 08:04:40 PM »
MLL is correct, nothing is ever random..

A Roll of a dice only has one outcome, we just don't have the ability to take in all the variables, movement/ gravity / speed.

The better civ and poker players have their own methods to increase the number of variables that are available to come to an discussion. for example previous game/hand history of players, build order / hand selection etc

if people were smarter we would know whether to quit / fold a game turn 1. With all variables known.

Offline RedPhoenix

  • CCCAC
  • Maceman
  • ******
  • Posts: 555
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #37 on: March 05, 2010, 09:10:57 PM »
Its impossible to put enough variables into a computer game to make it realistic without a random factor. RNG.

You'd need 100.000.000 different factors for morale alone, terrain, position of troops in battlefield, etc.

It never was possible for generals in real life to calculate all these factors of randomness anyway, since they are about each of your 100.000 soldiers variables that all effect the outcome.

Basically war has always been about odds.. you can calculate to enough certainty you have say, 75% chance to win a given battle, but certain variables can always turn it around. So as close as we can get is to make it random.

We could always increase different variables and lessen the effect of the random RNG in relation to those. But the game would become insanely about micro management then, and become impossible to play in quick turns.

Random is just the only option for a computer game.

I do still hope there are a lot more other variables to consider in battles than just RNG in Civ5 though. To make it a little bit more about true strategy, not just about the RNG. But you can never remove the random factor.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 09:11:55 PM by RedPhoenix »

Offline SirPartyMan

  • Head Tournament Director
  • Global Moderator
  • Ironclad
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #38 on: March 05, 2010, 10:48:24 PM »
lol spm, how can you compare an inside straight draw to a 10% warrior rush?

i WANT my opponent to go all in with a 10% chance of winning, they can do it to me 24/7, that's friging awesome return on my money.


You might be an expert, elite CIV player, but regarding poker this statement is well just DUMB.

You obviously don't understand a key concept in poker POT ODDS.  Let me use an extreme example to prove my point.

Let's say, in Texas Holdem, the current POT contains $1,000 - the up cards show that a flush is impossible, a full house is impossible, four of a kind is impossible, and a straight flush is impossible. I have to call $20 to stay in the game and see my final card - mine is the last bet - no other raise is possible.  Even with only a 10% chance to hit an inside straight - let's say I hold K, A and 10, J are visible on the board.  That is an awesome bet - I would take it every time and win bundles. Obviously 9 out of 10 times I lose $20, but 1 in 10 times, I'll win at least $1000 or more. Do the math.  Executed 10 times, the move gains $820 - so each time I bet $20 on average I'll win $82.  That's winning poker. Poker noobs may not understand that, but for sure the professionals do.

My argument is that to univerally say you should never stay in a poker game
with a 10% chance of hitting the straight is absolutely wrong. Sure most of the time you should fold, but not in the case I described. Any poker expert would give you the same explanation I just did.  The bottom line is ... it depends.

Likewise in CIV - you can maintain its *ALWAYS* wrong to take an 11% warrior vs. warrior shot.  But sometimes the loss of 1 warrior (i.e.10 hammers) eight times out of nine is inconsequential compared to the relative gain of eliminating your fiercest most skilled opponent from the game, one time out of nine.

Sure it's risky - but with certain risks come great rewards. I wouldn't do it *ALL* the time - but I've seen many skilled, aggressive players do it when the situation is right, your snarky comments notwithstanding.



SPM




« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 11:05:46 PM by SirPartyMan »

Offline GEFORCED

  • Warrior
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #39 on: March 06, 2010, 01:40:11 PM »
spm don't talk to me about maths rofl, you are a clown. Only a newb poker player is going to let you draw out for less than 10% of the pot....

the fact is, its the right thing for 5 players on the team to take 8-11% each to kill a player, but its bad sportsmanship and hurts the game itself because the losing player has no control over the outcome.


Offline [KC}magates

  • Settler
  • Posts: 8
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #40 on: March 06, 2010, 03:32:13 PM »
spm your missing a part of the point here: I and others do agree that it's good sense to take 11% to kill a rival.  the Risk vs Reward ratio is extreme.  you lose nothing and gain everything (especially with a warrior start).  so in terms of pot odds it's like putting in 10 dollars for a chance to win a 100k.  It's this extreme imbalance (that you would never ever seen in poker) that makes the luck of winning it a game ruining feature.  increasing the descrpenancy in odds toward the extremes seems the mechanicaly correct solution. 

Offline TheBadSeed

  • Modern Armour
  • **********
  • Posts: 1700
  • Gender: Male
  • Arrrrrrrr Ya gonna drink that rum?
Re: sportmanship and random imba luck
« Reply #41 on: March 06, 2010, 03:38:25 PM »
Actually, Magates, you're not risking "nothing" to take the 11% odds hit. If you were to keep that warrior in choke mode, you are practically guaranteed to change his build path path, slow him down, and gain advantage. If you take that 11%, you get a 1 in 9 chance of ending the game, and an 8 in 9 chance of not being able to press your advantage.

It's always a matter of choice.. unless you're Scorpio.. then the choice is made.. :D
"There is a crack in Everything;
    That's how the light gets in."
                    -Leonard Cohen

 

anything

League