3 ms·

> XCOM2 has a slightly controversial "randomness compensator": repeatedly missing increases your chance to hit, and being hit repeatedly by the aliens lowers th

> XCOM2 has a slightly controversial "randomness compensator": repeatedly missing increases your chance to hit, and being hit repeatedly by the aliens lowers their hit chance. Many games do, actually, and it's an interesting topic in of itself. In case someone wants some further reading: - http://www.redblobgames.com/articles/probability/damage-rolls.html http://www.redblobgames.com/articles/probability/damage-roll... - http://sinisterdesign.net/unpredictability-and-control-in-turn-based-combat-an-examination/ http://sinisterdesign.net/unpredictability-and-control-in-tu... - http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RogerHgensen/20101123/88511/Chance_Probability_Luck_Percentage_calculation_for_games.php http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/RogerHgensen/20101123/88511/C... - http://techland.time.com/2012/10/12/why-xcoms-random-results-sometimes-arent-and-you-should-play-on-ironman/ http://techland.time.com/2012/10/12/why-xcoms-random-results... - http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?t=50643 http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?t=50643 Another funny anecdote is that Wesnoth had to include a FAQ entry about the game being unfair because it relies too much on "luck": http://wiki.wesnoth.org/FAQ#There.27s_too_much_luck_in_this_game.21 http://wiki.wesnoth.org/FAQ#There.27s_too_much_luck_in_this_...

sevensor 10y ago
It's funny, when I see XCOM2, I think Terror From the Deep, into which I sunk so many hundreds of hours during my misspent youth. Although various guides online indicate that the game is actually winnable, I never managed to beat it. And it certainly didn't try to compensate you for, say, not detecting any alien subs until July and then having your crew slaughtered by giant lobsters.
- pjc50 10y ago
  I can't remember beating it either! Although I did beat the original original XCOM. The story behind TFTD's difficultly (you may have heard this one) is that people complained that XCOM was too easy, even on the hardest difficulty. But this was due to a bug: save/load did not persist the difficulty level properly, so most people played one or two missions on ultra-hard and the rest on easy, without ever realising. So when the developers turned up the difficulty and fixed the bug, suddenly the sequel was incredibly hard.
ralfd 10y ago
Saved
munchbunny 10y ago
Dota 2 does this as well for chance based skills. For certain skills, each subsequent failure will increase the chance that the next test will pass. When the test passes, the bias resets. Patch notes will sometimes talk about switching a skill from "true random" to "pseudo-random" to indicate this change. It's generally seen as a light to moderate boost because it ups the reliability of the skill noticeably. XCOM 2 had a few interesting implementation details. You can actually see it all in the source code provided in their modding tools, which is a really awesome thing IMO, to be able to see a huge chunk of XCOM 2's actual code. On the two lower difficulties (equivalent to "easy" and "normal") there is a relatively minor, invisible bonus to your next shot's chance to hit if you have a chain of misses. On the "hard" difficulty, this correction factor actually increases to compensate for several other changes that make the game much less forgiving of tactical errors. Then when you get to the "legendary" difficulty, the bonus goes away entirely and you're fighting a completely fair RNG along with all of its streakiness. I think this puts an interesting perspective on how "RNG fairness" works.

sevensor 10y ago

It's funny, when I see XCOM2, I think Terror From the Deep, into which I sunk so many hundreds of hours during my misspent youth. Although various guides online indicate that the game is actually winnable, I never managed to beat it. And it certainly didn't try to compensate you for, say, not detecting any alien subs until July and then having your crew slaughtered by giant lobsters.

pjc50 10y ago
I can't remember beating it either! Although I did beat the original original XCOM. The story behind TFTD's difficultly (you may have heard this one) is that people complained that XCOM was too easy, even on the hardest difficulty. But this was due to a bug: save/load did not persist the difficulty level properly, so most people played one or two missions on ultra-hard and the rest on easy, without ever realising. So when the developers turned up the difficulty and fixed the bug, suddenly the sequel was incredibly hard.

ralfd 10y ago

Saved

munchbunny 10y ago

Dota 2 does this as well for chance based skills. For certain skills, each subsequent failure will increase the chance that the next test will pass. When the test passes, the bias resets. Patch notes will sometimes talk about switching a skill from "true random" to "pseudo-random" to indicate this change. It's generally seen as a light to moderate boost because it ups the reliability of the skill noticeably. XCOM 2 had a few interesting implementation details. You can actually see it all in the source code provided in their modding tools, which is a really awesome thing IMO, to be able to see a huge chunk of XCOM 2's actual code. On the two lower difficulties (equivalent to "easy" and "normal") there is a relatively minor, invisible bonus to your next shot's chance to hit if you have a chain of misses. On the "hard" difficulty, this correction factor actually increases to compensate for several other changes that make the game much less forgiving of tactical errors. Then when you get to the "legendary" difficulty, the bonus goes away entirely and you're fighting a completely fair RNG along with all of its streakiness. I think this puts an interesting perspective on how "RNG fairness" works.