GamePress article on RNG in JWA: Let's start a discussion!

Hey everyone on the Forum, I hope your days are going well so far!

Today I published a new article, almost as a follow-up to @Piere87’s amazing survey on the state of the game! In the article, I discussed RNG in JWA, and why I feel it has become too much of a factor in battles and the game in general. What do you think about RNG in JWA? Let’s start a healthy discussion about it!

Please make sure to not call each other names and such because that only devalues the entire conversation. Try and keep it civil! Let’s try and make it a proper discussion and maybe the topic gets sent towards the devs or any other body in the Ludia team!


And here is the link to Piere’s article from yesterday!


Fab survey. Filled it in already.

1 Like

The article IS that good

I gotta say, there is still some skill left in skill tournaments, but for me at the top, it’s mostly predicting opponents and their playstyles as I fight the same people quite a lot. But there is way too much rng nowadays, especially with Ludia’s newest trend of giving creatures like a 10% or 15% critical hit now or critical counters and whatnot


Yes, too many coin flip percentages in the arena now.

1 Like

Yeah there is still a slight bit of skill left if you ask me, but it’s maybe like 10% compared to the 90% RNG that determines the match imo

Rng is an issue but after looking at the options adding more or less wont make a large enough difference

The game stagnates very fast when everything is equal (no rng)

Skill cannot play a large factor when you have a small amount of endgame dinosaurs because every move is known and worked out so it still falls back rng did you draw 1 to counter 2

Skill is mainly applicable is the sense of who makes the least mistakes skill in game like this in a large sense is impossible its more memory and working out numbers quickly as you reduce the rng you just make it more number based which again becomes boring very fast

Now im not saying skill doesnt exist or rng is good im saying no matter how you look it at rng must always play the largest factor

If we go back to before boosts when all teams where identical and 30 it was boring and it was who made the biggest mistake first the lower the rng the larger the “mistake” factor plays but with that comes more frustration as lowering or making rng less of a factor means games are decided purely on the surface numbers so you could start a game and have the “game” instantly tell you the outcome = more chance of rage quitting where as rng or “luck” can change that dramatically and quickly


However theres still alot of skill involved. Skill involves a lot of patience and persistence too. Its easy for a frustrated or impatient player to become vulnerable(easy pickings) to a player who is focused and really on the ball. You have to think 5 moves ahead at all times. RNG is there, no denying that, but doesn’t determine the majority of battles in skill.

1 Like

Good input! Definitely a good way to think about it as well. My main issue with RNG right now is that it feels like it determines too much. Of course, not much has changed that is a direct cause of RNG determining the match except maybe Partial Resistances, because that’s another layer of RNG added in the match. It’s a number of factors that all cause RNG to feel particularly more game-determining, such as the Class System being oppressive. At least, that’s what I think.

1 Like

Couldnt agree more with there is to much overall rng 100%

The key would be lowering it a bit all over everything rather than any drastic change

1 Like

Swapping sr3 into indot is infuriating for me - on either side. So much rng…

Interesting. I feel that when I battle most RNG doesn’t change anything for me.

Most RNG has counters now. Stuns and Crits are the 2 RNG variables that really can change the outcome of a battle but there are ways to deal with them, with Cunning, and Immunities.

You mentioned hoping to get a good team. That is something that matters in a battle I’m just not sure if or how it could be done differently. The WORST RNG IMHO is matchmaking, which is really terrible.

Otherwise I just don’t see any issues with RNG. It’s random when it’s random, it’s bit when it’s not, it’s both good and bad for me about 50% of the time.

These are just MY thoughts from where I am. But in Aviary it’s giant mess of anywhere from 18-30 level dinos with all variations of boosts and skill level. I always expect a bad match but never really know what I’ll find.

Love the article. I think the RNG is getting out of hand in arena. I am a fan of partial resistances that operate on a sliding scale, such as speed decrease, DOT and distraction, but I think stun and swap should be binary. Either you are 100% immune or not at all. Otherwise, one of you feels very lucky and the other feels very unlucky but neither of you find it fun because we all know how it feels when it goes against you.

We’ve all said it to ourselves at 2-2 “as long as they don’t go through dodge, I win” only to see the opponent hit through dodge and you lose. That level of battle-deciding RNG is far too prevalent and leaves players feeling extremely frustrated, often angry, especially when you consistently fall on the wrong side of lady luck.

The RNG associated with team draw wouldn’t be an issue if there weren’t a selection of creatures at the top of the meta that are impossible to kill without a counter (Parasauthops, Vasilas, Testa, Ankylos Lux off the top of my head). Maybe a couple of viable fierce would help or perhaps Scorpios Rex G3 needs to be less effective at shutting fierce down?

Nowadays, I put off doing my DBI until I have a spare hour to focus and get it done in one go. I used to battle throughout the day whenever I had a few minutes to keep incubators ticking over but, with the frustrations of the current meta and how LONG the battles are these days, I dread it rather than enjoy it.


The types of rng I hate most are:

Swap prevention

I would love to see creatures and abilities balanced in such a way that its just reliable. Dodge, for example, used to ignore 100% of damage. Now its 66.7% or something. We have enough things that hit through ir remove dodge it should just be 100% chance to dodge 66.7% damage - and adjust creature stats to compensate.

I hate being swap prevented by grypo, for example, on skoona. I hate all the rng involved in toxic quills against a cloaked IT. Will it hit through cloak? Will it crit? Will it stun? Will the stun be resisted? Will the IT crit the counter? Will it hit through cloak? Will the cleansing rampage crit? Will it hit through cloak?

It’s just way too much.


If my Indotaurus doesn’t get stunned by toxic quills, I usually have to pick myself up off the floor

1 Like

While I generally agree with the article, this is a great point. Without RNG, every match becomes entirely predictable. And while you can have a lot of fun with games where all interactions are known (e.g. chess), a game where every matchup is “solved” wouldn’t be fun. That’s why a lot of people don’t like team draw RNG in skill tournaments; when the actual matchup results are basically predetermined, all that matters are the actual matches you got - hence the importance of RNG. So yeah, RNG is always playing a role - in who you’re matched against, which dinos you got, or the results of abilities. RNG is inherently neccesary for team draws and matchmaking, so removing RNG elsewhere only increases the importance of RNG in these other areas. You aren’t removing RNG at all, you’re just shifting it around.

So I don’t think we should remove RNG altogether, but it could be reduced wherever possible. One thing I would do is make it so that move effects only need to pass 1 RNG check. For example, the article mentions that a stunning move must both beat the stun resistance and stun in the first place in order to work, and that’s a bit much. So to remove one of these checks, either every stun should be 100% (which I’m not sure I like), or stun resistance can only be 100% or 0%.

For dodges, the RNG is the main thing that sets them apart from shields, so I would keep RNG on these moves. But I would reduce the gap between a successful “roll” and an unsuccessful one. Right now, a dodge is either all or nothing. I would change that so that an unsuccessful dodge still dodges some damage, just not as much as a successful one (maybe something like 33% damage reduction vs 66% damage reduction). The RNG is there, but both results are still useful.


So you’d keep the Dodge check and the Stun/Stun res. check, but only one Stun check?

Basically yes. Stuns 100% with no resistance are probably too strong, so the RNG balances them out by adding risk - but they don’t need TWO rng checks. Dodge is distinguished as a mechanic by RNG, but currently that RNG is too impactful for how useful a dodge is.


Oh this I like a lot! I’ve seen a lot of people who dislike the Dodge mechanic and RNG and want it nerfed but I think this is better for everyone. We get to keep the Dodge and some RNG but everyone knows its going reduce damage either way, unless it’s a Precise or Definite attack. And as you said makes it more useful because it’s more reliable.

1 Like