I think crits should be removed


well I was reading many comments and topics to this and also battled today.

And I had it again, that I lost 4 battles in a row only because of crits my opponent got while my attacks went into nothing.

Another opponents lvl 16 Indom dodged two attacks, oneshotted my dinosaur, then kept fighting only to dodge again two attacks and oneshot another dinosaur. I then had enough and took my Indom only to see her be oneshotted by lvl 15 Gorgosuchus because Indom couldn‘t dodge both times.

Then I only had one crit in the whole row but the Indom dodged. My other opponents (the very single one) had so much luck with stuns and crits that I doubt this is some sort of misfortune. Because this happens so often to me.

Even more frustrating is it, when you‘re very slowly upgrading your team and then get into a battle with someone having a weaker team. And then you fail only because of all the crits and stuns your opponent gets.

I‘m trying to say that I really DONT like the idea that the gambling factor in these battles is so bigger than every strategy.
Plus, when you‘re unlucky and have to go into battle with a not so balanced team, your disadvantage is even bigger.

So, I really think Ludia should reduce the gambling factor. Not remove it, but reduce. Then changing the fame mechanics in that way, that in battles players with same lvl teams are battling each other.

That thing with comparing trophies doesn‘t work always, I had it so often that I had to face droppers who destroyed my entire team in less than 2 minutes.


Thats how I feel when my opponent has ridiculous luck:




I think that only carnivores should have crit how’s a leaf eater gonna know where the critical organs are anyway???

Well I kinda don‘t believe in the 50% rule. My Indom has been hit twice and killed in the fourth row. Didn‘t dodge once.

What about it’s average dodge over 2 back to back battles? your forgetting the two dodges it likely got next battle meaning 50%

Can’t just take one battles results and claim percentage is broken

I don’t like them in the strike events but in general play why not?

1 Like

Just gonna toss this in here one more time


In fairness I couldn’t read this whole article so how can I criticise it however I’m going to anyway. That article was rubbish. I don’t jump on here crying about RNG, it’s part of the game but luck does decide more games than skill. A poorly timed crit is the difference between win and loss.
It’s not an issue at the start because Monomin Indo and Indom are not in early game. The ones that do dodge are not OP so it doesn’t matter. Look at the study’s on luck people have posted the evidence (actual data) is pretty clear rather than that antecdotal dribble from MetaHub.


yup. you didn’t read it. :wink:


No I didn’t read All of it…

Got two lines in and then switched off something about comments??

I don’t blame anyone for not reading it. Long things are hard to read.


That’s what she said


I hope someone’s not here being mean to Brian :rage:


And now I’ve read it all and it’s still rubbish. Just so many words with out any data. put some numbers in the article if you want to refute an argument about numbers.
Again I’m not one to cry about RNG all the time I don’t think I’ve ever even nearly lost 10 battles in a row but actual data shows that the dodge decides the victor more than it doesn’t. I’m cool with that I’ve got my dodgers too. The price comparison of supply and demand is stupid it does not fit the argument.
P.S RNG will loose you a battle (or 3) but it’s not the reason you keep loosing and loosing and loosing. It’s not the reason you can’t make it out of (insert arena here) that is skill and team …and a bit of luck :wink:

1 Like

You keep referring to actual numbers.

You think accurate statistical analysis happens with some dude reporting how 20 consecutive battles went? If that’s all it takes for ya, I guess it’s irrefutable. I should’ve recorded 20 battles where it didn’t just for you.

It’s better than no data and sure 20 battles isn’t much but it held more than 20 chance outcomes in it.
What are you basing your stance on? Again no data at all.
Some Data > No Data
But I guess no data is not irrefutable

my lack of statistical analysis > your lack of statistical analysis

1 Like