Ludia Forums

(Re)Move percentages

#1

It think it is time to remove the made up percentages from the move’s description. Nothing works like that in the game, especially the dodging moves. I’ve started to count its efficency in the last 5 day, to see how many times it works and the results are terrible:
20/3
21/5
20/4
19/4
22/6
They are nowhere near 50% and this is just the dodging with cloak/evasive stance moves.
When will you refine these moves efficency already? This puts the game in the gambling section rather than the strategic. Not to mention that this is utterly annoying. You can’t count on these moves in battles like at all. Either remove these useless, meaningless percentages or fix the efficency because the current gameplay is getting worse and worse.
Thx

1 Like
#2

In my mind that’s the problem. You don’t rely on RNG to save your neck in a battle. Ever. I’ve always used RNG moves in such a way that it doesn’t matter if their secondary effects work or not, the guaranteed damage is what I base my tactics on.

4 Likes
#3

Fair point, however my phrasing needs some correction. I dont rely on RNG, but I calculate my options with the given percentages. This is why they are there, aren’t they? I don’t count on that a 50% dodge will work for every 2nd time, but in a longer term I expect it to land somewhere 50%. From 102 times it only worked 22 times. That’s 21%. Maybe from 1000 times it’ll work 500 times, but based on my experience that’s something I doubt.
The other thing is that most of the moves have secondary effect, the gameplay is dominantly effected by them and this is why these percentages should be less meaningless.
They could just say “it will either work or not”, but they include numbers. With numbers you calculate. In battle if you know that you 50% dodge didnt work in the last 6 times you’ll expect it to work for the 7th and you’ll be fourious when it’s not.

#4

RnG here not same with math. 50% here mean in each turn opponent has 50/50 to hit you. Same goes like distracting, when you distracting opponent it cut half opponent damage, when you use distracting againt opponent has 0 damage.

#6

If you were not battling a bot then the opponent won this RNG race 75% of the time. That funky because you will see complaints pretty often that someone can never hit through evasive/cloak. So is it your contention that cloak/evasive only if the numbers only represent when your dino dodged effectively? Or is this a count of you hitting through an opponents evasive/cloak adn how often yours dodges also?

#7

That is only when my cloak was effective. But for hitting through opponent’s cloak success ratio is pretty much the same. This is why this kind of method is frustrating. There are lucky people and unlucky people. It has nothing to do with strategic thinking.

#8

Gotcha. This is a count of when your dino dodged. So in that case all opponents hit through it against you at a high rate. I wish I was one of the lucky folks then, lol.

#9
#10

Back when I was into the PVP and using I-rex, I would only use the dodge move if my opponent is faster and I’m going to die anyway the next round so this would give me a chance that I could dodge and take out my opponent through RNG. For me clock for the I-rex was used as last resort otherwise I would just use it like the T-rex. Cloak was the last move, not the first.

Using these evasive moves right off, unless there is some damage with it is not a good strategic method for winning. That is just leaving it up the the roll of the dice… crossing your fingers and hoping not to die.

#12

I remember that ONE time when my mono dodged 3times in a row. I can’t count the times when it did not dodged at all, because it is happening way to often. The way RNG works is not backing up the 50% chance given. Some will be luckier than others, therefor the gameplay is not balanced. I think I’m upset with the numbers given: 50%. For me it means that that ability will work 50 times out of 100. Not 500.000/1.000.000 or 50-50 every time. But as I better understand how this RNG works, I think my solution will be to minimizing the ‘luck factor’ by dropping dinos with stunning and dodging moves and rather start investing in dinos with swap-in/bleeding/nullifying abilities/moves. However it will only solve my end of luck…

#13

I agree with this mostly. There is a 2x damage bonus on your next attack with I-Rex cloak though and when combined with the 2x damage attack is a very hard 4x hit. And if that attack crits… against Dino’s that lack armor or don’t have shields up this can be a devastating attack. But it is a gamble that can win or lose the match.

If I’m the faster Dino I’ll usually use attacks, but if I’m slower I usually cloak first.

#14

No such thing as a true random number that’s programmed. There isn’t. When generating a “random” number from 1-100 over many times, the average number will always be very close to 50.
I do not believe that to be the case in this game. I understand the arguments in defense of the developers, BUT. I would like to see a large scale study of what the true percentages are. I understand the math, you can justify it to yourself all you want but unless you have access to large database of what’s happening, you just do not have the data to conclude that the numbers are correct.

1 Like
#15

This works the other way around too. Unless you have access to the database you have no way to conclude that the numbers are incorrect. Ludia has access to this data. If the numbers are wrong, which would imply that every other game, service and so on which uses the same algorithm to determine the random numbers (Ludia of course didn’t come up with one themselves, they used an existing one), why wouldn’t they change the algorithm they use? Knowingly using the wrong one just wouldn’t make sense.

#16

@Planck I don’t disagree. I have no hard data either way. I do have my personal experience with the game, which causes me to question the data.