Ludia Forums

Why does rng break?

I get probability. I dont want to have that discussion. I want to know ludias findings. How come we can sometimes go days where your 75 stun lands less than 50% of the time - over 200 games?

How come 5% crit chances can crit 15%+ during the same time?

The real question is not that that occurance happens over 2-3 days, but why I consistently have one of these 2-3 bouts a month? And Im not alone.

These happen with too much of a pattern. Something is off.


I agree with this. I want to know why as well. I mean I notice these streaks. Sometimes I can go like 20 games straight where a certain dino(tuora for example) will not land one stun. I understand that each game is a different draw.(rng) But why do these streaks stay consistent.


I’ve often had double-digit streaks of matches without a stun, several times over 20 fights.

Thats just counting the fights where I used either my monostego or thags stunning attack at least once against a non-immune creature and the attack didn’t kill (since I don’t think you can tell if a killing attack would stun).

And the number of fights between such streaks seems to have reduced


Yeah, ive said it before… ive played alot of different games that rely heavily on rng rpgs, mmos, ccgs… ive never really ran into an rng system that works like this games does its so streaky… those matches where a mono dodges like 6 times… no stuns land

Right now my thor may as well read a crit chance of like 85% which is all fine a dandy until i go on the streak where the system balances itself by me not critting at all for some wierdly long duration until it “balances itself out”…


Yes, absolutely this. And its reproducable.

Literally half my deck depends on a 75% stun, and this is where its most noticeable.

Ludia, you said you were looking into it. What did you find? Because right now, your rng is not random. Or rather, it falls into easily discernable and observable patterns.

This ^^^

You nailed it, and it’s what so many have been complaining about while others are in denial.

Winning and losing streaks are real.


To add to my current thor streak… last match i hit an erlidom through cloak with an instant charge crit, then crited a rampage on a indo who popped invasive, and proceeded to crit a stegodues on an impact… i know thor is supposed to crit alot but 4-5 attacks in a row is a bit much.

1 Like

At 40% it’s really not. That said I don’t disagree with the OP to an extent.

1 Like

There are really ridiculous streaks in actions. Yesterday I played a match where my Indominus and both Indos got hit through cloak/evasive with every hit (100% hits, 0% dodges). And there are matches where two Indos can dodge everything fightin each other.

I’ve been convinced of the same “issue” in another game a long time ago. Wondered for ages why they’ve made it so. Now that I see people are convinced of the same in JWA, I’m starting to think it’s all just how we see it.

Remember that there are at least several (a lot more if you put your mind to it) types of “streaks”: there’s stuns, dodges, crits, etc. If you’re really looking for a streak, you’ll find a way to see it. If not in stuns, then in dodges, if not dodges, than opponent having high level dinos. If not that, then something else.

A way to (dis)prove this would be to decide what exactly it is you’re looking for before starting to battle (and disregard anything you think you noticed before that point), observe it for a long period of time and then compare the level of observed streakiness with the mathematical estimates.

I have always said that computers cannot do true RNG.

1 Like

Bad news: there’s (admittedly hotly debated but) amazingly robust evidence that humans can influence random number generators with intention. Look into the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Lab and their follow up project, the Global Consciousness Project.


This is misleading. As far as we can recognize as players “RNG” can be done pretty easily. Folks just want to find something to blame when they lose and an algorithm can’t fight back. It’s lazy.