Re: Ruminating
@swift07
"Shroud does make a good point tho about rng taking away the competitive factor."
Where can I read/watch this?
"Shroud does make a good point tho about rng taking away the competitive factor."
Where can I read/watch this?
Forum Discussion
13 Replies
- @reconzero it was a twitch clip I've seen a long time ago, that I can't seem to fine. But you can read this article:
https://www.thegamer.com/shroud-thinks-battle-royale-too-luck-based/ - @swift07 In competitive, not ranked or pubs, ring rng is a huge factor. A southern tip landing team will have a tough battle to try to win a game in a northern zone. This is why comp is a lot of games and not just one. The other big rng in comp is teams making poor decisions and sending into another team, resulting in both dying. This usually happens when one has better position than the other and a 3rd is lurking. In the Valk meta this has gotten worse. Teams coming in late due to the zone rng are able to fly over other teams and try to force their way into the best spot, usually resulting in both teams dying.
All this being said, the teams that are best at understanding the above do rise to the top most consistently. A team that can run edge as well as quick rotate depending on the situation usually is best. @hayhoryes, there are so many rng based variables in BR's. Off the top of my head, here are a few things:
1. Ring is a huge factor and if a team has to travel across the map to get to the final circle, they will run across a lot of other teams. Also, the final circle, it's movement and the environment (buildings, rocks, slopes, hills...etc.).
2. Loot off drop can vary. Even if you landed at a POI without any other teams, there's a chance that you might not get favorable loot, which will put you at a disadvantage. Now, imagine being contested and now you share the POI with 1 or more teams.
3. 3rd parties. If a team fights another team, and if they are not quick, they might be subject to a third party, possibly 4th, 5th...etc. All depending on where the other teams are.
4. Opponents and their decisions can also create rng.Better teams might have more chances to win or place high, but since there's a lot of rng involved, they could lose enough games and splits to end the tournament without accumulating enough points to do that.
- @swift07
1. Ring is a factor, but only because of the new, shorter timer. I've said before that it's a luck multiplier and needs to return to normal.
2. This is only luck-based if you're hot dropping. Don't hot drop and you'll find what you need... unless the fast-closing ring screws you with a long rotation.
3. These kinds of engagements are largely aviodable (early game) or manageable (with good positioning). Matches like Shroud described, where everyone "rats" until seven teams are fighting for a disappearing ring, are rare in my experience. Although I acknowledge that they may be more of a thing in ranked.
4. Can you give an example of this? @reconzero
1. Even before the ring changes, you're not going to know where the circle ends when you drop out of the ship. You could be on the opposite side of the circle.
2. Even if you landed somewhere with no other team, you might still not get what you want. One time, I've looted 2 buildings and 6 bins by myself, and came out with a p2020 and a 30-30.
3. You can probably avoid it more so in pubs, but in ranked or competitive, you might not be able to. In pubs, a majority of the people land at popular POI's. In ranked or competitive, people land everywhere.
4. Lots of things they can do. They can go ahead of you and gate keep you, they can push you, you can get sniped by them...there's a lot of things they can do to affect your game.I honestly think you should play ranked. Might change your perspective on the game.
- @swift07
1. Maybe playing a mobility legend skews my view on this, although jump towers, tridents, and map knowledge are not the exclusive domain of Pathfinder.
2. Not getting what you want is one thing, but you can always get something you can use until something better comes along.
3. You're on to something here. I've flirted with harder lobbies and it seems to be true that they distribute themselves a lot more evenly over the map. Makes my life hell.
4. Got it. Thanks.
"I honestly think you should play ranked. Might change your perspective on the game."
I'm a afraid this is more true than I'd like to admit, but it will never happen. I don't mind screwing over my teammates in pubs by being unwilling to be a team player, but I feel like that would just be too unsportsmanlike in ranked. And I despise any form of the game where people are encouraged to play for anything other than a win. But I still know what you mean. In any case, I'm sure the silver tiers can do just fine without me. @reconzeromaybe our opinions differ so much because you don't play ranked. But man, you have to think...if you want real competition, teamplay and strategy, then you should play ranked. Most people in pubs don't care about anything besides getting kills.
"And I despise any form of the game where people are encouraged to play for anything other than a win." You shoot for a win, and maybe you won't get it, but you place 2nd or 3rd and get a good amount of RP. Also, silver and gold tiers are like pubs. If you're a decent player, you should be able to get out of silver fairly quickly. I honestly think silver and gold lobbies are more fun than pubs. They feel more like real games because people actually care about winning.- @reconzero 2. I've landed on POI's and ended up with weapons that weren't that great. Than...after I died because my weapons sucked, I think to myself...if I had this or that, I could've won that fight.
- @reconzero What makes a game competitive is things being as close to equal (fair) as possible.
I think of Apex BR along the same lines as pro wrestling royal rumble. You have a bunch of people from different weight classes all competing against each other and anything goes. Usually the biggest guy, or the guy who gets the steel chair or trash can 1st and knocks the other guy over the head wins. Or something along those lines...but I think you get the picture. There's no real fairness there, vs something like mma where weight and skill etc is as tight as possible.
Same with Apex. There are different sized hitboxes, there are strong and weak weapons, strong and weak characters, limited ammo, random loot, shields of varying degrees and so on. Fundamentally it's pretty far away from being fair 1 on 1. Do the best players always win? Not necessarily, but usually. You could theoretically win without firing your gun. You could 3rd party the last 2 teams. You could win with 100 damage and 1 kill. Does that make you better than every one else in that lobby or just lucky? Food for thought 🙂 - @Unitee01
"You could theoretically win without firing your gun. You could 3rd party the last 2 teams. You could win with 100 damage and 1 kill. Does that make you better than every one else in that lobby or just lucky?"
Any of those things happening once makes you lucky. If you seek to make them happen routinely then you are smarter than your opponents and will win more, which imo is a form of being better. And the only way that player is in an "uncompetitive" game is if the players who lose to him need a very narrow definition of "competitive" in order to justify their loss. Or so says me. I don't disagree, but it was not what I was trying to say. People can play however they want.
I'm saying there will be times where you will die to someone who can't shoot his way out of a paper bag and there will be times you take a win you didn't work for at all. It will happen to all of us, it's the nature of how BR works - it leans more towards fun and less towards true competition in many ways.
