Jump to content


Could RNG manipulation be possible for WoT...in theory?

Come Get your tinfoil ladies

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Dyslexsticks #1 Posted 22 July 2019 - 09:25 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 34413 battles
  • 10,069
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

 

I realise that I'm using and incredibly ancient example of an RNG table, but as is known with most games, a random number generator is only "pseudo random". This number tends to be constantly rolling on a table of preset numbers, which are assigned to preset outcomes for most if not all mechanics in the game that call for a number.

 

As is shown at around 1:21, the exact same thing is done 3 times, with the exact same outcomes all 3 times. A small sample size perhaps, but it at least is a fairly good example of how player inputs are what triggers the rolls through the table.

 

So I've got to thinking, could something similar be shown here? Well, we do have a couple of issues with this. In regards to camera alignment, it is known that it doesn't always line up with the gun when starting a battle, thus meaning some additional player inputs would be needed to correct the camera, or some would be made automatically as the gun is made to meet your camera angle.

 

Ideally, we'd need a map, that spawns you on the exact same side, the exact same spawn, and level enough that the gun barrel is already lined up with no player input, at least 3 times in a row.

 

We'd simply need to fire the gun immediately as we load (which can be accomplished by holding RT, or R2 throughout the process of loading), and see if it hits the exact place all 3 times.

 

Of course, the idea that you could manipulate said RNG outcomes in your favour in battle is another story, as there's really no saying if accuracy RNG is affected by your inputs only, and not by, well, the other 29 players rolling that dice really damn fast.

 

I have tried looking at the battle mechanics on the wiki for WoT, but I couldn't find anything to do with a number table, or whether or not the "dice" is affected by player inputs. To find that out, I'd have to crack the games files in the PC, look at certain memory addresses as it's playing...yada yada, I'm not that confident in doing so.

 

Crazy to think that there could be some possibility though.


Did you manage to stand my post? You might like: My Twitter (fixed!)My Xbox to YouTube Guide


DwarfOnDrugs #2 Posted 22 July 2019 - 09:41 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 31610 battles
  • 2,431
  • [-UNL-]
  • Member since:
    03-12-2014

I’m going to be honest.

I read the first paragraph and got bored.

My response is it is possible however i don’t think WGCB would even know how to code RNG to be different to different players... they can’t even release a patch without breaking half the game


 


JelliedPenny08 #3 Posted 22 July 2019 - 10:19 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 15978 battles
  • 4,473
  • Member since:
    06-07-2014

+1 OP. I like the example, but I think it's old enough to be out of date. Yes that is how random numbers are generated, but I would be surprised if a game like this uses only 1 list of numbers due to the volume of calls on it. In game there are probably thousands of lists that are all rotated too. Early game design would have kept this simple due to much less available resources of the day. 

 

You can try replicating it, but I don't think you could "see" the pattern like in the example because of the more complex keys used. Just pray to RNGesus like the rest of us...

 

I am chuckling though that when you have a bad game it could be because of the number of shots fired at each other by potatoes in spawn forcing you to "have bad RNG".  :D



sergeant-slow741 #4 Posted 22 July 2019 - 11:05 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 23122 battles
  • 1,103
  • Member since:
    02-24-2017

View PostDwarfOnDrugs, on 22 July 2019 - 01:41 AM, said:

I’m going to be honest.

I read the first paragraph and got bored.

My response is it is possible however i don’t think WGCB would even know how to code RNG to be different to different players... they can’t even release a patch without breaking half the game

 

:trollface:
End of passion play, crumbling away I'm your source of self destruction. Veins that pump with fear,sucking darkest clear leading on your death's destruction. Taste me you will see more as you need dedicated to how im killing you.

Rubbelito #5 Posted 22 July 2019 - 11:43 AM

    Major

  • WoTC Online Contributor
  • 24513 battles
  • 8,464
  • [IMTLZ]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

What Penny said.

 

I can't make myself believe WG are using such a simple "random" technique.

 



redshadowrider #6 Posted 22 July 2019 - 11:46 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 37382 battles
  • 8,245
  • Member since:
    03-17-2014

View PostDwarfOnDrugs, on 22 July 2019 - 03:41 AM, said:

I’m going to be honest.

I read the first paragraph and got bored.

My response is it is possible however i don’t think WGCB would even know how to code RNG to be different to different players... they can’t even release a patch without breaking half the game

 

...and WG can't seem to fix those things that are broken.  I always wonder if the programmers that created the game took their cash and left. Leaving the rest to fend for themselves.
I'm just saying.....

kromhout55 #7 Posted 22 July 2019 - 11:55 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 34933 battles
  • 758
  • Member since:
    01-26-2017

I'm firmly in the camp that believes RNG is determined prior to the actual match, not in it, with one side getting +RNG.

Whilst I seem to always be on the receiving end of  -RNG.

For example, just played a standard match on port, I had tracked a Sherman Easy Eight. Got him pinned up against a wall broadside onto me. Took him down to 1HP left, then none of my subsequent shots would pen him, regardless of the fact I had my gun barrel stuck in his engine deck. Even tried an HE round.

Needless to say he then ammo racked me. :sceptic:



DwarfOnDrugs #8 Posted 22 July 2019 - 12:07 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 31610 battles
  • 2,431
  • [-UNL-]
  • Member since:
    03-12-2014

View Postredshadowrider, on 22 July 2019 - 11:46 AM, said:

 

...and WG can't seem to fix those things that are broken.  I always wonder if the programmers that created the game took their cash and left. Leaving the rest to fend for themselves.

 

from what i understand the company that actually created the game and made it work were layed off after a couple of years and ever since then we have dropped behind pc dramatically and the map design has gotten a lot worse. Now the console game could be developed by a team of 3 people the development is that slow.

 


TocFanKe4 #9 Posted 22 July 2019 - 03:57 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 21000 battles
  • 24,362
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View Postkromhout55, on 22 July 2019 - 06:55 AM, said:

I'm firmly in the camp that believes RNG is determined prior to the actual match, not in it, with one side getting +RNG.

Whilst I seem to always be on the receiving end of  -RNG.

For example, just played a standard match on port, I had tracked a Sherman Easy Eight. Got him pinned up against a wall broadside onto me. Took him down to 1HP left, then none of my subsequent shots would pen him, regardless of the fact I had my gun barrel stuck in his engine deck. Even tried an HE round.

Needless to say he then ammo racked me. :sceptic:

 

If RNG is determined before the match for each team it would be absurdly easy to tell. Damage rolls wouldn't add up for one team but it would over what it should be for the other team.  This has never been the case as long as I've played.

 

Every time I multiply the number of shots I pen times the average damage of the gun, I get near to what the damage I actually recorded for the match. That is if I pen enough shots and account for kills. Getting a low roll on one or two shots is normal, but if you get enough pens the damage is what it should be.  That shows RNG is not biased.


 

The E25 was built for Shenanigans


vampyrii #10 Posted 22 July 2019 - 04:09 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 9714 battles
  • 6,109
  • Member since:
    12-14-2013

Tinfoil hat theory.

 

  • Statement. The outcome of the battle is predetermined. MMer and RNG determine which team will win OR lose.
  • Counter-argument: Explain how many players have 65%+ W/L ratio then. Answer: They manipulate the MMer in their favour by breaking it, with 5 man platoons.
  • Counter-argument: But i play solo and have 60%+ W/L ratio. Answer: You are one of the exceptions that make the rule.

 

And so on. We have had this discussion since 2014. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


 

scwirpeo #11 Posted 22 July 2019 - 06:06 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 40633 battles
  • 11,176
  • [CRY]
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014
The only way to manipulate rng is to play a Russian tank. We all already know this.

MOEs so I can pretend like they matter

Spoiler

 


Potato QQ #12 Posted 22 July 2019 - 08:14 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 22536 battles
  • 4,789
  • Member since:
    04-15-2014
Remove RNG and make WOT about skills bot luck.

Rubbelito #13 Posted 22 July 2019 - 08:16 PM

    Major

  • WoTC Online Contributor
  • 24513 battles
  • 8,464
  • [IMTLZ]
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostPotato QQ, on 22 July 2019 - 10:14 PM, said:

Remove RNG and make WOT about skills bot luck.

 

So you would always hit exactly the millimeter where you aimed, even at 564m?

Yeah, sounds hilariously fun...



Potato QQ #14 Posted 22 July 2019 - 08:25 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 22536 battles
  • 4,789
  • Member since:
    04-15-2014

View PostRubbelito, on 22 July 2019 - 12:16 PM, said:

 

So you would always hit exactly the millimeter where you aimed, even at 564m?

Yeah, sounds hilariously fun...

 

Depends on the round.

How Heavy  or Light the round is

How Fast or Slow the round travels

Also you have to factor distance 

 

You might have to aim higher than the enemy tank to factor the bullet drop

 

This game is watered down to make it as easy as possible. 



Destraag #15 Posted 22 July 2019 - 08:59 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 41418 battles
  • 1,616
  • Member since:
    02-22-2014

View PostDyslexsticks, on 22 July 2019 - 04:25 AM, said:

 

As is shown at around 1:21, the exact same thing is done 3 times, with the exact same outcomes all 3 times. A small sample size perhaps, but it at least is a fairly good example of how player inputs are what triggers the rolls through the table.

 

So I've got to thinking, could something similar be shown here? 

 

Most likely not.

 

The key thing there is that the random number string is always seeded at index 0 at the start of the map in the Doom example. 

 

I would be shocked if the seed was always the same at the start of the map in WOT. Also does each client have one random string or does only the server have them (Most likely the answer is server side to avoid modded xbox problems).. and how many are used?

 

Only inputs from players that require a random... like firing (requires several rolls for accuracy and then pen then damage etc) would cause the random move to the next value not just waving the guns around which has no random properties. 

 

Some mumblings about how number strings are used to produce random values in a range...

Spoiler

Edited by Destraag, 22 July 2019 - 09:13 PM.

When a person resorts to attacking the other person rather than focusing on the issue (aka argumentum ad hominem), it becomes pretty clear they have nothing else to contribute and are wrong.


SepulturaSouls #16 Posted 23 July 2019 - 02:19 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 19183 battles
  • 1
  • [-8TH-]
  • Member since:
    03-17-2018
WARGAMING BOTS by the thousands are what the problem is. Top tier, auto loaders and Arty on red team, and 0-2 shot placebo tanks on green. The later will have 30-40 premium tanks, and 20 tier 10s but only averaging 400 something damage. I've checked thousands of service records. Auto loading (no cue time) even though there's only 100 players. Bots are hard to pen, can't see them even though they're 100m away in heavy tanks they disappear, bots don't expose themselves even when shooting, the list goes on and on. The reason? The servers are pretty much empty, and you've got to keep the game going, plain and simple. It's how the stats are controlled, not as simple as RNG.

M4ntiX #17 Posted 23 July 2019 - 02:24 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 29445 battles
  • 4,029
  • [JOCO]
  • Member since:
    03-18-2014

View PostSepulturaSouls, on 23 July 2019 - 02:19 PM, said:

WARGAMING BOTS by the thousands are what the problem is. Top tier, auto loaders and Arty on red team, and 0-2 shot placebo tanks on green. The later will have 30-40 premium tanks, and 20 tier 10s but only averaging 400 something damage. I've checked thousands of service records. Auto loading (no cue time) even though there's only 100 players. Bots are hard to pen, can't see them even though they're 100m away in heavy tanks they disappear, bots don't expose themselves even when shooting, the list goes on and on. The reason? The servers are pretty much empty, and you've got to keep the game going, plain and simple. It's how the stats are controlled, not as simple as RNG.

 

I think you may be my new favourite person on this forum! Oh btw, welcome. Killer first post, man! :D

"I live in reality and let me tell you, there is no one here."

"For some reason you feel the need to troll stink bomb a statement of fact."

"4 kids single father 2 boats a plane 3cars and more battles than you."

"Jesus you smegheads are whiny about your Epeens."


John-berg1995 #18 Posted 23 July 2019 - 02:33 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 12550 battles
  • 2,718
  • [CIA]
  • Member since:
    12-05-2015

View Postvampyrii, on 22 July 2019 - 04:09 PM, said:

Tinfoil hat theory.

 

  • Statement. The outcome of the battle is predetermined. MMer and RNG determine which team will win OR lose.
  • Counter-argument: Explain how many players have 65%+ W/L ratio then. Answer: They manipulate the MMer in their favour by breaking it, with 5 man platoons.
  • Counter-argument: But i play solo and have 60%+ W/L ratio. Answer: You are one of the exceptions that make the rule.

 

And so on. We have had this discussion since 2014. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Lol what? this is the dumbest thing I've ever read. 



x rocketfish x #19 Posted 23 July 2019 - 02:56 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 15607 battles
  • 842
  • Member since:
    05-27-2015
I did a simple RNG tinfoil hat test once.
I was in an arty. I fired 5 times blind at a bridge where I knew that reds were gonna cross. All 5 hit exactly on the bridge where I aimed.  A red tank got spotted on the bridge.  I aimed and fired at him 3 times.  All landed in the water long or short of the bridge.  Coincidence? Try it yourself.  

Salty_Tanker #20 Posted 23 July 2019 - 03:13 PM

    Major

  • WoTC Ambassador
  • 21277 battles
  • 2,723
  • Member since:
    12-21-2016
They can’t fix my Polish dog that refuses to bark :(  You guys overestimate WG’s computing skills . 

“ Never trust a forum member that uses an Anime profile pic .”      - SaltyMcD 






Also tagged with Come, Get, your, tinfoil, ladies

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users