The RNG is insane

[Zyme]

My opponent dice rolls:

72%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%

Mine:

30%
48%
22%
38%
33%
17%
23%

God awful and boring to play TBH. Literally unplayable. I just had to sit and end turn until the game was over so I could get my gold.

Oh and also really fun to play vs a team that has 83% dodge chance and 6 movement so you can't do anything and they just run past you.

[Slyspy]

The original game is a board game played using dice. The RNG is always going to have a significant impact on each game. The ability to minimise the impact of the RNG is what marks a good player out from the crowd.

Don't make risky moves which will result in a turn-over at the start of your turn. In general you want to make as few dice rolls as possible.

Various skills can help a slower team deal with a dodging team. Also dodging teams tend to be more brittle so punching them helps. In general though you want them to have to make as many dice rolls as possible so that they have more chance of failing.

[Zyme]

So how do I avoid rolling skulls every round meanwhile my opponent rolls 0. How do I minimize this risk?

You can't punch dodging teams because they literally run past 3 of my players without problems because they all miss.

Just now, skaven lying down, my FOUR orcs miss 67% dodge chance.

Or how about the fact the 3 STR skaven KOs my 4 STR orc?

Or how about every time I roll two dice I get two skulls, ending my turns on my first roll?

Or what about my legendary character who cant pick up the ball 67% twice in a row, so his 8 movement chars can touchdown in 2 turns just running down picking up the ball on first turn ON MY SIDE?

Or what about my sure hands thrower who can't pick up the ball either? And lost because his skavens ran on turn one to my side and blocked me from picking it up?

Or what about when I have 86% chance to score a touchdown my player trips. Of course.

All in ONE game.

Game looked fun at first but after playing it I realize how broken the mechanics are.

RNG is trash.

[Zyme]

Played a wood elf team, he played dark elf. He KO'd 7 of my players and killed one.

But when I play orc I can barely KO anything.

Did my wooden tree KO anything? With 10 AV? Nope.

And every time I roll a single dice, I always get the skull 100% of the time.

When it says I will slip 83% I slip 100% of the time.

Really balanced game this is.

[Zyme]

Guess what happened when I played dark elf vs human?

He KOed 5 of my players and I did 1.

What is this garbage?

[Rathole]

It is a game of dice rolls it happens. Are you very new to this game, and completed the campaign tutorial? I would bet half your problem is making too risky of rolls early into your turns/ making too many going for it/dodge risks. You do not want to get into this habit, you want to make moves that require as few rolls as needed.

How are you positioning your players? You want to space them out and not clump them up much so that you spread out the tackle zones so opponents have to make more dodge rolls to get where they want, increasing turnover chances. Hit cntrl a few times to see the tackle zones/tiles.

It just seems you might be playing to brazen before you have the concepts down

[Noodle Ninja]

The OP is correct. It's not just that luck plays such a massive role in the outcome of any one particular game, it's that you don't have enough turns to overcome the result of luck.

Losing a turn when you only have 16 total (assuming no riots - lol great idea) is dumb.

My only suggestion is to just not care about winning or losing but instead try to just focus on gaining xp.

If the game had twice as many turns per game you could even out the results of bad luck but there isn't time. If the total number of dice rolls per game were thousands instead of dozens, luck would even out in the end. You can do everything right and lose or you can be a complete noob throwing 1 dice blocks without the block skill and somehow just walk the ball up the middle and win.

It's dumb like that.

[Zyme]

Oh yeah did I forget to mention the heatstroke that removed 4 players so I had to play 10 vs 4?

[Rathole]

Originally posted by Noodle Ninja:

The OP is correct. It's not just that luck plays such a massive role in the outcome of any one particular game, it's that you don't have enough turns to overcome the result of luck.

Losing a turn when you only have 16 total (assuming no riots - lol great idea) is dumb.

My only suggestion is to just not care about winning or losing but instead try to just focus on gaining xp.

If the game had twice as many turns per game you could even out the results of bad luck but there isn't time. If the total number of dice rolls per game were thousands instead of dozens, luck would even out in the end. You can do everything right and lose or you can be a complete noob throwing 1 dice blocks without the block skill and somehow just walk the ball up the middle and win.

It's dumb like that.

The amount of turns are fine and your opponent could just as easily have a bad turn as well, in the end this a board game where almost everything is based off a dice roll, but in the end skill and knowledge of the game is going to get you much farther. In the end this is not something you play the tutorial or a game or two and expect to stomp everything. It takes a good deal of time and practice to learn proper techniques.

All in all RNG is the name of the game here, and can be just as awful in the actual table top, I have heard of stories of players getting up and buying brand new dice because they were so pissed off about rolls, it just happens

[Noodle Ninja]

First of all, the number of turns is not fine and you clearly don't understand basic statistics if you think so. The fact that there are any games that result in 0-0 score is obvious evidence of this.

Flip a coin 10 times, the probability of getting 100% heads is low but you shouldn't be surprised if it happens. Flip a coin 1000 times and you're going to get a distribution that looks MUCH closer to 50%. This is not up for debate and you prove yourself to be a fanboy for thinking it is.

The problem isn't RNG, it's the lack of opportunity to make up for bad RNG.

Most games use RNG. Company of Heroes 2 is an RTS that uses RNG for every bullet fired from every infantry model of every infantry squad. You're not going to find threads about how RNG won or lost someone a game of Company of Heroes 2 because thousands and thousands of bullets are fired per game.

[Rincewind]

Originally posted by Noodle Ninja:

First of all, the number of turns is not fine and you clearly don't understand basic statistics if you think so. The fact that there are any games that result in 0-0 score is obvious evidence of this.

Flip a coin 10 times, the probability of getting 100% heads is low but you shouldn't be surprised if it happens. Flip a coin 1000 times and you're going to get a distribution that looks MUCH closer to 50%. This is not up for debate and you prove yourself to be a fanboy for thinking it is.

The problem isn't RNG, it's the lack of opportunity to make up for bad RNG.

Most games use RNG. Company of Heroes 2 is an RTS that uses RNG for every bullet fired from every infantry model of every infantry squad. You're not going to find threads about how RNG won or lost someone a game of Company of Heroes 2 because thousands and thousands of bullets are fired per game.

There are plenty of threads about rounds bouncing off tanks in CoH2. But yea you are right.

But you play enough games and you can make up for bad rng.

[Splinter]

I’m a good player I swear. It’s the rng fault. Omg.

[Okanuk Vinn]

Originally posted by Noodle Ninja:

First of all, the number of turns is not fine and you clearly don't understand basic statistics if you think so. The fact that there are any games that result in 0-0 score is obvious evidence of this.

Flip a coin 10 times, the probability of getting 100% heads is low but you shouldn't be surprised if it happens. Flip a coin 1000 times and you're going to get a distribution that looks MUCH closer to 50%. This is not up for debate and you prove yourself to be a fanboy for thinking it is.

Doesn't the average Blood Bowl game involve you and your opponent rolling at least a couple hundred dice rolls in a single match though? Furthermore, how can you definitively say that 0-0 tied games are indicative of a lack of opportunities to overcome bad luck when there are so many variables at play during a match (i.e., coach skill at the game, players movement allowance, players abilities/traits, injuries, etc)? Claiming that there are plenty of turns in a Blood Bowl game for a reversal of fortune to happen isn't fanboyism, because that is exactly the case when you consider the sheer number of dice rolls you need to make in a match. It's as you yourself said, if you flip a coin ten times the odds that you'll get heads all ten times is unlikely but could feasibly happen, but flip a coin a hundred times and luck is more likely to give you an even distribution of heads and tails.

[Noodle Ninja]

I say that 0-0 games are indications that single matches are too short.

You can see a report of every dice roll at the end of the match. If you attempted to do this for most games, it would be tens of thousands to millions of RNG events instead of dozens.

This difference is key in evening out the probability of abnormal distributions or "luck".

Imagine if in chess each player had to roll 2d6 before taking their turn and got a "turnover" on a roll of 2. Would this increase or decrease the skill involved in determining the victor? Would this make the game more fun or fair? Are you seriously going to suggest that such a rule change would not mean at least some matches are the result of luck instead of skill?

There are mechanics in this game that could be balanced out by increasing the number of turns dramatically or by just removing them completely.

[Roland negro]

Originally posted by Slyspy:

The original game is a board game played using dice. The RNG is always going to have a significant impact on each game. The ability to minimise the impact of the RNG is what marks a good player out from the crowd.

Don't make risky moves which will result in a turn-over at the start of your turn. In general you want to make as few dice rolls as possible.

Various skills can help a slower team deal with a dodging team. Also dodging teams tend to be more brittle so punching them helps. In general though you want them to have to make as many dice rolls as possible so that they have more chance of failing.

this, sometimes is better move only a few, and wait for bad lucky too the rival

[Rathole]

Originally posted by Noodle Ninja:

I say that 0-0 games are indications that single matches are too short.

You can see a report of every dice roll at the end of the match. If you attempted to do this for most games, it would be tens of thousands to millions of RNG events instead of dozens.

This difference is key in evening out the probability of abnormal distributions or "luck".

Imagine if in chess each player had to roll 2d6 before taking their turn and got a "turnover" on a roll of 2. Would this increase or decrease the skill involved in determining the victor? Would this make the game more fun or fair? Are you seriously going to suggest that such a rule change would not mean at least some matches are the result of luck instead of skill?

There are mechanics in this game that could be balanced out by increasing the number of turns dramatically or by just removing them completely.

Blood Bowl is over 30 years old, so obviously the number of turns are fine. A game here is at least 45 mins to over an hour as it already is. I wonder how much actual time you have put into this game, as the more you play the less likely you will see 0-0 as you learn proper playing techniques, especially vs the AI

I think you are looking too much into the fact that this is a "turn based sports game" and more so a risk assessment game. The player who does this better most of the time will win, off course RNG. You always want to minimize any dice rolls you have to make either by GFI, dodges or tackle rolls