I wiped halfway through Athel Yenlui, and beat Righteous Stand, Festering Grounds, Fort Bracksenbrucke and Empire in Flames.
Did not see a single beastmen, anywhere. Not one.
I’d rather the spawn rates were reverted back to their original ratios, but Beastmen get a cap on how many times they can appear on a map. Or something. Def not this.
Not a single goddamn beastman all night, I really don’t like that.
Before this patch, some outliers were complaining that they were constantly getting beastmen. Personally I suspect it was a bug that only affected some people, but it could very well have been pure RNG.
The same thing could be happening, post patch, but in reverse. In any case, I think relying purely on RNG to determine these things might not be working out. Clearly we don’t want people to see nothing but beastmen, but not seeing a single one in 5 games is completely unnacceptable, too. Pure RNG ain’t working out, imo. A severely more weighted form of distribution, where you’re guaranteed to see at least 1 zone belonging to each faction, might be more beneficial. Or perhaps the same RNG distribution as pre-patch, but with a cap on beastmen so that they don’t go overboard and dominate the entire map like some people have reported.
This is a good idea, but I would point out that even in a small sample seeing actually 0 of something does definitely point to an issue in a system that by all rights should be much more consistent. Even if on average across everybody’s games we were getting exactly 33% beastmen presence, if it’s possible to play 5 consecutive maps and not see a single beastman there’s a problem, and we don’t need more data to assert that.
In the last Beta, it was the same for me, and I thought the same thing as you. Yesterday after the patch, however, I encountered them about 1/4 - 1/3 of about 6 runs. Maybe it was just a coincidence? It’s so hard to judge, however, when you only have your own limired number of runs… I hope FS has the proper telemetry to make sense of it.
Seeing 0 beastmen in a sample of 5 doesn’t say anything, you could of been extremely lucky, it’s the same as you getting beastmen a couple maps after each other. The bigger your testing pool is the more you start to ‘eliminate’ the luck factor. Getting lucky or unlucky on 100 maps is way less likely to happen. I hope that makes sense.
Making beastmen spawn in a controlled manner instead of using rng would be better, but not sure how the game code works and if that would even be possible to implement.
True, absolutely. But he also has his experience from the Beta to combine with it, which makes his “n” a lot higher. You are absolutely correct about statistics though. It could well be a coincidence. It could also be a sign of something wacky. But we’d need more data and more other people’s data as well to see that. And (hopefully) FS has that…
Going from 50% to 10% is alot, i think talking for me personally i think they could be increased a bit again. Also still funny how certain maps affect spawns still, not sure if that will ever be fixed.
This has been presented in different forms before and I think it would work wonders, especially if tied to natural habitats. Skaven being less present in great outdoor areas and beastmen existing in close proximity to outdoor areas.
No matter how it is balanced I think it would be great to enter an area and know which faction or possible factions to expect based on your surroundings. I really don’t know if it would be great outside of my mind though. Hard to tell.
That’s not alsozara’s point. Nor mine. The point is that it should never be the case that going through 5 maps without seeing a single beastman. I don’t care how the %s are, I don’t care that if you sum up the experiences of everyone, the numbers add up to the % Fatshark has determined. 5 maps without a single beastman shouldn’t happen. Something should prevent this from happening.
Pure RNG clearly ain’t working out.
That’d be pretty dope, aye! It particularly hurt last night to go through half of Athel Yenlui, which used to get a lot of beastmen because it’s a goddamn forest, and not see a single one. Like, damn.
Either way, hopefully Fatshark listens, or people make enough noise to force them to listen. Even post-patch I’ve seen some people complain about too many beastmen still, so even on that regard it seems that pure RNG isn’t working out.
I get ur point, i’m just saying maybe you got very unlucky today and you will keep getting beastmen arleast once a map for the rest of ur playtime. Maybe you are the outlier because i had beastmen spawn in every single one of my games and i played more than 5.
As i said in a response a bit further down, i agree that it shouldnt be purely rng based and maybe put a cap like you suggested, but im not sure if thats doable on how the coding works but fs devs can decide that.
And i do agree that we should get beastmen atleast once if we got the dlc for them
no sure how my rng could differ so drastically but ive been getting the from start to finish but mixed in with the other 2 factions in ways that shouldn’t be a thing. like an area obviously chaos but bestigors and archers are there. same with skaven.
Personally, I can live with this. I am however intrigued how the general (non-Forum) community would react to this. Considering that one argument people love to bring to bash Weaves is that adventure more is more random and therefore superior, we should expect backslash for making sections 100 % sure spawns of an enemy race. Then again, there is a lot of hypocrisy concerning the Weaves, so it might not be an issue.
Personally, I just want Beastmen to be present as they are interesting and fair to fight and add a meaningful supplementation to the enemy rooster of Chaos and Skaven.
Bro I’m a Mathematics major, I understand statistics fine thank you. Are you being intentionally obtuse? Obviously it doesn’t tell us anything about the overall ratio. What it does very clearly show us is that once again we have an RNG system without any protection against extreme circumstances. OP has now played what, 7 maps in a row without a single beastman? That’s analogous to how rerolling used to work, that is, true RNG with no protection against getting the same thing again and again. As with everything else, RNG without any boundaries or systems of protection is an absolutely attrocious system, since it leaves you open to extreme streaks of repetition.
So I’ll say it again, no more data is needed to very clearly assert there’s an issue here. The system shouldn’t let you play 7 maps in a row without a single beastman appearing, that literally shouldn’t be possible if this had been done right.
FS desperately needs to stop using unfettered RNG. It’s a truly awful way to do things.
Edit: Sorry didn’t notice Kaelus already covered this further up and you agreed. You can disregard most of this post.