Why Players think the AI cheats


#41

I’m with you ryan. I have no problem with a loss, but this ridiculous “FU mode” are annoying and frustrating. When i start gow, i lost a lot and thats okay. The matches are fair.
But today when goblins go crazy and their 1st turn ends with a single troop with 5hp left, then it’s pointless.
When the ai gets to every action or turn a freeskull, then its pointless.
And the freeturn for a 3match makes it not better.


#42

Speaking purely for myself, it’s mostly a matter of repetition fatigue rather than any fundamental flaw with the game. There are very few games I’d play as much as I have Gems of War; I think the premise and the execution is quite compelling. It’s just that, after doing any one activity for as long as I have, natural burnout sets in. Randomness had nothing to do with my decision to go from being a top-10 guildmember to mostly watching from the sidelines; the rest of life did.


#43

I have no doubt that their are numerous factors that influence a players activity.
Yet, I imagine the whole point of the luck factor is to keep things from being repetitive. Like @Bobzilla34 voiced… It’s not fun to win all the time. And it’s also not fun to lose all the time. The luck factor can make sure that neither issues happen too much. I feel, it’s doing more harm than good though.
I feel… It influences the burn out rate in a negative way.
The devs say more people are playing daily than ever before. I have to believe that there is an uptick of new players accounting for these stats.
What I’m more interested in knowing is how many of these new players last 6 months, to a year. And how many players are currently quitting over the 1 year mark quit.
To me… that would be a better representation of player retention than just daily log ins.
The higher rate from 2018 compared to 2017 daily log in makes total sense. There are more daily Rewards to collect in 2018 than there was in 2017. So that really has no representation of current retention rate the more I think about it.
But enough with me myself derailing my own thread. Lol


#44

By taking luck out of certain modes it would take even longer for new player to be able to play them, maybe they could create a new game mode that doesn’t even unlock until level 1000 even if its casual for no rewards the ability to play another human one on one. To give a fresh human element to end gamers and breed real rivalry etc, but I think its already been said real pvp will never exist.


#45

But its probably just our imagination.


#46

Of course. But surprisingly I try to pick my battles.
So since the constant skull storm ended. I’m okay with the present RFG for the most part.
It’s just the luck factor mechanic that I pray they get rid of.


#47

Yes.

When you win 95% of your matches, you’re very unlikely to lose two in a row. One loss stands out as “weird” to you because you’re expecting to win, then you win the next match and it feels “normal” again.


#48

I mean losing a 3t battle on purpose. Dont all the top guilds do that for guild wars?


#49

It’s been suggested to me. It feels like urban legend, but it’s also sensible based on experience?

I mean, I might design a game to start fighting harder against players who won more. That’s what matchmaking is supposed to do, but GoW thinks Fire Bombs are as strong as a meta team so matchmaking doesn’t work so well at that. So it’s logical if the game has, say, a property called AdaptiveAIFactor in its login data under the pEconomyModel tree, that might be a sign the AI has “levels” that change based on how the player has performed. And if it had one of those properties for every major game mode, that’d be more indicative.


#50

Or it would be cool if you knew when the Ai was about to go nutz. Like the whole team glows with a red aura or something. Then if you still manage to win it would feel like an accomplishment.


#51

Im new here and i dont know any of you like you all seem to know each other but i see what seems to be one person complaining about a luck factor when they seem to not understand the word “random” and others trying to fight ignorance with logic which is like trying to kick water uphill.


#52

The AI never knows when it’s “about to” get lucky because it’s not predetermined. That would literally be the opposite of lucky. Random is random.


#53

:point_up: this exactly!


#54

Ignorance like not knowing there’s a mechanic in the game called “luck factor” that can factor into the RNG to help the player or help the AI?
There’s a lot of hidden code that effects the “RNG” in single match.
Before claiming others to be ignorant. It’s usually helpful to educate yourself on the matter before sharing your thoughts on it.


#55

Have you seen the code? If it is public please link it so i can see it too.


#56

I really think the biggest problem with random luck forcing the player to lose periodically is that, at least in my opinion, losing should ALWAYS be the player’s fault. There is no way to force the player to lose in spite of them doing everything right without making the average player feel cheated.

I see people throwing around accusations that people just want a 100% win rate, and are salty because they don’t win every time. That’s clearly not the case. Everyone at the mid-game or end-game level had to play through the early part of the game. You know, that part of the game where you lose 90% of matches. Where even normal difficulty expeditions were next to impossible because you had no team building tools yet?

If we hated losing IN GENERAL, and just wanted a 100% win rate, we never would have persevered through that part of the game.

The problem is that we don’t like FAKE losses. And that’s all we have now. Once you’ve collected 80% of the cards in the game, and have several mythic cards, you only have two kinds of matches; ones where you skillfully get your team charged up and attacking with great efficiency, and ones where sheer luck overrides everything and you are forced to lose.

Those forced losses don’t enrich the game. They don’t pose an actual challenge to be overcome. They don’t give you anything to strive towards. They just suck and there’s nothing you can do about it. And that’s why people get so angry over it, it’s a pointless aggravating waste of time that does nothing to add to our enjoyment of the game at all.


#57

Im pretty new to this game but i am sure that everything is based on some kind of RNG. If there is code that circumvents the RNG to dictate a predetermined outcome then i would very much like to see proof of it. Otherwise random will always be random.


#58

Right here on the forums you can find information about the luck factor.
If you want to weigh in on the matter then it’s on you to educate yourself about it.
Had you came here and simply asked “what is the luck factor you are talking about?”
I would of gladly helped you see information about it from the devs.
But since you came here claiming “that I do not understand RNG”.
I find myself, not wanting to help you what so ever in providing education on the matter to you. Weird.


#59

Lol what a narcissistic response! Fortunately I have been blessed with enough intelligence that I completely understand “luck factor”. But that’s not what I asked for, is it? I asked to see the code. You are claiming that there is code that mandates a loss once certain criteria are met and I simply asked for proof. If this proof doesn’t exist than I am forced to take the Occam’s Razor approach. The solution which requires the fewest assumptions is that you are suffering from confirmation bias and probably some cognitive dissonance as well. But please feel free to wallow in your self pity pool if you like. I won’t stop you. :slight_smile:


#60

Come on guys and girls, an AI can’t cheat he can only follow his programming. So if there is something cheating it’s the devs who write the program for the game. :confused:
I’ve asked several times the same Q when I started with the game and after a while I got the answer “The AI doesn’t cheat but is biased” :face_with_raised_eyebrow:
So if that’s not clear enough that it’s not the game that’s cheating but that it is programmed that way I don’t know how much clearer they can put it. :thinking: