If they want to see what happens if shotguns and other weapons are realistic, they should try the 2005 Battlefront game. Quick recap on the results: every hitscan weapon instakills everybody or leaves them a hair away from death at any range, including sniper bodyshots, and every explosive wipes out everybody in the vicinity. And it is fun in terms of the sheer chaos that it ensues, especially with the dumb AI, but complete bullshit in terms of balanced gameplay.
Course' it's not realistic, but it's certainly more so. Honestly I think I'd feel weird if my shotgun fired some kind of weird perfect square shape every time I used it.
@@sirreginaldfishingtonxvii6149 That's so Damm arbitrary then, if you want to be realistic, then make it so it benefits the game. And realism into shotguns that cannot even reload correctly like irl, really?.
I’d actually like a long-barrel shotgun that has a tighter spread that deals more damage at range but less damage overall. Because that’d just be awesome to sneeze at people from medium range and scare them with a shotgun.
Because of spread, you can randomly land a super tight spread at long range, with the crit (and therefor no damage falloff). If anything, the spread makes shotgun crits range from chip damage to sniper rifle.
spread pattern just makes the weapons more consistent. you will always hit for 100 if you place your crosshair properly at close range, whereast with random spread you might do 80 15% of the times and die because of it, and the same goes for long range, you might miss completely because of random spread or you might get a very small spread pattern making for a less consistent damage which cant be properly accounted for by the player getting damaged, which for me, coming from cs and league where you either generally know what amount of damage you can tank (league) or you know the exact number of bullets that you can tank line in cs. (for example the ak does 27 damage with 1 shot so if you are at 82 hp or above you will always be able to tank 4 regular shots from an ak, and imo being able to calculate stuff like this only raises the skill ceiling and really doesnt affect the casuals in any way.
@@zezanje1 Why should TF2 be anything like league or cs? It's a much more chaotic game. You could walk around a corner into a sentry at random and die instantly regardless. That's part of the game in TF2, accounting for the unexpected. If you're going to lose an engagement 15% of the time just because you're dealing 20 less damage, and that matters significantly to you, maybe don't engage in that scenario. Risk-reward.
@@Have_some_plasma go to his twitter and pinned tweet, i don't hate him in any way tho Edit: The tweet longer is no longer the pinned tweet, its a foam cock now.
I've always felt more consistent with the Panic Attack than any other shotgun, but you know what that's probably more because of the 15 pellets than the fixed spread.
Even though you deal less damage at mid range with it it is much more consistent, with the shotgun? You might deal more damage but mostly lower damage due to the random bullet spread, the "fixed spread" allows the Panic Attack to be much consistent even though you are going to expect having to deal only low damage
@@Rogeryoo Especially since the spread is horizontally wide instead of vertically, yet still contains the same amount of bullets. So you can completely miss at mid-range, but if your crosshair got close enough and you're on the right level horizontally, you still do the same amount of damage as if you had hit.
ye, the same goes for back scatter which has a larger spread so you will never miss as hard but you will never hit as hard unless you are very close. ngl stuff like this makes tf2 such a great game in my eyes. if you are not feeling it right now, you swap from the scattergun to the back scatter and you both do minicrits probably once every 6-7 shots and have the ability to cheese classes below 150 in 1 shot with a good flank and you just simply cant miss as hard which makes you more consistent when you are performing poorer, making you better in a scount 1v1 for example than you would perform with a scatter gun when not feeling it. greatest shooter of all time ngl.
The thing with random bullet spread is that almost all casual players aren't bothered by it being off but some more competitive players are bothered by it being on, so it might as well be off. This is opposed to crits which a lot of people prefer on and a lot of people prefer off. Whether turning RBS off will cause a Vietnam style domino effect giving the design of every TF2 mechanic to comp players is unironically a concern of mine, I don't want comp players to be in control of casual TF2 but I also don't give a shit about RBS being on or off, good video by the way.
Hate this style of reasoning, just because you claim casual players aren’t bothered by it doesn’t mean casual players won’t notice. I feel like it should come down to the competitive players more tbh, as they should learn to improve their skill to the point where rbs doesn’t matter
@@chasekellow3835 I disagree, I still believe almost all casual players won't be bothered, even if they notice. The fact is it just doesn't change much and I doubt many people would be bothered by it's removal. Though you're right I don't actually know that, just seems highly probable given how insignificant it is and the mindset of the average casual player. Also RBS will always matter no matter the skill level of the player because of the nature of random chance, this is proven by the video which has a perfectly controlled test setting, there's no way to "git so gud" so that you control how the bullets of your shotgun come out the barrel. Actually the better you are the MORE RBS will effect your shots because the less your aim plays a factor in missing your shots the more RBS will, even if the plays the same amount it means more because other factors are lessened. I don't even care if RBS is on or off, but saying players should get gud enough to control random chance is dumb.
@@redshift0433 I agree with this, to be honest RBS on or off in casual means nothing when casual is filled to the brim with bots that haven't even been addressed by valve yet.
People need to stop thinking like this. Most competitive players don't give a shit about pub balance. It's just a TH-cam feud but it's not some divide in TF2 like people make it out to be. The average competitive player has no interest in "making casual competitive" like some very vocal people seem to think.
To me it comes off as kind of pretentious when he just explains a bell curve for little to no reason when his argument hinges entirely on taking an average.
@@007turtle1239 dude. it was for a short amount of time he mentioned it. he didn't stay on that topic for a full minute. A brief explanation. Also, we get it, you have a short attention span and you don't like it when the path deviates a little to explain a something kinda cool, and something we kinda forgot about in high school.
Exactly, zesty forgot that shotguns are shotguns and not sniper rifles, and that you are more likely to use the shotgun at mid to close range which makes small movements the difference between getting shot or not. You dont sit in a corner of the map and carefully and precisely aim on an enemy like a sniper. If i had a nickel for the amount of pellets didnt connect and got me killed leaving the enemy with less than 10 hp because of random bullshit spread, my bank account could rival Jeff Bezos'.
@@JustinWHY-zz7gz Make it have no bloom will turn it into a pseudo sniper though. Also that just sound like your aim is the problem because it is hit scan, there is no bullet travel times.
@@Apsolon "make it have no bloom will turn it into a pseudo sniper though" Bro are you high? The only pellets that hit where your crosshair lands are 2 out of the 10 that you fire, the other 8 are spread apart. No bloom bullet spread shotgun shots have a square pattern and the more far away your shot is the more spread apart the pellets are, they dont just stay in one fixed small pattern from short range all the way from long range. Also when did i mention anything about bullet travel time
@@JustinWHY-zz7gz The reason I said that is because now you can realistic hit peoples at farther range since the spread are fixed while RBS can technically do the same thing but they are less likely to happened than fixed, making it fixed technically also increase the effective range of the shotgun. While it doesn't deal significant dmg, it will affect how they receive heal or at least support your team more consistently. About bullet travel times, because you said your bullet didn't connect, if you aim right, your bullet will always connect plus hit scan so if you miss that is on you and remember this the center shot is always 100% accurate and it hit right on cross hair.
@@Apsolon Ok, 1: bloom shotguns can also hit people at long range because the pellet on your crosshair is always 100% accurate, and about the healing per second affected by chip damage can be done by anything, you can use a pistol to do 8 damage instead of 3 from longer range and can if you got the timing right you can hit 100% of your shots if you wait for the pistols spread to reset back to 100% accurate, and you dont seem to call the pistol a pseudo sniper so whats your point. 2: Bloom shotguns have horrible spread patterns, sometimes they're horizontal and somtimes they're vertical, which means that if my crosshair isnt dead center and i shoot a vertical pattern i missed someone with low enough hp to be killed with 2 to 3 pellets if the pattern was just a little more to the right or left, which makes it extremely infuriating. Theres literally no reason to keep bloom spread in the game, because with it off makes the game more consistent and makes every death feel like my own fault instead of the game screwing me over, same with random crits. Also i love how all the casual players say that removing bloom and random shits will make the game more competitive without even elaborating on why that is. Removing bloom and random crits will make the game more enjoyable and balanced. Casuals tend to think that RNG means causal fun when that obviously isnt the case.
One problem with fixed bullet spread is that at certain ranges, aiming perfectly centered will consistently do LESS damage than aiming near the side (since aiming at the center will cause only the middle column of pellets to hit).
@@DankDimensionMemes My bad, I thought you were talking about random spread being better. Because dealing more damage than expected at a longer range could be bs for someone.
I feel like most people really only started to notice/care more about the random bullet spread because of the change made to the panic attack making it have a fixed spread at all times
The only bullet spread that really bothers me is the revolver, and even that makes sense because they're meant to be a mid-range last resort that uses a few deliberate shots instead of mag-dumping every time
Everyone is forgetting that we did remove a randomness mechanic from TF2, random *DAMAGE* spread. The game would deviate how much damage falloff would effect your weapon by up to 15% both ways. This underrated TF2uber has a great video on it. th-cam.com/video/F1-aUhZq4WU/w-d-xo.html (Zesty I normally don’t care how much attention my comments get but I really think more people should be talking about this, I’d appreciate a pin)
@@Breakaway-ic5gj Coding in randomness isnt that difficult at all, in fact its extremely easy. Once you set up a random number generator (which most languages already provide), all you need to do is just add its output to the base stat, if its positive, it gets boosted, if negative, it gets reduced. This can be used to make damage fluctuate as OP mentioned, or in the case of bloom, the x and y positions of a pellet relative to the center. As for why they put them in, I don't know. In the case of Bloom, one of the points in Zesty's video was Bloom makes a shotgun's bullet spread more realistic to the behavior of an actual shotgun. For gameplay, that means a shotgun's damage output is inconsistent at long to medium range, which encourages using the weapon at short range where bloom is insignificant.
8:14 this is the only problem stationary targets are good for data, but think about every time your enemy walks to your left and your bullets go right and then there's the simple side of "I'm pissed because I got random crit killed and they didn't earn that kill" well think about the uncertainty where you randomly get dealt more damage because all the pellets squeezed over you not as bad as a random crit, but expecting 27 damage and then taking 80 isn't predictable
Assuming your crosshair is centred on the target, a stationary target or a moving target shouldn't make a difference because tf2's bullet based weapons are hitscan. For a moving target the main factors influencing whether your bullets hit or miss would be your aim, latency, angle etc. Stuff that Zesty already covered
@@getsuga2251 doesn't mean it's not another issue. saying it's not bad because there are other issues that also affect aim doesn't suddenly make it fine
Reading between the lines, what I think RBS opponents are bothered by is the inability to instantly determine who's to blame for a low-damage shot, their skill or other factors. This is of course admirable.
Not at all, those type of players use it as an excuse for when they're missing shots, happened in csgo for a while too but in that game it actually mattered
I feel like this. I am far from an expert at this game and always want to improve. There have been countless times where I feel like I'm hitting a good shot, but I deal damage in the low 20s. This may be due to poor aim, but I don't know for sure. This could just be random bullet spread telling me to go fuck myself. It makes it hard to tell if I missed that shot due to lack of skill, or just that 1 in 20 or whatever chance that the bullets just avoid my target. It's small, but everything counts when you're trying to get better.
well ye, reducing the number of random factors is always more fun at least to some extent and random spread and random crits are going too far imo. like just compare the more random spray patterns in cs2 and the more controlable spray patterns in csgo, you can actually juts notice the general downgrade in skill level of all the pro players (let alone the casual playerbase) to the point where when you see someone hit an actualy spray transfer you forget that that is even a thing, whereast pretty much most of the best csgo pro plays of all time were because of spray transfer being much more controlable. so like if you think of cs2's spraying inaccuracy increase as random spread and csgo's more controlable spraying patterns as predetermined spread, then valorant would be random crits with their sprays that are quite literally spra and pray and not fun for anyone.
Based on current video comments, here's the major divide: A) Because TF2 is unrealistic and shouldn't go towards a more competitive playstyle, RBS is fine especially since the deviation of bullets is notable but not *negatively consistent, as the video points out. There's plenty of other factors that COULD play into why a bullet misses its target, so RBS can't always be proven to be the culprit. or B) Because TF2 is a PvP video game that demands hand-eye skill to perform well, the least amount of random mechanics should be implemented to allow a player to succeed on their own terms, not on the game's. There's plenty of other factors that COULD play into why a bullet misses it's target, so RBS shouldn't be added to the list. I think only certain weapons should have RBS, specifically Scout's arsenal, the SMG, and Minigun, and probably another example I could think of. Certain weapons that would be too powerful consistently hitting without some kind of balance factor is important. The Revolver, for instance, having RBS if you fire too fast is a perfectly implemented balancing tool, that forces Spies to gamble or play patiently. But the Shotgun, which is already designed in its spread to perform worse at range, getting the added randomness is an extra kick in the pants. Statistically, it makes little difference in the short-term, but the nagging feeling of randomness does build over time. But if the SMG had no randomness to it... Sniper could actually be a terrifying assault rifle class. The Medic's syringe guns don't need randomness. They are already weak, and the very slight spread *could* cause a well-planned retreat to go awry in a situation where he otherwise could have survived. The argument COULD be made that randomness COULD let all the needles hit a target who is very evasive anyways, but the likelihood is nearly impossible. And where the difference between 1 and 0 is death, the Blutsauger hitting an extra needle could absolutely save a medic's life. In short, I surmise that the video is right that if a weapon DID have a randomness factor, it should only be applied to weapons that should not be allowed to succeed on average at far ranges. A random bullet spread mechanic forces Scouts closer, which balances the class as a whole because of his low health pool. In a video game where every single point of health matters, I wager it's not a justifiable argument for every weapon. If it's already impeded by distance, that should be the trade off by default, unless another factor would apply.
In agreement here, however just a note from a Heavy main that used to play the game competitively, RBS seems to aid heavy more than it hurts him, I find I land more shots with it on than off as the extra variables described in the video make having a consistent bullet spread on something with a cone of rapid firing hitscan kind of pointless and the random chance that more bullets are in the center of your shot is more likely to happen on HWG than static bullet spread giving the heavy an advantage. I plan on doing a comparison video just to see if my theory is correct but I would actually argue to enable static bullet spread for heavy as it tends to actually be a detriment instead of an aid a lot of the time since the difference in game play is even less negligible for Heavy. The same can be said for snipers SMG as it fires at the same interval rate as the minigun but has less pellets, however RBS seems to change little for sniper. Another can be said for spy where a consistent bullet spread is fairly insignificant where when you want your shots to land you just wait a few MS for a 100% accurate shot.
As an added note to Zesty's take on fast firing hitscan weapons let me iterate on how it works for rapid fire weapons because it's very different from shotguns and same can be said for a revolver which fires one pellet. The consistent spread is not perfectly accurate, instead it rotates in the same pattern repeatedly, giving it a "consistent" spread, however how this pattern is produced dictates whether it's good for the weapon. In my opinion it's entirely insignificant for revolvers and rapid fire weapons.
@@bucket6988 isn't that entirely placebo though? As far as I'm aware turning rbs off literally only applies to shotguns. Rapid fire guns being brought up is not because they're directly part of the rbs debate but as an example that rbs is a balancing mechanic. Such is the case for most if not literally all first person shooters, even the hard-core ones such as CS:GO. Yes CS:GO has spray patterns (and I'm pretty sure Zesty is just factually wrong in saying they gave shotguns a fixed *spread* in CS:GO*), but they are a separate mechanic from bullet spread, every gun in the game has bullet spread to discourage spraying/spamming at a long distance, even if you know the spray pattern (with exception to the negev which gets more accurate when sprayed although still has minor spread even then). *edit: it would seem shotguns both do and do not have fixed spread in CS:GO, they all shoot in unique patterns, but each pellet still has slight variations. Thus still technically having RBS but it's very minor.
@@bucket6988 I can save you the time and research on RBS being needed for Heavy. Step one, you turn off random spread for Heavy and the bullets land directly on his crosshair. Fun fact, the first bullet in your minigun is 100% accurate and actually can be used like a revolver. Tomi Sniping for aggro'ing snipers is a legit strategy and it works very well. Step two, you realize hackers used to do this often and realize heavies with pinpoint accuracy would kill people immediately across the map, or easily chunk their health. Step three, you keep RBS on and summon an eldritch god and show him what power a 100% accuracy heavy is, and you tell him to bury the command for RBS off in the sun.
Just one thing: The experiment at hand assumes that the player has perfect aim, at precisely center mass. Random bullet spread most often comes into play not with meatshots, but rather when it comes to finishing off an opponent. If your crosshair is halfway on top of your target, for instance, there’s a large chance that you WON’T get the necessary damage to finish off a target at low health. While I agree that random bullet spread is insignificant within the context of individual fights, the amount of people that have been subtly fucked over by them is probably much larger than we would expect. (Posting this solely to promote discussion, so no salt pls)
I respect your opinion on the experiment but, that’s kind of the whole thing with it being a semi-scientific experiment the variable at Play was the DPS of shotguns with bullet spread enabled the part of the experiment the changes (I don’t remember the exact terminology at moment)was the range. so having the engineer staying completely still was just a constant in the experiment, because if you change more than one variable then you don’t know which is causing the change in your data it might be that he’s moving it might be the random bullets spread or it might be the range end at that point it would no longer be a accurate presentation of the data. Along with that the location of the crosser is variable mostly controlled by the player themselves, which cannot be accurately represented because well zesty is not every single player in TF2. And this comment is not made out of salt I’m just giving my two cents again for the sake of discussion.
His study can only account for so many details. Inconsistent aim to get the maximum hit box contact is just a value that can’t be remade, and if it is somehow included, then that would skew the details and results. He just have to assume you’re going to hit close to center of mass with each shot
But there's also a chance you'll deal more damage to a low-health target when you're crosshair is slightly off, right? I don't understand why people seem to think random bullet spread equals less damage done. Even with perfect aim, that won't be the case, (unless you have nine enemies standing in a square formation).
"tf2 is a clusterfuck, a cluster fuck of different skill levels mashed together with a plethera of different class abilities. hit scan, projectiles, knives, clubs, swords, fucking fire!" perfectly incapsulates this game, and why its so good
Random bullet spread has been an issue for a long time, but it HAS become a popular topic of discussion again when it has been more of a background topic compared to really busted things like the wrap assassin ball or the righteous bison being broken, etc. If I recall correctly, back in the Jerma and Ster_ days this was a popular topic of discussion back then too. But as other, more pressing balance problems came up, this issue faded to the background of discussions. Things being in a relatively good balance place with a reasonably active community of content creators compared to how things were between the early days and now, makes this sort of topic something that could be reasonably discussed again.
What do we gain from these random elements? - Occasional dopamine hit for people who are already on a streak What do we lose by keeping them? -Some fights are won by rng (edit) -Skill and practice is invalidated What do we lose by removing them? - Nothing
@@lukeeatschips6324 I don't really think the difference in damage by bullet spread is big enough to say that "fights are won by RNG" nor that "skill and practice is invalidated." Random crits? Certainly. But random bullet spread? That's simply not true. Extreme hyperbole at best. If someone is blaming that for losing, then they're making up excuses.
In my experience of tf2, random bullet spread has noticeably led to exactly killed one person killed more than normal, by sending them flying off a cliff, but they probably would’ve died anyways Also, I find that random crits on normal weapons are just not fun even when I get them, but on melee weapons they’re actually really stupid and fun
That's pretty much my stand on random crits as well. Random crit rocket wiping out half the team isn't fun, but getting up close in the danger zone with random crit melee is fun in my eyes even if I get crit punched.
@Nicholas Darryl H. wouldnt removing random crits on the uber saw make it even more broken? since you could hit more people for ubercharge instead of 1 shotting them
I could take them or leave them, tbh. I Understand *why* people don’t like it, but I don’t see why so much. I’ve never had a kill stolen from me because of the random spread.
I really appreciated the use of statistics in your arguments and felt your analysis did the job, but I feel like a binomial distribution would have fit better here, especially when the close-range data is noticeably not normally distributed, but I can confirm through my own tinkering that it is very well-fit by a binomial distribution of the 9 random pellets
On top of this, the number of pellets that hit is a discrete variable, and since there's only 9 pellets for most shotguns which isn't a very large number, it makes little sense to approximate the normal distribution here. This is especially noticeable for the close range graph as a greater proportion of shots are more than 1 standard deviation away from the mean since the graph is so far to the right. I mean, the normal distribution can work here, it's just not the most appropriate option.
I hate how sometimes a Scout can just deal 50 damage from midrange to me in one shot just because he got a lucky spread, and being unable to consistently estimate stuff like that is enough reason for me to not want RBS. The fact it's even *possible* to do 12 damage instead of 50 at random is just stupidly unfair.
@@Chapstick159 200 hrs scout here, and it kinda is but it can happen It's just happened to me twice so far Once at almost point blank with my reticle around the arm area of an engine, but only did 18 DMG, the remaining 8 pellets literally made a carved moon on the far right side of the bloom (could be more about TF2 fucked server connection than RBS though)
I find myself convinced by this video. I am adamantly against random critical hits, especially after Dane's video a few years ago. I'm not as sure about spread as I am about crits, but I think I can go either way now. If I had to guess, I'd say even the people peddling FBS don't much know how little it does (including the youtubers that brought it up in the first place). If anything, I appreciate the tone of this video, as one that does not seek to aggravate. I was worried you would start that, especially after all of the undue hate, but it seems I am wrong.
I'm not surprised Dane came to the conclusion he did in that video, but he should have looked into what he was talking about more. Randon bullet spread, while in competitive makes sense entirely, does not NEARLY affect the game to the same degree as random crits lol. RBS is so much less likely to cause a "oh look I fkn died GOD DAMMIT--"
Dane also said people would site "comp tf2" as a reason for people getting into tf2 by 2023 in the same video, is late 2021 now and while there is still time, am gonna say he is full of shit, random crits make the game more fun and for that reason alone they should stay, simple as.
@@Lone-Nep Damn, I must have Alzheimer's or something, because I honest to God can't remember a single time I had fun getting instakilled by a splash damage class that clicked the ground one Tour de France away from me.
I never really thought about random spread until community servers started turning it off, but I love the shotgun and I have enjoyed being able to more easily judge things like the damage I can expect to get on follow up shots at a certain range and whether my shot was poorly aimed. I guess it's not so much about doing more or less damage as providing more useful feedback in a single shot, where with the random spread you might need a couple to get a feel for the situation you're in, a situation that might well have ended by that point. That being said I'm pretty average at the game, so maybe this is less of a factor to people with bigger brains haha.
Good video! Well argued. Small critique of your methodology (or presentation of data, depending how you want to look at it), though: I think you should have done the same experiment with fixed bullet spread as a control and used the results from that as the basis of comparison so that you're showing the difference between vanilla and what you're arguing against.
He shows some clips of fixed bullet spread in the training area he had but yeah he doesn't specifically talk about them, however, with fixed bullet spread every shot would deal the exact same amount of damage so it's less of an experiment and more of a check what those dmg values are.
the problem with having around 80% consistent bullet spread is that shotgun fights are resolved with 2~3 shots. This means that in every shotgun fight there is a fairly high chance of having an inconsistent shot, and that makes a difference (example: playing scout vs a soldier. You have a inconsistent shot and die)
2-3 shots? Sounds like a close-range encounter, in which you're literally bound to hit. That means either you actually miss and should get better or hitreg isn't doing good.
ye exactly. lets say that there is an even 5% diviation, that means that every 20 bullets you will miss 30% more or something, then that means (if you are 1v1ing scouts for exmaple), every 5 fights you will do significantly less damage than enemy scout and lose. lets say that if you are doing decently well you will hav 30 kils per game, which means that 6 times per game you would get screwed over by this dumb system, ant thats not even taking into account the fact that you slightly missing the center of the enemy's hitbox might overlap with a shitty spread pattern resulting in you missing your shot completely instead of hitting 30% of it. very dumb mechanic. its fine to have this in games where shotguns are nooby weapons for players that are bad at teh game, which is the ase for most games, but for tf2 where most classes rely on a shotgun, this mechanic has no place. the spread is very noticable on scout and in scout 1v1s where in casual your shots juts feel way more incosistent than in competitive.
@@fantastikboom1094Non sequitor. I am a scout main. I'm not "good at aiming" if i kill someone in 2 shots near me, because unlike your absurd requirement I don't have godlike aim and the other person (which most of the times has to deal with me running around them and getting in their face) can't be bothered to fling their mouse across the room to aim perfectly in the center of my hitbox. Calling people bad because you cant comprehend how a semi-bad player can kill a decent player because they rolled into dealing the slightest sliver of damage more is stupid, you are undermining the chaos that happens during a close range battle. Which to remind you, is usually never 2 classes strafing left and right and shooting at eachother in set intervals like robots. It's 2 classes in very *very* close range that have barely enough time to react to eachothers' movements. But sure, both I and the random people that I get into these encounters with both have "good aim" and should "get better at aiming" at the same time I guess. Because logic
this video really didnt need to be this long, it just feels better to know that the reason you missed even tho it looked like you hit your target is your own incompetence and not random spread. fortnite had a similar issue where "dead on" shots would completely miss because of bullet spread, and in return you dealing 9 damage from point blank range, and they dealt with that by increasing the numbers of fragments that hit 100% of the time when you hit your crosshair is placed on the target
A part that we don't explore as much is the person receiving more damage; is it fair for you to be killed by someone who isn't aiming at your center of mass simply because more random pellets ended up lining up with your hurtbox? I wouldn't say it necessarily rewards bad aim, but randomly taking more damage than average instead of less is a point to consider.
True, but its basically chip damage. Either you have enough health to fight more or escape and it probably made no difference, or you were so close to death something else would have probably killed you. And I don't know about other people but I have never died and thought "Damn random bullet spread!" Because there's no way for you to even tell.
Well I mean if you are at a distance where that extra damage can kill you so easily I feel the shot gun deserves to be more useful in that close range.
Yes, because when I take a ton of damage at close range from a shotgun I don't think "damn, that was well aimed" I always think "he just got lucky!" Random bullet spread is not like random crits, it gets broadcast to the world that you got killed by a crit, you get a specific sound effect when you are hit with one and sometimes you can see the crit coming towards you. There is literally no indication of random bullet spread from the receiver's view point unless they take out a calculator and know the exact distance and orientation of the shot to calculate how much damage they should have taken.
@@Nutty31313 I think that too, but on some level I think that would be there no matter what, just like when I get noscoped by a sniper while rushing them with a bat
I don't see how removing random bullet spread potentially pushes TF2 into territory it doesn't belong if RBS is as insignificant as you make it out to be. Random crits are a game changing mechanic, RBS is a quality of life change that removes any chance of variation that could occur whether in your benefit of shit aim or to your negative of proper aim but poor RNG, regardless of how small of a difference it makes. People feel less robbed when they fail to secure a kill, people feel less robbed when they lose a duel, and people have less excuses for why both of those factors occurred. RBS at times is more of a mental thing than it is a pure gameplay thing, but inherently a mechanic that brings in factors outside of the player's control even if the player did what they were supposed to do is an awful design, and shouldn't exist on that principle alone. RBS is entirely a matter of opinion on principle, same way that people gripe about the game being too casual or too competitive.
The variation is suppose to be there as a form of balance for the shot guns Without it they become too consistent at ranges they shouldn't be Its something that's meant to be out of control. Just look at what it does to scout in comp. With his pellets being so much more consistent he basically gets a range boost as he can now more consistently deal larger amounts of damage at medium range instead of feeling the urge to be as close as possible anymore.
Yeah, it's more of QOL thing. I don't care if it isn't realistic, if fuck up a shot I would preffer the fuck up being on me. It enfuriates me when one pellet misses my enemmy because it decided to fuck off to the edge of the cone as scout at short range and they live.
@@harryvpn1462 no it's not Plenty of things are based around random factors. The pistol, revolver, mingun, dmg all have random factors and are balanced by those random factors.
Ironically, as someone who was more neutral on bullet spread, this vid actually helped convince me to support no random bullet spread? Damage wise the range is minuscule, but the consistency helps with long range chip damage, which is able to help deal with snipers. It’s not much, but the difference between one pellet and no pellet is the big deal in those situations, so you can get that flinch. The other arguments don’t really make me want to support random bullet spread either. To me, being able to work slightly more effectively than not at all at longer ranges feels more realistic, and the whole ‘competitive slippery slope’ doesn’t really mean much. The whole argument about there being other random factors just said to me that the feeling of variance would be there even without random bullet spread, so why bother keeping it in? Shotguns still wouldn’t be completely reliable, especially without the headshots CS:GO has.
I'm actually surprised with this comment here. I had the same line of reasoning, but for staying neutral towards bullet spread and to stop caring about it, since it aint matter as you said. I don't know why support taking it out, but otherwise? I think your reasoning itself removed from what you support makes 110% sense.
RNG in video games can make for interesting mechanics. Overall I would say TF2 doesn't do RNG very well since it doesn't contribute to the game in a meaningful way. A game that does RNG very well in comparison is Dota 2, where things like rune spawns and certain abilities are random yet you can always account for them some way. It means you can play around the expected RNG, as opposed to TF2 where you can killed by a crocket as soon as you walk around the corner. Can't really play around that. The irony is Dota 2 is a hypercompetitive game but the RNG arguably makes it more skill based by forcing you to account for the random factor. Honestly though Dota balance gets like x100 times the effort TF2 gets, at least.
Thank you for being the only person in this game who doesn't blindly hate dota 2. I see some people saying that dota 2 is the start of valve's decline as a game developer. Even though tf2 should be blamed IMO as it was the first valve game to first introduce loot boxes and microtransaction
@@ilikemusic3856 I've got 1k hours in Dota and 3k in TF2 and I think they're both great games. Dota is a fantastic games the real problem is players can be so toxic it makes the game hard to enjoy.
@@m136dalie Though I have been playing tf2 way less(barely played 5 hrs this entire month). I still play CS:GO and Dota 2 a decent amount. And yes dota 2's community is toxic. But Tf2's community is not a gurdian angel as some likely you to believe. You got people who post garbage on TH-cam(zealot) to people who send straight up send death threats if a youtuber they like starts making variety content. And in the meanwhile you got manchildren,children,furries,annoying tryards,people who try to make this game be competive even though there are like 100 reasons why it can't,people thinking if you play dota2 or cs:go you are "stupid".etc etc. Now there's somethings good about this community but they are so rare and far between compare to all the dogshit that surrounds it.
@@ilikemusic3856 You gotta admit, TF2 pubs are extremely chill. No one flames you, gets mad for buying wrong item or stealing kill. Dota pubs, even unranked sometimes, people just have so much internal anger they will lash out at the smallest thing. There's toxic people everywhere but I feel Dota, despite being a good game, tends to bring out the worst in people. I rarely have to mute people in TF2 but in Dota it's become second nature to mute teammates who flame.
@@m136dalie I think this is because of 2 things. 1. Tf2 is a casual game at heart and the fact there's like 12 players in both team. So if someone fucks up in tf2 it isn't a huge deal unlike dota which has 5 players each so if someone fucks up it would matter. 2. Maybe most of the players are F2P.
The issue with this experiment is that it only applies to perfect center-of-mass shots. It fails to account for all of the other variables that can go into the decision-making behind a shotgun shot. For example, if you were to damage an opponent down to about 40 health, then you can make the decision to divert some of your mental energy away from perfectly aiming for center of mass, and instead focus some of your energy on juking/dodging. In this case, you're more likely to hit a grazing shot on the opponent's sides. Or, you can afford to retreat a bit and make some distance before making the killing blow. If you have fixed bullet spread, you can reasonably expect that at certain aiming points, you'd hit something like 54 or 63 damage, and so you can afford to go for these less-accurate shots in order to secure the kill (similar to going for a splash rocket on a wounded opponent instead of a direct shot as Soldier). You can develop the knowledge of how much damage certain aiming points would give, and use that to make informed decisions on how to aim. With random bullet spread, this decision-making is moot. You could go for a less accurate shot, and hit something like 36 damage to 72 damage, and it's completely out of your control. This applies even more to mid-range shots. It interferes with the development of skills such as damage number recognition and relevant decision-making based on those numbers, just like random crits. The effects aren't immediately obvious like crits, because there's very little way of knowing when random bullet spread came into effect or didn't come into effect, but it still applies, and it still negatively impacts the game, at least to SOME degree. If only 85% of shots fit within the "average", that's still 15% of shots that don't. 15% is a significant amount of shots. That's almost 1/6, which is funny when you consider a shotgun has 6 shots. At midrange this is even more ridiculous, considering only 68% of shots land in the std dev range. Using your conservative estimate of 70%, I can say that betting on a 70% chance of doing an expected amount of damage is just not reasonable, at all. If the average range of damage is 13, that could be considered significant. 13 damage is 10% of a light class's health. And all of this is only against a stationary target with perfect center-of-mass aiming. The variance would be even greater if you were to test different angles, different aiming positions, etc. Just because aiming perfectly gives you a "consistent" RANGE of damage 85% (or less) of the time, doesn't mean it's not significant in actual gameplay. I'm a numbers nerd, and I can see myself doing this sort of test too, but I would've absolutely tested way more variables than just distance. There's also potential issues with the way you rounded things, but it's not that important, because even with the numbers presented, these issues still apply. All of this, and there's still no real argument for why shotguns should have random spread to begin with. Should a shotgun be less effective at range? Yes. Should its effectiveness be random and unpredictable? Probably not. Even if you want to argue that it'd be more "realistic" or "reasonable", it still feels bad from a gameplay perspective and can hamper the development of skills. Firing at a wounded target at midrange the exact same way should not give variable results. I shouldn't sometimes hit a 50 and sometimes hit a 30 with identical shots on someone who has 40 health. If I aim properly, I should be rewarded for my knowledge of damage numbers and my skill of hitting the shot. Consistency is always a good thing when it comes to this sort of gameplay.
Zesty would outright come up with fake information if it helped him "shit on tryhards". He's not gonna argue in good faith - I think everyone who's played XCOM or any similar game knows having a 1/6 chance of failure is too damn high and he pretends like it's 1/60.
This just boils down to 1 phrase "Know when to pick your fights and when to flee", if you are relying on grazing shots to win, you might as well just flee and lure your enemy into a more advantageous position, if you're a Scout you can just go away faking an escape and return in a matter of seconds to catch your enemy off guard, if you're an Engineer you can "Flee" towards your Sentry so it can either scare them or just finish them off, if you're a Pyro your shotgun is a support weapon mostly to finish off your already flaming target, so if you're in a situation that doesn't seem good, just fake a retreat like with Scout and then just go for a closer shot, or just pull out your Flamethrower which is literally made for Close Encounters, and if you're a Heavy, your shotgun is a last resort weapon, mostly useful when you ran out of Minigun ammo and you have to retreat to an Ammo Pack or Dispenser, and if you're running a Fat Scout build, then just like the previous Scout example, fake a retreat and kill your enemy when they least expect it, overall fleeing is also an even better option if you're fleeing towards a stairway, as your hitbox can be harder to hit due to the perspective. In the example you gave on almost securing a kill, you have the enemy at 40 health, why would you start dodging at that point? Dodging is supposed to be the first thing you do, and after weakening your for you then put more pressure on them and go for the kill, specially if you're using a shotgun. Also, you're talking about mid and long range, which as explained in the video, it's outside of the effective range of the shotgun, so it's obviously going to be less effective, because you're not supposed to be using it at mid to long range, you're supposed to either get close to use it, or shoot some shots as a way to scare the enemy and then flee into a more advantageous position or even safety.
It does reward your skill. But memorization of damage numbers isn't a skill, so why should THAT be rewarded? True skill lies in overcoming obstacles that come your way, and reacting to sudden changes. If that extra health loss is a deciding factor, odds are you would have lost that encounter anyway what with Scout's ability to rapidly go from mid range to close range and the fact that his scattergun has 14.2% more damage ramp-up.
@@ashtongiertz8728 You're very late to the conversation, but. Recognizing and adjusting your play based on damage numbers IS a skill. You can't just claim it's not. It requires knowledge and experience. I think my original comment explains more than enough of how it can be a skill in practice, and how making it that random is not ideal.
Slight flaw in the argument. The 15% of the time that the shots did higher damage is still a downside because it’s equally as true for the enemy. So not only does half your shot whiff for no reason but the engineer you’re fighting could fire a slug at you instead. It may not be as significant as random crits but there’s still a tangible enough difference that I frankly can’t believe anyone with significant time in the game wouldn’t notice.
But you can also twist the argument by saying your enemy ALSO can deal less damage than they normally would. Honestly, I feel like it could go either way, but I think more people make a fuss about it because of confirmation bias and the fact people don’t like to think that “I got that kill from sheer RNG,” when RBS does go in their favor
@@matthewsusilo8698 My point being that it isn't just a 15% chance of a downside, it's 30%. Which is a lot when you're weighing options going into battle.
Important to note that damage thresholds play a HUGE factor in killing your enemy, your differences at medium and long range even in the expected bell curve can tip yourself into two shot or three shot range for light classes, three or four for medics, ect. which can play a pretty huge impact at larger ranges
Except due to the objective based win/lose conditions and the team factor, the outcome of individual dogfights doesn't really impact the outcome of the fame. It's the combined sum, and that's when probability evens out, leaving skill as the deciding factor.
@@ashtongiertz8728 yeah but we're exclusively talking about this issue in the context of 1 on 1 dogfights, the overall game impact is minimal because its a symmetrical effect
@@Pigmedog I'm just putting it into perspective. If we focus our argument solely on how it effects individual dogfights, we'll quickly lose perspective. The main argument against RBS is that it can mess with individual dogfights. My counter-argument is that TF2 wasn't designed around individual dogfights, so we shouldn't balance things around individual dogfights unless the outcome is consistently stacked in one direction (eg sniper can kill 5/10 classes instantly at ranges where 4/5 of those classes are only capable of chip damage)
@@glb0768 It's not equal to shooting a blank, though. You're just doing slightly more or slightly less damage. If you miss entirely because of random bullet spread, you're either too far away, or your aim is off. With bullet spread off, you would still only hit with one or two pellets, for 6-12 damage. The difference is tiny. Also, you often shoot a target several times, which should even the damage out even more. Dealing slightly less damage than the expected average, five shots in a row, would be very unlikely, for example.
Removing random aspects doesn't make the game more competitive, it makes it more fair. You can have the game be silly and casual without the usage of RBS and random crits. Just because two aspects of the game become less random doesn't mean it's going to downward spiral into 6v6 5cp with item limits, it just helps in giving the better player a rightfully deserved win.
I _do honestly agree?_ Random Crits are something I won't care about removal or stay of, but RBS? _It does feel right to have it?_ You still have 100% hit chance no matter what regardless, it's just _one_ of a metric crap ton of mechanics and elements that affect if your shot hits hard or if it beefs. Aim... Position... Internet connection...
Just because the game has other elements that affect your shots doesn't justify having more of said mechanics. Their not connected at all. We should minimize such needless randomness, not pointlessly increase them.
@@epiclamp44 Thing is it doesn't change anything. At the range where that would matter you wouldn't do any more damage then you already did, and at close range? Still doesn't matter, you either hit it or beef it no matter if it's a waffle pattern or not.
Random bullet spread isnt that noticable at all, there is just absolutely no reason for it to exist. Its removal would only be a net positive cuz the casuals wont notice/care and the tryhards/more competitive ppl wont get upset in the rare occasion that it messes something up.
What? What about RBS on miniguns, pistols and SMGs? In there they're pivotal in balancing the weapon. Why do competitive tryhards want shotguns to be better and more consistent at mid to long range when the main realistic and sensible downside in 90% of shooters is that shotguns are *inconsistent* and *worse* at mid to long range? Imagine if the minigun had a predictable and consistent bullet spread. It would be an automatic fucking sniper. It needs it to be balanced. RBS on shotguns is barely noticeable and when it is removed it is not an improvement to shotguns, it's simply an unnecessary statistical buff. There's a reason the panic attack lists its spread as an upside. Do Heavies and snipers bitch and moan when their shots whiff because of spread? No, because they understand the limitations of their spread and play at scenarios that favour their spread. People should be doing the same with shotguns.
@@SaltCane ok so now that i've read your whole comment i can reply properly. There already is a mechanic in the game that makes shhotguns suck at mid to long range regardless if there is rbs, it is called "damage fall-off" where you deal less damage the further you are. The argument that shotguns balance depends on the rbs, completely ignores the existence of damage fall-off. So the "balance" argument goes in to the trash because there is already something that keeps the shotgun balanced/make sense in mid to long ranges. The reason why you might want to remove rbs is the very rare occasions that you lose a kill due to it, like some of the shots uncle dane exlampified in his "Remove Random Crits" video. While these circumstances are very rare, they are extremely annoying when they happen. And the fact remains that most players woulnt even notice/care about the removal of the rbs. The people who would notice it are the "tryhards" and it would make that side of the spectrum happier as a result. While not affecting the more casual side in the slightest. As i mentioned in my original comment this only results in a net positive so there is no reason for rsb to not be removed. Thanks, have a good day!
@@SaltCane Pistols and SMGs have fixed variations of 0.2, even if you turn off RBS. The minigun's pellets fire in a circle, with one landing in the middle with RBS off, giving you consistent damage output, and yet Heavy is by far one of the least played classes in competitive or community servers.
@@SaltCane they dont have to be inconsistent at long range range. Just worse. No RBS still has the shotgun be worse at long range, so it is perfectly balanced
i like your high effort videos, especially your script writing and editing style. i hope you don't get burnt out from making the most out of this decade old game.
nobody thinks random spread is a significant issue or causes any real problems in the game. it's just the fact that it doesn't contribute anything positive to the game and can be removed by valve with one simple command.
The problem with RBS is that it obscures whether or not you're missing your target or just getting unlucky. There's also times where you will completely miss a meat shot because all the pellets distribute to some unusual direction, like in videos like this: th-cam.com/video/nwl_tQrtRYw/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/slbEpF96ea0/w-d-xo.html Biggest thing is that there is such a thing as the negativity bias, so negative events are remembered twice as much as positive ones. So effectively you need to double the numbers used for how often the player notices them, which is about 30% which is far less favorable. Other issue is that it also affects how the opponents estimate whether they can disengage or not. If they assume a shotgun will do 8-20, but it instead all pellets connect and it hits for 36 and you probably die when you otherwise would be just fine.
For those clips you gotta think. Did the rbs actually make a difference in the fight? The second clip maybe, but in the first clip not only did he aim at the top of the engineers back on his side so it makes complete sense those shots missed, but he won the fight easily anyway. It does make a difference but it's so minor you almost never notice it. It just feels like such a nitpick because there are so many more things in the game that are complete bs and ruin the game for way more people than it helps only to talk about randomness costing you a handful of damage.
Imo it's more of casual players don't care if it's on or off... So just have it off? And to the argument that rbs keeps scout in check? No. No it doesn't. Because like you said. Rbs only really effects mid to long range and scout is most effective close range, like right in your face. his low health is the thing that keeps him in check. Hence why the balancing of scout is so good. He's best at very close range and that's also where he's the most vulnerable.
Rbs keeps him in check because when it is on he cant get consistent damage from long to mid range, making him a close range beast but really weak and inconsistant at mid to long range
@@DivonMC dude who Is trying to get consistent damage from long range with scout? And even then I'd still argue getting 3-9 damage at long range isn't that big of a deal anyway.
Honestly, this video made me flip from not caring about bullet spread, to thinking it should be turned off. Your own data shows that most of the time players won't noticed if it's off... But getting a low damage roll always sucks, which means players will only notice it *specifically* when it hurts them. Most players won't be able to notice when a high damage roll helps them, making the experience overall feel more negative. So why not leave it off if most players won't notice or care?
If they can't notice if a mechanic has been turned off, then wouldn't the same be for it being turned on? If they won't notice or care about bullet spread most of the time, wouldn't that not be ruining the experience at all? Often the result is blamed on random crits, aim, ping, hitboxes or loads of other random factors that contribute to lower damage output that AREN'T random bullet spread. It's not very often someone blames bullet spread for a death. So why turn it off if it doesn't make much of a difference when it's on anyway? And even then, random bullet spread can be beneficial to the fairness of the game. That's because also a balancing mechanic in a way. Imagine a heavy's minigun, but pinpoint accurate. It's already hard to get around a heavy's minigun fire, but without random bullet spread, that would make the one weapon that lacks the need to reload, with a very high firerate, be pinpoint accurate. It would be dealing the most consistent amount of DPS at the exact same ranges, which would be VERY unbalanced and predictable, and even then with it turned on it's not like it's THAT unpredictable. It's reasonable why you'd turn it off, but often they don't even matter if you DO get a low damage roll. Besides, the pellet accuracy roll thing only covers SHOTGUNS. If you account for SMGs, Miniguns, Revolvers, Pistols, often it doesn't come down to bullet spread that makes you lose a fight, but rather the other factors. If anything, it helps balance out one. It should be kept on imho because it's a mechanic that introduces unpredictability and balancing out weapons (or the scout himself) that would otherwise be overpowered or make no difference without it. It's not so bad. Why's it a problem in the first place? It's not exactly a common complaint (let alone a complaint at all) in alot of other games, even ones similar to TF2.
@@blazinga3815 you didn’t even disprove his point. Don’t compare a 1/7 chance of having a very dissatisfying shotgun shot to something like ping which is out of anyone’s control. If ping could be removed, would players want it kept into the game for it’s random and unpleasant effects? This is something that is a controlled and programmed phenomenon that only effects a player dramatically when you shoot someone and all the bullets swivel around their hitbox. No player of any skill or level of familiarity with TF2 would enjoy that except someone who has overthought the concept to the point of obscurity. EDIT: Automatic weapons are different as the rapid nature of the projectiles never are taken into account, and could remain in either state. The impact it has on burst weapons like shotguns are the issue at hand, and what produces such a noticeable and undesirable experience.
yeah, you need to weigh up both the pros and cons of a mechanic when you discuss removing it if all you do is demonstrate the that the cons of the mechanic were minor, it means nothing until you can prove the pros of keeping it outweighs that in this case, it barely makes a difference, but it is a slightly difference, on the other hand the only good thing about it is the fact it keeps shotguns less effective at longer range, but if that was the desired effect why not just increase damage falloff to achieve the same result without having any undesirable effects at all. so therefore it should be removed
At the same time getting a meat shot is always super satisfying so it can definitely have its positives too if it can get you one from a little further out, which the data showed it could. Also keep in mind that the 15% chance was only at a range where you probably shouldn't be using the shotgun anymore to begin with. At the range of normal shotgun play its effects are minimal and can go both ways. Also like he said, it makes a shotgun act like a shotgun.
I don't see any reason for keeping RBS in. It's impact is negative. Sure, it's impact is barely negative, but it's still negative. I haven't heard an argument for why RBS is a positive mechanic. The only one I could think of is something similar to the argument for random crits (it feels good to get good RNG), but you make it clear that your point is that they ultimately don't matter, which would conflict with that. I do agree that RBS is fine for weapons like the pistol, smg, minigun, etc... and it seems Valve agrees. Their official command for turning off RBS still leaves it on for those weapons and only disables it for shotguns, scatterguns, and their alternative unlocks. If one side is against having RBS and the other is apathetic to it, then what would be lost from removing it?
@@gabrielraynard8056 Coming from a long-time Scout main, what makes him meta is his movement and his high damage output. Scout isn’t known for accuracy. He’s about getting in as close as possible and maximizing damage while keeping up movement and evading the enemy’s damage. I think RBS has a bigger effect on classes like Engineer, Pyros, and Soldiers who run shotgun. Since they lack mobility (atleast when they have their shotgun out), they benefit from keeping a medium distance and being consistent with their shots.
@@_-Huligan-_ that's the point. Damage fall off maybe there already, but these class usually end up in close range anyway. These class also have an extra firepower, but it also can be complemented even more with their other weapons, the shotguns. That is the balancing side of RBS, to prevent these class from abusing their firepower without punishment. You can't just escape a fight by pulling it out when your main source of damage got depleted without being punished. Scout don't have extra firepower like rockets and sentries, so his scattergun deals higher max ramp up damage than the shotguns with conjunction of speed, making the user must take more risk, but also can dish out high damage and hard to hit. So his medium range is gimped by this 2 factors to make scouts a high risk high reward. You dish out higher damage than most shotguns with mobility to compensate the distant and make yourself hard to hit with the exchange of low max health and lower medium combat capabilities
@@gabrielraynard8056 if scout's accuracy is really a problem RBS should be removed and then scout's gun accuracy should be nerfed, RBS may mess up scout's medium range fighting skills but there's always a chance that the bullets will actually stay close to the crosshair and get him out of a medium range fight that RBS was supposed to make sure he was going to die
@@offandsphere6788 We got that with the backscatter. The gun's pointless because you have to go into the already effective range of scouts to do the exact same damage but also still gimped by the downside if you not shooting the enemy's butt. In other words your compromised didn't change anything, so why changing it if the old system still do the same?
Personally, even if RBS doesn't make a significant difference, I still support disabling it. Even if it's a small amount damage left up to random chance, you're still leaving that damage up to random chance. It's a similar issue to if there were random minicrits. Sure, it's not a giant issue, but leaving any damage up to random chance rezulsf in the invalidation of skill to a degree, and can result in losing or winning fights you didn't deserve to
Yeah and honestly I know this a bad opinion but with how inconsistent ping and hitreg can be I really like it better when arena shooters use hit capsules rather than tightly bound hitboxes. Basically it's a sorta egg-shaped hitbox around the character model that lets players move fast without the engine dropping the ball on hitreg as much. Basically if a bullet goes under your model's arm or between their legs it still hits them. As for his point about it balancing hitscans I have to strongly disagree. We already have damage fall-off to push combat closer. Additionally, it presents the ability for someone to get lucky and get better damage at long range with shots hitting due to lucky spread. Basically I'm not a fan of leaving something more to chance than it needs to be in PvP games. Why let someone be screwed out of 2-shotting a medic 1/7th of the time just by luck when they could instead just fail because they missed?
The damage is suppose to be left up to random chances as a way of balancing the shot guns. They aren't suppose to be consistent, so to eliminate that inconsistency as much as possible it requires you to get as close as possible. Which is what you are suppose to do with a shot gun.
@@GiRR007 if the shotguns consistently did fuckall damage at long range they would be just as balanced. They still spread out over time with fixed weaponspread. I have no idea what Zesty was on about with it balancing shotguns. They are equally balanced at longer ranges with or without it on. It's just less consistent without fixed weaponspread.
Random bullet spread is the worst of both worlds: It doesn’t impact the game _that much_ and you only notice it when you _don’t_ kill someone you were aimed straight at. There isn’t a single benefit to it, unlike random crits which, while I don’t like them, they do have good qualities. They _should_ be removed but there’s no reason to get too upset that it exists in the meantime.
What about inaccuracy for pistols and revolvers? Or how demo’s pipes have random rotation and explosion times? Or how literally every other game, including competitive ones like CSGO, have some sort of random spread or inaccuracy?
Zesty literally said it's in the game for balance reasons. Shotguns aren't supposed to be snipers. Most competent shooters nowadays have it to limit weapons' effective ranges.
Fixed bullet spread is a lot like UCF in Melee. It's unnoticeable most of the time for most people but makes a decent difference at top-level play. Likewise, I think it makes sense to have it in competitive settings, but I don't really care if it's there or not.
1. Even if it is obvious he should repeat the shooting test with the spread disabled. He didn't have anything to compare it with and just took the average unilaterally. 2. 8:50 He knows that the discussion about the spread isn't only about the player but also the opponent? He put the 15% of the times it does more damage than expected as a possitive, without taking into account the fact when the opponent approaches you, he should know what damage you can dish out and that this damage should be consistent. Otherwise strategy and positioning doesn't have much impact. So it's is still 30% of the time that this happens. 3. Only using one class and not all of them and only having him facing forward instead of at least two more possitions isn't enough to draw any type of conclusion. And given how quick it would be to make those adjustments, it is pure lazyness 4. RaNdOm CrItS bReAcK sTaLeMaTeS. I swear to god. Not a single person that repeats this retarded argument can provide a single clip of that being the case. Because it is not true. The only margnal case that this isn't true, is if the map is unbalanced, a crits kills half the team and you steamroll from then on. On a balanced map, a stalemate usually means the teams are equal roughly. And if the map isn't a clusterfuck, then the team can rebuild and hold another stalemate. Also the mechanic isn't random and just rewards players that have done more damage, so it is usually more likely to reinforce a stomp. 5. A shotgun should feel like a shotgun....in a game where a lead poisoned guy flies by exploding rockets on his feet, teleporters exist and a crazy german dude can defy death. Suuure....
I kinda agree about first 4, yet I don't really care about it, I would complain if valve removes it, but 5... No. Tf2 was sci-fi-ish (edit, for me). Yes, teleporters, rocket jumps don't fit into phisics of real life, but things make sense. Explosion "repulse" things, so man could potentially be knocked by it in air; fat man could potentially take more bullets than thin fast dude, etc. So when barrel hasn't got special muzzle and shoots randomly, it's not equal to ultra realistic simulator, it's just general logic. Btw then valve adds freaking banana, so today it's not that true, but when I don't see banana, I see this style in tf2, and I kinda like it. No, removing rbs won't make this less logic, I just say why it makes sense for me to see shotguns without fixed spread.
The game is not meant to be taken this seriously. If people are this concerned over a minor RNG element detracting from their skillful plays, they need to play a game like CS where you’re intended to play that way.
I mean, TF2 can be random and fun without things like random crits and random spread. And something being taken seriously and somdthing being fair and consistent are 2 seperate things.
tf2 is already silly and unseriousness by design without bad mechanics making it inconsistent for no reason. tf2 is a silly game where random shit happens because its a fun clusterfuck, but it should still be fair and consistent to play.
Ok ok. I'm posting this at 6:53 as I would just like to point out that one of the properties of the normal distribution is that 66% of the data lies within one standard deviation of the mean (middle). With the far and medium graphs the data is close enough for the data to be assumed to be normal. However on the close rande graph there would be a strong argument that the data does not meet the requirements and does not folow a normal distribution. Furthermore the data must be symmetrical for this distribution to be used, again the first two are close enough to be assumed to be normal but I would argue that the close range sample is not normal. However statistics does sometimes rely on a lot of "close enough" and it's completely up to interpretation.
My stance: turn it off Why?: I want MY fuckups and clutches to be MY fault, of MY doing, I don’t want to be GIVEN a kill despite fucking up my aim on a shotgun and I REALLY don’t want my kill ROBBED because “Tf2 GiVeTh AnD tF2 tAkEtH aWaY” despite aiming very well Welp that’s just my opinion though, although it might be surprisingly unpopular though just like my belief in caring about ALL of the humans that are playing the video game with you’s sanity (not just teammates) is also surprisingly unpopular
Dude, unless you're playing Player Destruction, Zombie Infection, Versus Saxton Hale, or Arena on some community map, a single instance of RNG screwing you over doesn't really matter. If it's near an objective, you're teammates should be there to finish what you started. If you weren't near the objective or your team, one or both of you is/was way out of position and won't have much impact on the game's outcome regardless. If you keep repeatedly dying to someone at midrange with a shotgun, then RBS isn't the issue; it's skill. So either you're complaining about a mild inconvenience, or you're huffing copium.
i realised that due to the nature of RANDOM bullet spread is that there is technically a possibility when you get a crit that all the bullets are centered making a shotgun a sniper unless there is a hidden trait about rbs that makes that impossible
I 100% agree with you. I don't understand why sweaty players only care about shotgun spread and don't bitch about how the minigun isn't a fixed super accurate laser. It's because guns have some random spread in every game and in real life. It's important for keeping an effective range. Even the pistol has spread to prevent people from using it as a laser. It normalizes the skill ceiling somewhat because a bot can't just laser you down.
Welp I'm here before the video started. So here is my prediction. Random bullet spread very bad, a few rage moments, Patreon plug, (sponsors are lame) the highest quality intro ever. I learn a lot about source spaghetti. And a TF2 server plug (I will start playing on them I SWEAR) I'll be back after the video :) Edit: halfway through video, forgot he intense math. My bad guys. Edit 2: just got to Patreon, knew it. Edit 3: ey hay not to bad missed a few and got a few wrong but I learned a lot and predicted the future. ( I dont mean to call you out zesty still ly) nice video as always and thanks for reading my comment
the point is to remove as many variables outside your control as possible. if its trivially easy to disable somethign that causes random inconsistency, there's absolutely no reason to leave it on.
Except this is a team-based game where individual matchups are just a small piece of the big picture. And the big picture is where RNG gets canceled out. RBS may win battles, but it can't win wars.
Still not convinced by this. In my OPINION, rbs is still a completely arbitrary mechanic that negatively affects your shotgun. Unnoticeable, sure, but unnoticeable doesnt make it necessary. One console command and its gone. Random crits are noticeable and have a much larger impact on the game in comparison to rbs, but that doesnt mean "rbs has less of a reason to be removed" that just means to me that "the removal of rbs can be summed up to "its unnecessary" and thats all it needs." Like it or not, it still objectively negatively impacts the damage of your shotgun. I dont care if rbs means that shotguns are more realistic, tf2 is a completely unrealistic game. In a game where multiple rockets can be stored in a launcher at one time and a pair of mittens are considered viable combat options, then shotguns always firing in a fixed pattern is the least of our worries in relation to the tf2 worls continuity with our own. I just think the argument starts at "arbitrarily and negatively affects the damage of your shotgun" and ends at "unnoticeable but unnecessary"
RBS on miniguns, pistols, and smgs? Why do people want shotguns to be consistent and better at mid to long range when the realistic and main downside of shotguns in 90% of games is that they are inconsistent and worse at mid to long range? Imagine if the minigun had a fixed and predictable spread. It would make it an automatic sniper for fuck's sake.
@@SaltCane yeah, things like miniguns, pistols, smgs, revolvers, ect. should have random bullet spread because then they would be unbalanced. But the difference is that they're sustained fire weapons. The difference with shotguns are burst fire weapons with natural spread. Shotguns arent balanced by RANDOM bullet spread, its bullet spread in general. You do less damage at longer ranges thats the downside to any shotgun. The inconsistency of rps is that now you have a chance to do less damage at closer ranges wheee the shotgun is meant to be stronger. Removing rps doesnt just make the shotgun to 90 damage at long range, the natural bullet spread of shotguns does the balancing for it. It is not a necessary balancing mechanic and many community servers have already proved just how minimal an effect it has on a typical game of tf2. Tf2 doesnt have to have every mechanic a regular fps game has, all it has to do is be first person and have guns you can shoot at other people, they can choose the factors of how you shoot or what amount of damage, knockback, ect. the shooting does
Except the lack of reliability of doing damage is itself a factor. Think about games that allow you to purchase items that give a chance to crit. Aside from specialized builds, you aren't buying crit expecting to get a lucky streak and hit five crits in a row, but rather the fact that it is increasing your Damage that if then paired with items that also increase attack speed, heavily increases lethality. Shotguns not being reliable at mid and far ranges *IS* a factor that isn't arbitrary nor random, as it will always exist every time you use that weapon at those ranges, therefore encouraging options that are more reliable at those further ranges if you want to regularly succeed. Lacking reliability is an acceptable negative factor, and is one heavily used in many games that are *way* more competitive (And balanced) than TF2. To give an example from another Valve game, a key part of Dota's meta is reliable versus unreliable stuns, which heavily changes the value of specific abilities. However Leshrac's unreliable stun (Which has a long setup time) isn't viewed as pointless as you merely need to adjust your playstyle to make it reliably hit, like comboing with other disabling heroes, buying atos or Euls for guaranteed lockdown, etcetera. Likewise, shotguns unreliability comes from range, and the easiest way to mitigate and even eliminate the unrelaibility of the shotgun is to get close to the target you are shooting at. Random doesn't mean bad, and eliminating anything that has any randomness in TF2 would undoubtedly inevitably result in the game being worse. Things like random crits in TF2 are bad implementation as there isn't any regularity to it nor any way to plan around it, but weapon spread and weapon accuracy not only makes sense but is an extremely common factor for balancing and impacting the value of weapons for almost every shooting game I am aware of, with even CSGO (Valve's actually competitive shooter) having inaccuracy and weapon spread instead of making everything perfectly straight laser hitscan.
Consistency as a design decision is a concept I don't see discussed much outside of card games, so I'm glad Zesty brought it up! Whether it's individual cards, decks, or even the overarching archetypes present in every card game, the potential value spread is a part of the balance. The Aggro and Combo archetypes are all about high value, but at the cost of lower consistency, while Control and Midrange focus on consistent value at the cost of lower blowout potential. I'm simplifying of course, but it's just interesting to see this general take brought out of the card game sphere.
Having played with and without a lot, i can confidently say it doesnt really matter. You can keep it on or off, my experience wont change. Which i think is the sentiment of this video anyways
Honestly the "it doesn't make a significant difference in damage" argument could be applied damage spread as well. The only time damage spread really mattered is when Loch n Load did 120 damage and had a chance to one-shot 125 hp classes. LnL doesn't do that anymore and damage spread was removed anyways.
No. Random damage spread was not *just* an issue with the LnL. It screwed up a number of breakpoints by making them exceedingly inconsistent in an annoying manner entirely outside your control. Random bullet spread *can* be controlled by managing your distance. As someone who played comp TF2 for years, I find random bullet spread an annoyance, but an acceptable one. Fixed and predictable bullet spread doesn't just allow for abuse, it can and should be abused if you want to play optimally. Wherein you need to focus on aiming to the sides of the opponent, which is less 'skillful' and more just counter-intuitive.
Demo has a high chance to just not be able to two shot many things, and Stickies meanwhile, now have a chance to one shot light classes. Its very noticable. Also just plain the times you're screwed on RNG with Damage thresholds and the opponent is left with single digit HP.
Random damage spread made a huge difference when using melee weapons. You roll low twice in a row and all 125 health classes were tanking two hits, and that's a GIGANTIC increase to their survivability just because you rolled low
The idea behind removing unnecessary RNG is to tighten the feedback loop of facing skill-based consequences and learning from them. If damage output relies on what angle the other person is, how far away they are, how good your aim is, etc then that damage output scaled directly based on the skill of the person pulling the trigger. How good their aim is, when they pull the trigger, *whether* they pull the trigger. Some issues like ping will be forever unavoidable RNG. But adding more RNG beyond that - be that spread or crits - slurs the signal of whether you actually played that last encounter well or not. Did you win? did you lose? Was that because you engaged more skillfully than your personal best or personal average during that encounter or was it because some cosmic dice somewhere just decided today's not your day? Yes, there is a lot of chaos on the game. That doesn't mean we need to defend mechanics that move the needle more towards every engagement being a version of the paper rock scissors taunt.
So, if majority of playerbase is "not care", 15% of negative impact is "not notable" and we have players, who don't like randomness in game mechanics we have a logic conclusion - remove random shotgun spread and game becomes better for all, right?
Rewatching this video with more experience (Still no ill will toward zesty) New notes: *A general question* So how is this different from random damage spread? Random damage spread would also cause a perfectly aimed shot to deviate up or down due to RNG, do you think random damage spread should be added back to casual? 2:17 *the tests* I would hate to make your testing even more extensive as 1512 IS a lot of shots, HOWEVER, you should also test missing the target slightly to the left and right as well as up and down (maybe the engineer's shoulders, hips, and head) as bullet spread may reward poor aim if you get lucky. Bullet spread is not only a problem of losing damage you should have done, but gaining damage undeserved. 7:38 *More damage not being negative* except that more damage is also negative (see *"the tests"* for a more indepth explanation) It'll let you get an unfair victory, maybe that heavy needed that extra 2-5 health to win a fight, but random bullet spread decided that you earned an extra pellet or two. Like random crits, just to a lesser degree, it let's you get kills for being stupid. Poor aim? Who cares have some extra damage because you aimed left when the bullets went right. "I got a kill, that guy sucks, get owned idiot" 11:33 *if there is a difference it's very subtle* Even if it's subtle it adds up over time, does it not? Even a 10% reduction on a 10 damage weapon will add up over time. Imagine a scenario where a slight deviation means everything. You're using the frontier justice, the round is about to end a demo destroys your sentry with the loch n' load dealing 27 splash, lauching you away from the demo and dealing an additional 2 fall damage leaving you with 96 HP and out of shotgun range. You have ONE crit locking each pellet at 18 damage and increasing effective range, he took at least 32 damage since you heard your lvl 2 sentry hit him twice leaving him with 143 HP. At the range you're at you expect to hit 6 pellets (108 damage) letting you follow up with an additional 2 non-crit 6 pellet, 18 damage shots dealing at total of 144 damage just barely killing him, eating the pill he fired to save your buildings dying in the process and letting your team win the round. However, RBS was not in your favor, you hit 3 crit pellets (53 damage) and a total of 5 non-crit 3 damage pellets (15 damage) dealing a total of 68 damage leaving the demo at 75 HP, heroically eating the pill, dying, and then having your buildings destroyed losing the round. 15:37 *stock uber* nothing else to say, just stock uber I will say however, I couldn't care less about it's removal it's casual, however, your arguments, are . . . Let's just say they're a brick wall with a door anyone can walk through.
I think random damage spread + random bullet spread is too much RNG to be manageable. If random damage spread is to be brought back, it shouldn't apply to shotguns or mini guns. If RBS was to be removed however, we can bring back RDS without fear of exponential RNG
Think of it this way. There is very little benefit to random pellet spread and removing it would remove a minor frustration from the game. Missing a shot is more my fault and more in my control if rbs is off. Yes it isn't making the game horrendous as is, but is there a reason to have it in the first place?
You are missing the point. Sometimes you do MORE damage with random spread while fighting at CLOSE range. The detriment comes at ranges outside of the intended, as it should.
@@DiegoAlanTorres96 Yes, but it goes both ways, It's not about if you do more or less, it's about consistency. If you are fighting an engie as scout close range, sometimes he will two shot you because of random spread, even if his aim is off simply because he got lucky.
RBS might not do too much all the time but the thought of my perfect shot dealing the exact damage needed to kill someone deciding NOT to kill them since one pellet decided to straight up miss makes using a shotgun in casual just not feel as reliable. Worse than Random crits? No. definitely not. But i don’t like this mechanic having free real estate in the back of my head.
I think you've turned me on this aspect of TF2's RNG. Though, I'd still rather have random crits be removed or otherwise made less random in pubs. There isn't a whole lot I disagree with here, and your argument was constructed nicely. Great video, man.
@@mutilator97 I'm personally of the opinion to remove random crits on all ranged weapons, but keep them for but keep them for melee weapons. It'd remove 90% of the complaints about random crits I think but still leave them open for people to goof around with things like demopan.
@@CanadianTeaMaker my biggest issue with random crits is on melee. Snipers are meant to be vulnerable at close range. Snipers need to rely on range in order to have an advantage over their enemies due to their rifle's high damage and lack of falloff. Just kidding nevermind they delete you instantly half of the time because fuck you for trying to take advantage of snipers biggest weakness. Jarate bushwacka is bad enough but random crits let him keep hold of his secondary slot for his smg or a backpack whilst not leaving him with damage vulnerability from the bushwacka and whilst still letting him one shot you
A key thing he focused on in the video is Negative and Significant. Random crits are both of this. It's not a 15% damage different is 3x damage for no fall off at no cost. That's a pretty significant value and anyone who's ever played a game of pub TF2 could probably list a few moments where their push was completely shut down by a single random crocket from a gibbus soldier. Random bullet spread I don't really care about, but random crits are absolutely abysmal. Regarding the whole "leave them on melee weapons" argument, that's also not great either. The ability to one-shot 5 of the 9 classes at a significantly high rate is incredibly powerful and nullifies the weaknesses of classes like Sniper and Medic. The latter of which is notorious for critting what feels like 100% of the time and arguably has more of a reason to remove random crits from melee. Sure, the Ubersaw is almost a guarantee "fuck light classes" weapon. But many would argue that it would be more beneficial for there to be no random crits so that the medic could get a second swing and build more uber. EDIT: Also, this argument of "random-crits break stalemates" is a really dumb one because *cough cough* Ubercharge exists *cough*. Also, people have been complaining about random crits long before the competitive TF2 community got involved.
Your data says there is a 30% chance that your shotgun unexpectedly deals more or less damage. I say 30%, because getting killed by a blow that you know you would've survived isn't exactly fun either.
@@Buglin_Burger7878 ok but even if the average for a target holding still at a certain distance away that average always be in flux so again you would never realistically be able to tell.
My issue with random bullet spread is that havin it disabled actually make the shotguns about 25% less accurate, so mid range is no good, which contrary to other games is good in tf2 because the shotgun don’t 1 shot and is a secondary weapon unless ur Texan
Good content, though the fact that the experiment had so many constants means that it won't accurately reflect many of the complaints wrt random bullet spread - although that's more just a limitation with the game in general. I think turning off random bullet spread in casual wouldn't hurt, really. Also saying that the bullet spread is "predictable" is kinda absurd, since 99% of players don't know the damage range and can't accurately calculate how likely their shot is to deal less or more damage. This also ignores that most fights are going to be between two constantly moving targets, which will cause any form of random bullet deviation to matter so much more. It is also true that there are tons of factors in TF2 that affect consistency, some of which can't be fixed, but this isn't really an argument *against* removing the factors that can be easily addressed.
Opening strong with the statistics was a solid choice. 85% of shots being standard or better in terms of damage really shattered my expectations established by other youtubers, as I didn't have a full opinion formed personally. I do consider 15% to be FAR from insignificant though, but ultimately RBS is already turned off in places where that 15% would be meaningful. And, the doomsaying around 17:00 about the removal of RBS and the chain effect if could have are pretty unfounded, especially when looking at modern valve and their near total disregard for TF2. RBS would be changed either in tandem with or after other much more significant changes, and the community would crusade against such changes in all likelihood. Outside of those two nitpicks however, this is a really solid video in response to the movement that launched from what was essentially an under-explored, subjective footnote in Dane's video.
@@BonziBUDDY it's a fallacy because it's stupid. There's literally nothing hinting that such an insignificant change would eventually lead to more comp changes in the future. Valve doesn't update the game enough for that to happen. Valve completely gave up on comp tf2 after the failure of meet your match comp system. Even when they pushed the game to comp, it wasn't because of small changes in the past.
There is an issue with these statistics, none of them show what the standard point is... as standard should be the Fixed shot damage. Then everything is above/under that. If you factor that in... the graphs end up showing Fixed does more in close range and less in medium/long range. So RBS actually makes the shotguns better at range oddly enough.
When it comes to shotguns, I don't mind random bullet spread, but there's something to be said about fixed spread when it comes to rapid fire weapons. Back when I used to play Rust, I remember the fixed spread being something you could learn, and if you were good enough (which I wasn't) you could learn the spread pattern when full autoing somebody, and land all/most of your shots that way. And I don't mean I want it to be pinpoint accuracy, just that the spread on automatic weapons being something I could theoretically predict and account for, instead of being 100% random. That said, in TF2, I don't particularly mind random spread at all, but it would raise the skill ceiling on characters like the Heavy IMO
I prefer no bullet spread because, if i take an L and die i get peace of mind that it wasnt a dice roll that i lost, and if I win it wasnt because of lucky spread. It's not wether or not I lose, it's just peace of mind.
Honest to god, the RBS is God awful on specificallly the shortstop. It performs so much better with it off. That little T is so much less punishing than rbs, especially at mid range where the shortstop is supposed to shine.
Zesty the chance that it screws you over doesn’t really matter that much (plus let’s be real here 30%it will screw you or your opponent over isn’t insignificant as you call it) what matters more is how much it does and your provided statistics show a huge difference in min and max damage for example for far range min was 4 while max was 36 and it was similar for mid and close range as well.
The issue with random bullet spread is not necassarily its CONSISTENCY, but the fact that there is a chance that my shot, that I aimed well, could do marginally less damage than I intended it to. While it's more likely that DOESN'T happen, its more likely that you DON'T get a random crit. Just because it's unlikely doesn't mean it's balanced.
@@licemere9899 video shows that they are in fact consistent, but that doesn’t mean it’s IMPOSSIBLE to get bad bullet spread. One fight could go wrong because of it, and indeed cost you the game.
Pin my comment
ask and you shall receive
@@ZestyJesus he never said please 🥺
did you just shit your pants?
@@ZestyJesus 1:36 Sauce?
Holy shit penny been a good time, is your discord still a acive
"to make shotguns behave like shotguns"
_meanwhile shotguns IRL_
fuckin' leathal from what is considered "far" in this video
If they want to see what happens if shotguns and other weapons are realistic, they should try the 2005 Battlefront game. Quick recap on the results: every hitscan weapon instakills everybody or leaves them a hair away from death at any range, including sniper bodyshots, and every explosive wipes out everybody in the vicinity. And it is fun in terms of the sheer chaos that it ensues, especially with the dumb AI, but complete bullshit in terms of balanced gameplay.
Course' it's not realistic, but it's certainly more so.
Honestly I think I'd feel weird if my shotgun fired some kind of weird perfect square shape every time I used it.
@Flyin' Steve we don't talk about that game here.
Sometimes you gotta sacrifice realism for fun sometimes. It balances it. Removing bullet doesn't help neither.
@@sirreginaldfishingtonxvii6149 That's so Damm arbitrary then, if you want to be realistic, then make it so it benefits the game.
And realism into shotguns that cannot even reload correctly like irl, really?.
I’d actually like a long-barrel shotgun that has a tighter spread that deals more damage at range but less damage overall. Because that’d just be awesome to sneeze at people from medium range and scare them with a shotgun.
So basically you want a shortstop for all classes ?
@@trackking9885
sure
totally what he meant
A slug shotgun?
That's just the TFC shotgun
Even as an engineer main i'm terrified by the idea of a Frontier Justice Crit without spread
Because of spread, you can randomly land a super tight spread at long range, with the crit (and therefor no damage falloff). If anything, the spread makes shotgun crits range from chip damage to sniper rifle.
good thing it has spread no matter what then?
spread pattern just makes the weapons more consistent. you will always hit for 100 if you place your crosshair properly at close range, whereast with random spread you might do 80 15% of the times and die because of it, and the same goes for long range, you might miss completely because of random spread or you might get a very small spread pattern making for a less consistent damage which cant be properly accounted for by the player getting damaged, which for me, coming from cs and league where you either generally know what amount of damage you can tank (league) or you know the exact number of bullets that you can tank line in cs. (for example the ak does 27 damage with 1 shot so if you are at 82 hp or above you will always be able to tank 4 regular shots from an ak, and imo being able to calculate stuff like this only raises the skill ceiling and really doesnt affect the casuals in any way.
@@zezanje1
Why should TF2 be anything like league or cs? It's a much more chaotic game. You could walk around a corner into a sentry at random and die instantly regardless. That's part of the game in TF2, accounting for the unexpected. If you're going to lose an engagement 15% of the time just because you're dealing 20 less damage, and that matters significantly to you, maybe don't engage in that scenario. Risk-reward.
"competitive" my ass.
I love the detail of Pyro not being given a dialogue box in the introduction.
Pyro DID get one though. It just didn't have words in it.
Get back to work Dr bright and don't mind that instead of running tests on SCP-1786 I'm watching TH-cam
🔥
@@TylerYoshi If a dialogue box has no dialogue. Shouldn't it be called just a box?
Love him or hate him, you gotta admit Zesty’s got some top-notch editing.
Why hate him though? He presents points very well, got great editing skills and his *angery* is fun to watch.
Edit: yeah alright alright, I get it.
@@Have_some_plasma go to his twitter and pinned tweet, i don't hate him in any way tho
Edit: The tweet longer is no longer the pinned tweet, its a foam cock now.
@@Have_some_plasma a foam cock?
For sure, i almost never agree with him but always show up for the top notch videos. Just quality content
@@TheBoghopper2 a foam cock? Waitwhatthefuckman
It still baffles me the community's ability to make 20 minute, well edited videos about random mechanics that haven't been updated for years
Content drought.
tf2 goyslop
The knocking at 1:18 was so realistic that I stopped to look over at my front door thinking someone was there
ik wtf
@@Bushman06 same i live on a second floor and i have a door on my left behind me and said door leads to a balcony and i was like wtf!? plus it's 11 pm
i got legitamently scared that someone was somehow breaking into the second story window of my building.
I almost sh@t myself
Where I am my left is a wall, so no much problem there
Zesty really spent like 40 mins on a discord stream just to make a tree of life that was flashed for like 10 frames
* laughs in clipart *
Thats wicked
@@kannatheweeb8836 wicked!
thats wicked
thats wicked!
I've always felt more consistent with the Panic Attack than any other shotgun, but you know what that's probably more because of the 15 pellets than the fixed spread.
same😂😂
The panic attack is hide as hell, you're bound to hit quite a few pellets even if your crosshair isn't on top of someone.
Even though you deal less damage at mid range with it it is much more consistent, with the shotgun? You might deal more damage but mostly lower damage due to the random bullet spread, the "fixed spread" allows the Panic Attack to be much consistent even though you are going to expect having to deal only low damage
@@Rogeryoo Especially since the spread is horizontally wide instead of vertically, yet still contains the same amount of bullets. So you can completely miss at mid-range, but if your crosshair got close enough and you're on the right level horizontally, you still do the same amount of damage as if you had hit.
ye, the same goes for back scatter which has a larger spread so you will never miss as hard but you will never hit as hard unless you are very close. ngl stuff like this makes tf2 such a great game in my eyes. if you are not feeling it right now, you swap from the scattergun to the back scatter and you both do minicrits probably once every 6-7 shots and have the ability to cheese classes below 150 in 1 shot with a good flank and you just simply cant miss as hard which makes you more consistent when you are performing poorer, making you better in a scount 1v1 for example than you would perform with a scatter gun when not feeling it. greatest shooter of all time ngl.
I'm so glad the shotguns in tf2 feel like shotguns irl. Tf2 is known for it's realistic features like rocket jumping, mediguns, teleporters, etc...
yeah oh and don't forget trimping and sticky jumping mediguns laser guns ect
Oh yea and also fixing and making a building with only a wrench!
And watches the size of your hand making you completely invisible, it’s crazy how far real life science has come
exactly, so bullets should be consistent. Real life buck shot is a mess.
shotguns irl? a real shotgun would kill someone from tf2's max falloff range
The thing with random bullet spread is that almost all casual players aren't bothered by it being off but some more competitive players are bothered by it being on, so it might as well be off. This is opposed to crits which a lot of people prefer on and a lot of people prefer off.
Whether turning RBS off will cause a Vietnam style domino effect giving the design of every TF2 mechanic to comp players is unironically a concern of mine, I don't want comp players to be in control of casual TF2 but I also don't give a shit about RBS being on or off,
good video by the way.
Hate this style of reasoning, just because you claim casual players aren’t bothered by it doesn’t mean casual players won’t notice. I feel like it should come down to the competitive players more tbh, as they should learn to improve their skill to the point where rbs doesn’t matter
@@chasekellow3835 I disagree, I still believe almost all casual players won't be bothered, even if they notice.
The fact is it just doesn't change much and I doubt many people would be bothered by it's removal. Though you're right I don't actually know that, just seems highly probable given how insignificant it is and the mindset of the average casual player.
Also RBS will always matter no matter the skill level of the player because of the nature of random chance, this is proven by the video which has a perfectly controlled test setting, there's no way to "git so gud" so that you control how the bullets of your shotgun come out the barrel.
Actually the better you are the MORE RBS will effect your shots because the less your aim plays a factor in missing your shots the more RBS will, even if the plays the same amount it means more because other factors are lessened.
I don't even care if RBS is on or off, but saying players should get gud enough to control random chance is dumb.
Great minds think alike
@@redshift0433 I agree with this,
to be honest RBS on or off in casual means nothing when casual is filled to the brim with bots that haven't even been addressed by valve yet.
People need to stop thinking like this. Most competitive players don't give a shit about pub balance. It's just a TH-cam feud but it's not some divide in TF2 like people make it out to be. The average competitive player has no interest in "making casual competitive" like some very vocal people seem to think.
"Do I like random crits? Only when they benefit me"
Couldn't've said it better myself
What i like about your chanel are your points of view and seeing the methods you use to explain them, they are so refreshing for this community!
To me it comes off as kind of pretentious when he just explains a bell curve for little to no reason when his argument hinges entirely on taking an average.
@@007turtle1239 a little refresher never hurt anyone
@@beefsandvvich the explanation of a bell curve does nothing to further his argument.
@@007turtle1239 dude. it was for a short amount of time he mentioned it. he didn't stay on that topic for a full minute. A brief explanation. Also, we get it, you have a short attention span and you don't like it when the path deviates a little to explain a something kinda cool, and something we kinda forgot about in high school.
@@Cast-Carnival Completely irrelevant to what I said. Pure cope.
I think you should’ve also done tests with aiming off to the side to see how it effects near-miss shots
Exactly, zesty forgot that shotguns are shotguns and not sniper rifles, and that you are more likely to use the shotgun at mid to close range which makes small movements the difference between getting shot or not.
You dont sit in a corner of the map and carefully and precisely aim on an enemy like a sniper.
If i had a nickel for the amount of pellets didnt connect and got me killed leaving the enemy with less than 10 hp because of random bullshit spread, my bank account could rival Jeff Bezos'.
@@JustinWHY-zz7gz Make it have no bloom will turn it into a pseudo sniper though. Also that just sound like your aim is the problem because it is hit scan, there is no bullet travel times.
@@Apsolon "make it have no bloom will turn it into a pseudo sniper though"
Bro are you high?
The only pellets that hit where your crosshair lands are 2 out of the 10 that you fire, the other 8 are spread apart.
No bloom bullet spread shotgun shots have a square pattern and the more far away your shot is the more spread apart the pellets are, they dont just stay in one fixed small pattern from short range all the way from long range.
Also when did i mention anything about bullet travel time
@@JustinWHY-zz7gz The reason I said that is because now you can realistic hit peoples at farther range since the spread are fixed while RBS can technically do the same thing but they are less likely to happened than fixed, making it fixed technically also increase the effective range of the shotgun. While it doesn't deal significant dmg, it will affect how they receive heal or at least support your team more consistently.
About bullet travel times, because you said your bullet didn't connect, if you aim right, your bullet will always connect plus hit scan so if you miss that is on you and remember this the center shot is always 100% accurate and it hit right on cross hair.
@@Apsolon Ok,
1: bloom shotguns can also hit people at long range because the pellet on your crosshair is always 100% accurate, and about the healing per second affected by chip damage can be done by anything, you can use a pistol to do 8 damage instead of 3 from longer range and can if you got the timing right you can hit 100% of your shots if you wait for the pistols spread to reset back to 100% accurate, and you dont seem to call the pistol a pseudo sniper so whats your point.
2: Bloom shotguns have horrible spread patterns, sometimes they're horizontal and somtimes they're vertical, which means that if my crosshair isnt dead center and i shoot a vertical pattern i missed someone with low enough hp to be killed with 2 to 3 pellets if the pattern was just a little more to the right or left, which makes it extremely infuriating.
Theres literally no reason to keep bloom spread in the game, because with it off makes the game more consistent and makes every death feel like my own fault instead of the game screwing me over, same with random crits.
Also i love how all the casual players say that removing bloom and random shits will make the game more competitive without even elaborating on why that is.
Removing bloom and random crits will make the game more enjoyable and balanced.
Casuals tend to think that RNG means causal fun when that obviously isnt the case.
“here’s your obligatory and well displayed”
Ad plays *OH OH OH OH RILLYYYYYYYYYYY AUTO PARTS*
One problem with fixed bullet spread is that at certain ranges, aiming perfectly centered will consistently do LESS damage than aiming near the side (since aiming at the center will cause only the middle column of pellets to hit).
While that might be true, still better overall.
@@DankDimensionMemes better for you, kind of bullshit for who you're fighting against.
@@DanielFerreira-ez8qd explain, fixed spread is better overall
@@DankDimensionMemes My bad, I thought you were talking about random spread being better. Because dealing more damage than expected at a longer range could be bs for someone.
@@DanielFerreira-ez8qd no worries
I feel like most people really only started to notice/care more about the random bullet spread because of the change made to the panic attack making it have a fixed spread at all times
The only bullet spread that really bothers me is the revolver, and even that makes sense because they're meant to be a mid-range last resort that uses a few deliberate shots instead of mag-dumping every time
As well as finishing a kill with a single bullet. Which I think is usually 100 percent accurate on the first shot anyway.
Everyone is forgetting that we did remove a randomness mechanic from TF2, random *DAMAGE* spread. The game would deviate how much damage falloff would effect your weapon by up to 15% both ways. This underrated TF2uber has a great video on it.
th-cam.com/video/F1-aUhZq4WU/w-d-xo.html
(Zesty I normally don’t care how much attention my comments get but I really think more people should be talking about this, I’d appreciate a pin)
oh yeah I mentioned random damage spread in my comment too, that shit sucked monkey ass
getting one shot as scout by a huntsman BODY shot was dumb
Man coding these random mechanics seems complex, why did Valve even add them in the first place ?
@@Breakaway-ic5gj Random damage spread was bareable at launch. The unlocks they added started making it more annoying.
@@Breakaway-ic5gj Coding in randomness isnt that difficult at all, in fact its extremely easy. Once you set up a random number generator (which most languages already provide), all you need to do is just add its output to the base stat, if its positive, it gets boosted, if negative, it gets reduced. This can be used to make damage fluctuate as OP mentioned, or in the case of bloom, the x and y positions of a pellet relative to the center.
As for why they put them in, I don't know. In the case of Bloom, one of the points in Zesty's video was Bloom makes a shotgun's bullet spread more realistic to the behavior of an actual shotgun. For gameplay, that means a shotgun's damage output is inconsistent at long to medium range, which encourages using the weapon at short range where bloom is insignificant.
Oh yea, that was the only good random mechanic, I'd rather keep it than spread or crits
8:14
this is the only problem
stationary targets are good for data, but think about every time your enemy walks to your left and your bullets go right
and then there's the simple side of
"I'm pissed because I got random crit killed and they didn't earn that kill"
well think about the uncertainty where you randomly get dealt more damage because all the pellets squeezed over you
not as bad as a random crit, but expecting 27 damage and then taking 80 isn't predictable
Assuming your crosshair is centred on the target, a stationary target or a moving target shouldn't make a difference because tf2's bullet based weapons are hitscan. For a moving target the main factors influencing whether your bullets hit or miss would be your aim, latency, angle etc. Stuff that Zesty already covered
@@getsuga2251 yeah, it’s like running in the rain. Only if the rain was lasers. Then just don’t walk into the rain. Problem solved: get better.
@@getsuga2251 Zesty said himself that most of these factors can be controlled *by the player*
@@MishaTakesLs exactly
@@getsuga2251 doesn't mean it's not another issue. saying it's not bad because there are other issues that also affect aim doesn't suddenly make it fine
Reading between the lines, what I think RBS opponents are bothered by is the inability to instantly determine who's to blame for a low-damage shot, their skill or other factors. This is of course admirable.
Not at all, those type of players use it as an excuse for when they're missing shots, happened in csgo for a while too but in that game it actually mattered
I feel like this. I am far from an expert at this game and always want to improve. There have been countless times where I feel like I'm hitting a good shot, but I deal damage in the low 20s. This may be due to poor aim, but I don't know for sure. This could just be random bullet spread telling me to go fuck myself. It makes it hard to tell if I missed that shot due to lack of skill, or just that 1 in 20 or whatever chance that the bullets just avoid my target. It's small, but everything counts when you're trying to get better.
well ye, reducing the number of random factors is always more fun at least to some extent and random spread and random crits are going too far imo. like just compare the more random spray patterns in cs2 and the more controlable spray patterns in csgo, you can actually juts notice the general downgrade in skill level of all the pro players (let alone the casual playerbase) to the point where when you see someone hit an actualy spray transfer you forget that that is even a thing, whereast pretty much most of the best csgo pro plays of all time were because of spray transfer being much more controlable. so like if you think of cs2's spraying inaccuracy increase as random spread and csgo's more controlable spraying patterns as predetermined spread, then valorant would be random crits with their sprays that are quite literally spra and pray and not fun for anyone.
Based on current video comments, here's the major divide:
A) Because TF2 is unrealistic and shouldn't go towards a more competitive playstyle, RBS is fine especially since the deviation of bullets is notable but not *negatively consistent, as the video points out. There's plenty of other factors that COULD play into why a bullet misses its target, so RBS can't always be proven to be the culprit.
or
B) Because TF2 is a PvP video game that demands hand-eye skill to perform well, the least amount of random mechanics should be implemented to allow a player to succeed on their own terms, not on the game's. There's plenty of other factors that COULD play into why a bullet misses it's target, so RBS shouldn't be added to the list.
I think only certain weapons should have RBS, specifically Scout's arsenal, the SMG, and Minigun, and probably another example I could think of. Certain weapons that would be too powerful consistently hitting without some kind of balance factor is important. The Revolver, for instance, having RBS if you fire too fast is a perfectly implemented balancing tool, that forces Spies to gamble or play patiently. But the Shotgun, which is already designed in its spread to perform worse at range, getting the added randomness is an extra kick in the pants. Statistically, it makes little difference in the short-term, but the nagging feeling of randomness does build over time. But if the SMG had no randomness to it... Sniper could actually be a terrifying assault rifle class.
The Medic's syringe guns don't need randomness. They are already weak, and the very slight spread *could* cause a well-planned retreat to go awry in a situation where he otherwise could have survived. The argument COULD be made that randomness COULD let all the needles hit a target who is very evasive anyways, but the likelihood is nearly impossible. And where the difference between 1 and 0 is death, the Blutsauger hitting an extra needle could absolutely save a medic's life. In short, I surmise that the video is right that if a weapon DID have a randomness factor, it should only be applied to weapons that should not be allowed to succeed on average at far ranges. A random bullet spread mechanic forces Scouts closer, which balances the class as a whole because of his low health pool.
In a video game where every single point of health matters, I wager it's not a justifiable argument for every weapon. If it's already impeded by distance, that should be the trade off by default, unless another factor would apply.
In agreement here, however just a note from a Heavy main that used to play the game competitively, RBS seems to aid heavy more than it hurts him, I find I land more shots with it on than off as the extra variables described in the video make having a consistent bullet spread on something with a cone of rapid firing hitscan kind of pointless and the random chance that more bullets are in the center of your shot is more likely to happen on HWG than static bullet spread giving the heavy an advantage. I plan on doing a comparison video just to see if my theory is correct but I would actually argue to enable static bullet spread for heavy as it tends to actually be a detriment instead of an aid a lot of the time since the difference in game play is even less negligible for Heavy. The same can be said for snipers SMG as it fires at the same interval rate as the minigun but has less pellets, however RBS seems to change little for sniper. Another can be said for spy where a consistent bullet spread is fairly insignificant where when you want your shots to land you just wait a few MS for a 100% accurate shot.
As an added note to Zesty's take on fast firing hitscan weapons let me iterate on how it works for rapid fire weapons because it's very different from shotguns and same can be said for a revolver which fires one pellet. The consistent spread is not perfectly accurate, instead it rotates in the same pattern repeatedly, giving it a "consistent" spread, however how this pattern is produced dictates whether it's good for the weapon. In my opinion it's entirely insignificant for revolvers and rapid fire weapons.
@@bucket6988 isn't that entirely placebo though? As far as I'm aware turning rbs off literally only applies to shotguns.
Rapid fire guns being brought up is not because they're directly part of the rbs debate but as an example that rbs is a balancing mechanic. Such is the case for most if not literally all first person shooters, even the hard-core ones such as CS:GO.
Yes CS:GO has spray patterns (and I'm pretty sure Zesty is just factually wrong in saying they gave shotguns a fixed *spread* in CS:GO*), but they are a separate mechanic from bullet spread, every gun in the game has bullet spread to discourage spraying/spamming at a long distance, even if you know the spray pattern (with exception to the negev which gets more accurate when sprayed although still has minor spread even then).
*edit: it would seem shotguns both do and do not have fixed spread in CS:GO, they all shoot in unique patterns, but each pellet still has slight variations. Thus still technically having RBS but it's very minor.
THE SYRINGE GUNS HAVE RBS?
WHAT THE ACTUAL SHIT, TURN IT OFF
@@bucket6988 I can save you the time and research on RBS being needed for Heavy. Step one, you turn off random spread for Heavy and the bullets land directly on his crosshair. Fun fact, the first bullet in your minigun is 100% accurate and actually can be used like a revolver. Tomi Sniping for aggro'ing snipers is a legit strategy and it works very well.
Step two, you realize hackers used to do this often and realize heavies with pinpoint accuracy would kill people immediately across the map, or easily chunk their health.
Step three, you keep RBS on and summon an eldritch god and show him what power a 100% accuracy heavy is, and you tell him to bury the command for RBS off in the sun.
Just one thing:
The experiment at hand assumes that the player has perfect aim, at precisely center mass. Random bullet spread most often comes into play not with meatshots, but rather when it comes to finishing off an opponent. If your crosshair is halfway on top of your target, for instance, there’s a large chance that you WON’T get the necessary damage to finish off a target at low health. While I agree that random bullet spread is insignificant within the context of individual fights, the amount of people that have been subtly fucked over by them is probably much larger than we would expect.
(Posting this solely to promote discussion, so no salt pls)
Get better aim???????
I respect your opinion on the experiment but, that’s kind of the whole thing with it being a semi-scientific experiment the variable at Play was the DPS of shotguns with bullet spread enabled the part of the experiment the changes (I don’t remember the exact terminology at moment)was the range. so having the engineer staying completely still was just a constant in the experiment, because if you change more than one variable then you don’t know which is causing the change in your data it might be that he’s moving it might be the random bullets spread or it might be the range end at that point it would no longer be a accurate presentation of the data. Along with that the location of the crosser is variable mostly controlled by the player themselves, which cannot be accurately represented because well zesty is not every single player in TF2.
And this comment is not made out of salt I’m just giving my two cents again for the sake of discussion.
The fact that you had to ask for "no salt pls" is kinda funny to me and something that makes too much sense to add 😅
His study can only account for so many details. Inconsistent aim to get the maximum hit box contact is just a value that can’t be remade, and if it is somehow included, then that would skew the details and results. He just have to assume you’re going to hit close to center of mass with each shot
But there's also a chance you'll deal more damage to a low-health target when you're crosshair is slightly off, right? I don't understand why people seem to think random bullet spread equals less damage done. Even with perfect aim, that won't be the case, (unless you have nine enemies standing in a square formation).
"tf2 is a clusterfuck, a cluster fuck of different skill levels mashed together with a plethera of different class abilities. hit scan, projectiles, knives, clubs, swords, fucking fire!"
perfectly incapsulates this game, and why its so good
Random bullet spread has been an issue for a long time, but it HAS become a popular topic of discussion again when it has been more of a background topic compared to really busted things like the wrap assassin ball or the righteous bison being broken, etc. If I recall correctly, back in the Jerma and Ster_ days this was a popular topic of discussion back then too. But as other, more pressing balance problems came up, this issue faded to the background of discussions. Things being in a relatively good balance place with a reasonably active community of content creators compared to how things were between the early days and now, makes this sort of topic something that could be reasonably discussed again.
I like both Random Crits and RBS, just wish people would stop whining and just take them
@@Chapstick159 RBS? sure it can stay, random crits though no.
@@kenos2347 even though 90% of weapons can’t?
What do we gain from these random elements?
- Occasional dopamine hit for people who are already on a streak
What do we lose by keeping them?
-Some fights are won by rng (edit)
-Skill and practice is invalidated
What do we lose by removing them?
- Nothing
@@lukeeatschips6324 I don't really think the difference in damage by bullet spread is big enough to say that "fights are won by RNG" nor that "skill and practice is invalidated." Random crits? Certainly. But random bullet spread? That's simply not true. Extreme hyperbole at best.
If someone is blaming that for losing, then they're making up excuses.
15:38
No, random crits exist to allow a pubstomper to pubstomp harder.
Any other theory is complete cope.
LoL no, it's based on recent damage done so the pubstomper who's doing a ton of damage will be far more likely to get crits
@@aceskeletonne7446
Thank you for correcting me by...
saying what I just said
1:18 it doesnt matter how many times i replay this i still think someones knocking on my door in real life every time
In my experience of tf2, random bullet spread has noticeably led to exactly killed one person killed more than normal, by sending them flying off a cliff, but they probably would’ve died anyways
Also, I find that random crits on normal weapons are just not fun even when I get them, but on melee weapons they’re actually really stupid and fun
That's pretty much my stand on random crits as well. Random crit rocket wiping out half the team isn't fun, but getting up close in the danger zone with random crit melee is fun in my eyes even if I get crit punched.
i think its pretty fucking fun if i kill 3 people with a single crit rocket
had never thought of that... random crits only on melee, that actually sounds nice
@Nicholas Darryl H. wouldnt removing random crits on the uber saw make it even more broken? since you could hit more people for ubercharge instead of 1 shotting them
@@poopyjoe7435 Well you'd be in danger zone at more time, which is a risk, balancing out the extra uber with the fact that it's just more risky.
I could take them or leave them, tbh. I Understand *why* people don’t like it, but I don’t see why so much. I’ve never had a kill stolen from me because of the random spread.
9,000 hours and I’ll say the same, I think it’s a bunch of whiny comp players
@@Chapstick159 uncle dane be like
Lil timmy with a gun unlike Dane I like random crits
Play hitscan then
@@Chapstick159 you likely have but just havent noticed because its not really noticeable
I really appreciated the use of statistics in your arguments and felt your analysis did the job, but I feel like a binomial distribution would have fit better here, especially when the close-range data is noticeably not normally distributed, but I can confirm through my own tinkering that it is very well-fit by a binomial distribution of the 9 random pellets
On top of this, the number of pellets that hit is a discrete variable, and since there's only 9 pellets for most shotguns which isn't a very large number, it makes little sense to approximate the normal distribution here. This is especially noticeable for the close range graph as a greater proportion of shots are more than 1 standard deviation away from the mean since the graph is so far to the right. I mean, the normal distribution can work here, it's just not the most appropriate option.
I hate how sometimes a Scout can just deal 50 damage from midrange to me in one shot just because he got a lucky spread, and being unable to consistently estimate stuff like that is enough reason for me to not want RBS.
The fact it's even *possible* to do 12 damage instead of 50 at random is just stupidly unfair.
You must be really lucky to get it, but i still agree
Sure, but I would rather have a scout get lucky 50 on me every once and a while rather than them doing consistent 40's on me all the time.
I have played 9,000 hours of TF2, never seen a 50 damage scout shot from mid range. Maybe it’s 1 in a Billion, but stop whining
@@Chapstick159 200 hrs scout here, and it kinda is but it can happen
It's just happened to me twice so far
Once at almost point blank with my reticle around the arm area of an engine, but only did 18 DMG, the remaining 8 pellets literally made a carved moon on the far right side of the bloom (could be more about TF2 fucked server connection than RBS though)
@@jacehackworth6413 “i like RBS because it benefits me”
I find myself convinced by this video. I am adamantly against random critical hits, especially after Dane's video a few years ago. I'm not as sure about spread as I am about crits, but I think I can go either way now. If I had to guess, I'd say even the people peddling FBS don't much know how little it does (including the youtubers that brought it up in the first place). If anything, I appreciate the tone of this video, as one that does not seek to aggravate. I was worried you would start that, especially after all of the undue hate, but it seems I am wrong.
I'm not surprised Dane came to the conclusion he did in that video, but he should have looked into what he was talking about more. Randon bullet spread, while in competitive makes sense entirely, does not NEARLY affect the game to the same degree as random crits lol.
RBS is so much less likely to cause a "oh look I fkn died GOD DAMMIT--"
Dane also said people would site "comp tf2" as a reason for people getting into tf2 by 2023 in the same video, is late 2021 now and while there is still time, am gonna say he is full of shit, random crits make the game more fun and for that reason alone they should stay, simple as.
@@Lone-Nep More fun how, exactly? Because funny haha sudden death? It's an unfair frustrating mechanic even in a casual setting, simple as.
@@Lone-Nep That is not fun at all. Is only fun for the person who gets the Crits.
@@Lone-Nep Damn, I must have Alzheimer's or something, because I honest to God can't remember a single time I had fun getting instakilled by a splash damage class that clicked the ground one Tour de France away from me.
I never really thought about random spread until community servers started turning it off, but I love the shotgun and I have enjoyed being able to more easily judge things like the damage I can expect to get on follow up shots at a certain range and whether my shot was poorly aimed. I guess it's not so much about doing more or less damage as providing more useful feedback in a single shot, where with the random spread you might need a couple to get a feel for the situation you're in, a situation that might well have ended by that point.
That being said I'm pretty average at the game, so maybe this is less of a factor to people with bigger brains haha.
Good video! Well argued. Small critique of your methodology (or presentation of data, depending how you want to look at it), though: I think you should have done the same experiment with fixed bullet spread as a control and used the results from that as the basis of comparison so that you're showing the difference between vanilla and what you're arguing against.
He shows some clips of fixed bullet spread in the training area he had but yeah he doesn't specifically talk about them, however, with fixed bullet spread every shot would deal the exact same amount of damage so it's less of an experiment and more of a check what those dmg values are.
the problem with having around 80% consistent bullet spread is that shotgun fights are resolved with 2~3 shots. This means that in every shotgun fight there is a fairly high chance of having an inconsistent shot, and that makes a difference (example: playing scout vs a soldier. You have a inconsistent shot and die)
2-3 shots? Sounds like a close-range encounter, in which you're literally bound to hit. That means either you actually miss and should get better or hitreg isn't doing good.
ye exactly. lets say that there is an even 5% diviation, that means that every 20 bullets you will miss 30% more or something, then that means (if you are 1v1ing scouts for exmaple), every 5 fights you will do significantly less damage than enemy scout and lose. lets say that if you are doing decently well you will hav 30 kils per game, which means that 6 times per game you would get screwed over by this dumb system, ant thats not even taking into account the fact that you slightly missing the center of the enemy's hitbox might overlap with a shitty spread pattern resulting in you missing your shot completely instead of hitting 30% of it. very dumb mechanic. its fine to have this in games where shotguns are nooby weapons for players that are bad at teh game, which is the ase for most games, but for tf2 where most classes rely on a shotgun, this mechanic has no place. the spread is very noticable on scout and in scout 1v1s where in casual your shots juts feel way more incosistent than in competitive.
@@fantastikboom1094Non sequitor. I am a scout main. I'm not "good at aiming" if i kill someone in 2 shots near me, because unlike your absurd requirement I don't have godlike aim and the other person (which most of the times has to deal with me running around them and getting in their face) can't be bothered to fling their mouse across the room to aim perfectly in the center of my hitbox. Calling people bad because you cant comprehend how a semi-bad player can kill a decent player because they rolled into dealing the slightest sliver of damage more is stupid, you are undermining the chaos that happens during a close range battle. Which to remind you, is usually never 2 classes strafing left and right and shooting at eachother in set intervals like robots. It's 2 classes in very *very* close range that have barely enough time to react to eachothers' movements.
But sure, both I and the random people that I get into these encounters with both have "good aim" and should "get better at aiming" at the same time I guess.
Because logic
@@S_whoelse What are you yapping about
this video really didnt need to be this long, it just feels better to know that the reason you missed even tho it looked like you hit your target is your own incompetence and not random spread. fortnite had a similar issue where "dead on" shots would completely miss because of bullet spread, and in return you dealing 9 damage from point blank range, and they dealt with that by increasing the numbers of fragments that hit 100% of the time when you hit your crosshair is placed on the target
A part that we don't explore as much is the person receiving more damage; is it fair for you to be killed by someone who isn't aiming at your center of mass simply because more random pellets ended up lining up with your hurtbox? I wouldn't say it necessarily rewards bad aim, but randomly taking more damage than average instead of less is a point to consider.
True, but its basically chip damage. Either you have enough health to fight more or escape and it probably made no difference, or you were so close to death something else would have probably killed you. And I don't know about other people but I have never died and thought "Damn random bullet spread!" Because there's no way for you to even tell.
Well I mean if you are at a distance where that extra damage can kill you so easily I feel the shot gun deserves to be more useful in that close range.
Yes, because when I take a ton of damage at close range from a shotgun I don't think "damn, that was well aimed" I always think "he just got lucky!"
Random bullet spread is not like random crits, it gets broadcast to the world that you got killed by a crit, you get a specific sound effect when you are hit with one and sometimes you can see the crit coming towards you. There is literally no indication of random bullet spread from the receiver's view point unless they take out a calculator and know the exact distance and orientation of the shot to calculate how much damage they should have taken.
thats how shotguns work
@@Nutty31313 I think that too, but on some level I think that would be there no matter what, just like when I get noscoped by a sniper while rushing them with a bat
I don't see how removing random bullet spread potentially pushes TF2 into territory it doesn't belong if RBS is as insignificant as you make it out to be. Random crits are a game changing mechanic, RBS is a quality of life change that removes any chance of variation that could occur whether in your benefit of shit aim or to your negative of proper aim but poor RNG, regardless of how small of a difference it makes. People feel less robbed when they fail to secure a kill, people feel less robbed when they lose a duel, and people have less excuses for why both of those factors occurred. RBS at times is more of a mental thing than it is a pure gameplay thing, but inherently a mechanic that brings in factors outside of the player's control even if the player did what they were supposed to do is an awful design, and shouldn't exist on that principle alone. RBS is entirely a matter of opinion on principle, same way that people gripe about the game being too casual or too competitive.
The variation is suppose to be there as a form of balance for the shot guns
Without it they become too consistent at ranges they shouldn't be
Its something that's meant to be out of control.
Just look at what it does to scout in comp. With his pellets being so much more consistent he basically gets a range boost as he can now more consistently deal larger amounts of damage at medium range instead of feeling the urge to be as close as possible anymore.
Yeah, it's more of QOL thing. I don't care if it isn't realistic, if fuck up a shot I would preffer the fuck up being on me. It enfuriates me when one pellet misses my enemmy because it decided to fuck off to the edge of the cone as scout at short range and they live.
@@GiRR007 balancing around random factor specially in a game like tf2 is terrible design
@Cyrus Stryker Ah yes, tf2, pinnacle of realistic weapons and mechanics. Also explain the panic attack lol
@@harryvpn1462 no it's not
Plenty of things are based around random factors.
The pistol, revolver, mingun, dmg all have random factors and are balanced by those random factors.
Ironically, as someone who was more neutral on bullet spread, this vid actually helped convince me to support no random bullet spread? Damage wise the range is minuscule, but the consistency helps with long range chip damage, which is able to help deal with snipers. It’s not much, but the difference between one pellet and no pellet is the big deal in those situations, so you can get that flinch.
The other arguments don’t really make me want to support random bullet spread either. To me, being able to work slightly more effectively than not at all at longer ranges feels more realistic, and the whole ‘competitive slippery slope’ doesn’t really mean much. The whole argument about there being other random factors just said to me that the feeling of variance would be there even without random bullet spread, so why bother keeping it in? Shotguns still wouldn’t be completely reliable, especially without the headshots CS:GO has.
I'm actually surprised with this comment here. I had the same line of reasoning, but for staying neutral towards bullet spread and to stop caring about it, since it aint matter as you said. I don't know why support taking it out, but otherwise? I think your reasoning itself removed from what you support makes 110% sense.
Implies that casual players who would prefer random mechanics removed are competitive bandwagoners, doesn’t elaborate, leaves
That's Zesty's schtick.
Oops, i want the tiniest bit less rng in the game, guess i’m a tryhard who kills friendlies while yelling about how nobody plays competitive.
@@chickennugget6684 Killing friendlies is great, it's really funny when they rage in chat afterwards.
@@chickennugget6684 lots of ppl play comp, just not valve comp
RNG in video games can make for interesting mechanics. Overall I would say TF2 doesn't do RNG very well since it doesn't contribute to the game in a meaningful way.
A game that does RNG very well in comparison is Dota 2, where things like rune spawns and certain abilities are random yet you can always account for them some way. It means you can play around the expected RNG, as opposed to TF2 where you can killed by a crocket as soon as you walk around the corner. Can't really play around that.
The irony is Dota 2 is a hypercompetitive game but the RNG arguably makes it more skill based by forcing you to account for the random factor. Honestly though Dota balance gets like x100 times the effort TF2 gets, at least.
Thank you for being the only person in this game who doesn't blindly hate dota 2. I see some people saying that dota 2 is the start of valve's decline as a game developer.
Even though tf2 should be blamed IMO as it was the first valve game to first introduce loot boxes and microtransaction
@@ilikemusic3856 I've got 1k hours in Dota and 3k in TF2 and I think they're both great games.
Dota is a fantastic games the real problem is players can be so toxic it makes the game hard to enjoy.
@@m136dalie Though I have been playing tf2 way less(barely played 5 hrs this entire month).
I still play CS:GO and Dota 2 a decent amount.
And yes dota 2's community is toxic.
But Tf2's community is not a gurdian angel as some likely you to believe.
You got people who post garbage on TH-cam(zealot) to people who send straight up send death threats if a youtuber they like starts making variety content.
And in the meanwhile you got manchildren,children,furries,annoying tryards,people who try to make this game be competive even though there are like 100 reasons why it can't,people thinking if you play dota2 or cs:go you are "stupid".etc etc.
Now there's somethings good about this community but they are so rare and far between compare to all the dogshit that surrounds it.
@@ilikemusic3856 You gotta admit, TF2 pubs are extremely chill. No one flames you, gets mad for buying wrong item or stealing kill.
Dota pubs, even unranked sometimes, people just have so much internal anger they will lash out at the smallest thing. There's toxic people everywhere but I feel Dota, despite being a good game, tends to bring out the worst in people.
I rarely have to mute people in TF2 but in Dota it's become second nature to mute teammates who flame.
@@m136dalie I think this is because of 2 things.
1. Tf2 is a casual game at heart and the fact there's like 12 players in both team. So if someone fucks up in tf2 it isn't a huge deal unlike dota which has 5 players each so if someone fucks up it would matter.
2. Maybe most of the players are F2P.
The issue with this experiment is that it only applies to perfect center-of-mass shots. It fails to account for all of the other variables that can go into the decision-making behind a shotgun shot.
For example, if you were to damage an opponent down to about 40 health, then you can make the decision to divert some of your mental energy away from perfectly aiming for center of mass, and instead focus some of your energy on juking/dodging. In this case, you're more likely to hit a grazing shot on the opponent's sides. Or, you can afford to retreat a bit and make some distance before making the killing blow. If you have fixed bullet spread, you can reasonably expect that at certain aiming points, you'd hit something like 54 or 63 damage, and so you can afford to go for these less-accurate shots in order to secure the kill (similar to going for a splash rocket on a wounded opponent instead of a direct shot as Soldier). You can develop the knowledge of how much damage certain aiming points would give, and use that to make informed decisions on how to aim.
With random bullet spread, this decision-making is moot. You could go for a less accurate shot, and hit something like 36 damage to 72 damage, and it's completely out of your control. This applies even more to mid-range shots. It interferes with the development of skills such as damage number recognition and relevant decision-making based on those numbers, just like random crits. The effects aren't immediately obvious like crits, because there's very little way of knowing when random bullet spread came into effect or didn't come into effect, but it still applies, and it still negatively impacts the game, at least to SOME degree.
If only 85% of shots fit within the "average", that's still 15% of shots that don't. 15% is a significant amount of shots. That's almost 1/6, which is funny when you consider a shotgun has 6 shots. At midrange this is even more ridiculous, considering only 68% of shots land in the std dev range. Using your conservative estimate of 70%, I can say that betting on a 70% chance of doing an expected amount of damage is just not reasonable, at all.
If the average range of damage is 13, that could be considered significant. 13 damage is 10% of a light class's health.
And all of this is only against a stationary target with perfect center-of-mass aiming. The variance would be even greater if you were to test different angles, different aiming positions, etc. Just because aiming perfectly gives you a "consistent" RANGE of damage 85% (or less) of the time, doesn't mean it's not significant in actual gameplay. I'm a numbers nerd, and I can see myself doing this sort of test too, but I would've absolutely tested way more variables than just distance. There's also potential issues with the way you rounded things, but it's not that important, because even with the numbers presented, these issues still apply.
All of this, and there's still no real argument for why shotguns should have random spread to begin with. Should a shotgun be less effective at range? Yes. Should its effectiveness be random and unpredictable? Probably not. Even if you want to argue that it'd be more "realistic" or "reasonable", it still feels bad from a gameplay perspective and can hamper the development of skills. Firing at a wounded target at midrange the exact same way should not give variable results. I shouldn't sometimes hit a 50 and sometimes hit a 30 with identical shots on someone who has 40 health. If I aim properly, I should be rewarded for my knowledge of damage numbers and my skill of hitting the shot. Consistency is always a good thing when it comes to this sort of gameplay.
Zesty would outright come up with fake information if it helped him "shit on tryhards". He's not gonna argue in good faith - I think everyone who's played XCOM or any similar game knows having a 1/6 chance of failure is too damn high and he pretends like it's 1/60.
This just boils down to 1 phrase "Know when to pick your fights and when to flee", if you are relying on grazing shots to win, you might as well just flee and lure your enemy into a more advantageous position, if you're a Scout you can just go away faking an escape and return in a matter of seconds to catch your enemy off guard, if you're an Engineer you can "Flee" towards your Sentry so it can either scare them or just finish them off, if you're a Pyro your shotgun is a support weapon mostly to finish off your already flaming target, so if you're in a situation that doesn't seem good, just fake a retreat like with Scout and then just go for a closer shot, or just pull out your Flamethrower which is literally made for Close Encounters, and if you're a Heavy, your shotgun is a last resort weapon, mostly useful when you ran out of Minigun ammo and you have to retreat to an Ammo Pack or Dispenser, and if you're running a Fat Scout build, then just like the previous Scout example, fake a retreat and kill your enemy when they least expect it, overall fleeing is also an even better option if you're fleeing towards a stairway, as your hitbox can be harder to hit due to the perspective.
In the example you gave on almost securing a kill, you have the enemy at 40 health, why would you start dodging at that point? Dodging is supposed to be the first thing you do, and after weakening your for you then put more pressure on them and go for the kill, specially if you're using a shotgun. Also, you're talking about mid and long range, which as explained in the video, it's outside of the effective range of the shotgun, so it's obviously going to be less effective, because you're not supposed to be using it at mid to long range, you're supposed to either get close to use it, or shoot some shots as a way to scare the enemy and then flee into a more advantageous position or even safety.
@@TooFewSecrets That's not an argument against what the guy presented.
It does reward your skill. But memorization of damage numbers isn't a skill, so why should THAT be rewarded? True skill lies in overcoming obstacles that come your way, and reacting to sudden changes.
If that extra health loss is a deciding factor, odds are you would have lost that encounter anyway what with Scout's ability to rapidly go from mid range to close range and the fact that his scattergun has 14.2% more damage ramp-up.
@@ashtongiertz8728 You're very late to the conversation, but. Recognizing and adjusting your play based on damage numbers IS a skill. You can't just claim it's not. It requires knowledge and experience. I think my original comment explains more than enough of how it can be a skill in practice, and how making it that random is not ideal.
Slight flaw in the argument. The 15% of the time that the shots did higher damage is still a downside because it’s equally as true for the enemy. So not only does half your shot whiff for no reason but the engineer you’re fighting could fire a slug at you instead. It may not be as significant as random crits but there’s still a tangible enough difference that I frankly can’t believe anyone with significant time in the game wouldn’t notice.
Rather have higher damage tbh. Makes the shotguns feel better and more consistent
@@redline841 you also get a 15% chance of dealing less damage per shot.
@@bagofbananas790
I accept the gamble
But you can also twist the argument by saying your enemy ALSO can deal less damage than they normally would.
Honestly, I feel like it could go either way, but I think more people make a fuss about it because of confirmation bias and the fact people don’t like to think that “I got that kill from sheer RNG,” when RBS does go in their favor
@@matthewsusilo8698 My point being that it isn't just a 15% chance of a downside, it's 30%. Which is a lot when you're weighing options going into battle.
For the TF2 shotguns to behave like actual shotguns, they would need double damage so it one shots you at close range
And be fucking lethal across the map
More like sextuple.
I don't see why people seek realism in a game where you jump with rockets.
I think he meant in terms of how the pellets behave and not in general
But this is the sniper job
"It's bad but it's there so don't change it cus it's there, some people don't like it, otthers don't care, so don'tt change it pls"
fr tho
Important to note that damage thresholds play a HUGE factor in killing your enemy, your differences at medium and long range even in the expected bell curve can tip yourself into two shot or three shot range for light classes, three or four for medics, ect. which can play a pretty huge impact at larger ranges
Except due to the objective based win/lose conditions and the team factor, the outcome of individual dogfights doesn't really impact the outcome of the fame. It's the combined sum, and that's when probability evens out, leaving skill as the deciding factor.
@@ashtongiertz8728 yeah but we're exclusively talking about this issue in the context of 1 on 1 dogfights, the overall game impact is minimal because its a symmetrical effect
@@Pigmedog I'm just putting it into perspective. If we focus our argument solely on how it effects individual dogfights, we'll quickly lose perspective.
The main argument against RBS is that it can mess with individual dogfights. My counter-argument is that TF2 wasn't designed around individual dogfights, so we shouldn't balance things around individual dogfights unless the outcome is consistently stacked in one direction (eg sniper can kill 5/10 classes instantly at ranges where 4/5 of those classes are only capable of chip damage)
a 15% chance that my shot will say nah dawg is really high and that really shouldn't be downplayed
Yes, 15% of the time doing less damage isn’t a huge deal. However, it DOES change things unnecessarily. It has no positive
Yea glossed over this point in the video
shooting a blank 15% the time is a lot tbh
it’s chip damage, and sometimes it can even do more damage
Pretty sure the given positive was the 15% chance of doing *more* damage.
@@glb0768 It's not equal to shooting a blank, though. You're just doing slightly more or slightly less damage. If you miss entirely because of random bullet spread, you're either too far away, or your aim is off. With bullet spread off, you would still only hit with one or two pellets, for 6-12 damage. The difference is tiny.
Also, you often shoot a target several times, which should even the damage out even more. Dealing slightly less damage than the expected average, five shots in a row, would be very unlikely, for example.
Removing random aspects doesn't make the game more competitive, it makes it more fair. You can have the game be silly and casual without the usage of RBS and random crits. Just because two aspects of the game become less random doesn't mean it's going to downward spiral into 6v6 5cp with item limits, it just helps in giving the better player a rightfully deserved win.
TF2 used to have goddamn damage rolls and with it's removal NO ONE has asked for it's return.
I _do honestly agree?_
Random Crits are something I won't care about removal or stay of, but RBS? _It does feel right to have it?_ You still have 100% hit chance no matter what regardless, it's just _one_ of a metric crap ton of mechanics and elements that affect if your shot hits hard or if it beefs. Aim... Position... Internet connection...
Just because the game has other elements that affect your shots doesn't justify having more of said mechanics. Their not connected at all. We should minimize such needless randomness, not pointlessly increase them.
@@epiclamp44 Thing is it doesn't change anything.
At the range where that would matter you wouldn't do any more damage then you already did, and at close range? Still doesn't matter, you either hit it or beef it no matter if it's a waffle pattern or not.
“How do you dodge a soldiers rockets if even he doesn’t know where they’re going”
- Sounsmith
Random bullet spread isnt that noticable at all, there is just absolutely no reason for it to exist. Its removal would only be a net positive cuz the casuals wont notice/care and the tryhards/more competitive ppl wont get upset in the rare occasion that it messes something up.
"B-but muh realism"
"B-but muh ""soul"""
What?
What about RBS on miniguns, pistols and SMGs? In there they're pivotal in balancing the weapon.
Why do competitive tryhards want shotguns to be better and more consistent at mid to long range when the main realistic and sensible downside in 90% of shooters is that shotguns are *inconsistent* and *worse* at mid to long range?
Imagine if the minigun had a predictable and consistent bullet spread. It would be an automatic fucking sniper. It needs it to be balanced.
RBS on shotguns is barely noticeable and when it is removed it is not an improvement to shotguns, it's simply an unnecessary statistical buff. There's a reason the panic attack lists its spread as an upside.
Do Heavies and snipers bitch and moan when their shots whiff because of spread? No, because they understand the limitations of their spread and play at scenarios that favour their spread. People should be doing the same with shotguns.
@@SaltCane ok so now that i've read your whole comment i can reply properly.
There already is a mechanic in the game that makes shhotguns suck at mid to long range regardless if there is rbs, it is called "damage fall-off" where you deal less damage the further you are.
The argument that shotguns balance depends on the rbs, completely ignores the existence of damage fall-off. So the "balance" argument goes in to the trash because there is already something that keeps the shotgun balanced/make sense in mid to long ranges.
The reason why you might want to remove rbs is the very rare occasions that you lose a kill due to it, like some of the shots uncle dane exlampified in his "Remove Random Crits" video. While these circumstances are very rare, they are extremely annoying when they happen.
And the fact remains that most players woulnt even notice/care about the removal of the rbs. The people who would notice it are the "tryhards" and it would make that side of the spectrum happier as a result. While not affecting the more casual side in the slightest.
As i mentioned in my original comment this only results in a net positive so there is no reason for rsb to not be removed.
Thanks, have a good day!
@@SaltCane Pistols and SMGs have fixed variations of 0.2, even if you turn off RBS.
The minigun's pellets fire in a circle, with one landing in the middle with RBS off, giving you consistent damage output, and yet Heavy is by far one of the least played classes in competitive or community servers.
@@SaltCane they dont have to be inconsistent at long range range. Just worse. No RBS still has the shotgun be worse at long range, so it is perfectly balanced
i like your high effort videos, especially your script writing and editing style.
i hope you don't get burnt out from making the most out of this decade old game.
nobody thinks random spread is a significant issue or causes any real problems in the game. it's just the fact that it doesn't contribute anything positive to the game and can be removed by valve with one simple command.
The problem with RBS is that it obscures whether or not you're missing your target or just getting unlucky. There's also times where you will completely miss a meat shot because all the pellets distribute to some unusual direction, like in videos like this:
th-cam.com/video/nwl_tQrtRYw/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/slbEpF96ea0/w-d-xo.html
Biggest thing is that there is such a thing as the negativity bias, so negative events are remembered twice as much as positive ones. So effectively you need to double the numbers used for how often the player notices them, which is about 30% which is far less favorable. Other issue is that it also affects how the opponents estimate whether they can disengage or not. If they assume a shotgun will do 8-20, but it instead all pellets connect and it hits for 36 and you probably die when you otherwise would be just fine.
tldr
@@sirdomo4 Negativity bias makes it feel closer to 30% change to botch or get snipped from far away.
For those clips you gotta think. Did the rbs actually make a difference in the fight? The second clip maybe, but in the first clip not only did he aim at the top of the engineers back on his side so it makes complete sense those shots missed, but he won the fight easily anyway. It does make a difference but it's so minor you almost never notice it. It just feels like such a nitpick because there are so many more things in the game that are complete bs and ruin the game for way more people than it helps only to talk about randomness costing you a handful of damage.
Imagine spending this much time on a mechanic that doesn’t effect anything
@@Chapstick159 That you'll need to bring up with Zesty.
Imo it's more of casual players don't care if it's on or off... So just have it off? And to the argument that rbs keeps scout in check? No. No it doesn't. Because like you said. Rbs only really effects mid to long range and scout is most effective close range, like right in your face. his low health is the thing that keeps him in check. Hence why the balancing of scout is so good. He's best at very close range and that's also where he's the most vulnerable.
Rbs keeps him in check because when it is on he cant get consistent damage from long to mid range, making him a close range beast but really weak and inconsistant at mid to long range
@@DivonMC dude who Is trying to get consistent damage from long range with scout? And even then I'd still argue getting 3-9 damage at long range isn't that big of a deal anyway.
but if i turn it off then i only have my skill to blame and not the rbs
it is just a placebo
@@theeyeballthatcameoutofthe5268 it probably is just placebo but why not eliminate that small factor?
Honestly, this video made me flip from not caring about bullet spread, to thinking it should be turned off. Your own data shows that most of the time players won't noticed if it's off... But getting a low damage roll always sucks, which means players will only notice it *specifically* when it hurts them. Most players won't be able to notice when a high damage roll helps them, making the experience overall feel more negative. So why not leave it off if most players won't notice or care?
If they can't notice if a mechanic has been turned off, then wouldn't the same be for it being turned on? If they won't notice or care about bullet spread most of the time, wouldn't that not be ruining the experience at all? Often the result is blamed on random crits, aim, ping, hitboxes or loads of other random factors that contribute to lower damage output that AREN'T random bullet spread. It's not very often someone blames bullet spread for a death. So why turn it off if it doesn't make much of a difference when it's on anyway? And even then, random bullet spread can be beneficial to the fairness of the game.
That's because also a balancing mechanic in a way. Imagine a heavy's minigun, but pinpoint accurate. It's already hard to get around a heavy's minigun fire, but without random bullet spread, that would make the one weapon that lacks the need to reload, with a very high firerate, be pinpoint accurate. It would be dealing the most consistent amount of DPS at the exact same ranges, which would be VERY unbalanced and predictable, and even then with it turned on it's not like it's THAT unpredictable.
It's reasonable why you'd turn it off, but often they don't even matter if you DO get a low damage roll. Besides, the pellet accuracy roll thing only covers SHOTGUNS. If you account for SMGs, Miniguns, Revolvers, Pistols, often it doesn't come down to bullet spread that makes you lose a fight, but rather the other factors. If anything, it helps balance out one.
It should be kept on imho because it's a mechanic that introduces unpredictability and balancing out weapons (or the scout himself) that would otherwise be overpowered or make no difference without it. It's not so bad.
Why's it a problem in the first place? It's not exactly a common complaint (let alone a complaint at all) in alot of other games, even ones similar to TF2.
@@blazinga3815 you didn’t even disprove his point. Don’t compare a 1/7 chance of having a very dissatisfying shotgun shot to something like ping which is out of anyone’s control. If ping could be removed, would players want it kept into the game for it’s random and unpleasant effects? This is something that is a controlled and programmed phenomenon that only effects a player dramatically when you shoot someone and all the bullets swivel around their hitbox. No player of any skill or level of familiarity with TF2 would enjoy that except someone who has overthought the concept to the point of obscurity.
EDIT: Automatic weapons are different as the rapid nature of the projectiles never are taken into account, and could remain in either state. The impact it has on burst weapons like shotguns are the issue at hand, and what produces such a noticeable and undesirable experience.
yeah, you need to weigh up both the pros and cons of a mechanic when you discuss removing it
if all you do is demonstrate the that the cons of the mechanic were minor, it means nothing until you can prove the pros of keeping it outweighs that
in this case, it barely makes a difference, but it is a slightly difference, on the other hand the only good thing about it is the fact it keeps shotguns less effective at longer range, but if that was the desired effect why not just increase damage falloff to achieve the same result without having any undesirable effects at all. so therefore it should be removed
At the same time getting a meat shot is always super satisfying so it can definitely have its positives too if it can get you one from a little further out, which the data showed it could. Also keep in mind that the 15% chance was only at a range where you probably shouldn't be using the shotgun anymore to begin with. At the range of normal shotgun play its effects are minimal and can go both ways. Also like he said, it makes a shotgun act like a shotgun.
I don't see any reason for keeping RBS in. It's impact is negative. Sure, it's impact is barely negative, but it's still negative. I haven't heard an argument for why RBS is a positive mechanic. The only one I could think of is something similar to the argument for random crits (it feels good to get good RNG), but you make it clear that your point is that they ultimately don't matter, which would conflict with that. I do agree that RBS is fine for weapons like the pistol, smg, minigun, etc... and it seems Valve agrees. Their official command for turning off RBS still leaves it on for those weapons and only disables it for shotguns, scatterguns, and their alternative unlocks. If one side is against having RBS and the other is apathetic to it, then what would be lost from removing it?
well... it balance scout from being a meta class to an annoying nuisance
@@gabrielraynard8056 Coming from a long-time Scout main, what makes him meta is his movement and his high damage output. Scout isn’t known for accuracy. He’s about getting in as close as possible and maximizing damage while keeping up movement and evading the enemy’s damage. I think RBS has a bigger effect on classes like Engineer, Pyros, and Soldiers who run shotgun. Since they lack mobility (atleast when they have their shotgun out), they benefit from keeping a medium distance and being consistent with their shots.
@@_-Huligan-_ that's the point. Damage fall off maybe there already, but these class usually end up in close range anyway. These class also have an extra firepower, but it also can be complemented even more with their other weapons, the shotguns. That is the balancing side of RBS, to prevent these class from abusing their firepower without punishment. You can't just escape a fight by pulling it out when your main source of damage got depleted without being punished. Scout don't have extra firepower like rockets and sentries, so his scattergun deals higher max ramp up damage than the shotguns with conjunction of speed, making the user must take more risk, but also can dish out high damage and hard to hit. So his medium range is gimped by this 2 factors to make scouts a high risk high reward. You dish out higher damage than most shotguns with mobility to compensate the distant and make yourself hard to hit with the exchange of low max health and lower medium combat capabilities
@@gabrielraynard8056 if scout's accuracy is really a problem RBS should be removed and then scout's gun accuracy should be nerfed, RBS may mess up scout's medium range fighting skills but there's always a chance that the bullets will actually stay close to the crosshair and get him out of a medium range fight that RBS was supposed to make sure he was going to die
@@offandsphere6788 We got that with the backscatter. The gun's pointless because you have to go into the already effective range of scouts to do the exact same damage but also still gimped by the downside if you not shooting the enemy's butt. In other words your compromised didn't change anything, so why changing it if the old system still do the same?
Personally, even if RBS doesn't make a significant difference, I still support disabling it. Even if it's a small amount damage left up to random chance, you're still leaving that damage up to random chance. It's a similar issue to if there were random minicrits. Sure, it's not a giant issue, but leaving any damage up to random chance rezulsf in the invalidation of skill to a degree, and can result in losing or winning fights you didn't deserve to
Yeah and honestly I know this a bad opinion but with how inconsistent ping and hitreg can be I really like it better when arena shooters use hit capsules rather than tightly bound hitboxes. Basically it's a sorta egg-shaped hitbox around the character model that lets players move fast without the engine dropping the ball on hitreg as much. Basically if a bullet goes under your model's arm or between their legs it still hits them.
As for his point about it balancing hitscans I have to strongly disagree. We already have damage fall-off to push combat closer. Additionally, it presents the ability for someone to get lucky and get better damage at long range with shots hitting due to lucky spread.
Basically I'm not a fan of leaving something more to chance than it needs to be in PvP games. Why let someone be screwed out of 2-shotting a medic 1/7th of the time just by luck when they could instead just fail because they missed?
Okay comp player
The damage is suppose to be left up to random chances as a way of balancing the shot guns. They aren't suppose to be consistent, so to eliminate that inconsistency as much as possible it requires you to get as close as possible. Which is what you are suppose to do with a shot gun.
@@GiRR007 if the shotguns consistently did fuckall damage at long range they would be just as balanced. They still spread out over time with fixed weaponspread. I have no idea what Zesty was on about with it balancing shotguns. They are equally balanced at longer ranges with or without it on. It's just less consistent without fixed weaponspread.
@@Chapstick159 I wish
Random bullet spread is the worst of both worlds:
It doesn’t impact the game _that much_ and you only notice it when you _don’t_ kill someone you were aimed straight at.
There isn’t a single benefit to it, unlike random crits which, while I don’t like them, they do have good qualities.
They _should_ be removed but there’s no reason to get too upset that it exists in the meantime.
Circular spread patterns are tighter than square ones. Your shotguns while less consistent with random spread, hit a smaller area.
It was so satysfying when I killed medic, heavy and someone else with single crocket
What about inaccuracy for pistols and revolvers? Or how demo’s pipes have random rotation and explosion times? Or how literally every other game, including competitive ones like CSGO, have some sort of random spread or inaccuracy?
Zesty literally said it's in the game for balance reasons. Shotguns aren't supposed to be snipers.
Most competent shooters nowadays have it to limit weapons' effective ranges.
@@someweeb3650actually, the fixed spread pattern is 33% tighter than RBS.
Fixed bullet spread is a lot like UCF in Melee. It's unnoticeable most of the time for most people but makes a decent difference at top-level play. Likewise, I think it makes sense to have it in competitive settings, but I don't really care if it's there or not.
i like how this guy is still playing tf2, respect to you. also love your science lessons put in a game, best way to learn no cap.
The 70,000 real players
Alt title: 20 minutes of bad faith arguments and fallacies
1. Even if it is obvious he should repeat the shooting test with the spread disabled. He didn't have anything to compare it with and just took the average unilaterally.
2. 8:50 He knows that the discussion about the spread isn't only about the player but also the opponent? He put the 15% of the times it does more damage than expected as a possitive, without taking into account the fact when the opponent approaches you, he should know what damage you can dish out and that this damage should be consistent. Otherwise strategy and positioning doesn't have much impact. So it's is still 30% of the time that this happens.
3. Only using one class and not all of them and only having him facing forward instead of at least two more possitions isn't enough to draw any type of conclusion. And given how quick it would be to make those adjustments, it is pure lazyness
4. RaNdOm CrItS bReAcK sTaLeMaTeS. I swear to god. Not a single person that repeats this retarded argument can provide a single clip of that being the case. Because it is not true. The only margnal case that this isn't true, is if the map is unbalanced, a crits kills half the team and you steamroll from then on. On a balanced map, a stalemate usually means the teams are equal roughly. And if the map isn't a clusterfuck, then the team can rebuild and hold another stalemate. Also the mechanic isn't random and just rewards players that have done more damage, so it is usually more likely to reinforce a stomp.
5. A shotgun should feel like a shotgun....in a game where a lead poisoned guy flies by exploding rockets on his feet, teleporters exist and a crazy german dude can defy death. Suuure....
I kinda agree about first 4, yet I don't really care about it, I would complain if valve removes it, but 5... No. Tf2 was sci-fi-ish (edit, for me). Yes, teleporters, rocket jumps don't fit into phisics of real life, but things make sense. Explosion "repulse" things, so man could potentially be knocked by it in air; fat man could potentially take more bullets than thin fast dude, etc. So when barrel hasn't got special muzzle and shoots randomly, it's not equal to ultra realistic simulator, it's just general logic.
Btw then valve adds freaking banana, so today it's not that true, but when I don't see banana, I see this style in tf2, and I kinda like it. No, removing rbs won't make this less logic, I just say why it makes sense for me to see shotguns without fixed spread.
The game is not meant to be taken this seriously. If people are this concerned over a minor RNG element detracting from their skillful plays, they need to play a game like CS where you’re intended to play that way.
I mean, TF2 can be random and fun without things like random crits and random spread. And something being taken seriously and somdthing being fair and consistent are 2 seperate things.
tf2 is already silly and unseriousness by design without bad mechanics making it inconsistent for no reason.
tf2 is a silly game where random shit happens because its a fun clusterfuck, but it should still be fair and consistent to play.
@@moistenedwall1003would you also remove random spread from mini guns, pistols, smgs, syringe guns, the grenade launcher and sticky bomb launchers?
Ok ok. I'm posting this at 6:53 as I would just like to point out that one of the properties of the normal distribution is that 66% of the data lies within one standard deviation of the mean (middle). With the far and medium graphs the data is close enough for the data to be assumed to be normal. However on the close rande graph there would be a strong argument that the data does not meet the requirements and does not folow a normal distribution. Furthermore the data must be symmetrical for this distribution to be used, again the first two are close enough to be assumed to be normal but I would argue that the close range sample is not normal.
However statistics does sometimes rely on a lot of "close enough" and it's completely up to interpretation.
My stance: turn it off
Why?: I want MY fuckups and clutches to be MY fault, of MY doing, I don’t want to be GIVEN a kill despite fucking up my aim on a shotgun and I REALLY don’t want my kill ROBBED because “Tf2 GiVeTh AnD tF2 tAkEtH aWaY” despite aiming very well
Welp that’s just my opinion though, although it might be surprisingly unpopular though just like my belief in caring about ALL of the humans that are playing the video game with you’s sanity (not just teammates) is also surprisingly unpopular
Dude, unless you're playing Player Destruction, Zombie Infection, Versus Saxton Hale, or Arena on some community map, a single instance of RNG screwing you over doesn't really matter. If it's near an objective, you're teammates should be there to finish what you started. If you weren't near the objective or your team, one or both of you is/was way out of position and won't have much impact on the game's outcome regardless. If you keep repeatedly dying to someone at midrange with a shotgun, then RBS isn't the issue; it's skill.
So either you're complaining about a mild inconvenience, or you're huffing copium.
i realised that due to the nature of RANDOM bullet spread is that there is technically a possibility when you get a crit that all the bullets are centered making a shotgun a sniper unless there is a hidden trait about rbs that makes that impossible
I 100% agree with you. I don't understand why sweaty players only care about shotgun spread and don't bitch about how the minigun isn't a fixed super accurate laser. It's because guns have some random spread in every game and in real life. It's important for keeping an effective range. Even the pistol has spread to prevent people from using it as a laser. It normalizes the skill ceiling somewhat because a bot can't just laser you down.
Welp I'm here before the video started. So here is my prediction. Random bullet spread very bad, a few rage moments, Patreon plug, (sponsors are lame) the highest quality intro ever. I learn a lot about source spaghetti. And a TF2 server plug (I will start playing on them I SWEAR) I'll be back after the video :)
Edit: halfway through video, forgot he intense math. My bad guys. Edit 2: just got to Patreon, knew it.
Edit 3: ey hay not to bad missed a few and got a few wrong but I learned a lot and predicted the future. ( I dont mean to call you out zesty still ly) nice video as always and thanks for reading my comment
Meta
+1 except he subverts expectations and says random bullet spread isnt a big deal
Then the rest of what you said
That will certain cover it
@@Jckfrbn it's this.
Sounds right
the point is to remove as many variables outside your control as possible. if its trivially easy to disable somethign that causes random inconsistency, there's absolutely no reason to leave it on.
Except this is a team-based game where individual matchups are just a small piece of the big picture. And the big picture is where RNG gets canceled out. RBS may win battles, but it can't win wars.
If you remove too many then you make the game boring and destroy it's replayability.
Is it me or there's more science and evidence on this video than Uncle dane's video on Random Crits.
I purposefully present contrarian opinions for the sole purpose of farming views, haha, I have tricked you!
based
literally me uniroincally
This isn't a joke isn't it
it is a joke, you moron, it's why I made the comment
you have no bitches
Still not convinced by this. In my OPINION, rbs is still a completely arbitrary mechanic that negatively affects your shotgun. Unnoticeable, sure, but unnoticeable doesnt make it necessary. One console command and its gone. Random crits are noticeable and have a much larger impact on the game in comparison to rbs, but that doesnt mean "rbs has less of a reason to be removed" that just means to me that "the removal of rbs can be summed up to "its unnecessary" and thats all it needs." Like it or not, it still objectively negatively impacts the damage of your shotgun.
I dont care if rbs means that shotguns are more realistic, tf2 is a completely unrealistic game. In a game where multiple rockets can be stored in a launcher at one time and a pair of mittens are considered viable combat options, then shotguns always firing in a fixed pattern is the least of our worries in relation to the tf2 worls continuity with our own.
I just think the argument starts at "arbitrarily and negatively affects the damage of your shotgun" and ends at "unnoticeable but unnecessary"
RBS on miniguns, pistols, and smgs?
Why do people want shotguns to be consistent and better at mid to long range when the realistic and main downside of shotguns in 90% of games is that they are inconsistent and worse at mid to long range?
Imagine if the minigun had a fixed and predictable spread. It would make it an automatic sniper for fuck's sake.
@@SaltCane yeah, things like miniguns, pistols, smgs, revolvers, ect. should have random bullet spread because then they would be unbalanced. But the difference is that they're sustained fire weapons. The difference with shotguns are burst fire weapons with natural spread. Shotguns arent balanced by RANDOM bullet spread, its bullet spread in general. You do less damage at longer ranges thats the downside to any shotgun. The inconsistency of rps is that now you have a chance to do less damage at closer ranges wheee the shotgun is meant to be stronger. Removing rps doesnt just make the shotgun to 90 damage at long range, the natural bullet spread of shotguns does the balancing for it. It is not a necessary balancing mechanic and many community servers have already proved just how minimal an effect it has on a typical game of tf2. Tf2 doesnt have to have every mechanic a regular fps game has, all it has to do is be first person and have guns you can shoot at other people, they can choose the factors of how you shoot or what amount of damage, knockback, ect. the shooting does
Except the lack of reliability of doing damage is itself a factor. Think about games that allow you to purchase items that give a chance to crit. Aside from specialized builds, you aren't buying crit expecting to get a lucky streak and hit five crits in a row, but rather the fact that it is increasing your Damage that if then paired with items that also increase attack speed, heavily increases lethality.
Shotguns not being reliable at mid and far ranges *IS* a factor that isn't arbitrary nor random, as it will always exist every time you use that weapon at those ranges, therefore encouraging options that are more reliable at those further ranges if you want to regularly succeed. Lacking reliability is an acceptable negative factor, and is one heavily used in many games that are *way* more competitive (And balanced) than TF2. To give an example from another Valve game, a key part of Dota's meta is reliable versus unreliable stuns, which heavily changes the value of specific abilities. However Leshrac's unreliable stun (Which has a long setup time) isn't viewed as pointless as you merely need to adjust your playstyle to make it reliably hit, like comboing with other disabling heroes, buying atos or Euls for guaranteed lockdown, etcetera. Likewise, shotguns unreliability comes from range, and the easiest way to mitigate and even eliminate the unrelaibility of the shotgun is to get close to the target you are shooting at.
Random doesn't mean bad, and eliminating anything that has any randomness in TF2 would undoubtedly inevitably result in the game being worse. Things like random crits in TF2 are bad implementation as there isn't any regularity to it nor any way to plan around it, but weapon spread and weapon accuracy not only makes sense but is an extremely common factor for balancing and impacting the value of weapons for almost every shooting game I am aware of, with even CSGO (Valve's actually competitive shooter) having inaccuracy and weapon spread instead of making everything perfectly straight laser hitscan.
Bullet spread: exists
That one bullet in the middle: "You didn't have to cut me off"
Def a bit annoying. Thats why i mostly run the panic attack instead of stock.
Random crits are absolutely fine.
As long as I'm the only one getting them
Consistency as a design decision is a concept I don't see discussed much outside of card games, so I'm glad Zesty brought it up!
Whether it's individual cards, decks, or even the overarching archetypes present in every card game, the potential value spread is a part of the balance. The Aggro and Combo archetypes are all about high value, but at the cost of lower consistency, while Control and Midrange focus on consistent value at the cost of lower blowout potential. I'm simplifying of course, but it's just interesting to see this general take brought out of the card game sphere.
Having played with and without a lot, i can confidently say it doesnt really matter. You can keep it on or off, my experience wont change. Which i think is the sentiment of this video anyways
Honestly the "it doesn't make a significant difference in damage" argument could be applied damage spread as well. The only time damage spread really mattered is when Loch n Load did 120 damage and had a chance to one-shot 125 hp classes. LnL doesn't do that anymore and damage spread was removed anyways.
No. Random damage spread was not *just* an issue with the LnL. It screwed up a number of breakpoints by making them exceedingly inconsistent in an annoying manner entirely outside your control.
Random bullet spread *can* be controlled by managing your distance.
As someone who played comp TF2 for years, I find random bullet spread an annoyance, but an acceptable one. Fixed and predictable bullet spread doesn't just allow for abuse, it can and should be abused if you want to play optimally. Wherein you need to focus on aiming to the sides of the opponent, which is less 'skillful' and more just counter-intuitive.
Demo has a high chance to just not be able to two shot many things, and Stickies meanwhile, now have a chance to one shot light classes.
Its very noticable. Also just plain the times you're screwed on RNG with Damage thresholds and the opponent is left with single digit HP.
Random damage spread made a huge difference when using melee weapons. You roll low twice in a row and all 125 health classes were tanking two hits, and that's a GIGANTIC increase to their survivability just because you rolled low
The idea behind removing unnecessary RNG is to tighten the feedback loop of facing skill-based consequences and learning from them.
If damage output relies on what angle the other person is, how far away they are, how good your aim is, etc then that damage output scaled directly based on the skill of the person pulling the trigger. How good their aim is, when they pull the trigger, *whether* they pull the trigger.
Some issues like ping will be forever unavoidable RNG.
But adding more RNG beyond that - be that spread or crits - slurs the signal of whether you actually played that last encounter well or not. Did you win? did you lose? Was that because you engaged more skillfully than your personal best or personal average during that encounter or was it because some cosmic dice somewhere just decided today's not your day?
Yes, there is a lot of chaos on the game. That doesn't mean we need to defend mechanics that move the needle more towards every engagement being a version of the paper rock scissors taunt.
So, if majority of playerbase is "not care", 15% of negative impact is "not notable" and we have players, who don't like randomness in game mechanics we have a logic conclusion - remove random shotgun spread and game becomes better for all, right?
Rewatching this video with more experience
(Still no ill will toward zesty)
New notes:
*A general question*
So how is this different from random damage spread? Random damage spread would also cause a perfectly aimed shot to deviate up or down due to RNG, do you think random damage spread should be added back to casual?
2:17
*the tests*
I would hate to make your testing even more extensive as 1512 IS a lot of shots,
HOWEVER, you should also test missing the target slightly to the left and right as well as up and down (maybe the engineer's shoulders, hips, and head) as bullet spread may reward poor aim if you get lucky. Bullet spread is not only a problem of losing damage you should have done, but gaining damage undeserved.
7:38
*More damage not being negative*
except that more damage is also negative (see *"the tests"* for a more indepth explanation)
It'll let you get an unfair victory, maybe that heavy needed that extra 2-5 health to win a fight, but random bullet spread decided that you earned an extra pellet or two. Like random crits, just to a lesser degree, it let's you get kills for being stupid. Poor aim? Who cares have some extra damage because you aimed left when the bullets went right. "I got a kill, that guy sucks, get owned idiot"
11:33
*if there is a difference it's very subtle*
Even if it's subtle it adds up over time, does it not? Even a 10% reduction on a 10 damage weapon will add up over time. Imagine a scenario where a slight deviation means everything. You're using the frontier justice, the round is about to end a demo destroys your sentry with the loch n' load dealing 27 splash, lauching you away from the demo and dealing an additional 2 fall damage leaving you with 96 HP and out of shotgun range. You have ONE crit locking each pellet at 18 damage and increasing effective range, he took at least 32 damage since you heard your lvl 2 sentry hit him twice leaving him with 143 HP. At the range you're at you expect to hit 6 pellets (108 damage) letting you follow up with an additional 2 non-crit 6 pellet, 18 damage shots dealing at total of 144 damage just barely killing him, eating the pill he fired to save your buildings dying in the process and letting your team win the round. However, RBS was not in your favor, you hit 3 crit pellets (53 damage) and a total of 5 non-crit 3 damage pellets (15 damage) dealing a total of 68 damage leaving the demo at 75 HP, heroically eating the pill, dying, and then having your buildings destroyed losing the round.
15:37
*stock uber*
nothing else to say, just stock uber
I will say however, I couldn't care less about it's removal it's casual, however, your arguments, are . . . Let's just say they're a brick wall with a door anyone can walk through.
I think random damage spread + random bullet spread is too much RNG to be manageable. If random damage spread is to be brought back, it shouldn't apply to shotguns or mini guns.
If RBS was to be removed however, we can bring back RDS without fear of exponential RNG
Random bullet spread is like the ugly cousin to random crits
Think of it this way. There is very little benefit to random pellet spread and removing it would remove a minor frustration from the game. Missing a shot is more my fault and more in my control if rbs is off. Yes it isn't making the game horrendous as is, but is there a reason to have it in the first place?
Yeah. Remove it would make player blame the small excuse and start to think that they need to play better.
You are missing the point. Sometimes you do MORE damage with random spread while fighting at CLOSE range. The detriment comes at ranges outside of the intended, as it should.
@@DiegoAlanTorres96 Yes, but it goes both ways, It's not about if you do more or less, it's about consistency. If you are fighting an engie as scout close range, sometimes he will two shot you because of random spread, even if his aim is off simply because he got lucky.
It builds character.
RBS might not do too much all the time but the thought of my perfect shot dealing the exact damage needed to kill someone deciding NOT to kill them since one pellet decided to straight up miss makes using a shotgun in casual just not feel as reliable.
Worse than Random crits? No. definitely not. But i don’t like this mechanic having free real estate in the back of my head.
Also due to RBS people don't fire shotguns at range despite the average damage being BETTER then fixed spread.
bruh the knocking in the video made me actually get up and check
I think you've turned me on this aspect of TF2's RNG. Though, I'd still rather have random crits be removed or otherwise made less random in pubs. There isn't a whole lot I disagree with here, and your argument was constructed nicely. Great video, man.
I think random crits would be fine if they didn't scale with damage done. Keep them forever at their lowest value.
@@mutilator97 I'm personally of the opinion to remove random crits on all ranged weapons, but keep them for but keep them for melee weapons. It'd remove 90% of the complaints about random crits I think but still leave them open for people to goof around with things like demopan.
@@CanadianTeaMaker my biggest issue with random crits is on melee. Snipers are meant to be vulnerable at close range. Snipers need to rely on range in order to have an advantage over their enemies due to their rifle's high damage and lack of falloff. Just kidding nevermind they delete you instantly half of the time because fuck you for trying to take advantage of snipers biggest weakness. Jarate bushwacka is bad enough but random crits let him keep hold of his secondary slot for his smg or a backpack whilst not leaving him with damage vulnerability from the bushwacka and whilst still letting him one shot you
Yeah, also, if going to the reduce probability, rockets and splash damage weapons should have the less
A key thing he focused on in the video is Negative and Significant. Random crits are both of this. It's not a 15% damage different is 3x damage for no fall off at no cost. That's a pretty significant value and anyone who's ever played a game of pub TF2 could probably list a few moments where their push was completely shut down by a single random crocket from a gibbus soldier. Random bullet spread I don't really care about, but random crits are absolutely abysmal.
Regarding the whole "leave them on melee weapons" argument, that's also not great either. The ability to one-shot 5 of the 9 classes at a significantly high rate is incredibly powerful and nullifies the weaknesses of classes like Sniper and Medic. The latter of which is notorious for critting what feels like 100% of the time and arguably has more of a reason to remove random crits from melee. Sure, the Ubersaw is almost a guarantee "fuck light classes" weapon. But many would argue that it would be more beneficial for there to be no random crits so that the medic could get a second swing and build more uber.
EDIT: Also, this argument of "random-crits break stalemates" is a really dumb one because *cough cough* Ubercharge exists *cough*. Also, people have been complaining about random crits long before the competitive TF2 community got involved.
Your data says there is a 30% chance that your shotgun unexpectedly deals more or less damage. I say 30%, because getting killed by a blow that you know you would've survived isn't exactly fun either.
You will never be able to tell whether you would or would not have survived a shot because of random bullet. That's how insignificant it is.
@@GiRR007 Except you can, if the average is 37 then if you have above 37 health and die... you are able to tell.
@@Buglin_Burger7878 ok but even if the average for a target holding still at a certain distance away that average always be in flux so again you would never realistically be able to tell.
My issue with random bullet spread is that havin it disabled actually make the shotguns about 25% less accurate, so mid range is no good, which contrary to other games is good in tf2 because the shotgun don’t 1 shot and is a secondary weapon unless ur Texan
Good content, though the fact that the experiment had so many constants means that it won't accurately reflect many of the complaints wrt random bullet spread - although that's more just a limitation with the game in general.
I think turning off random bullet spread in casual wouldn't hurt, really. Also saying that the bullet spread is "predictable" is kinda absurd, since 99% of players don't know the damage range and can't accurately calculate how likely their shot is to deal less or more damage. This also ignores that most fights are going to be between two constantly moving targets, which will cause any form of random bullet deviation to matter so much more.
It is also true that there are tons of factors in TF2 that affect consistency, some of which can't be fixed, but this isn't really an argument *against* removing the factors that can be easily addressed.
Opening strong with the statistics was a solid choice. 85% of shots being standard or better in terms of damage really shattered my expectations established by other youtubers, as I didn't have a full opinion formed personally. I do consider 15% to be FAR from insignificant though, but ultimately RBS is already turned off in places where that 15% would be meaningful. And, the doomsaying around 17:00 about the removal of RBS and the chain effect if could have are pretty unfounded, especially when looking at modern valve and their near total disregard for TF2. RBS would be changed either in tandem with or after other much more significant changes, and the community would crusade against such changes in all likelihood. Outside of those two nitpicks however, this is a really solid video in response to the movement that launched from what was essentially an under-explored, subjective footnote in Dane's video.
The 17:00 part is legit a slippery slop fallacy.
@@sussy3778 it's a fallacy until it isn't
@@BonziBUDDY it's a fallacy because it's stupid. There's literally nothing hinting that such an insignificant change would eventually lead to more comp changes in the future. Valve doesn't update the game enough for that to happen. Valve completely gave up on comp tf2 after the failure of meet your match comp system. Even when they pushed the game to comp, it wasn't because of small changes in the past.
There is an issue with these statistics, none of them show what the standard point is... as standard should be the Fixed shot damage. Then everything is above/under that.
If you factor that in... the graphs end up showing Fixed does more in close range and less in medium/long range. So RBS actually makes the shotguns better at range oddly enough.
That God damn knocking noise scared the shit out of me
When it comes to shotguns, I don't mind random bullet spread, but there's something to be said about fixed spread when it comes to rapid fire weapons.
Back when I used to play Rust, I remember the fixed spread being something you could learn, and if you were good enough (which I wasn't) you could learn the spread pattern when full autoing somebody, and land all/most of your shots that way.
And I don't mean I want it to be pinpoint accuracy, just that the spread on automatic weapons being something I could theoretically predict and account for, instead of being 100% random.
That said, in TF2, I don't particularly mind random spread at all, but it would raise the skill ceiling on characters like the Heavy IMO
comp is cool and awesome. ever since i played comp ive gained so many of my lifelong friends! thanks comp tf2!
I prefer no bullet spread because, if i take an L and die i get peace of mind that it wasnt a dice roll that i lost, and if I win it wasnt because of lucky spread.
It's not wether or not I lose, it's just peace of mind.
Honest to god, the RBS is God awful on specificallly the shortstop. It performs so much better with it off. That little T is so much less punishing than rbs, especially at mid range where the shortstop is supposed to shine.
Zesty the chance that it screws you over doesn’t really matter that much (plus let’s be real here 30%it will screw you or your opponent over isn’t insignificant as you call it) what matters more is how much it does and your provided statistics show a huge difference in min and max damage for example for far range min was 4 while max was 36 and it was similar for mid and close range as well.
The issue with random bullet spread is not necassarily its CONSISTENCY, but the fact that there is a chance that my shot, that I aimed well, could do marginally less damage than I intended it to. While it's more likely that DOESN'T happen, its more likely that you DON'T get a random crit. Just because it's unlikely doesn't mean it's balanced.
video has just shown that statistically it's not possible? even then there are 5 bullets left
@@licemere9899 video shows that they are in fact consistent, but that doesn’t mean it’s IMPOSSIBLE to get bad bullet spread. One fight could go wrong because of it, and indeed cost you the game.