Please show some love to my content creator friends that helped make this video possible! www.twitch.tv/klean www.twitch.tv/ghostfreak66 www.twitch.tv/markstrom www.twitch.tv/covertgg www.twitch.tv/swabo www.twitch.tv/worrun_ www.twitch.tv/blackrait www.twitch.tv/pestily www.twitch.tv/senseiscav
Thank you for everything you do for the tarkov community Veritas! Your door example reminded me of how people breach the factory office, 1 of 3 doors is a know variable, a dead end. whichever door you open first is the wrong door, so you move to breach the second and increase your chance of survival.
"you didn't choose the outcome, you chose to act based on what limited information you had, but it was the system that was the significant contributing factor to what ultimately was the final outcome."
This is an amazing video, ive just bought tarkov, coming in with ten's of thousands of hours of experience across dozens of shooters somthing about tarkov is both intriguing to me and fundamentally wrong. I couldnt put my finger on it, over the past 3 weeks ive sunk 100 hours into the game and researching it, attempting to understand maps, ammo, guns and the concept of progression and somthing made me feel stange when playing it, different to Squad, DayZ, CS but this video has shed a light on it. I completely agree with your conclusion, and after watching this im unsure of whether I want to continue playing and learning this strange game, the complexity feels like a challenge and the opportunity to learn excites me although the conclusion worrys me, that even if i put 2k into this game will i ever understand it, will understanding it tangibly increase my enjoyment and ability to win, is it a game I can enjoy in the sence I do others. Through my experience in my work life i believe in excessive organisation, planning and knowledge to succeed, i follow this in almost everything i do, perfectionism, but this game seems to spit in the face of people like me, and yet somthing about it intregues me in a love hate relationship. I never write comments but for some reason the game and your video made me want to write this...
Normally I would go with the mathematical approach, of 'Always Switch', but since we're dealing with Tarkov, I'll opt for 'It doesn't matter'. Because, well... Tarkov.
Haha yeah :D I mean if you push a player who does nothing else then playing this game you are fucked 90% of the time anyway, if you camp, push or do a thing in the middle :D Instant headshots happen to often.
fun fact, famous youtuber Veritasium chose his name based on the meaning of "veritas" combined with the fact that "veritas" was already taken.... I just now connected those dots lmao
"I ask now for you to consider a few things. Consider that all the content creators I spoke to earlier are smart..." Hold on there Veritas, you are already asking a whole lot with that one alone.
Veritas taking us to Tarkov school. Entire game feels like a test I tried to study for, still failed and realized it was the method of study and lack thereof.
As a new player to Tarkov, I have yet to experience being "meta" so I am not operating under the same context as a veteran who feels every fight is either "the same" or B.S.R.N.G. However, as an avid shooter player and avid irl shooter, the "randomness" of this game's ballistics system appeals to me greatly. Complaints about "ridiculous" numbers of shots to kill from something like 9mm hp against a plate carrier are unrealistic. In real life you really could dump 20 9mm rounds designed for expansion and energy transfer into a trauma plate and the plate likely wouldn't be worse for wear. In this situation, I would also adjust to aim for the head or even the legs in real life. Try something like a 7.62x39 with a steel penetrator and it would almost certainly go through, but there is a *chance* it would be stopped. If it did make it through, the bulk of the lead would likely be stopped and a fair portion of its velocity would be stripped as well, leading to a reduction in damage. Now there is a hole in your plate with a cavity surrounding it, and any other bullet is now more likely to penetrate that armor as well, if you are *lucky* enough to hit an area that has already been compromised. In my mind, the number of variables and "randomness" involved here represent real life better than any other shooter. If you want consistency (1 bullet = x damage, 1 armor = y% mitigation) play any of the other hundreds of shooters that have done this before. I appreciate the fact that the Tarkov devs (with exceptions and imperfections I am sure) have let realism drive the gameplay experience. Diluting these choices and creating more predictability would honestly only make it easier to determine the "best" gun. It is human nature for a meta to develop, and it will develop in any game regardless of design. In COD, you are punished for using anything off-meta because the meta is provably and objectively better than the other options. TTK is easily calculated and recoil easily demonstrated. That weapon will be better in the entirety of situations you find yourself in. The only variable is range. In Tarkov, there are far more variables. That 1911 with RIP rounds might be exactly what you need when you encounter a guy who has already been through a few fights, didn't have the chance to loot fresh armor, and his has been shot all to heck. Now suddenly your off-meta pistol will 1-tap the guy to the thorax. To me, this is *fun* . Any weapon could be *exactly* what you need at any given moment, and no single weapon will be exactly what you need for *every* situation. It is up to the player to weigh the probabilities, which are infinite and impossible to accurately measure. This means a player can "go with their gut" and not have it necessarily be an objectively worse choice than the meta. I understand the frustrations from a gamer's perspective. Inconsistencies in games are normally incredibly frustrating. In this case, (unless someone wants to point out something I'm missing) I can understand the real life principles that were taken into consideration in each of these penetration and damage mechanics. Real life ballistics is complicated. If the game has to be complicated in order to be realistic, then I am happy to deal with it for realism's sake. Great video, awesome effort and research. I agree that being more open with information should be a priority for the devs. Hiding pen and dmg values is dumb and detracts from the experience.
Best comment here and it has 2 likes (I was the second), and veritas didnt even heart it. This comment is better than the hour long video. He is just waxing poetic about a bunch of tangential BS. You basically stuck a wrench in the wheels of all the people who cry about the way this game functions. Its true. If you want predictable damage and simple calculations, theres thousands of those games. This game is going for "realism" and in the real world people can have a failed parachute during a skydive, hit the ground from thousands of feet up and walk away with a few bruises. Ballistics are no different. People have been shot in the face and survived. This game needs to be more transparent about how some of the systems work, but its going about it correctly. It should be a little luck and a little skill, because in real life a boxer could lose a fight to an average joe if he lands one good punch. Lifes fucking weird like that. Edit: btw this game is messy. I'm not saying it is perfect but I think I do like the way it functions. I highly agree with your assessment that any weapon could be the right weapon in the moment.
@@phant0mdummy Thanks for the comments. My fear is that the game loses what makes it unique. There are innumerable features in this game that I have wished for my whole life in video games and I would not be playing it if it weren't for those features. Right now, there is nothing else like Tarkov. The more similar it becomes to mainstream shooters the more it can get lost in the soup. Many great games have come and gone in recent years because they just aren't unique enough to maintain a base among today's mega-games. Again, thanks for the positive comment, and I am glad someone agrees.
Thanks for writing what I was going to write and then got tired of typing on my work break. The beautiful messiness makes the meta messy, dynamic, and infinitely complicated which as you said makes it easier for players who may not understand the invisible mechanics to make choices (use their agency) and still choose something that can compete against a "meta" build. And this way bsg doesnt have to rebalance 10 million things each wipe because only they understand what is really going on. And if the players hate a certain weapon/ammo they don't actually have to nerf it to the ground to satisfy the playerbase, they can just nerf the visible stats and buff the invisible ones and none will be the wiser. I feel tarkov has the most varied and interesting gear choices found "in the wild" than any other fps I've played, and its mainly because of how incredibly complicated these systems are. And I love it for that. It's a breath of fresh air from games like CS:GO or DayZ. Of course content creators who analyze games to their most minute detail and mechanic are gonna hate it though because they can't say they know what the best thing is for sure, they have to use their feelings to decide in many cases which is "wrong" because it isn't empirical or necessarily repeatable. But funnily enough in real life equipment choices are kind of like this, you have some info and a ton of unknowns, but ultimately you can feel which is the best tool for the job once you've used several of them. Ofc you can always be wrong in this choice ;)
1:11:43 literally the only kind of argument ive heard about the balistic/ armor system is ''ive played alot ive gotten alot of rubles its not balanced that i can be killed in 4 shots by a newbie even if its to the head'' now thats not fair, realistic, balanced and i would argue its not even fun just to win because you have overwhelmingly better gear
@@PM.MINDSET thats what hes saying here. that a lot of people are mad about getting domed by newbies but he thinks it would be ridiculous if chads got by just because of their gear, and not their skill. if you dome a chad they had it coming, and their gear shouldnt save them
@@psychicsqu1d711 not only that, it would make the game feel like Rust after the blueprint update, where the meta became big groups to get lots of BPs and anything outside of that meta was suicide. You lose the idea of someone genuinely getting good at something and coming on top because the only people that can ever actually do well are the guys that followed the meta. Sure, in Rust, you COULD go out and dome an AK guy with a bow, take his gear, make a bass in a hurry that's hard to raid, and generally do well. But 1) what level of skill do you need for that (answer: fucking incredible) and 2) how long till his group of 20 farm for 3 hours and blow your base into nothing as revenge? Anyone that thinks it's a good idea for people that follow the meta and get overwhelming gear to control the game and always win, is foolish and doesn't actually enjoy the game, they enjoy winning and nothing else.
@@zer0768 Exactly this. Even though groups have an insane advantage, it's no where near compared to how broken rust groups are. Me and my friend have to farm the entire week for a chance at ak by the end cause we are fuckin duo on a main server.
The argument I got was the overwhelming and unnecessary amount of variable make the game and combat inconsistent, and greatly diminish the impact of the players choices. His solution is to create a simple ballistic system with less randomness to give choices meaning. He never said anything close to It’s not balanced I can be killed by a newbie in 4 shots even to the head. He said something closer it’s not balanced that I can get 1 tapped by a newbie to the head after shooting him 6+ times in the torso. Or that a Makarov can penetrate his high tier headgear. Not that he spent a lot of rubles and should therefore win
Thank you for the movie, Veritas. You are combining my two favorite things in videos: game design, and long structured essay videos. I’m only half way through the video right now but I had to stop to comment on how happy this upload made me. Thank you.
After watching to the end and spending some time to think about your conclusion I have to wonder if you asked the right question. Your conclusion is that in order to make the game more enjoyable it needs more consistency since that's what makes a shooter more enjoyable. If your question going into this was "how do I make the shooter Escape from Tarkov more enjoyable?" then you certainly came to a conclusion that is true. What I wonder about is if the question was the wrong one. Is Escape from Tarkov a shooter? Sure, one of it's core mechanics is shooting guns but is that it's true core mechanic? Maybe it isn't. Nikita really likes to point out that Tarkov is supposed to be like real life. That's where his so often memed statement of "It's not supposed to be fun" comes from. The thing about real life is that it's not consistent and that while we all are under the impression that we have some sort of choice in how our lives change and move, in the end we are all governed by chaos and randomness. When looking at the bigger picture choice is an illusion. If Tarkov is truly meant to be like real life the inconsistency, chaos and randomness of the game are spot on. When shooting a bullet in real life there are so many factors that influence that bullet. How did the molecules in the bullet settle when it was cast, is there a grain or two of gunpowder more in the case, what are the harmonics of the gun and how are they going to influence the bullet, is there a small pocket of air on it's path that is significantly different to the rest, how exactly did the molecules of the armored plate settle when it was cast and how is that randomness going to interact with the randomness of the bullet? So on so forth. The variables are endless. Just like the variables are endless in Tarkov. I think the question is not "How do I make the shooter more enjoyable?" but "Should Tarkov be less like real life and more like a game?" If your answer to that question is yes then you can ask the question that you asked. The problem being that you'd have to convince Nikita of your answer since I believe that he would answer no. If it wasn't obvious by my reply, your video was excellent and I thoroughly enjoyed it. A rare gem of quality and thought provoking concepts and ideas that is rare to find on RU-vid.
@@II-sk4cb Absolutely true. If you can't find any fun in the game you shouldn't play it. As Nikita often says "It's not for everyone". I can find fun in the chaotic world of Tarkov. My biggest gripe with the game are the servers/netcode and performance. Not it's inconsistency with everything else.
I don't play Tarkov because I'd rather not risk it not working on Linux, so what I say ultimately doesn't really matter. But I agree with the sentiment that inconsistency is key to realism. I would love a game with random gun jams, misfires, and weird stuff like that, with an unknowable meta solution. I love the idea that people could gravitate toward different equipment due to little more than superstition. I know it seems unrelated, but take the boardgame Axis and Allies. It's a war game about World War 2 with different units with different attack and defence stats. During each round of combat, each unit rolls a die, if it rolls lower than the attack/defence stat an enemy unit is destroyed. An infantry unit has 1 attack and 2 defence. When it is attacking, each infantry unit has 1/6 of destroying an enemy unit (have to roll a 1), while defending you have a 1/3 chance (a 1 or a 2 is good). So what? Well, there is this variant known as Low Luck A&A, where you add up all the hit chances of all the units before rolling if there is anything left over. Say you have a tank (attack 3) and 3 infantry attacking against 3 defending infantry. In Low Luck A&A the outcome of the first round is determined. The combined attack of the tank + 3 infantry is 3 + 3*1 = 6, which means that the chance to kill an enemy is 6/6=100%. The combined defence is 3*2 = 6, which similarly leads to a 100% hit chance in LLA&A. You would be rolling 7 dice in normal A&A, here you are rolling 0. Great, more consistency, but still you are going to have some randomness the next round, so not much has changed. Sure, maybe in small scales it's the same. But what about bigger scales? Say you attack a territory with 3 defending infantries with a 6 tanks. Tanks are gonna win, no doubt about it, not even in normal A&A. But what if you lose a tank? Or maybe even 2? If you are really unlucky you might even lose 3, and there is even a theoretical possibility of losing the engagement. Tanks are expensive. So you send cheaper infantry to act as cannon fodder. You choose who to sacrifice when you take a hit, so you are going to always sacrifice all your infantry before starting to lose tanks, because tanks are basically always better than infantry. But how much infantry to send? You could send 1, or 2, even 3 just to be safe. If you really want to keep all your tanks, you have to send more infantry than you will probably need, leaving you potentially open to a counterattack. Then there is LLA&A. Answer? Send one infantry. The enemy has 6 combined attack, meaning 1 guaranteed hit on the first round. You have 19 combined attack with 6 tanks + 1 infantry, so you always kill the enemies in 1 shot. Good job, you solved the game, therefore you killed the game. LLA&A is just chess, but worse. My point is, you want consistency? Play an esport. Those are consistent. Want gritty realism? You need either some randomness baked in your game, or so many variables you cannot realistically compute them in real time to find the best possible solution. Only the first solution is realistically possible though. You need skill to win a realistic game, but that is not enough. You also need luck. The better you are, the less luck you need, to the point where a sufficient skill gap might result in almost certain odds, but some inconsistency is key. Unlike LLA&A, there is an argument to be made for "Low Luck Tarkov", because there aren't other games to fill that niche (not that I know of at least), but we need "Random Tarkov" too. If for nothing else, because that is the vision the devs had in mind from the start.
I'd also like to think that he got a taste of his idea when the Mosin was meta. Good accuracy. Good ammo. Good fun. Everyone could use it. Everyone who was good at the game hated it because all the highest armors became trash and it removed a big point of grinding to better stuff if a 20k gun could kill anyone. I agree with what you're saying. His question doesn't line up with what the game is doing. At least to this noobs understanding.
I think you have entirely the wrong take away from this video. The thesis is that core game mechanics should be de-obfuscated so players can make informed decisions within the game without relying on third party tools. Not necessarily changed, altho it arguably should have some changes, instead just made clear. Inconsistency is not just RNG, its also made worse by a lack of feedback and knowledge. Feedback and knowledge that the game does not want to give us, and that we have to drag out of the game by force at the moment.
Just started playing Tarkov and this video explained so much. Like why I get one tapped and lose all my hard earned gear, or why I one tap a PMC then sink 14 rounds into the chest of a scav only to watch him limp 5 more steps while I reload and bleed out... Nice job man. Cheers.
Fr, sometimes I control fire a scav with a few rounds cus hes a scav and the dude is still standing and i get more injured then I would have if I just held down the trigger
I go doesn't matter because I'm chaotic neutral and I'm certain my decisions are influenced entirely by how I feel today. And I feel pretty good thanks to you, this is a journey.
The fact that you got us thinking with information that we should have already know is scary! Toilet paper the next valuable item! Thank you for the chance you gave me.
This is straight BRAINFOOD! Seriously, I feel like I just spent the whole day taking high school finals again, but weirdly feeling a huge sense of accomplishment for just watching and digesting this. Also, I think my personal learning curve of Tarkov looks like a Fibonacci Spiral with how many stupid mistakes and wrong assumptions I've had over my first three wipes, lol
The confused pest beat edit is fuckin amazing 🤣 What I find funny is I can bet that this video was your shortest, most concise version! 😂 Fantastic work Veritas, on absolute peak form lately. How frustrating the comments are saying never switch or go whatever when you fully explained it! I knew always switch from picking it up somewhere but it's only now I truly understand it.
This is an insanely well put together project, so geniusly written that I didn't even notice it was an hour long. As a player whose highest lvl is 7 with a little over 100 hrs my opinion might not have much worth, I have to say that I think I don't think tarkov suffers for the randomness it employs. Tarkov from what I gather is all about the FEELINGS. Feeling stressed, feeling scared, feeling lost. For a video game, randomness is the only way to truly keep those feelings, at least partially. And real life is the most random thing I've known.
It's not a hardcore game, it's not a tactical shooter. Tarkov is a horror game through and through. I mostly say that because for a shooter your trained PMC doesn't know how to handle a gun but what you said here is also 100% true.
Veritas, man, if ur reading this I am in awe of ur insight in so many different things. Not only understanding these heavy concepts but being able to teach them very simply. U have talent in what seems like everything. You make me think. I would buy an auto/biography of u in a heartbeat.
Always switch because after one elimination, there's a ⅔ chance the favored outcome is the door you didn't choose. Mythbusters were the first who introduced this to me
Top tier content my dude, I cannot imagine how long this mustve taken, from writing, recording, curating the clips, setting up the tests for your streamer buddies, editing, drawing etc etc. Props dude, good shit.
Having gone through the entire thing (great vid) I'd counter everything with: in real encounters you have all these same factors. Even 5 kevlar vests shot with the same guns and same clip of ammo at the same spot will result in 5 different outcomes even though most factors where seemingly the same. That's the interesting thing about live: the same action doesn't always give the same result. Before being send out you won't know how many enemies you face and what gear they wear. You won't know exactly what ammo and guns will be the most effective. Entropy is just a part of the human experience and it is impossible to understand and predict everything.
Teaching people Bayes' Theorem via Tarkov, I love it. Also you switch cause the chances it's behind the door that wasnt open and you didn't choose is 2/3 vs staying is 1/3. Also legit, your tree visualisation is really intuitive. I always understood it from like the math perspective but my professors never managed to really explain it so that it makes sense intuitively.
this is a sentiment often held by Boomers and the remains of the Silent Generation - Back in the day knowing how to do something that someone else didn't meant that you had more to offer, either to your workplace or farm or trade, thus giving out information for free was and still is something that older people do not like to do. This statement has sort of fallen to the wayside over time since the invention of the internet - which is essentially unlimited information for free - Finding info on this is difficult for the exact reason that older folk followed this statement for their entire lives.
Followed along all the way until the final conclusion. Very good video, I just wanted to add something. Sane and rational people will develop principles and act in the best way they can at the time and still end up in terrible situations, although *importantly* they are just less likely to. So maybe in that way the game is a monte hall simulation with imprecise feedback and you have to constantly validate the experimental results. Although that just sounds a lot like life. You never know what’s going to happen until things play out in time. It takes a high level of discernment to be able to understand even a fraction of something’s nature, let alone how you can improve your response to it. People like you and Pestily and co. can intellectualize and study the gameplay to break down these emergent properties for other people to easily digest, while someone like me will just play without that level of mastery and “do my best” with a much less complete understanding of what is right and wrong and ride on luck alone. I will never achieve a higher level of gameplay and I recognize for me it will be harsh and unforgiving when I play. But the universe never makes a mistake. Things play out exactly as they’re meant to given the initial factors, even with the complexity of human beings, quantum physics, or the even stranger rules of Tarkov. That said I know the point was more that the mechanics are so complicated that they may as well kill players off with lightning strikes. I can’t comment on that part, just the approach of reaching the conclusion. The video was well produced, thought provoking and thorough though so thank you for making it.
I'm glad you made a video about this. This is everything I thought about the game and more especially when you get to end game. I've been a long time watcher of your stream, since the days when your sensitivity was off and you had no idea about ammo. Years later one of the most thuroughly analyzed and enjoyable pieces of content in this game. GJ
there was more to the video than the quiz though... Also, you give this quiz to an easy 95% of the community and they'd do worse. If 95% of the community (and I define that as people who really play the game, not just own it) cannot understand it no matter how they try, that's on the game, not the community.
3 door problem, switch doors as its considered the winning strategy in these problems as it assumes that 2/3 times you have chosen the wrong one anyways so switching after being told what is behind one door gives you increased chance if you take into account a lot of other things.
Never switch. Growing up my father always told me "Never second guess yourself" and to be quite honest. Its stuck with me my whole life. Time to enjoy the rest of the vid
i didnt know what the fibonacci sequence was but when you showed the 0 1 1 3 5 8 13 on screen i paused and tried to identify the pattern and as a blue collar uneducated midwesterner i was proud of myself for figuring it out so quick c:
I don't know how many of you remember or were there for it, but Veritas is literally talking about Tarkov from about 3 years ago lol. It was such a solid mil sim back then, that over the years has now become this weird E-Sports stat based number crunch game. Devs....it's real simple; bullets kill/incapacitate when they hit, regardless of armor or bullet type. They used to know this. Not to mention the insane recoil mechanics that make me feel like I'm actually playing as a 5 year old who picked up a gun for the first time and not a battle hardened soldier. Veritas, you da man for bringing all this so clearly into the light and allowing most of us to finally understand what was feeling soooo off about the game.
Never switch, be confident in your choices. Always switching the moment you are questioned belies a lack of confidence and your split second, hell, life decisions, will suffer from a lack of confidence.
So casuals vs hardcore rant again. Playing hardcore big ARMA events for years now, i see this randomness as realism, the inconsistency you talk about. But this inconsistency is the point. Speaking of arma and reality, sometimes it doesn't matter if you have the best armor, random piece of shrapnel or randomly placed bullet will end you anyway. All you can do is to wear the best gear and weapon available to you and hope it will help. Yes it is frustrating, but it's also the point. Sometimes chance is against you, sometimes it's on your side, but sometimes tactics and knowledge can manipulate this chance, making your victory much more enjoyable. The part i can agree on - BSG should make meta less obvious and provide more options, but i think modular armor and economy rebalance (soon tm) might fix this. nice video tho, thx for time and effort you put into this. PS. nice try with russian title of the game. Close, but.. no
I feel the argument here is less about the fact that the game is random, and more that the game is ambiguously random. It's not that any scrub with a pistol can dome you and take your gear and it's a roll of the dice if you survive, so much as since it's so poorly explained to you what happens because of the complexity of the system and minimal information, that people tend to just feel cheated, and will use whatever gear the meta tells them seems to prevent things like that, at the cost of actually using gear they want and having fun with the game. For example, a game I know a little more intimately, in Dark Souls you can be great at the game, PvP some complete noob, and through sheer luck you can lose. You can also PvP some guy wearing no armor using a dagger, and his level of skill could be significantly higher than yours and you also lose. But you KNOW why you lost. He parried you and did x damage because that's what the multipliers say he should do given his equipment and stats. He didn't say, hit you with a dagger, but his dagger had a curved hit box that wasn't communicated or hinted to you, and it's hit box allowed a 1 hit to your heart, but only if he hits you on the 14th frame off your roll, and from a 97° angle, and so deep down a rabbit hole of nonsense stats, some of which actually end up not mattering, that you just say "I got fucked, I should have won that".
@@zer0768 well i can somewhat agree with your point. At the same time i think a) IMO BSG has more pressing problems to fix, such as A-D strafing, netcode etc. b) This level of ambiguity, again IMO, was added to add some balance for all weapons and destroy possibility of meta, opening a door for randomness and confusion for players. As we can see it didn't work exactly that way, since the guys cracked game open and now we all know AP and FD stats, all the formulas etc. Confusion is here still tho and that's the problem. If players know nothing at all about armor and ammo, results may seem random and therefore unpredictable, but now we think we know everything and then randomness happens causing frustration c) Recent changes i think are very promising and show that the game is really evolving, so these things might as well change. Especially considering new super-meta-almost-always-oneshot-weapons, such as KS-23 and Mk-18, modular rigs and vests with different armor zones and who knows what else
@@Kieral100 a) I agree 100%, I would definitely say they have more pressing issues on their plate. b) I think a nice compromise would just be randomness that is ALMOST always guessable. Maybe not so much as giving stats, but in that experimentation can more readily tell you how best to use your gear, so that you can actually build comfort with it. That's how things are in real life after all. For instance, we know from studies done that if I shoot x armor with y bullet I tend to get z result. And that's ALMOST always true. And not only that, any amateur that wants to can verify that data, even though there will always be outliers. However the fact that most people assumed x ammo vs killa's helmet is less effective than leg shots shows that results aren't quite predictable enough for a good player to be mostly right based on what they observe and there's still room for them to tighten up the system. I'd imagine doing so would let people actually experiment with what they like, or just what they can get their hands on, and become competent enough that they can break metas. After all, just like in real life the bottom tier gun you know in and out will always do better than the expensive one you can't shoot properly. C) I concede this point entirely as you are most certainly more experienced than I am, and so I will take your word here as I don't have a leg to stand on there.
Why have I not been subscribed to you till now!? I put off my math homework to watch some fun videos about my fav game and learn some maths that is actually engaging and exciting to learn!
"Well, when I was originally asked to choose a door, I had a 33.3% chance of choosing right. But after he opens one of the doors and then re-offers me the choice, it's now 66.7% if I choose to switch. So, yeah, I'll take door number two, and thank you for that extra 33.3%." - Ben Campbel
Honestly, this video might be one of the final nails in the coffin my experience in Tarkov. I had no idea how much randomness and lack of choice was actually built in.
The god damn ammo description should just say what level armor it beats. I dont see why not. "Penetrates level 1-3 armor" "Penetrates level 5 armor and under" I dont care how they want to word it. Just stop with all the alt tab nonsense. I'm tired of going to wiki for every basic question.
@@crimeandpwnishment2080 Could still just say if it’s “useless”, “Not effective”, “veryeffective” against level 3/4/5/6 whatever armor in a little tab.
@@crimeandpwnishment2080 then how does the wiki break down all the ammo by the armor it will shred or the flesh damage? How are certain ammunitions met and more expensive? They need to include this stuff in game. This isnt dark souls.
Wow, really refreshing perspective on this. These break downs on ammunition are really interesting and also very valid. I couldn't agree more, the level of true complexity and misunderstanding about said complexity does steer players away from the game. I think they are intrigued by the game but over burdening new players with these combat complexities while they also have all of the navigation/map related specifics to try to understand becomes a very large deterrent for beginners. Also as Veritas said, changes in this manner would really help the skill of players to shine more than the items or silly mechanics that happen in the game so it wouldn't just benefit beginners, it would be beneficial to all.
I really love the whole "your armor predictions are only accurate for a small subset of scenarios". It adds realism for me. People can calculate all the best stats and probabilities, but you can walk into a raid, get popped by a scav with 7.62 PS one time, and now the perfect plan is out the window.
If you don't understand why he's talking about this, check out the previous video he made. If you still don't understand, check the video before that. Repeat until you understand
I dont quite agree. The parts about there should be more information located in the game like penetration values and more tools to give information regarding what is happening and why it happened is right, more good information is never bad. Though I don't agree with simplifying the game, yes it will make it simpler easier to understand but that is not necessary a good thing. I dont want to play csgo or valorant with looting and an out of game inventory system or like a battle royale like pubg or any others. I just think that in making something more simple and easier to balance you have to remove choices, like instead of 8 bullets being very similar it turns to 3 options HP, AP, Standard. There being a large number of guns and some not being very viable compared to others and instead of that simply removing some options since they dont have a place in the meta since it will essentially be the same gun after simplifying it. Like removing a TX15 since its an semi M4 with a different stock config. Removing the 18" barrel since its basically the same as 370mm M4 barrel. Tarkov is not meant to become a Esport and that is ok. The game does not have to come down to a science or to be able to make a flowchart for optimal play. You make the best out of your RNG some times your skill is good enough to make up for it some times not. I just dont think tarkov should become a esport title. Dayz was not popular because of it being an like a esport and neither did warz succeed even though it was simple and easy to understand compared to dayz. I dont think you can simplify the game without losing much of the atmosphere of the game. I played EFT since 21/01/17 and played at least every second wipe but most of the wipes at the start.
One more point: Completely solving armour and ammo would lead to a written in down meta. Removing any and all autonomy from the player about what to bring. It'd be an inherently solved meta removing any sort of discovery and variance from the game, making any diverting preference sub-optimal no matter the playstyle. I'm all for clearing up netcode and hitreg, but i gotta say, some randomness and obscurity regarding damage and armour does help the game to some extent. Just like in CSGO where with every weapon or economy update there is a new meta established and fully adhered to within days. That would in EFTs case also cripple new players even more since they'd be unable to acquire the ideal gear while EVERYBODY else runs optimised ammo, gun and gear. Right now at least people play stuff the THINK is better and stick to sub-optimal tactics due to misunderstanding or simplifying the issue at hand. For example the ammo/armor pairings aren't really solvable now because you can't in a split second factor in gun, ammo, armour, armour condition and health of an enemy to decide which part to hit and then reliably do so. So some stick to spraying the legs because while that is not ideal its simple. With a solved meta you can always assume what your opponent is running. And always play the same. Your takeaway from the meta guns is heavily biased imo. People don't use point and click zero recoil snap to your face laserguns because they love that type of gameplay so much, but because its op bullshit that shouldnt exist and theyd be at a disadvantage if they didnt use it.
@@TherealTenmanI True, Im mostly a CS player, so with enough hours you should go with your guts, resulting in crazy prefires, wallbangs, etc...but tarkov is way more random, so idk
You made this video inadvertently for me to watch at this exact time after I decide to stay up all night playing tarkov after a long day of rocket league. You have pointed out my life and I’m unsure how or what made this happen. Other than our choices that led both of us here.
There is no mathematical proof of that problem which is accepted among mathematicians. It also isn't a mathematical problem, so there won't be any proof.
school is usually simple and mostly info that is not worth learning. games are tricking us into thinking info is useful but its even more useless info than school unless you are doing it for living like these streamers
The fact that we dont have offline ways to tests things just makes me believe that is on purpose, from the development side, this should have been in from day one :/
Always stay because my gut > me overthinking it and convincing myself I’m wrong when I’m not (also I’d expect it to be a mind game and they’re trying to trick me into switching to the wrong door)
At this point in my Tarkov experience it has almost always been switch when confronted with unexpected obstacles. Have started some more deliberate practice thanks to these and other videos to get better in combat so I can get the loot before it’s gone, instead of looking for an easier path. Thanks for great info. Your audio videos are incredible information to help decipher what’s going on.
