T110's Zen-like Inner Core.

The_Chieftain:   I have three immediate issues with the comparison.   Firstly, they explain that a symptom of a bad card is one which can result in the user being worse off for playing it than if he didn't play it at all. I can't think of any case in WoT where this is true. The worst that happens is that a shell fails to penetrate, or an artillery round misses heinously, that sort of thing. There is no negative repercussion short of a couple of credits used for the round. And at that, you sometimes can't be sure that even with a high roll a penetration could occur. What may happen is that after your RNG event, the enemy will then try his own RNG event to shoot you back, which can be mitgated by a number of things depending on the situation. Which brings us to the next point.   They also explain that having an RNG which is academically known to the players to be fair and balanced over a number of incidences is a bit beside the point if that instance happens only once per game. Yet how many shots are fired per game? How many shots may a person be subjected to over a play session?    Thirdly, using the ogre example, they say they like it because it forces the player to make a tactical decision. Well, the player in WoT may have to make the same decision. Does he fire at the big, slow, heavy target, which may, but probably won't remove it from the fight? Or should he shoot the lighter, weaker one, and definitely remove it? Or maybe engage that fast one over there which is potentially the biggest threat of all, but may not get a hit at all. The decision that the player makes before he clicks the fire button may change the course of the game even before the effect of RNG is calculated. But if he -knew- that he would remove that heavy, or he would hit that fast one, etc, removes some if the decision-making process from the user.