Now, i know this is probably a very heated topic that has been brought up in the past, but whenever i get influenced by RNG, i just get reminded of that one article i've read years ago.
The article was russian and apparently had leaked data from the code that suggests the existence of a variable that might influence RNG. WG has obviously never stated anything regarding that topic.
From my very biased, personal and not data-driven experience, i feel like something like that might exist.
If you're curious, i have 37k games and a WN8 of 2500.
Just today i had a game where i hit 8 shots and lowrolled every single hit, which mathematically only has a 0.4% chance of happening and it made me think.
I know that there are also psychological factors to how you perceive RNG, like the fact that you remember bad outcomes more often than good ones. You can also be influenced by in-game stats, i. e. you're playing the most accurate tank in the game, but you don't hit every single shot, thus you might think you're unlucky. There's also the fact that killshots are naturally much more likely to be lowrolls and show low numbers in the hit log. Damage breakpoints can also play a role. For example, 390 alpha damage guns are often seen as 400 damage guns because people like to round up, which can make 395 rolls "feel" like lowrolls, even though they're not. More than 50% of shots will deal less than 400. There are probably many more factors that i'm missing.
Still, considering all that, every time i count my ratio of low/highrolls at the end of a game, lowrolls seem to be vastly superior. I've also noticed this the other way around. When i'm getting shot by above average players, they seem to highroll less on average than when i'm getting shot by beginners. I've particularly noticed that when it comes to snap shots, i get hit by way more inexperienced players than unicums. Though that could potentially be because of a difference in playstyle aswell.
Now, if any bias like that should exist, i'm sure it would be a very minor adjustment, otherwise it would have already been noticed. You won't have bad players that will suddenly highroll every single shot and hit without aiming.
Honestly, i don't even know if a RNG difference would be a bad thing. Above average players have enough tools to get advantages over new players these days and it seems like they're just getting more and more (OP premiums, gold ammo, premium consumables, better crews, directives, improved equipment and field modifications). RNG bias might help at maintaing the balance at least somewhat.
Where it becomes a problem is when that variable (most likely something indicating skill, maybe related to winrate) becomes abusable. It could for example be beneficial to intentionally tilt my stats in random battles over hundreds of games, to then make the system think i'm weaker than i actually am, so that i can get a very slight RNG advantage in ranked battles.
I just want to hear some opinions and see if you guys think something like that might exist.