Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

User avatar
JestersGhost
Posts: 868
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 4:39 pm

Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby JestersGhost » Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:50 pm

Oh, look, I'm doing a mechanics post again. Yawn...

:)

I've been working out some numbers and examples (it's what I do for fun. No, seriously), and thought some solid examples of various systems might give people a better handle on the pro-and-cons of different ways of doing a combat system. It will also demonstrate some non-intuitive things from "obvious" ways of doing things (some of which were a surprise to me when I found them), which is why I keep making a big deal about how important it can be to get right as soon as possible.

In all of these examples, we'll assume, unless otherwise stated, an attack that recharges in 12 seconds, costs 24 endurance, hits for 100 damage 50% of the time, and that by default 50% of incoming damage is resisted.

Lets start with the easy example of damage versus resistance.

Without changing anything, one attack, if it hits, will do 50 damage, due to the default resistance. On average, 4 attacks will total 100 damage, as only two of them will hit.

Let's add enough enhancements to double the damage. We now hit for 100 damage (200 x 50%), and four average attacks will do 200 total. Like duh, you might say.

And, hopefully obviously, if we add enough enhancements to triple the damage, we hit for 150, and do 300 on average over four.

Okay. Let's add enough enhancements to double our accuracy. We now hit for 50 damage per hit, but still do 200 damage total over four hits, as all of them will hit.

But what happens if we triple our accuracy...oh. We can't. No matter how many more accuracy enhancements we add, we get no benefit, because we are already hitting 100% of the time. But we can keep on adding damage enhancements, and getting benefit from them. And if the base accuracy is higher, say 75%, we might only need one accuracy enhancement to be "good enough", and then just fill the other slots with damage.

Hmm...that sounds familiar...

That's fine, you might say, we'll just cap damage enhancements on a single power to 100%, then they're the same. Maybe even just have each successive one have less effect than the last until...huh, wow, deja vu again. Weird.

:P

Let's try something else, however. Let's say damage enhancements don't increase the raw damage number, but instead increase the resistance ignored.

So adding enough enhancements to double the damage now means you're doing 100% damage instead of 50%. One hit does 100 damage, and four on average will do 200 total (100 each, with only two hitting). Exactly the same result as doubling the raw damage, except just like accuracy, adding more now has no benefit.

Let's now compare less extreme examples, where we hit 75% of the time: One hit 50 damage, 150 damage on average total (three out of the four),
and 75% damage dealt: One hit 75 damage, 150 damage total (an average of two hits per four).

Huh. That's handy.

I will follow up with other posts regarding recharge and endurance. I was going to do them all in one, but this is far too long already :)
[ quantum sufficit / casual-tempest.net / My Combat Mechanics Thread ]

User avatar
Coyote
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 4:06 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby Coyote » Wed Apr 26, 2017 9:43 pm

One problem that I have with this, and with all similar analyses, is that it assumes a fixed chance to hit.
I hate that mechanism exactly for the reason that you listed... that unless base chances to hit start very low, which is a bad design idea, you very quickly run into the 100% chance to hit cap once you start improving it.

Conceptually, the reason for this is that you are separating the offensive accuracy from the defensive ability to avoid being hit, and because we generally want the offensive accuracy to be at least 50%, there may not be much room for improvement.

Two concepts that mitigate this issue are:

A: opposed values. You have Accuracy on the offense side, and Defense on the defense side. Where they are equal, you have your base to-hit chance (maybe 50%, maybe 75%, depends on how you like to design it). As Accuracy goes higher than Defense, your chance to hit increases asymptotically towards the game's maximum chance to hit (usually 95%). As accuracy goes lower than Defense, your chance to hit decreases, again asymptotically, towards the game's minimum chance to hit (usually 5%).

B: penetrating accuracy. We start with the normal to-hit chance as in CoH, and improve it normally... but any to-hit number above 95% (or whatever to-hit cap we use) is used to modify any Defense rolls after a hit is made. Defense is rolled separately after a hit, and all mobs have at least a bit of defense, so that getting higher chances to hit will always increase the chance to successfully hit by at least a bit. Note that because all mobs have at least a 5% base Dodge chance, this can be used to show the possibility of some unlucky miss, so in this design concept, we can actually have the to-hit cap at 100%.

In either case, though, we mitigate some of the issues that CoH had with its easy ability to pass the to-hit cap, while facing mobs that rarely had defense stats. And I think that discussing the style of to-hit calculation is both very important and very basic to the design of all combat systems.

LaughingAlex
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 4:22 pm

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby LaughingAlex » Thu Apr 27, 2017 12:40 am

One problem that I have with this, and with all similar analyses, is that it assumes a fixed chance to hit.
I hate that mechanism exactly for the reason that you listed... that unless base chances to hit start very low, which is a bad design idea, you very quickly run into the 100% chance to hit cap once you start improving it.

Conceptually, the reason for this is that you are separating the offensive accuracy from the defensive ability to avoid being hit, and because we generally want the offensive accuracy to be at least 50%, there may not be much room for improvement.

Two concepts that mitigate this issue are:

A: opposed values. You have Accuracy on the offense side, and Defense on the defense side. Where they are equal, you have your base to-hit chance (maybe 50%, maybe 75%, depends on how you like to design it). As Accuracy goes higher than Defense, your chance to hit increases asymptotically towards the game's maximum chance to hit (usually 95%). As accuracy goes lower than Defense, your chance to hit decreases, again asymptotically, towards the game's minimum chance to hit (usually 5%).

B: penetrating accuracy. We start with the normal to-hit chance as in CoH, and improve it normally... but any to-hit number above 95% (or whatever to-hit cap we use) is used to modify any Defense rolls after a hit is made. Defense is rolled separately after a hit, and all mobs have at least a bit of defense, so that getting higher chances to hit will always increase the chance to successfully hit by at least a bit. Note that because all mobs have at least a 5% base Dodge chance, this can be used to show the possibility of some unlucky miss, so in this design concept, we can actually have the to-hit cap at 100%.

In either case, though, we mitigate some of the issues that CoH had with its easy ability to pass the to-hit cap, while facing mobs that rarely had defense stats. And I think that discussing the style of to-hit calculation is both very important and very basic to the design of all combat systems.
I also wonder though if a more smoothed rating could be used to determine accuracy/defense rolls. A player with say, 100 accuracy vs someone with 100 defense would have 50/50, or say someone with 100 accuracy vs only 50 would be 75/25. Maybe make accuracy and chance to hit more of a comparison based stat than a flat "to-hit" minus "defense". But a given it'd still be important to be careful.

Everyone hates it when the random number god causes them to miss 5-6 times in a row with well over a 75% chance to hit. I always over-killed accuracy and to-hit chances i CoH because of that and it was also my main reason for loving the power Leadership: Tactics(my favorite power in the whole game).

Edit: I think being able to buff to-hit and accuracy was something I miss in CoH as well...the option to play against the RNG.

User avatar
broxen
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:01 pm
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby broxen » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:59 am

Oh, look, I'm doing a mechanics post again. Yawn...
No yawns here. I find these posts entertaining.
-Broxen

User avatar
JestersGhost
Posts: 868
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby JestersGhost » Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:16 pm

One problem that I have with this, and with all similar analyses, is that it assumes a fixed chance to hit.
I hate that mechanism exactly for the reason that you listed... that unless base chances to hit start very low, which is a bad design idea, you very quickly run into the 100% chance to hit cap once you start improving it.
Actually, I'm not, I'm just using it as an example. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Conceptually, the reason for this is that you are separating the offensive accuracy from the defensive ability to avoid being hit, and because we generally want the offensive accuracy to be at least 50%, there may not be much room for improvement.
I think it's more accurate (sorry) to say that when accuracy and defense values are equal we should have a 50% chance to hit. That's why I was using it as my starting value.
A: opposed values. You have Accuracy on the offense side, and Defense on the defense side. Where they are equal, you have your base to-hit chance (maybe 50%, maybe 75%, depends on how you like to design it). As Accuracy goes higher than Defense, your chance to hit increases asymptotically towards the game's maximum chance to hit (usually 95%). As accuracy goes lower than Defense, your chance to hit decreases, again asymptotically, towards the game's minimum chance to hit (usually 5%).
Doesn't actually change the problem, just means you have to slot more accuracy to hit the same limit. The point is that scaling damage will never hit a cap, and so there is never a time when you have "enough" damage. As a side note, I actually don't like having an accuracy cap on the high end. For very obvious reasons there should probably always be a minimum chance to hit, but I have absolutely no problems with someone who is slotted for accuracy never missing.
B: penetrating accuracy. We start with the normal to-hit chance as in CoH, and improve it normally... but any to-hit number above 95% (or whatever to-hit cap we use) is used to modify any Defense rolls after a hit is made. Defense is rolled separately after a hit, and all mobs have at least a bit of defense, so that getting higher chances to hit will always increase the chance to successfully hit by at least a bit. Note that because all mobs have at least a 5% base Dodge chance, this can be used to show the possibility of some unlucky miss, so in this design concept, we can actually have the to-hit cap at 100%.
This is not far removed from the mechanisms that CoH used, and the math gets...weird, and difficult to predict, and required a massive round of patching when PvP was introduced. It is tempting in these situations to start adding more bits to an equation to solve a problem, but all you will end up doing without a lot of analyses is making the issues harder to find, but considerably more likely.

It took me this analysis to finally grok the fundamental issue with accuracy vs. defense compared with damage vs. resistance, and I've been working on these mechanics since CoH shutdown. I knew there was a difference, but I'd never realised it was fundamentally irreconcilable until now.
And I think that discussing the style of to-hit calculation is both very important and very basic to the design of all combat systems.
Hence these posts :D

Fundamentally, no matter how many layers of accuracy roll-over, etc. you add, you always hit a hard cap at 100% at some point when accuracy outstrips defense. This is the only combat value that has this issue - damage vs. resistance (as demonstrated) doesn't, and when I have a chance, I'll show that recharge and endurance costs don't either.

There are obviously ways of dealing with this. You suggested several, CoH originally tried a few, and I suggested one. The question is always, "Which is best?" MY main contention I guess in all of this is the answer is objective and mathematically provable :)
[ quantum sufficit / casual-tempest.net / My Combat Mechanics Thread ]

User avatar
JestersGhost
Posts: 868
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby JestersGhost » Mon May 01, 2017 8:25 am

Okay, I know I said I'd move on to recharge and endurance, but I've actually another posts worth of material on accuracy, damage and resistance. One of the reasons for this is I want to clarify something:

I'm not pushing mechanics I suggest as the way SoH should be made. None of us are in a position to do this, and the SoH devs have a wealth of game-development experience behind them, certainly more than me.

There are several reasons for these posts then:
a) It sets up more reasonable expectations for how things can behave. Ideas are good to have and share, but not all are equal. Providing good reasons why such-and-such probably won't make it into the game is helps streamline discussion while we wait for the alpha.
b) More understanding of how games work is useful for players. My first post hopefully helped demonstrate the reasoning behind the original CoH system, and the polarising ED decision later.
c) Following on from that, it is (for me at least and apparently some others of you) an interesting topic of discussion that keeps us involved in the progress of SoH while we wait.
d) There is an outside chance that something discussed in these threads will be useful. They're happy to take suggestions on costumes and enemy groups, why not powers and mechanics?

So, let's recap. My first post demonstrated the way that accuracy was capped at 100% was fundamentally different from any of the other combat stats in CoH (since it lacked a "penetration" start for ignoring resistances, the way accuracy ignores defenses).

This meant that adding accuracy didn't scale as well as adding damage, in relative terms. To explain that, I'm going to re-iterate a core principle from my first mechanics post:

Absolute values matter far less than relative values. That is, adding "25" to something doesn't tell you anywhere near as much information as saying "doubled" or "halved", and that relative measures like this are actually what you need to balance against. Let's give a concrete example, using a similar power as from my first post (128 damage, 50% base accuracy, 50% resistance, 12 second recharge, 24 endurance cost):

Against a target with 25% defense, an average of four attacks does 64 damage (50% base accuracy - 25% defense = 25% hit rate = 1 hit against 50% base resistance).

Adding 25% to your accuracy (via an enhancement) gives over four "average" attacks 128 damage (75% - 25% = 50% = 2 hits).
The damage output has gone up 100%.

Adding another 25% to your accuracy = 192 damage.
The damage output has gone up by 50%.

Adding a final 25% accuracy = 256 damage.
The damage output has gone up 33%.

Notice we now get no benefit from adding any more accuracy. Also, see how the actual relative increase in damage is less with each addition in accuracy? Well, good, you might say - adding more and more enhancements should have diminishing returns. Sure, there's a decent argument for that. But lets compare damage increases (not penetration, but raw damage, as original CoH did):

Our mathematically pure average of four attacks un-enhanced does 64 damage again, as before.

Adding 25% damage to the attack now does 80 after resistances (as we're not increasing accuracy, we only need consider the "average one hit of four that will land).
This is, as you might expect, a 25% increase in damage.

Adding another 25% damage to the attack now deals 100 damage after resistances.
This is again a 25% increase.

Next enhancement, 125 damage.
Oh look, 25% increase.

You get the idea - accuracy, in relative improvement, actually has a decreasing effect. Damage, however, doesn't. When coupled with the fact that damage can be added with limit, whereas we cannot increase accuracy any further, you again see why raw damage is preferable over increasing accuracy past a certain point. Obviously, increasing accuracy initially is more beneficial than damage, but once you hit "max accuracy" the benefit ends. How important this is depends on how many enhancement slots you have, and that's outside the scope of this discussion currently.

Damage penetration, as suggested in my original post, behaves like accuracy, however, since it is mathematically identical. It basically a way of making damage increase scale in the same fashion as accuracy. The issue with this, however, is that the other "big two" enhancements, recharge and endurance cost, scale like raw damage (something I'll discuss eventually, I promise).

So what happens if we make accuracy scale like damage, that is, not have diminishing returns? To do that, you'd have to remove the limit at 100% accuracy somehow. Now obviously, you can't hit more than every single time, but take a step back. What does hitting more often provide, in simplified terms? More damage, effectively (yes, I know I'm ignoring the effects of accuracy on reliability of crowd-control and debuffs, but there's a limit to what I can consider in one post). So why not scale damage based on accuracy, past 100%? You can explain it as being able to pick out critical areas, or weak points in the armour or whatever.

We have to slightly tweak the way our accuracy enhancements work too - rather than adding 25% accuracy, they now make us 25% more likely to hit, regardless of how likely to hit we were before. That is, they now work identically to raw damage. You hit more often until you reach 100%, then you just keep scaling up damage. Awesome. Why don't we do that then?

Well, why would you now ever slot a damage enhancement? Slotting an accuracy increases damage output by exactly the same amount, and means all your crowd-control effects and debuffs land more reliably. Making accuracy the same as raw damage means exactly that - it's the same, and there's no point having both.

Some games, realising this, have actually dropped accuracy and defense as a stat. You still have characters that dodge, but it's simply deflecting or avoid the full-strength of the impact, and functions exactly the same as resistance. I can see all the super-reflex fans grabbing their pitchforks, so bear with me one moment.

Missing is psychologically frustrating compared to resistances - you at least feel like you're doing something if you hit for minimal damage, but landing only one blow in twenty, even if total you've done the same amount of damage overall, feels far less "super". Removing accuracy/defense as an actual mechanic removes this frustrating aspect of gameplay.

Also, CoH generally had resistances based on damage type (fire, psionic, energy, etc.) and defenses based on "delivery mechanism" (melee, ranged, AoE). Enforcing that distinction, so that "defense" powersets gained resistances based on whether the attack was melee, ranged or AoE (with different powersets having a weakness to one or the other of those), and "resist" powersets gained resistances based on damage type, would give a different feel to each powerset still, and require a bit of tactical thought about which power to use against which opponent. And of course your "ultimate" power in a defense powerset could still be "avoid all melee/ranged/AoE attacks for ten seconds" - but that would be a special effect, and very time-limited.

This suggestion does, however, limit the number of possible debuff/buff types, which is very important in CoH gameplay - dark blast and sonic would basically have the same secondary effect under this scheme.

----------

The two suggestions in my two posts give a very different feel for gameplay, though both mathematically equalise accuracy and damage enhancements, slot for slot (admittedly that's because we replaced one with the other in one of the suggestions). Which of those "feels" you prefer is entirely subjective, and deciding between them is up to the devs and the playerbase.

I recommended in my original mechanics post way back when (feels so long ago) that it's best to decide on the feel you want for a game first, and then build the mechanics to match that feel. The polls suggest this is exactly what Consultant et al are doing, and it's good to see.

Still going to make posts like these though :)

Next up, recharge and endurance (for reals this time).
[ quantum sufficit / casual-tempest.net / My Combat Mechanics Thread ]

Mister Nice Guy
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:02 am
Location: Valhalla

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby Mister Nice Guy » Tue May 02, 2017 9:11 am

Defense was there so you could make your bullet proof "shaolin" monk (or something like that.. bubbles!? :P ).

It was for Defenders, trollers, scrappers and tanks (on the hero side)
Blasters could easily negate the defense by picking powers that didn't have the possibility of going against high defense stats (how the hell are you gonna dodge a psychic aoe blast - or an aoe blast in general? (scrappers and tankers with defense stat powers, did however have a small resistance boost on them iirc versus anything but psychic)

The reason you added any accuracy enhancements to your attacks in CoH was simply because higher level mobs had automatic higher defense versus you and vice versa. (Which was silly imo... Like I've said in some of my other posts, I would much rather have a flatter xp curve vs automatic stat gain.)

User avatar
JestersGhost
Posts: 868
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby JestersGhost » Tue May 02, 2017 10:38 am

Defense was there so you could make your bullet proof "shaolin" monk (or something like that.. bubbles!? :P ).
Or the Flash, or Catwoman, or Harley Quinn or any other character that doesn't want this happening to them really. Not really sure what you're replying to in my post though?
Blasters could easily negate the defense by picking powers that didn't have the possibility of going against high defense stats (how the hell are you gonna dodge a psychic aoe blast - or an aoe blast in general? (scrappers and tankers with defense stat powers, did however have a small resistance boost on them iirc versus anything but psychic)
Precognition, rolling with the blast, dodging the shrapnel, "slippery mind". *shrug* Take your pick. Pretty much anything can be explained if you want to. That's why that's entirely irrelevant to this discussion, really. This is purely about the objective mathematics.
The reason you added any accuracy enhancements to your attacks in CoH was simply because higher level mobs had automatic higher defense versus you and vice versa. (Which was silly imo... Like I've said in some of my other posts, I would much rather have a flatter xp curve vs automatic stat gain.)
Not quite accurate. Level 1 to 20 you had a decreasing accuracy bonus that disappeared entirely from 20 on, leaving you with a base 75% to hit mobs, which makes sense as an anti-frustration feature for new players. Players always had a base 50% to be hit versus equal con mobs and players. Now, sure, level differences had extra scaling added to those values, but it was a function of level difference, rather than absolute level.

While I'm in general agreement that "artificial" stat boosts are...well...artificial, accuracy is a weird thing psychologically (and mathematically). Going from 50% to 75% accuracy halves the opponent's chance to dodge, but doesn't double your chance to hit. And people really hate missing - it feels like failing, while doing a little bit of damage every time feels like you're making progress, even if it averages out to less damage overall.

This is why most MOBA's have dropped accuracy or dodging from their stats - admittedly those are a much more competitive environment, but landing that one last attack can be the difference between life and death. Having it fail at the whims of the random-number-gods really sucks.

Again, I'm not really pushing any one solution here, just laying out the evidence for people to decide what kind of "feel" they want in the game.
[ quantum sufficit / casual-tempest.net / My Combat Mechanics Thread ]

User avatar
GladDog
Posts: 1768
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:48 pm
Location: Pottstown PA

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby GladDog » Tue May 02, 2017 12:18 pm

I've always had a tough time understanding defense, although obviously is a good thing to have. Did some powers, such as Elude and Moment of Glory, require extra attack chances?

Case in point; My Fire/EM Tanker was in a PvP arena. It was a 4v4, and I ended up opposing a MA/SR scrapper using Perma-Elude. This was long before ED and before the HO nerf - my accuracy/damage HOs added 50% acc and 50% dam. Total Focus was slotted 4 acc/dams and two dam/mez. I missed this girl 5 times before I finally hit her. Then I missed 6 more times before I hit her with Energy Transfer and whomped her.

My accuracy bonus with TF was 225% --- 75% + 75 X 200%. When I was using Fiery Embrace and Build Up that total was about 263% - and I still missed on 5 straight attacks. What was going on there?
IN BRIGHTEST DAY, OR DARKEST NIGHT
NO SPAM SHALL STAY UPON THIS SITE
FOR THOSE THAT FEED THIS EVIL BLIGHT
BEWARE THE PAIN OF GUARD DOG'S BITE!

User avatar
JestersGhost
Posts: 868
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby JestersGhost » Tue May 02, 2017 12:49 pm

I've always had a tough time understanding defense, although obviously is a good thing to have. Did some powers, such as Elude and Moment of Glory, require extra attack chances?
Not as such, but CoH did have a weird mechanic - there were actually two values that affected your final hit chance. "To Hit" was the value that directly countered defense, but there was very few powers that added to it. Against a high defence character your to-hit would be floored to 5%. Then, however, accuracy came into play, and multiplied that by 225%, giving a final result of about 11%. Which sounds about right with your experience (you actually hit her slightly more than expected).

Interestingly, this demonstrates the problem with extra complicated mechanics like this. For characters who relied on defense, they actually needed that floored accuracy to survive. Upping the accuracy to 10% doubles the amount of damage incoming to the scrapper. However, there was literally nothing they could do about accuracy enhancements. Regardless of how high they got their defense, the result would be 5%, then multiplied by your accuracy. Fundamentally, in PvP, defense characters could not floor enemies to hit chances, whereas resist-based defenses could happily hit 95% and stay there (until sonic was introduced at least).

It took the players to point this out, and in PvP an extra term to counter accuracy was eventually added to defense based powers. IF you want more detail, paragon wiki still has an excellent breakdown of the attack mechanics.
[ quantum sufficit / casual-tempest.net / My Combat Mechanics Thread ]

User avatar
broxen
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:01 pm
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby broxen » Tue May 02, 2017 12:58 pm

While I'm in general agreement that "artificial" stat boosts are...well...artificial, accuracy is a weird thing psychologically (and mathematically). Going from 50% to 75% accuracy halves the opponent's chance to dodge, but doesn't double your chance to hit. And people really hate missing - it feels like failing, while doing a little bit of damage every time feels like you're making progress, even if it averages out to less damage overall.

This is why most MOBA's have dropped accuracy or dodging from their stats - admittedly those are a much more competitive environment, but landing that one last attack can be the difference between life and death. Having it fail at the whims of the random-number-gods really sucks.

Again, I'm not really pushing any one solution here, just laying out the evidence for people to decide what kind of "feel" they want in the game.
This is why Slot Machines at Casinos will often pay out small frequent payments totaling less than your actual bid. 35¢ on 50¢ bid, etc. Net-net you're still losing money, but every little victory makes you feel like sticking around for the next pull on the hammer.

I'd argue that the occasional total "miss" and the frustration derived from that, is part of the phycological lure used to keep you playing, but I have no data to back that theory up. I only know that personally when I "miss" at the casino it makes me feel like trying again. That said, I agree with JestersGhost in that missing too often, or at critical moments will make me angry and more apt to walk away, so it should be more limited unless I'm obviously fighting a mob out of my league.

Edit: Thinking on this further... I suppose that never missing would also make a player frustrated that they are having constant success in hitting mobs, but still potentially losing over time.
-Broxen

User avatar
GladDog
Posts: 1768
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:48 pm
Location: Pottstown PA

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby GladDog » Tue May 02, 2017 1:19 pm

Against a high defence character your to-hit would be floored to 5%. Then, however, accuracy came into play, and multiplied that by 225%, giving a final result of about 11%. Which sounds about right with your experience (you actually hit her slightly more than expected).
Actually it would have been 5% + 200% of 5%, or 15%. Hmm, did not think defense vs accuracy worked that way. I always thought it was total accuracy minus total defense, which would have meant that girl (or girl character) would have needed 310+% defense to counter my accuracy. But I was wrong about that. Now it makes perfect sense.

At 15% that would be one hit for every 6-7 attempts. 5% + 263% of 5% would be 18.5%, or one out of 5-6 attacks, so I was probably hitting about the correct amount.

The damage resistance cap was unlimited in Issue zero, and 90% for tanks after Issue one, not 95% (I wish it was 95%! I could have stood toe to toe with a lot of AVs unsupported for quite a long time if it was 95%), 75% for everyone else. Brutes got the tank cap, even though their defenses were secondary sets.
IN BRIGHTEST DAY, OR DARKEST NIGHT
NO SPAM SHALL STAY UPON THIS SITE
FOR THOSE THAT FEED THIS EVIL BLIGHT
BEWARE THE PAIN OF GUARD DOG'S BITE!

User avatar
JestersGhost
Posts: 868
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 4:39 pm

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby JestersGhost » Wed May 03, 2017 5:41 am

Against a high defence character your to-hit would be floored to 5%. Then, however, accuracy came into play, and multiplied that by 225%, giving a final result of about 11%. Which sounds about right with your experience (you actually hit her slightly more than expected).
Actually it would have been 5% + 200% of 5%, or 15%. Hmm, did not think defense vs accuracy worked that way. I always thought it was total accuracy minus total defense, which would have meant that girl (or girl character) would have needed 310+% defense to counter my accuracy. But I was wrong about that. Now it makes perfect sense.
Yup, forgot to add on the original 5% :P And this is why we discuss things :)
The damage resistance cap was unlimited in Issue zero, and 90% for tanks after Issue one, not 95% (I wish it was 95%! I could have stood toe to toe with a lot of AVs unsupported for quite a long time if it was 95%), 75% for everyone else. Brutes got the tank cap, even though their defenses were secondary sets.
Huh, I always thought resist and defense caps were the same for tanks. We can all learn something it seems :) Weren't scrappers 80%? I thought scrappers got a lightly higher cap. I find it hilarious that resistance was uncapped originally - which had no counter or way of being lowered at release, while defense, which could never actually be floored in practice, had powers and even inspirations dedicated to negating it.

To a degree, it makes perfect sense for PvE. To avoid the frustration of missing too often, accuracy functions as an "uncounterable" way of avoiding missing AI enemies. Unfortunately, that's not as fun in PvP, where now one side has no way to mitigate the other's buffs. It also wasn't very fun against Devouring Earth, as their little support crystals in number could punch straight through defensive sets for the same reason.

Those sort of things is why I make a big deal of making combat mechanics "symmetrical" - everything has a counter, and no one stat is just flat-out better than it's counterpart. That will bite you at some point. The core equations have to all line up. It's a little bit more work up front, but it saves you a tonne of balancing and patching and nerfs and player goodwill down the line.
[ quantum sufficit / casual-tempest.net / My Combat Mechanics Thread ]

User avatar
GladDog
Posts: 1768
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:48 pm
Location: Pottstown PA

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby GladDog » Wed May 03, 2017 7:59 am

Huh, I always thought resist and defense caps were the same for tanks. We can all learn something it seems :) Weren't scrappers 80%? I thought scrappers got a lightly higher cap. I find it hilarious that resistance was uncapped originally - which had no counter or way of being lowered at release, while defense, which could never actually be floored in practice, had powers and even inspirations dedicated to negating it.
Some of the issue 0 tanks complained vehemently about losing their exploit; in fact, several quit the game when they were no longer utterly invinvible. A lot of them said they would 'stick around' if they set the resistance cap at 95%, but Jack Emmert was pretty convinced that this needed to be treated as an exploit, not a 'feature', and set at 90% (which is still higher than most games had). Now, I have always been really hard on Jack Emmert. He was way too attentive to the zealots on the forums that wanted insane difficulty and insane omnipotence, and rarely listened to the vast majority that wanted a fun game. But this was one of the times he made the correct move that increased challenge without making the game unplayable.

The loudest ones were the Hamidon tanks. They felt they could not tank Hamidon if they could take ANY damage. Well, I am here to say that you can take damage against Hami and still tank just fine; you just can't sit back and eat a sandwich while you are doing so. We did try a LOT of things to make it easier. I 6-slotted Taunt with range enhancements, and I could actually stand outside of the goo and still hold agro! Of course, this whole point was made moot when they changed Hamidon's attacks, as well as the Mito's attacks, to 'Hamidon damage', meaning no one had ANY resistance, or defense, to it at all! A lot more tanks quit when they did that, since the best 'tank' for Hamidon raids became a Regen Scrapper using Instant Healing.

But the total that quit because they could actually take damage was about a hundred, and I am sure they retained thousands that would have quit if these adjustments were not made.

BTW, Scrappers were DEMANDING 80% at the same time as tanks were SCREAMING for 95%. But they got a damage resistance cap of 75%, and I am pretty sure that never changed.
IN BRIGHTEST DAY, OR DARKEST NIGHT
NO SPAM SHALL STAY UPON THIS SITE
FOR THOSE THAT FEED THIS EVIL BLIGHT
BEWARE THE PAIN OF GUARD DOG'S BITE!

Dying Breath
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 9:20 am

Re: Accuracy, Resistance and Limits

Postby Dying Breath » Wed May 03, 2017 11:54 am

<snip>
To a degree, it makes perfect sense for PvE. To avoid the frustration of missing too often, accuracy functions as an "uncounterable" way of avoiding missing AI enemies. Unfortunately, that's not as fun in PvP, where now one side has no way to mitigate the other's buffs. It also wasn't very fun against Devouring Earth, as their little support crystals in number could punch straight through defensive sets for the same reason.
Or Rularuu eyeballs, which no one ever fought. I remember vividly the Issue 1 launch with Rularuu invading all over the city; I quickly found out that even perma-Elude plus all toggles was useless against them :/


I don't mind asymmetrical bonuses for accuracy, defense, etc... just as long as there's a benefit in slotting one over the other. For instance, if you could hit to 90% with 150% damage increase OR 98% with 100% damage increase. The two cases will not yield the same damage over time, but depending on the duration of a fight, you might choose to have more powerful blows land less often, or you might just really hate missing. I have not run anything like an analysis of these numbers, they are purely to demonstrate what I feel is a reasonable decision, and would definitely need some tweaking for balance. I'm also more than fine with having a hard limit for the amount of accuracy that you can enhance, and am fully in support of a <100% accuracy cap.

Just a quick aside, do you think that something like CoH's streakbreaker is necessary?


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests