Get rid of the damn tohit cap

[Vanden]

49 minutes ago, Razor Cure said:

Because super heroes miss. Duh. Hard concept.

This isn't an actual argument. You're just saying that we should miss because you say we should. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

 

In other words, you're consistently disparaging my argument because it's affected by my feelings on missing, while simultaneously championing the status quo entirely because of your feelings on missing. That's pretty hypocritical, man.

 

49 minutes ago, Razor Cure said:

Or maybe it is missing due to 'extra' factors. Obviously these are unseen, but HOW hard is it to think of a miss as the bad guy dodging, your hand slipping, a gust of wind, a team mate blocking line of sight?

Missing at the to hit cap just means..it is a miss. Which CAN happen due to the cap being 95%. Since auto hitting, again, is a really silly idea.

These things are already accounted for with actual in-game mechanics like subpar accuracy enhancement, tohit debuffs, and defense buffs. If that's all accounted for and the final tohit chance is over 100%, then the attack should hit. A miss at that point is just punishing the player for being unlucky.

Edited November 23, 2020 by Vanden

[Monos King]

 This is the funnest thread in a while. Here's something to keep in mind. The game is a fictitious simulation of reality; because it is fiction you can abridge physical reasoning infinitely to fit or dismiss anything *cough* Entangling Arrow *cough*. You can argue whether or not it makes sense in real life all you want but it won't matter because in translation to game, both sides will be right. This is why when making logic related changes you instead look at precedent and balance.

1. Example: it mostly makes sense for psychic attacks to never miss, but as it's a game and that would be poor balance since there are other powers that would still miss, it's off the table. Instead, very few armors have def/res to them.
2. Example: various powers could (and do) apply -defense logically, but the game primarily thematically limits it to moves that explicitly pierce or bypass armor (radiation, swords, bullets, etc.) In the end though, the logical criteria for -def and -res become so interchangeable in many places, that you see overlap.

Logic can not be universally applied into games because you can't factor every straying element of reality, so you stick to what you can control. You leave your game mechanics to be an approximation of the infinite possible factors (like what if they slow down, or slip, or has a burst of energy) and move on.

 

The only argument to really discuss here is whether or not removing the cap is OP. Personally, no opinion. This is exciting though.

 

[Epoch Paradox]

On 11/17/2020 at 9:32 PM, Number Six said:

This is something I've kicked around a bit internally, but with a twist. The idea is to make to-hit chances above 95% possible, but not easy. It wouldn't simply be a matter of just getting 5% more tohit, but applying some sort of severe diminishing returns curve for every point past 95% you push it.

 

Ideally it would be tuned so that if you're a level 50 in Atlas smacking hellions around, you get either 100% tohit or close to it. But if you're fighting a +4 AV, it would be nearly impossible to get close to 100 unless you have massive buffs. In between, could be something you could choose to build for -- maybe put all of those purple +Acc bonuses to use somehow.

 

It's not a very well fleshed out idea at this point, just something that I threw out there and got some commentary on.

Is it not possible to make reduced damage "partial hits"?

And isn't say 95.1%-99.9% also an option?

Great example with the level 50 in Atlas.

[Blackfeather]

1 hour ago, Moka said:

Ahhh! 😧 The PVPer in me hates this! (Yes, PVPers do still exist!)

Mwahahahahahah! Like I said, imagine the changes. Goodbye, PvP tab-targeting. 😈

[srmalloy]

2 hours ago, Vanden said:

This isn't an actual argument. You're just saying that we should miss because you say we should. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

And you're saying you shouldn't miss because you say you shouldn't. Same thing. You're arguing two ends of a spectrum, and they're not going to overlap, regardless of how many times either of you restates your position.

 

The mechanics are there, they apply the same 5% minimum chance to hit and 5% minimum chance to miss to everything in the game; they are applied evenly and fairly. Your cranking your "chance to hit" past 95% serves to give you a buffer against mobs with more than the standard defense, or are higher level, or if your to-hit is debuffed, or any one of the myriad things that can decrease your chance to hit. You benefit from the caps just as much as you're hampered by them.

 

And I have to wonder why you're bringing this all up now, as if it's been festering in your soul since the first time you made an attack on Live with a 100% modified to-hit 'chance', and hit the 5% miss window, and now you're trying to get the Homecoming staff to change it because you think they'll be less wedded to one of the core mechanics of the game than  the Paragon Studios staff were. The game we see, and the numbers behind them, can't account for every little thing that might happen; that's what the RNG, and the hit and miss caps, are there for.

[Moka]

I think every time we miss we should receive an electric shock irl.

[Vanden]

5 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

And you're saying you shouldn't miss because you say you shouldn't. Same thing. You're arguing two ends of a spectrum, and they're not going to overlap, regardless of how many times either of you restates your position.

The difference is that I’m not making an argument based solely on opinion while simultaneously mocking another argument because it’s based on an opinion.

 

7 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

You benefit from the caps just as much as you're hampered by them.

What are you talking about? There is no benefit for me from having tohit capped at 95%. All it can possibly do is make my powers miss.

 

 

 

[Greycat]

13 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

And I have to wonder why you're bringing this all up now,

You know, I've generally stepped out of the thread since some of the basis of Vanden's arguments are things I don't agree on, but I did mention this before and I am curious what brought this up now, still.

[srmalloy]

1 minute ago, Vanden said:

What are you talking about? There is no benefit for me from having tohit capped at 95%. All it can possibly do is make my powers miss.

Tell that to the AV that just missed you despite their 100%, 150%, or even 200% chance to hit. You have the same 5% chance to be missed no matter how much the "chance to hit" of the mob attacking you is over the to hit cap.  It's comic-book physics; you can be standing there with your nose in the bore of the D-100 120mm main gun of a T-55 tank, your head tied across the muzzle, and it still has a 5% chance of missing you.

[Eclipse.]

1 hour ago, Epoch Paradox said:

Is it not possible to make reduced damage "partial hits"?

In one of the senarios where there was a _specific_ complaint earlier in the thread, Assassin Strike Missing, a reduced damage "partial hit" would actually be worse than a full out miss. Missing still leaves you hidden, just gotta wait for the CD, a 'partial hit' would pop you out of hide.

There's a number of other scenarios where this would be true, as well, well placed snipes can fall in the same category, as can certain Targeted-AOE Mezz skills.

Also, for partial mezz how would you handle that? -1 mag, -2 mag, -% duration, -% mag? What about domination, or skills that already have lower mag mezz? Would just the damage be reduced, but the mezz stays? Or even worse, how would you handle skills that have a to-hit check but don't do damage (EG. poison debuffs)

[Vanden]

12 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

Tell that to the AV that just missed you despite their 100%, 150%, or even 200% chance to hit. You have the same 5% chance to be missed no matter how much the "chance to hit" of the mob attacking you is over the to hit cap.  It's comic-book physics; you can be standing there with your nose in the bore of the D-100 120mm main gun of a T-55 tank, your head tied across the muzzle, and it still has a 5% chance of missing you.

If you're in a situation where an enemy mob is over 100% chance to hit you and the tohit cap is coming into play, you are losing the fight. Your only options are to run away, win the fight immediately, or massively change the enemy's chance to hit with tohit debuffs or defense buffs. Player survivability in this game relies on the AI either missing more often than it hits, or dying before it can make very many attacks. That fact is, that cap is of virtually no benefit to the player when the roles are reversed and it's the AI that is having its tohit capped; defeat for the player is still very much on the table.

[Razor Cure]

1 minute ago, Vanden said:

defeat for the player is still very much on the table.

So wait, you are in a situation VS a super powerful bad guy..and YOU want the ability to hit them..100% of the time? Yeah, that makes sense. Why shouldn't you be able to always hit something so powerful.

[Epoch Paradox]

11 minutes ago, Eclipse. said:

In one of the senarios where there was a _specific_ complaint earlier in the thread, Assassin Strike Missing, a reduced damage "partial hit" would actually be worse than a full out miss. Missing still leaves you hidden, just gotta wait for the CD, a 'partial hit' would pop you out of hide.

There's a number of other scenarios where this would be true, as well, well placed snipes can fall in the same category, as can certain Targeted-AOE Mezz skills.

Also, for partial mezz how would you handle that? -1 mag, -2 mag, -% duration, -% mag? What about domination, or skills that already have lower mag mezz? Would just the damage be reduced, but the mezz stays? Or even worse, how would you handle skills that have a to-hit check but don't do damage (EG. poison debuffs)

How would I handle it? I would leave it the way it is and not worry about it. Personally, I laugh when I hit Aim, Build Up with tactics running on one of my blasters and miss a snipe on a -1 foe.

I would miss missing like that. I was merely attempting to suggest something less than a 100% auto hit type resolution. Consider this reply as me editing my first post to say.... Hi! hope you're all having a great day!

 

Also I forgot to mention... You made some very good points in your reply. Have a good one!

Edited November 24, 2020 by Epoch Paradox

[Vanden]

Just now, Razor Cure said:

So wait, you are in a situation VS a super powerful bad guy..and YOU want the ability to hit them..100% of the time? Yeah, that makes sense. Why shouldn't you be able to always hit something so powerful.

Why don't you point out where I said we should have 100% chance to hit at all times, including when we're completely outmatched?

[Eclipse.]

In general I don't think it needs fixed, I think a 5% chance to miss is fine.

However, I think _if_ we're going to make it theoretically possible to get 100% to-hit chance, that's also fine...with the caveat that enemies should be much more likely to have +def powers other than Veng/MoG/Elude. Right now it seems relatively rare.

Centurions in ITF should have maneuvers/phalanx fighting, it fits thematically, they all have shields yet only Rom and 1 minion type has a defensive power? Crey tanks should have appropriate defensive shields, pretty sure they have EM so why don't they have EA shields? 

Honestly, given how little defensive powers enemies have I feel like 5% chance-to-miss is generous on some mobs, and perhaps egregious on others. I don't make that decision based on Min/lt/boss, but on skill set a Roman soldier with a shield should not have the same likelihood of getting hit by a hero with a broadsword as a circle of thorns cultist in a robe.

[GM Tempest]

I warned about stealing sweetrolls for hostile behavior on the same page and it goes to it again. I will steal this thread's sweetrolls at this rate - which means the thread will close from lack of sweetrolls. No more namecalling or insults, please, think of the sweetrolls.

[Doomguide2005]

I will point out my Claws/SR Scrapper has been in situations where, despite being slightly over the 'soft cap' the foes most definitely had well over 100% chance to hit.   Heck he could have probably used his non-existent Elude and those foes still would have been over 100% hit chance.

 

As in hello Rularuu.  

 

On the other hand the easy counter argument is would a 5% miss chance changed the out come of the battle.  Of course not, tactics yes, outcome no.  I'm a player they're incredibly stupid AI.  

 

DE similarly 'cheat' with their Quartz eminators.  

 

 

[RageusQuitus2]

6 hours ago, Doomguide2005 said:

I'm a player they're incredibly stupid AI.  

Right after post by gm asking to knock off name calling. 

 

I for one applaud the AI.  Never complains on the forums about how op the players are.  

[Hew]

This is exceedingly dangerous territory. The only way I could see this being acceptable, is as mentioned previously, we grant more much extensive defense capabilities into pretty much everything.

 

The barrier to entry for average play is very reasonable at this time. Pushing it in such a way that highly/overgeared/overcompensating players have 99.9999% chance to hit is absolutely going to slaughter the average player capability.

 

You cannot balance against such extremes.

 

What is next, 99% resist in armor sets?

 

[tidge]

Time to roll up "Swee Troll" who will have to be wearing a "95% To Hit" Cap.

[Vanden]

7 hours ago, Hew said:

This is exceedingly dangerous territory. The only way I could see this being acceptable, is as mentioned previously, we grant more much extensive defense capabilities into pretty much everything.

 

The barrier to entry for average play is very reasonable at this time. Pushing it in such a way that highly/overgeared/overcompensating players have 99.9999% chance to hit is absolutely going to slaughter the average player capability.

 

You cannot balance against such extremes.

I'm honestly not seeing how this would be the case. Nothing about the math or mechanics behind tohit would change; you'd still need to do everything you currently have to do in order to ensure your chance to hit is as high as possible. You actually could have to do a bit more, since it raises the performance ceiling. Large teams would be able to unleash their AoEs knowing their controls and damage will land, sure, but that's virtually already true. A high-end team full of maxed-out characters already wipes out enemies with ridiculous speed and safety; this wouldn't change anything for them at all.

 

The barrier to entry thing for new players is a new one, though. I can't imagine how raise the performance ceiling a little makes it harder for new players, unless you're talking about the new defensive options that you say the enemies will have to have to allow this. I already talked about this earlier - making it possible to reach 100% chance to hit raises player DPS by roughly 5.3%, so just raising enemy HP by a similar amount should compensate for any increase in clear speed.

7 hours ago, Hew said:

What is next, 99% resist in armor sets?

Not sure if I should call this a slippery slope or strawman, since it fits both pretty well, but either way it's not what we're talking about.

[srmalloy]

19 hours ago, Vanden said:

If you're in a situation where an enemy mob is over 100% chance to hit you and the tohit cap is coming into play, you are losing the fight.

 

Player survivability in this game relies on the AI either missing more often than it hits, or dying before it can make very many attacks. That fact is, that cap is of virtually no benefit to the player when the roles are reversed and it's the AI that is having its tohit capped; defeat for the player is still very much on the table.

To-hit chance just affects the likelihood that you take damage; if a mob has a gonzo to-hit, but lacks effective damage, it's just an annoyance.

 

Player survivability depends on mitigating the incoming damage well enough that you can eliminate the damage source(s) before you run out of hit points. Different ATs and powersets approach it differently. Regen, for example, relies mostly on healing fast enough that they have the time to reduce the incoming damage to less than their healing rate.

 

But since the impression that I get from the other posters is that this is an undesirable change, and the arguments for the change seem to me to boil down to "I don't want to have to miss! Make it so I don't have to miss!", I'm going to bow out of further participation in this thread before I say something to make GM Tempest start stealing sweetrolls.

[Vanden]

3 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

the arguments for the change seem to me to boil down to "I don't want to have to miss! Make it so I don't have to miss!"

As usual, the arguments against the change opt for a reductive mocking of the opposition, and ignore the very real argument that the cap takes player agency out of the equation and replaces it with pure luck.

[Bill Z Bubba]

25 minutes ago, Vanden said:

As usual, the arguments against the change opt for a reductive mocking of the opposition, and ignore the very real argument that the cap takes player agency out of the equation and replaces it with pure luck.

I have yet to see an argument that sways me to remove the fumble chance.

[Vanden]

Just now, Bill Z Bubba said:

I have yet to see an argument that sways me to remove the fumble chance.

If you're unconvinced, you can just be unconvinced. You don't have to make fun of the other side.

 

(Not necessarily you, specifically)

Edited November 24, 2020 by Vanden