Fix the Clamp!

[JusticeBowler]

The benefit is clear, its just also very small. If the effort involved to make the change is also very small as I assume it is, this is not a factor.

 

There is no benefit if people don't want the game to play this way. The Clamp (and the streak breaker) have been around for a very long time without controversy or even much interest. They are what they are. You aren't "improving" anything.

[justicebeliever]

The benefit is clear, its just also very small. If the effort involved to make the change is also very small as I assume it is, this is not a factor.

 

I have no opinions on the "Clamp", but I have a strong opinion how to decide what changes to make...

In any software framework, there are going to be four basic areas of change

1.) Big Impact on Players (and we are assuming for argument's sake that the impact is good), but requires a lot of work to implement

2.) Big Impact on Players, but requires little work to do

3.) Small to no Impact on Players, but requires a lot of work

4.) Small to no Impact on Players, but requires little work to do

 

You can automatically eliminate any suggestion that falls into #3, and you should only get around #4 if you are really, really bored and have cleaned out the queue of #2

 

So if it is going to have little impact, in my mind, it's still a non-starter since it would detract from the Dev's working on things that will have a big impact...

 

My 2 cents on how to prioritize change

[Vader Bomb]

 

Cracking suggestion. This change would definitely improve the game.

 

I am actually quite confused why people disagree, its.... as if 1) they dont understand the question or 2) they play the game under a rock.

 

I love putting time and effort into pimping out my lvl50s but to then come across a lvl1 minion and miss! DOH!

 

If you have the accuracy to roll a 95% chance to hit then the streaker breaker should be activated everytime. (Of some sort)

 

+99 Alouu

 

[SwitchFade]

-99

 

/Jranger

 

No change vote.

[Alouu]

For those of you dissenting based on arguments such as “Why is this change worth it?” or “This is just the way RPGs are!” I invite you to consider a scenario in which my suggestion is already implemented in the game. That is to say, you hit when you are supposed to hit and you miss when you are supposed to miss. Assume that this has been the status quo since launch day.

 

Then a suggestion comes along which goes along the lines of “Hey guys, lets make it so if we have a 100% chance to hit, it gets rounded down to 95%!”. I hope you can appreciate what a singularly unpopular suggestion this would be. Personally I can easily imagine that not a single member of this community would take to such an idea. It would be universally scorned and rejected as anti-fun in its arbitrary randomness, unnecessary as the formula for missing already works fine and so on. If you have an ounce of integrity I hope you can admit to yourselves you would be right there among us, rightfully calling out what a stupid bloody suggestion it was.

 

From there it is but a single logical step to acknowledge that rejecting proposition A in favor of keeping status quo B, translates directly into accepting proposition B at the expense of status quo A.

[HelenCarnate]

Make it 99% instead of 100 or 95%.  That way, I can still get a chuckle when I wiff at destroying an object 4x as big as my character at point blank range.

[Burnt Toast]

And I invite you to accept the scenario where people can and will disagree with you - welcome to the internet. People can disagree on here - you can take it personally or you can take it in stride. Your unwillingness to allow people to have their own opinions will not get you far in this forum. Sorry you presented an idea that the moajority of replies are against... it happens. Just an FYI you do not speak for the entire community and I would loathe a system of 100% to hit - so please do not put words into others mouths or assume "not a single member of this community would take such an idea..."

 

You can keep twisting and refusing to acknowledge others valid opinions, but like I said - that will get you nowhere except probably ignored.

 

 

For those of you dissenting based on arguments such as “Why is this change worth it?” or “This is just the way RPGs are!” I invite you to consider a scenario in which my suggestion is already implemented in the game. That is to say, you hit when you are supposed to hit and you miss when you are supposed to miss. Assume that this has been the status quo since launch day.

 

Then a suggestion comes along which goes along the lines of “Hey guys, lets make it so if we have a 100% chance to hit, it gets rounded down to 95%!”. I hope you can appreciate what a singularly unpopular suggestion this would be. Personally I can easily imagine that not a single member of this community would take such an idea. It would be universally scorned and rejected as anti-fun in its arbitrary randomness, unnecessary as the formula for missing already works fine and so on. If you have an ounce of integrity I hope you can admit to yourselves you would be right there among us, rightfully calling out what a stupid bloody suggestion it was.

 

From there it is but a single logical step to acknowledge that rejecting proposition A in favor of keeping status quo B, translates directly into accepting proposition B at the expense of status quo A.

[Alouu]

And I invite you to accept the scenario where people can and will disagree with you

 

If I hadn't acknowledged that I was being disagreed with, I wouldn't have made any responses. The point is from what position does the disagreement come from. The arguments "this is the way it's always been" and "why bother" can get thrown out in opposition to any idea ever made and are equally invalid every time they do. If you want a look at what a sound argument looks like take a read of @justicebeliever's post. From that post I accept the conclusions since they are logically made and thus have to accept as a result, that if anything this should be a back burner suggestion.

 

I would loathe a system of 100% to hit

 

You do understand you would still be able to miss... right?

 

[Burnt Toast]

It doesn't matter WHY people don't want it... that's what you are failing to get. I do not have to justify my opinion on a change that frankly most people do not think is needed. I have given reasons... but you tried to insult me by suggesting I was a roleplayer and that roleplaying doesn't constitute a valid reason. You simply want to argue until people agree with you - I hate to break it to you, but that probably is not going to happen. I think it is a horrible idea and if it were (which thankfully I know it won't be) implemented on HC - I would abandon HC for another server. HC is not going to make radical changes to the core of the game play - which is why I suggested you just run your own server. People do not want this system you proposed... deal with it. You can keep posting over and over, but it's not something the majority wants.

 

And I invite you to accept the scenario where people can and will disagree with you

 

If I hadn't acknowledged that I was being disagreed with, I wouldn't have made any responses. The point is from what position does the disagreement come from. The arguments "this is the way it's always been" and "why bother" can get thrown out in opposition to any idea ever made and are equally invalid every time they do. If you want a look at what a sound argument looks like take a read of @justicebeliever's post. From that post I accept the conclusions since they are logically made and thus have to accept as a result, that if anything this should be a back burner suggestion.

 

I would loathe a system of 100% to hit

 

You do understand you would still be able to miss... right?

[SwitchFade]

No touch clamp, clamp good.

 

Clamp fun.

 

Clamp necessary.

 

Me like clamp, me cuddle with clamp. Love clamp.

 

Keep clamp!

[Alouu]

you tried to insult me by suggesting I was a roleplayer and that roleplaying doesn't constitute a valid reason.

 

You're confusing me with someone else. My previous two posts also don't apply to the arguement you made, they address two specific non-arguements made by others.

[Burnt Toast]

My bad on the RP thing - but that doesn't invalidate the rest of my post. You come across as condescending and dismissive of others opinions because you don't like their opinion...because you do not believe it has a valid reasoning. Thinking your system is not needed... valid reasoning. Liking the way the system currently is...valid reasoning. With that I am done as the back and forth is not productive and the suggestion will never be implemented on HC.

 

you tried to insult me by suggesting I was a roleplayer and that roleplaying doesn't constitute a valid reason.

 

You're confusing me with someone else. My previous two posts also don't apply to the arguement you made, they address two specific non-arguements made by others.

[Sunsette]

I'm for this change, personally. I adore the critical miss/hit systems in dice-based games because they simulate action -- it's an added layer of abstraction that I don't feel adds a lot to any non-turn-based video games outside of spells or powers that are specifically designed to create the effect of an especially unreliable ability or especially dodgey character.

 

It's worth noting that in other video games that use a random roll system, the cap is typically 100% and getting to 100% with standard attacks is usually one of the first expectations of a gearing system. Even in CoX, "slot Acc" is one of the first suggestions made to a newbie who's running low on end.

 

I have no idea of the difficulty of fixing it -- something like the clamp could either be a very simple change or a very, very pain in the ass change to make, depending on how it's built in the code and the kind of code access and documentation the team has. If it's a pain in the ass, leave it alone; it's not a big deal. But if it's not, yeah, I think it should change.

 

In a vacuum, anyway.

 

Unfortunately, in practice I think it's a bad change because of the signal it sends to the player base. I'm thinking about the Super Strength Rage topic now; haven't weighed in on that one because it it's not a set I know anything about. But a lot of the interest in this game is that we missed it. This is not a live game that needs to constantly make changes to please a paying fanbase and compete. It needs to protect what people love about the game.

 

Let's say for the sake of argument that the change is implemented, and 70% of people think it's a good change. They also wouldn't have cared if it didn't happen, because it's a minor issue. But the other 30%... whatever their reasons for disliking the change, they dislike it and it sends a signal: they are going to mess with fundamental systems of the game. Those people are often core users and their complaints will reverberate.

 

While I generally hate "ain't broke, don't fix it" as a rationale to avoid adjusting with a game, due to the proliferation of alt servers and the game's nostalgic appeal, I think that it's more risky than it's worth it.

[blayzemaster]

I would heavily applaud getting rid of the clamp

[SwitchFade]

I would heavily applaud getting rid of the clamp

 

I heavily vote to keep the clamp.

[Alouu]

I really liked that post Sunsette, your "in a vacuum" arguments make perfect sense to me. I also agree that we need to preserve what made us all come back to this game after such a long time, I dont know if you also saw the post on turning defense into a logarithmic system but I think it was a perfect example of something that while it may technically be better balanced if implemented well, it would lose part of what makes the game what it is. In the case of the clamp though, its not iconic in any way, or nostalgia invoking, or even noticeable really unless you know what to look for. Its just a nuisance.

 

Regarding your appraisal of support and dissent about the change, the situation you hypothesised where there are 70% who mildly want the change and 30% who vehemently oppose it doesnt seem right to me, I would say it's more like a 10 / 80 / 10 split. I havent taken a full tally of supporters and dissenters in this thread yet but it does look quite evenly split and I would say what we are seeing here is the two 10's at each pole clashing (very vocally..). If thats true then all that is needed is a majority of that 80 in the middle.

[Zlatan]

And I invite you to accept the scenario where people can and will disagree with you - welcome to the internet. People can disagree on here - you can take it personally or you can take it in stride. Your unwillingness to allow people to have their own opinions will not get you far in this forum. Sorry you presented an idea that the moajority of replies are against... it happens. Just an FYI you do not speak for the entire community and I would loathe a system of 100% to hit - so please do not put words into others mouths or assume "not a single member of this community would take such an idea..."

 

You can keep twisting and refusing to acknowledge others valid opinions, but like I said - that will get you nowhere except probably ignored.

 

To me it looks like you are the one who is unwilling to listen to other peoples opinions and suggestions. How ironic. In addition you also do not speak for the community. You speak for you, the end. Why would you even share that sentace on a public forum.

 

Also there is an (interval) 100% to hit system thats already implemented in the game, its called the streakbreaker. Both players and NPCs use it. Do you loathe that idea? Maybe go in the opposite direction?

 

And tweaking the clamp would NOT make it inevitable to hit everytime. If you do not have the accuracy (at that time) it is still possible to miss.

 

I am a member of this community and I like this idea Alouu.

[Super Atom]

Removing the 5% is a mistake. It wasn't arbitrary as previously mentioned by any means. This was put into place specifically to prevent people from doing what you want. I'm all for changes that help but this just seems like you want to not miss because it occasionally annoys you.  :-\

[TotalThunder]

You're suggesting this because they removed the Accuracy cap (which was 95%) in Path of Exile, aren't you?

 

Aggro cap is silly. AOE cap is silly. And yeah, always having a 5% chance to miss is silly.

 

But hitting enemies that extra 5% of the time won't even be noticeable unless you're actively looking for it. That being said, I sort of feel like this change is sort of... bad in the grand scheme of things. CoH is already easy enough. The "clamp", like aggro and aoe cap, is a balance thing.

 

All the people calling the system outdated just because they don't like it are being silly. CoH, like other MMOs, is the mutant abortion of a Pen-and-Paper RPG. You're rolling a d-100 when you attack. It's not weighted to roll a 96-100, it just happens sometimes. Critical Failures have always existed in RPGs. It's not a "dumb roleplay reasons" thing. It's a fundamental part of the experience.

 

In real life, even if you keep a firearm perfectly clean and oiled; It can still jam. It happens.

 

"It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness; that's life."

 

That being said, I've always thought missing with CERTAIN ATTACKS is a little silly. Like Laser Beam Eyes. Or Inferno. Did you get distracted suddenly? Did the explosion just WOOSH past them? (The same with AOE caps.) I feel like giving certain attacks a "This attack always hits if you have above X% Tohit Bonus" would be a more appropriate change. More challenging to implement, but more interesting.

 

But even if you're a master... punch.. man? Master Punch-man. Sometimes the person you're trying to punch might get lucky and dodge. That's the 5%. It's kind of one of the last tiny bits of difficulty that CoH actually has. Yeah it's random. Yeah it's silly. Everything else is random chance. That's an RPG.

[Auroxis]

From an RPG perspective, missing with your attacks adds to the immersion and realism. But what actually happens in-game? The same attack animation occurs and you don't actually see your character messing up, which ends up taking away from the immersion rather than adding to it. This is especially notice-able in long animations, as your spend more time looking at how perfectly your character is attacking only to see that "miss" show up at the end.

 

On the flipside, enemies do have dodge animations in place, they just don't fit all attacks and don't appear if the enemy is in an attack animation. It would be a shame to see those defensive animations go away in cases where they do fit the attacker's animation.

 

I honestly wouldn't mind it being up on the test server for people to experience and give feedback on.

[_NOPE_]

/JRanger

[Burnt Toast]

Never said I speak for the community.... RIF.

 

I "listen" to suggestions, but does not mean I have to agree with them no matter how hard someone stomps their feet... so not ironic actually. I see no valid reason to make the change, but as I and many others have stated - there are numerous reasons to keep the system the way it is. The OP seems to think it is simply changing a few lines of code and voila everything is changed... it is not that simple. But... like others who think they can code and want to change the core mechanics of the game...I reminded him that he now has that option.

 

Good for you liking the idea - as you can see - your position is the minority on this.

 

I never called for any change so your other point about "going in the other direction" is fallacious.

 

 

 

And I invite you to accept the scenario where people can and will disagree with you - welcome to the internet. People can disagree on here - you can take it personally or you can take it in stride. Your unwillingness to allow people to have their own opinions will not get you far in this forum. Sorry you presented an idea that the moajority of replies are against... it happens. Just an FYI you do not speak for the entire community and I would loathe a system of 100% to hit - so please do not put words into others mouths or assume "not a single member of this community would take such an idea..."

 

You can keep twisting and refusing to acknowledge others valid opinions, but like I said - that will get you nowhere except probably ignored.

 

To me it looks like you are the one who is unwilling to listen to other peoples opinions and suggestions. How ironic. In addition you also do not speak for the community. You speak for you, the end. Why would you even share that sentace on a public forum.

 

Also there is an (interval) 100% to hit system thats already implemented in the game, its called the streakbreaker. Both players and NPCs use it. Do you loathe that idea? Maybe go in the opposite direction?

 

And tweaking the clamp would NOT make it inevitable to hit everytime. If you do not have the accuracy (at that time) it is still possible to miss.

 

I am a member of this community and I like this idea Alouu.

[DSorrow]

The way I see it, there's bad and good kind of random and the hit chance clamp goes into the bad random territory. I wouldn't mind at all if my attacks always did 90-100% of the listed damage for an average of 95%, but it's pretty irritating to have 1 out of 20 attacks forcibly do nothing at all for the same result over time. This especially irritating when you miss a long cooldown power or with powersets such as Titan Weapons or Dual Blades where the forced miss messes up momentum/combos.

 

While I agree with some posters that the hit chance clamp isn't a critical issue in the game and doesn't warrant development time over more critical/useful things, I just don't see why the 5% forced chance to miss has to exist. From a balance point of view, going from 95% to 100% hit chance has a negligible impact on PvE so the only reasons I can come up with are that "it's an RPG mechanic" that has to exist because it's always been there or RP reasons that basically amount to "the Hellion just ducked to pick up a dime on the street and your fireball went over them" which doesn't really work with animation hitting the hellion square in the face.

 

If completely getting rid of the hit chance cap is out of the question, as a more development intensive (and possible more immersive/realistic) middle ground, I'd at least like to see the cap removed for enemies that are stunned/held/slept. Sure, their power armor and other buffs can still benefit them, but that should remove the final 5% "immersive world aligning" because the opponent is by definition unable to act.

 

PvP might be the only case where this has an actual impact. I'm not very qualified to discuss PvP balance, but doesn't PvP already use a separate hit chance formula that could still keep the clamp?

[Primantis]

From an RPG perspective, missing with your attacks adds to the immersion and realism. But what actually happens in-game? The same attack animation occurs and you don't actually see your character messing up, which ends up taking away from the immersion rather than adding to it. This is especially notice-able in long animations, as your spend more time looking at how perfectly your character is attacking only to see that "miss" show up at the end.

 

On the flipside, enemies do have dodge animations in place, they just don't fit all attacks and don't appear if the enemy is in an attack animation. It would be a shame to see those defensive animations go away in cases where they do fit the attacker's animation.

 

 

 

 

On the flip-flipper side. I've seen my hero whiff so bad that they shot up towards the ceiling! The enemy technically "evaded" it because it said "deflected" yet it did not appear that way in the animation. My hero totally misfired..

 

I think there was a light on the ceiling that really pissed my Defender off so she shot it down with her Comic Burst. Must not have been an green-friendly light bulb or something.

[jack_nomind]

The way I see it, there's bad and good kind of random and the hit chance clamp goes into the bad random territory. I wouldn't mind at all if my attacks always did 90-100% of the listed damage for an average of 95%, but it's pretty irritating to have 1 out of 20 attacks forcibly do nothing at all for the same result over time. This especially irritating when you miss a long cooldown power or with powersets such as Titan Weapons or Dual Blades where the forced miss messes up momentum/combos.

 

While I agree with some posters that the hit chance clamp isn't a critical issue in the game and doesn't warrant development time over more critical/useful things, I just don't see why the 5% forced chance to miss has to exist.

 

Because of the thing you just said -- because doing an average of 90% damage isn't the same thing as missing one time in twenty.  One reason automatic or critical failure misses exist in tabletop games is because it occasionally forces the players to respond to missing a crucial attack.

 

Combat in CoH lasts a lot longer in terms of number of attacks rolled than combat in tabletop games does, so it's not quite the same.  CoH also, as was pointed out a little while ago in this thread, does force a hit after every miss at >90% hit chance.

 

PvP might be the only case where this has an actual impact. I'm not very qualified to discuss PvP balance, but doesn't PvP already use a separate hit chance formula that could still keep the clamp?

 

Sort of.  I think that's an interesting proposal; retain forced misses in PvP, change only the accuracy clamp in PvE.  I'm still worried about unintended consequences but I've got no specific objections to that one.