[ QUOTE ]
First off, this post is *NOT* a precursor of any particular impending change. The topic is strictly informative and for discussion.
I'd like to know about breakpoints for To Hit and Defense and how you, the players, think it should work. I'm not talking about mechanics -- I'm talking about the expectations you have in a fight.
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
I really honestly hope this is an indication that defense is being looked at for future balancing. My personal preference is that max defense equate to max resistance. However, since max resist and zero defense results in other undesirables, such as resist debuffs, potential hold stacking, etc, which max defense wouldn't suffer as easily, I feel that defense should take 50% more damage than resistance.
1) Base to hit 50%, zero added defense, zero added to-hit.
The defender should be hit 50%.
2) Base 50%, max to hit, zero defense.
The defender should be hit 95%.
3) Base 50%, zero to hit, max defense.
The defender should be hit 5%.
Max resist [non-tankers] would take slightly more damage than this.
Also, although this is a very low number, the odds of this scenario are slim. Most people put at least one accuracy in each power.
4) Base 50%, max to hit, max defense.
The defender should be hit 37.5%.
Unless the defender is a defense-based tanker, then it should be 22.5% (85% max resist; 15% incoming damage; +50% to balance that the defender may avoid debuffs).
I feel contested to hit/defense should give as much edge to defense as contested to hit/resist would give to resistance. If a non-tanker has 75% resistance and is hit 100% of the time, he's still only taking 25% of the potential damage. But he may also be getting hit by debuffs to his resistance. So, I wouldn't think it fair that defense have that same level of pure damage mitigation as well as possibly avoiding defense debuffs. As I said above, +50% damage to the maxed defense.
1-4: There should be no maximums or caps. Instead, each additional bit of defense or accuracy/to-hit (or resistance or damage) should provide diminishing returns without limit.
The only limit might be on total mitigation, capped at 25x or 100x (100x == 90% resistance and 45+% defense in the current system), whatever seems reasonable. But getting from say, 10x mitigation to 100x mitigation should require extraordinary means, say 7 bubblers.
It would be nice if a solo blaster, with high damage + aim + buildup + etc and low hit points, fighting a solo tanker with high hp + defense + resistance + healing and low damage, were so "balanced" that they each delivered a killing blow to each other simultaneously. But trying for such a perfect system is unrealistic. In any case, it would need to factor in damage buffs, healing, etc.
I agree with Pudds. The current way of calculating if a person hits a target is very good except when the attacker has high +tohit buffs and the defender has high +def buffs. In this case the attacker should only hit 60%-70% of the time rather than the nearly every time as it is now.
For example, when I take my Ice tanker against a scrapper with FA, sometimes it feels like my +def toggles are just a waste of end. I'm not complaining about the overall effectiveness of my tank. My tank does quite well (with hibernoob) and a nerf in the effectiveness of tohit vs def would probably cause balance issues with Ice tanks specifically. But the general tohit vs def formulas do need to get reworked.
[ QUOTE ]
First off, this post is *NOT* a precursor of any particular impending change. The topic is strictly informative and for discussion.
I'd like to know about breakpoints for To Hit and Defense and how you, the players, think it should work. I'm not talking about mechanics -- I'm talking about the expectations you have in a fight.
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
1) No bonuses to hit or defense: Hit defender 75% of the time
2) Max to hit vs no defense: Hit defender 95% of the time.
3) No to hit vs max defense: Hit defender 5% of the time.
4) Max to hit vs Max defense: Hit defender 25% of the time.
At the extremes, it should be possible to reliably hit, otherwise battles could go on forever.
But that chance must be below 50%, or Defense means nothing at those levels (and conversely, it would take a huge amount of defense to get below the to hit cap).
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
[ QUOTE ]
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Around 90% of hits should connect.
[ QUOTE ]
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
99% at attacker; As defender I would expect to always be hit.
[ QUOTE ]
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
20%; 20% I don't think defense should shut down offense.
[ QUOTE ]
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
75%; 75% Conversely, if I were to have my perfect system, defense would be always be able to hold back some attacks.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First off, this post is *NOT* a precursor of any particular impending change. The topic is strictly informative and for discussion.
I'd like to know about breakpoints for To Hit and Defense and how you, the players, think it should work. I'm not talking about mechanics -- I'm talking about the expectations you have in a fight.
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
1) No bonuses to hit or defense: Hit defender 75% of the time
2) Max to hit vs no defense: Hit defender 95% of the time.
3) No to hit vs max defense: Hit defender 5% of the time.
4) Max to hit vs Max defense: Hit defender 25% of the time.
At the extremes, it should be possible to reliably hit, otherwise battles could go on forever.
But that chance must be below 50%, or Defense means nothing at those levels (and conversely, it would take a huge amount of defense to get below the to hit cap).
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed with all. Especially number 4 since it probably means the defender has hit their level 38th defense power. Does anyone really want to hit a level 38 defense power to be hit 50% of the time? =/ 25% with caps just seems more sane IMHO. =/ If it were any worse it would be anti immersive for the defense based set, they are taking full damage after all...
[ QUOTE ]
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
1/ I would say I would expect to hit and be hit 55-60%, all things being equal.
2/ I would expect to hit 90-95%, likewise if I was the defender, expect to be hit that often (whats good for me is good for others).
3/ I would expect to hit 5% of the time, even the worst fighter occasionally gets lucky 
4/ I would expect DEF to outway To-Hit, so maxed DEF and Maxed To-HIT, I would expect to hit 30% of the time.
In saying that, I would slightly lessen the severity of those numbers for NPC's of roughly eqiuvalent lvl (say 10% instead of 5% against a maxed DEF NPC etc). Keep the +5 Purple rules thou that make it really hard to hit them, I think that's fair enough.
Overall I like the system as it is now, DEF just needs a big helping hand. Especially considering sets like SR have no mitigation, only DEF, so when you get hit you feel the whole thing. At the mo, if you have max DEF and the other Player has max To-Hit it feels like you make it a 50/50 hit/miss equation, and that hurts if thats all you have to defend yourself with 
GOD bless,
Shem
Here's a question related to this.
When you think "Max defense" or "Max to-hit", is that max solo, using only powers on your character, or max with outside buffs?
-- War
In all cases, I'd WANT to hit 100% of the time. Nobody actually WANTS to miss their attacks, do they?
1) I'd be happy with hitting 75% of the time. I could tolerate 50% of the time. As the defender, I'd be absolutely ecstatic to be dodging half the incoming hits, but expecting far more to get through. After all, I have no defences.
2) As the attacker, I'd want and expect to hit each and every time. As the defender, I'd expect to get hit every time but I really wouldn't be happy with it. I'd like to know there was at least a small chance of dodging a fatal blow while I run away to buy some purples.
3) What I want as the attacker isn't really an issue here. With maximum defence I wouldn't expect to hit at all, but just as the defender in the last situation, I'd like to know there's at least a small chance of getting a lucky hit in. As the defender, I'd expect to be able to stand next to the attacker, drop a boombox and go AFK for... ooh... a month. Maybe cut it down to a week, I wouldn't want to be greedy.
4) As the attacker, I'd expect to hit more often than with no buffs at all. As the defender, I'd expect to dodge more than with no buffs at all. A 50/50 split would probably keep my happy in both situations.
That's just to hit buffs though.
Let's say it takes ten unslotted, low damage attacks to down an SR Scrapper. As the Scrapper, dodging 25% of them is going to feel pretty good. You're going to get at least one dodge, probably two or three. You last noticeably longer and feel like you get something for your slots.
Now let's say that the same Blaster actually has enough slots and high damage attacks to defeat that SR Scrapper in two hits. Suddenly, only being able to dodge 25% is going to feel a lot less sexy. It's going to feel like your defences were completely ignored, making all those slots you wasted buffing your defence feel worse than useless.
For me, the right 'hit' ratio would have to somehow take into account the power of the attacks involved. Maybe at high levels of defence, you could have a chance to partially dodge attacks? Instead of the Scrapper either being hit in the face by an energy blast or sidestepping it completely, the attacker has a chance to almost hit, to score a kind of glancing blow so that the blast only grazes the Scrapper's cheek and deals reduced damage? That would help defence to feel more worthwhile when lots of damage is involved... but it would also turn it into resistance, which kind of defeats the idea of having it be defence in the first place.
[ QUOTE ]
First off, this post is *NOT* a precursor of any particular impending change. The topic is strictly informative and for discussion.
I'd like to know about breakpoints for To Hit and Defense and how you, the players, think it should work. I'm not talking about mechanics -- I'm talking about the expectations you have in a fight.
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Hi _Castle_ and fellow forum goers.
Let me throw you and everyone in the forums a monkey wrench on this and try to paint a word picture of what I would expect. Im going to break it down a bit on a couple of things and after that you can all flame on me. 
Ok here comes your word picture:
Melee attack example
1) In answer to your first question, let us say I am a normal human that has never, ever, thrown a punch before but have seen other people do so (no hit bonuses). I am standing next to a card board box (no defense against me at all) that is my size and I decide to take a swing at it. I would expect to hit it EVERY time I swung at it unless I slipped or was off balance. How much I actually damaged it would depend on how well and how hard I hit it. If I got all my weight behind my swing and hit right in the center of the box I would expect to punch a hole through it. If I got all my weight behind the swing but hit it a glancing blow or hit the corner of the box I would not expect to punch a hole in the box but would perhaps look for a dent in the card board or a crumpled spot.
2) I am a prize fighter and I know every thing there is to know about prize fighting (max possible to hit value) I am up against our card board box again (no defense) I would expect to hit the box EVERY time I swung at it and even hit it if I were off balance. I would expect to put a hole in the box, no matter where I hit it, provided I put all my strength behind it, every time I swung.
3) I am a normal person (no to hit bonuses) and I am up against the same prize fighter as above (maximum defense) for a demonstration of defense. I expect to hit where I aim almost 100% of the time (say I slip or am off balance 1% of the time, I therefore hit 99% of the time). I also expect that one of 2 things would happen; the first being that my opponent is no longer where I was aiming and my blow misses or, the second is that my opponent is still standing where he was when I swung but he has batted my pitiful attempt at hitting him away. Heaven help me if he should decide to take a swing at me.
4) Now it is time for the prize fighter (maximum to hit bonuses) to take a few swings at the person who is contending for his title (maximum defense bonuses). I would expect that the prize fighter would be up against his equal in this situation. The prize fighter would hit where he aimed 100% of the time but his opponent would duck or dodge completely perhaps 10-15% of the time, get his gloves in the way and block 50-60% of the time and use a combination of dodging and blocking that would still cause him to be hit 15-20% of the time but only take a little bit of damage (a glancing blow). The rest of the time (25-5% in this case) I would expect to see a nice solid blow land that would do some decent damage the more solid the blow the more damage I would expect. I would also expect a fight of this type to last for several 3 minute rounds
.
Ranged attack example
1) In this example, let us say I am a normal human that has never, ever, used a bow and arrow before but have been given a demonstration of the proper techniques to use (no hit bonuses). I am standing 3 feet from an archery target (no defense against me at all) that is my size and I fire off a shot. I would expect to hit it EVERY time I shot. How much I actually damaged it would depend on how good my pull was. If I used my full strength each and every pull I would expect the arrow to penetrate to the same depth every time. How often I missed AND how much damage I did would depend more on how far away the target was. Just for the sake of argument and to put numbers on it lets say that every 1 foot away we move the target I lose 1% on my accuracy and on my damage so that at 50 feet away I am only hitting the target 50% of the time and the arrow that does hit only goes in half as far.
2) I am Robin Hood (max possible to hit value) I am up against our man sized archery target again (no defense) I would expect to hit the target EVERY time I shot at it. I would again expect the arrow to penetrate based on how good my pull was which should be maximum. I would now expect to hit my target between 1 and 100 feet every time I pull. I would also again expect the amount of damage to decrease with range.
3) I am a normal person (no to hit bonuses) with my bow and I am up against a fully armored knight of old (maximum defense) standing 3 feet from me. I expect to hit the knight 100% of the time. I also expect that one of 3 things would happen; the first is that I manage through shear luck (1% of the time) to actually have the good fortune to get my arrow into a joint in the armor or between 2 of the armor plates and actually do the maximum damage possible, the second being that my arrow glances off his armor (50% of the time), the third one is that I manage to hit his armor straight on (49% of the time), the arrow will still bounce off but I would expect him to bruise a bit underneath. The farther away the knight is the less often I would expect to hit him and the less damage I would do if I got that lucky shot in (see 1 above).
4) Now Robin Hood (maximum to hit bonuses) is up against our knight from antiquity (maximum defense bonuses). I would expect Robin Hood to get a shot between the armor or into the joints from 3 feet 95% of the time that he fired. 2.5% of the time the arrow would bounce harmlessly aside the other 2.5% of the time the arrow would hit straight on but would bounce off causing a bruise to the knight. Every foot farther that the knight was away Robins chance of getting an arrow into the joints would go down 1% and glance and bounce would increase .5% each.
This is getting a bit long but the last really important point about to Hit would be
Area effects:
If it really affects the area it should ALWAYS hit every thing in the area. A spherical explosion for example should hit every thing that is inside the sphere, whether or not it takes damage should be based on its level of armoring or shielding. I dont care how agile a fellow is, if hes inside the explosion when it occurs, no amount of contorting is going to save him from the damage (jumping out before it explodes is another matter entirely). Armor or shielding will reduce the amount of damage he takes but he still gets hit.
Other quick points:
Cones the center and up close are where the damage is the closer to the edge and the farther away the less damage. Like other area of effects if you are in the cone when it goes off you get hit.
Damage over time if you hit someone with flaming oil they will catch fire and continue to burn, but if your first punch with shadow maul misses that doesnt mean that the rest should miss too. Each swing should be checked separately.
Theres more but you see where I am getting
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
I'll throw in my two cents.
1) To me it makes sense for this to scale by level. At level 1, I think I could live with 50% accuracy. By level 50, I might expect close to 100% accuracy in this situation.
As a defender who has no defense, I would expect to be hit at least half the time.
2) If I have the maximum possible accuracy, then I should hit at least 95% of the time. As a defender, if someone else has the maximum accuracy, and I have no defense, then I guess I wouldn't expect to be missed at all. I don't think I'd want to be in that situation, though.
3) I wouldn't really expect to hit them much at all, but if I hit less than 20% of the time, I would start to get frustrated. Hitting below 10% I think I'd just give up.
On defense, I would expect to be hit maybe 1% of the time. I could live with 10% though, I think.
4) With us both at max, I would say 50/50 is as fair as you can get.
Avatar: "Cheeky Jack O Lantern" by dimarie
[ QUOTE ]
I'm talking about the expectations you have in a fight.
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
If this is 1v1 in a closed environment with no outside influences:
1) As the Offender, I expect to hit 75% of the time. As the Defender, I expect to be missed 25% of the time.
2) As the Offender, I expect to hit 95% of the time. As the Defender, I expect to be missed 5% of the time.
3) As the Offender, I expect to hit 5% of the time. As the Defender, I expect to be missed 95% of the time.
4) As the Offender, I expect to hit 50% of the time. As the Defender, I expect to be missed 50% of the time.
On #4 I was torn in whether to make it: As the Offender, I expect to hit 75% of the time. As the Defender, I expect to be missed 25% of the time, or leave it at the 50%. I went with the 50% because #1 seems like what the first part of the game is like. Everyone is fresh, new and has hardly any powers. Thus, everyone can throw stuff out and hit for the most part.
Situation #4 comes off as what an epic, final, end game encounter is like. Both sides are maxed out on their power, fully buffed. So to make it fun and epic, a 50/50 chance for a win seemed a lot better and less one sided against the guy who had worked so hard to get Max Defense, who would be getting hit 75% of the time.
[ QUOTE ]
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Technically, thats two different questions: Of course, as the Attacker, I'd WANT to hit my target ALL THE TIME! On the other hand, As both the attacker and defender in this situation, I'd EXPECT the ratio to be pretty much 50%
[ QUOTE ]
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, I'd WANT to hit the target all the time, the difference is, in this situation, It's much more reasonable to expect it. As the defender, I'd pretty much expect to take it in the shorts. Problem is, without inspirations, many ATs are stuck at the base Defense value, while pretty much anyone can slot Accuracy.
[ QUOTE ]
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, I believe Ive harped on the language used enough by now. In this situation, I'd expect to hit very rarely, no MORE than 1/20 attacks, maybe fewer. As the defender, I'd expect to be pretty much untouchable in this situation.
[ QUOTE ]
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Now, this is a tough one. Part of me says that it should be back to the basic 50%, the same as if neither player had either. Some people might feel this unfair to one or the other parties, but honestly, we're dealing with two opposed abilities here, it really doesn't matter what increment you choose to examine (100% of Max, 50% of Max, whatever), if you increment both abilities equally, they should each bear the same weight, whihc is to say they should cancel each other out.
Of course, there is still the larger problem, of Accuracy percentages being true only when a ridiculously large sample is taken. Frankly, I really don't feel that 950/1000 hits is the same thing as 95/100- especially when I'm slotting 2 lvl 53 Accuracy SO's in all my attacks, AND running Focused Accuracy, and still missing 4/5 attacks against a +1 minion. Heck, many nights, I'd be surprised if I even MADE 1000 attacks in my session.
Well, this seems like a pretty loaded question.
But, I've always been a proponant of Defense over resistance(Still wany my /Ice Brute back), in my mind the world is too full of examples where a good defense is better than a good offense. Or how often do you see tie goes to the defender in a ruleset for tabletop games?
With that in mind, I give this opinion, and it can be taken with the necessary grain of salt.
1) I'd expect a 55-60% chance to hit here. I believe that by default offense is the norm. most reflexive actions are to strike or lash out.
I like the caps of 95% and 5%, they are easy to work with, and easy to put calculations to develop as well) But I'd like to see the values just that little bit closer to always hit, always miss
2) as the attacker I'd expect a 97.5% hit chance, as the defender I'd expect that same 2.5% miss chance
3)as the attacker I'd expect a 2.5% hit chance, as the defender I'd expect a 97.5% miss chance
At this end of the spectrum, I believe that defense should have the advantage, generally, a great defender can counter anything a great attacker can throw at them.
4)I believe as the attacker at 40-45% hit chance is reasonable, and as the Defender a 55-60% miss chance is best reflected in the power.
I'm sure that most people may disagree and believe that this should be a cut down the middle line, but realistically, the game is going to see twice as much offensive ablities as 'defensive'(not strictly defense, but resists as well) Thus, the rarity of these defensive abilities should be offset by the increased performance as the ability increases.
for the 4 questions: 50% 95% 5% 50%
Liberty
My 50s:
Hero: Armor Assassin (scrapper), Cross Dresser (scrapper), Surly Seaman (blaster), Defensive End (Tank), Rad Rhino (Cont)
Villain: Beast Infection (Corr), Sweet Zombie Jesus (MM), Milk Weasel (Stalker), Orgullo (MM), Agent Eris (Crab)
[ QUOTE ]
First off, this post is *NOT* a precursor of any particular impending change. The topic is strictly informative and for discussion.
I'd like to know about breakpoints for To Hit and Defense and how you, the players, think it should work. I'm not talking about mechanics -- I'm talking about the expectations you have in a fight.
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
1) 50%
2) 95%
3) 5%
4) 50%
*shrugs*, simple...but that's what I like about it.
Formerly "Back Alley Brawler"
1.) 60% Hit rate. It's a werid number, but it hits a wee bit more than it misses to make the fight a touch more interesting.
2.) 90% Hit rate. Not guranteed, but close. Bit more leeway than currently for 'lucky misses.'
3.) 10% hit rate. Same reasoning as #2.
4.) 30% hit rate. You'll hit, but not too often.
I am a personal fan of the idea of "defense trumps offense" in games. Not a lot of games have that.
Also, I dislike how everything seems to be based on the old d20 systems with the 'natural 1' and 'natural 20' things. If you don't know what that means... a 5% chance is 1 in 20. That just happens to be the same size of dice from a certain old RPG system that I've never been fond of. It's a handy core reference system for games, but it seems like everything is using the old standby.
[ QUOTE ]
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
With no accuracy, 50 50. With some accuracy, 3 out of 4 attacks should hit. With max accuracy, I'd say missing an attack every other attack chain. (As a defender with no defense, I don't expect much.)
[ QUOTE ]
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Same case as max accuracy from 1), miss an attack every other attack chain.
[ QUOTE ]
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Ick.
Attacker: No accuracy, one attack in 6, with max accuracy, I'd expect 1 out of every 3 or 4.
From defense perspecitive: I'd hope for 9 out of 10 misses vs no accuracy (or always missing 
, 7 out of 8 misses vs max accuracy.
[ QUOTE ]
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Attacker: with no accuracy, I'd hope for 2 hits out of 5, with max accuracy, 2-3 hits out of every 4.
Defense: vs no accuracy, I would want to see at least every other attack miss. vs max accuracy, at least one attack in every 4 attacks should miss.
Ultimately, I think defense should be a little better than tohit/accuracy and should always have some effect.
[ QUOTE ]
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
No defense and base toHit, I would want to hit 75% of the time and miss 25% of the time.
[ QUOTE ]
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
I would want to hit 95% of the time and be missed 5% of the time.
[ QUOTE ]
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
I would expect to be missed 95% of the time, and to hit only 5% of the time.
[ QUOTE ]
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
As the defender with maxed values I would like to see 75% misses against me, and only see 25% hits.
Everyone is capable of hitting something at least some of the time, no matter what your character, you have a chance to hit. Not everyone is good at dodging something at all, most characters never train in defenses and thus defense is a specialty, and should be rewarded since it is harder to obtain.
I can see why however one would like a 50/50 in # 4. But, (not referencing curent system ) making it so you can hit better is always easier to do then to make it so you get hit less. Thus you need to reward those who manage to find ways to get hit less by letting them cap higher then those who just dabble in trying to hit better so they can kill faster.
Hitting more serves more then one purpose, defense does not.
Vixens of Violence:
-------------------------
Psionic Scion - LvL 50 - Mind / Psi / Mu Dom ( Perma w/ 77.5% global currently )
Current Project: Isabella il Veleno
I am an Alt-o-holic =)
1) 66%
2) 90%
3) 10%
4) 33%
[ QUOTE ]
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
I take this to mean that neither combatant is any more or less skilled than the average person in attacking and defending.
In real life, a fight of this type usually comes down to trading blow after blow until someone falls down first. There are usually no dodges (dodging being the defender skillfully and intentionally avoiding the hit that would have otherwise hit a less skilled individual). There are usually no misses (missing being that even if the target didn't move an inch, the attacker still would not hit them at all). It would simply come down to who could take the most blows (who has the most hit points) or whomever gets in the first hit.
Looking at fights like a school yard fight, a bar fight, or pretty much any other kind of fight, it always tends to be that dodging is extremely uncommon and missing is pretty much non-existent. There are always outside influences, but I have an extreme distaste for "the chance of external influences" to be a guaranteed mathematical factor dictating how often I can hit something. If there is a big 300-pound guy standing in front of me and I want to punch him, I guarantee you that I'm not going to miss (unless he skillfully dodges, see below). As a human being of sound mind and body, I would not miss if I were to throw a baseball at the side of a barn from ten feet away. I disagree with the notion that a game should make me miss a guaranteed x% of the time. I find that very insulting. It's one thing to add challenge, it is another thing entirely to make my character (a superhero, no less) into some sort of dysfunctional dolt.
To sum up number 1, both targets having no particular skill granting accuracy or defense, I would say they should both hit each other 100% of the time.
[ QUOTE ]
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
I take this to mean that I have an amazing ability/power that allows me an extreme amount of accuracy. Perhaps computer-assisted targetting, as an example. If the target has no defense, in other words, no particular skills at dodging, I would obviously expect to hit them every single time. (Again, I dislike the "external influences" excuse.) This would be like RoboCop firing his Auto-9 at a run-of-the-mill street thug. The thug is not going to dodge, period.
Another example might be a world-class martial artist. If said fighter was attacking an average Joe, he would not miss any blow that he intended to connect with.
Max accuracy versus the average Joe's (lack of) defense, 100% guaranteed hit rate.
[ QUOTE ]
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Assuming that I had no particular skills for landing blows/aiming shots, I would never expect to hit someone with a highly-specialized skill at dodging. That would be like any able-bodied human being trying to land a punch on Quicksilver or The Flash. Or try hitting either of them with a gunshot. Simply never going to happen, except maybe with pure dumb luck. But I would put that possibility into such a small percentage that it's not even worth factoring into a game.
Going back to the martial artist versus the average Joe, if the martial artist did nothing but defend, Joe would never land a single blow on him, unless he found some way to surprise him (which should never be automatically factored into a mathematical to-hit rate).
An average person's accuracy versus extreme defense capabilities, I say an absolute 0% chance of hitting.
[ QUOTE ]
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
[/ QUOTE ]
I would say that there would be a very high dodge rate, but ultimately I, the highly skilled attacker, would eventually land a hit once the opponent made a mistake and I found an opening. I would say that it is generally more difficult to successfully dodge than it is to land a hit, since attacks often have the advantage of unpredictable timing.
Let's take the example of a martial arts duel, where both fighters are equally skilled. It's typically dodge after parry after dodge after parry, until one of the defenders makes a mistake and leaves himself open very briefly, at which point the highly skilled attacker would home in on this opportunity and land his first hit. Such an opening would only come about due to an extended onslaught of a skilled attacker, thus an average Joe off the street would never land a blow, but a very skilled martial artist would eventually.
We see such martial arts battles in movies all the time, and they tend to be quite exciting. The blow-by-blow fight can be great too. Both have their place. Captain Kirk and many of his opponents generally fit into point 1, and Jet Li and his usual opponents easily fit into point 4. Points 2 and 3, IMO, are no-brainers.
In summary, max to-hit versus max defense, the attacker would hit a small percentage of the time (5% at most), but never within the first one or two attacks (unless the first attack is a surprise attack). I have a great idea on how to implement this, but I will refrain from posting it here, as this thread is not for ideas on mechanics.
[ QUOTE ]
If anything, defense heavy sets should have some form of unresistable defense per se maybe, to put them more evenly on par with the insane amount of To Hit buff capability...or just quite simply lower the cap of To Hit buffs...because with Tactics, Focused Accuracy (a BIG problem in and of itself, it should be a click not a toggle), Fortitude, Vengeance (when stacked forget about it), etc. I will chew through defense all night long.
Maybe have To Hit buffs reach a MUCH lower cap against certain powers or sets...I don't know, but it definitely is a big balance issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? base - 50% ie with no acc enhance
Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?expect with no defence, 0%
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed? 100%, 0%
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed? 0%, 100%
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed? 50%, 50%
'defence' as defence is seemingly much maligned by the development team and I cant really figure out why, sure the values used to be nuts back when blasters could run around with 40% def and such but res sets dont seem to be so 'hated'.
Equally leveled opponents fighting using equal powers against equally well-slotted defenses should come out as a wash, around 50-50, but randomly, so if one gets 'lucky' then there's either a series of whiffs or a bunch of sequential hits, depending.
Starting from there, adjust according to level, powers and slotting. In the real world, accuracy depends upon skill, distance and the attack used. So a target shooter firing prone from rest with a rifle at a barn will not miss as often as a roundhousing drunk sailor in a fistfight with Chuck Norris.
I know this is a fantasy game, but it breaks my immersion to miss a really large target with my snipe. I'm cool with not doing damage, but missing a sitting duck really shouldn't happen all that often.
Sorry about the tangent.
1) Probably around 60-80%, since I hate to miss.
2) Almost always hit, say around 90%-99%
3) Hit somewhere between 1% and 10% of the time
4) Hmm... say somewhere like, 40% of the time, giving defence the edge over to-hit
Always remember, we were Heroes.