No mechanics, huh. Hmm. Well, applying to do this for you guys gave me an appreciation for just how complicated a question this all really is. That said, I think the goals of the current system work fine for the most part, as I think they pretty much fall in line with what I want from it. A 50% base chance of hitting can be annoying in the lower levels, but for most of the game, it's relatively trivial to get yourself sufficient hit buffing to forget all about it. All things being equal.... all things should be equal. This is not just a case of no defense and no to-hit buffing. Any time defense is the same as the to-hit, it should be 50-50. That's what having matched ability is all about, it can go either way. I'd say you should never miss or never hit when it's capped/floored in either direction, but that's very frustrating, and we should not gloss over that human element. the 5%/95% cap/floor is then a good idea.
The real issue here is the comparative availability, I think. Assuming a plethora of buffs on either side for either def or to-hit, it all works out fine. Unfortunately, this is rarely the reality, from what I can tell.
The other question here, in looking at some of the other responses, is are we to assume that PvP and PvE use the same system, or not? Because some of these responses seem to be saying "I want to both hit and dodge more often than my opponent, all things being equal". Which is fine for the PvE experience, where players are on one side and AI is on the other. But it isn't fundamentally possible in the PvP sphere, since the experience/expectation needs to be the same for every player. All of which would indicate that it might be best if things worked one way in PvP and another in PvE. Which is what i've honestly always felt is really needed to balance PvP properly without PvE falling apart(as has happened a handful of times despite the devs' best efforts). They're two different things, and perhaps they should have two different sets of rules. though, come to think of it, if you set up the game so that equal amounts of to-hit buffs and defense buffs always break an even 50/50, then all you'd have to do is raise the players' base defense and to-hit to get the effect of being more effective against mobs than they are against you without PvP going out of whack.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The answer to this question is that I as the attacker expect under the current system to hit 95% of the time. As the defender I expect to be missed 5% of the time. The latter half being my experience in pvp zones playing as a /ninjitsu stalker.
[/ QUOTE ]
To clarify here: Does this mean, in a perfectly balanced system, you would expect Max To Hit to always completely negate Max Defense? That's how I read what you have written.
To everyone:
The availability of To Hit buffs is a seperate question. Assume for purposes of this exercise that you have access to buffs far beyond what you would need to reach a maximum value.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then I would want DeBuffs far beyond what I need to reach the minumum value.
The 95%/5% bounderies are good. Going back the the 20 sided dice where a 20 will always hit and a 1 will alway miss.
Poison Pill
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Guys, i don't think the question is "Do you know the current defense values?" like some people seem to be answering. It's more "If you designed the game, what chances to hit would you design in these situations?"
[/ QUOTE ]
Correct.
[/ QUOTE ]
In a max offense vs max defense situation, I'd expect to hit my target about 50% of the time.
At the same time, in a minimum offense vs minimum defense situation, I'd expect to hit around 75% as the game is currently set up for.
But part of me really wants a setup where equal amounts of Offense and Defense cancel each other out and leave you at base ToHit values. Unfortunately, that's not something we have now.
Virtue: multiple characters.
CoH/V: Woot! Maybe Fun is to be had once again.
Ack! RUN! Regen is glowing mean & green!
If it reduces you, it's a nerf.
If it buffs the mobs, it's challenge.
They are not the same.
I agree with others who say this balance is currently borked. I think the biggest problem is that accuracy means almost nothing in PvP, because it is so heavily trumped by to-hit and defense coefficients in the equations. For example, barring inspirations, a controller, even a rad controller, has almost no chance killing a /SR, /Ninjitsu, or /EA with their tier 9 running by themselves. Conversely, those same toons might as well have no armor on at all when facing any other hero AT who has access to the massive to-hit buffs via BU, PBU, Aim, and Focused Acc. There's simply a disconnect between these powers being absolutely dominate or absolutely useless.
So my answers, and I mean this only for PvP:
1. 70% (misses make for a dull fight)
2. 85%: create room for -defense debuffs to add value for even the best PvP offense builds.
3. 50%: Nothing should be godly. However, some consideration should be given to grant some tier-9s that are defense-only some other benefits to offset this, such as dmg resistance, increased regen, etc.
4. 70%
In all cases, my numbers would make stalkers want to howl, probably. I can understand that. Perhaps the interruption of AS should be re-examined, as well as their max HP. I just dislike the rock-papers-scissors nature of solo PvP.
1) With default To-Hit vs no defense: As the attacker or defender in this situation, I would want 1 of every 2 (or 50%) to hit at the least. What I 'expect' in these cases is more like 1 in 3 as attacker and 1 in 2 as defender.
2) If I have max To-Hit vs no defense, I -want- to be hitting most of the time. like 4 out of 5 times. If I was the defender in that situation, I would be running away as I would expect to be getting hit most of the time. (No matter what I might -want-.)
3) In the defaut To-Hit vs Max Defense - I would want to hit from time to time. Maybe 1 in 5. And I would expect that I would seem never to hit. And this would also be what I would expect as the one being attacked. The occasional attack getting through.
4) Max To-Hit vs Max Defense - I would expect this to act the same as case 1. 1 in 2 tries should hit. Basicly, Max To-Hit vs Max Defense should cancel each other out.
(The following is in hero system terms)
1) 11- to hit (7 OCV vs a 7 DCV) - Average roll hits
2) 17- to hit (13+ OCV vs a 7 DCV) - Most rolls hit
3) 5- to hit (7 OCV vs 13 DCV) - Still a few chances on 3d6 to hit
4) 11- to hit (13 OCV vs 13 DCV) - Average roll hits
Of course, in this Hero System example, as with any time you are talking about dice, there are people that are luckier than others that skew the chances. Same holds true for random number generators.
Too Many Characters... not enough player
Member of Alts-R-Us.
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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 think a 50/50 split is about right here.
[ 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 ]
There should always be a chance to miss, so lets say 95% hits and 5% misses with this one.
[ 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 ]
Just as there should always be a chance to miss, there should always be a chance to hit. Say 5% chance of hitting and 95% chance to miss.
[ 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 ]
This is really the same thing as having default values in those areas, so back to 50/50.
[/ QUOTE ]
And truth be told, I think the same base numbers should be applied to to all aspects of the game, PvP & PvE.
My Deviant Art Page
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The answer to this question is that I as the attacker expect under the current system to hit 95% of the time. As the defender I expect to be missed 5% of the time. The latter half being my experience in pvp zones playing as a /ninjitsu stalker.
[/ QUOTE ]
To clarify here: Does this mean, in a perfectly balanced system, you would expect Max To Hit to always completely negate Max Defense? That's how I read what you have written.
To everyone:
The availability of To Hit buffs is a seperate question. Assume for purposes of this exercise that you have access to buffs far beyond what you would need to reach a maximum value.
[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely not. I do not think max To Hit should automatically trump max Defense. That's what yellows are for.
No one even uses yellows in PvP, lol...accept in zones to see stalkers. They aren't necessary, that should tell you something.
Players like bubblers and SR scrappers get TOASTED in anything larger than a pentad and other players aren't even using yellows.
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 ]
Couldn't agree more with this statement.
Hmm
1) normal acc vrs normal defense: miss rate 1:6 or 83% accuracy. (1:4 or 75% has some extremely frustrating miss streaks)
2) max tohit vrs normal defense: miss rate 1:10 or 90% accuracy (A chain is rarely 20 attacks long)
3) normal to hit vrs max defense: miss rate 2:3 or 33% accuracy
4) max hit vrs max defense: miss rate 1:2 or 50% accuracy
by comparison, the numbers stand at
normal accuracy vrs normal defense 75%
max accuracy vrs normal defense 95%
normal accuracy vrs max defense 75-45=30% or 1:3 hit rate
max accuracy vrs max defense 95-45 = 50%
I believe accuracy SO's are calculated after defense is calculated, so thats 30*1.66 = 50% and 50*1.66 = 83.3%
The main Problem is High accuracy burst damage. Defense based chars fall apart since the dmg mitigation from defense is based around spreading out the hits over time. In PVP burst damage means extra damage that doesn't miss, bypassing defense completely.
By comparisons, resists (and regen somewhat) only work if the player gets hit, so if they're getting hit every time the resists provide a perfect defensive boost.
I think defense should be balanced around the amount of mitigtion the equivalent resistance would provide. Most chars push 60 to 80% resist (fire, dark, etc) so max defense should provide a 70ish% defense after calculating SO's (30% accuracy)
One of the other problems in PVP currently is high defense or resist can totally negate characters not built around doing massive and accurate burst damage.
Having that much resist basically negates lower dmg builds from participating in non-team pvp tho. Defense and resists overall need to be looked at in relation to issues like support class damage. I'd have to look more in depth before I could provide useful feedback tho.
I agree with the basic consensus on 1, 2, and 3 that I have read so far, being...
1. Base accuracy, zero defense = 50 - 66 % chance to hit.
2. Max accuracy, zero defense = 90 - 95% chance to hit.
3. Base accuracy, max defense = 5 - 10% chance to hit.
But I disagree very strongly with the general consensus that the values on #4 that this situation should balance it back to 50 - 66%.
We all play in a game where we know there are powersets that rely exclusively on Defense to survive. That being the case, the maximum accuracy versus maximum defense still needs to give the defensive powerset more of a chance to survive. I would give the advantage in the #4 scenario to the defense-based set by giving them an unresistable defense of some sort. So...
4. Max accuracy, max defense = 33 - 50% chance to hit.
[ 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?
[/ QUOTE ]
50% hit ratio, 50% miss ratio
[ 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 ]
95% hit ratio, 5% miss ratio
[ 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 ]
5% hit ratio, 95% miss ratio
[ 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 ]
50% hit ratio, 50% miss ratio
The problem as I see it is that it's impossible to tell how much defense or tohit you've got. If there was a way to display the pre-calculated chance to hit when targeting an enemy it would be easier to see how good certain buffs/debuffs was.
Winner of Players' Choice Best Villainous Arc 2010: Fear and Loathing on Striga; ID #350522
I'll Play Devil's advocate here. I think the extremes (95%/5%) that most people post for their highs and lows lead to too many one-sided events. If you find a foe you're poorly matched against, you might as well just sit there.
I'd rather see a better chance for luck playing a role.
Like others, I'd see 50/50 as the "averge" baseline for "none/none" and "max/max"
I, though, think in PvP, making the max certainty to hit/miss closer to a whopping 80%/20% or 85%/15% would lead to more 'lucky shots' that might make the one-sided fights feel a little less biased. The outcome of such a battle may still be rather predetermined, but not to the point where your adversary figures "what's the point" and just steps away from the keyboard.
I think
1) Base accuracy, zero defense = 30-40% chance to hit
2) Max accuracy, zero defense = 90% chance to hit
3) Base accuracy, max defense = 10% chance to hit
4) Max accuracy, max defense = 30-40% chance to hit...
We all know that in the PVE game, people slot their powers with +ACC... so having it be 30 percent at base vs base isnt really a problem (because most people wont have that)
In PVP some people are becoming gods with super defense, but they need it because its their only way to survive. 30-40% makes them killable but still gives them a decent line of defense (keeping things balanced, without going crazy in any direction).
Mew
[ QUOTE ]
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.
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 ]
See? This is the problem! Who *cares*. This is a situation doomed to be no-fun to someone, just like holds in pvp. If it's a single player game, then I am the hero, and my to hit should count more than their defense, and their tohit should count less against mine. In pvp, you can't have dice rolls determine every interaction and expect it to be fun or fair.
Model the damn projectiles and attacks.
Interesting discussion.
1. 50/50
2 and 3 I agree with the general consensus.
3. 50/50
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
1) 70% of the time should be a hit.
In a fight, most attacks will land unless something prevents them from doing so. If you don't actively defend yourself, you will get hit. This goes in a fist, gun, or any other sort of fight.
2) 98% hits
You are actively concentrating on hitting them. A trained fighter or marksman will rarely, if ever miss a target that is not actively avoiding or defending itself.
3) 10-15% hits
You aren't really trying hard to hit them, and they are doing everything humanly possible to avoid it, 10-15% is just Murphy's law.
4) 60% hits
Both are tying very hard, But it's easier to shoot or hit someone than it is to dodge someone hitting you.
[ 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 think the current 50/50 is a pretty good place to be.
[ 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 ]
As an attacker I would want to hit 100% of the time. I have gone to the trouble of (somehow) hitting the cap for ToHit, and my target has no Defense. If I start randomly missing in spite of that, then I could lose a fight based on pure luck, regardless of the effort I took to improve my position.
As the person being attacked, I certainly wouldn't complain if there was still a random chance of the other player missing, but 0% doesn't seem especially unfair to me.
[ 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 ]
As an attacker, I'd like to have some chance of hitting the other person, regardless of how high they get their Defense value. 2-5% doesn't seem totally out of the question.
It's not bad for the person being attacked, either - it's low enough that it'll probably not be worth the trouble of attacking me (without any ToHit buffs) but it doesn't make me completely untouchable, even to someone who's at the base values.
[ 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 ]
This is the tricky one, because it's very hard to come up with a number that doesn't marginalize one or the other. If it's too low, then there's no real way to fight the person with high Defense, and if it's too high there's no point in using Defense to begin with. If you ask me, 50% is way too high.
I think for both sides a number around 20% would be about right. That's still a higher percentage of incoming damage than a Resistance set would be taking if they were at the cap (barring unresistable damage).
1) With no buffs I would like to hit my enemy 66% of the time. With no buffs I would like my enemy to miss me 50% of the time. Yeah, I know those are incompatible.
2) Buffed out the wazoo I want to hit the defender always, but I also prefer a no guarantee system, so I am happy with the 95% cap. I have no defense and my enemy is buffed out the wazoo, I expect to be hit always.
3) 25% of the time I want to hit a target that is "unhittable". As the "unhittable" defender I would be happy totally dodging attacks 75% of the time. Obviously, that will get most Defense based toons dead pretty quick though. If I as the defender get hit 25% of the time, but ~75% of those hits are mostly dodged, I would still feel like my defense was useful. As the attacker, I would at least be able to hit and feel like I am doing something. I guess that is the key, when attacking you want to feel like something is happening, so missing 85+% of the time is harsh and begins to feel pointless.
4) See #1. At any point where defense and to hit are equal, 50% to 66% should apply.
A partial hit would appeal to me as an attacker, because while I am more tolerant of misses than most, it still can get frustrating. A mostly dodged would appeal to me as a defender, because I wouldn't be so all or nothing. Of course partial hits/mostly dodges run into the issue of what do you do with non-damage effects? Weaken the mag and/or duration of status, lower the power of slows, etc. That sounds like a lot of work just to figure out what to do, and then trying to figure out how to do it as well.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
Edit: Post removed, because everything I said applied to PvE rather than PvP. Note to self: Try to pay at least a little attention to what you're doing.
In general, for PvE I thin chance to hit and defense should be stacked in the player's favor by about 10-20% from a base line of 50%, so if I'm a player and case 1 is no tohit and no defense I'd expect to hit 60-70% of the time.
If I'm a player and a defender in case 1 I'd expect to be missed 20% - 25% of the time.
For PvP these numbers should be 50% instead.
on the high end of the spectrum in PvE, if I'm a player and have base tohit and the enemy has max defense I'd expect to hit 25% of the time.
In PvE If I'm a player and I have max defense and an enemy has base to hit I'd expect to be missed 80%-90% of the time.
For PvP if I'm attacking a player with max defense and I have base tohit I'd want to hit at least 25% of the time.
For PvP if I'm defending with max defense and the attacker has base to hit I'd want to be missed at least 75% of the time.
For PvP if I'm attacking a player with max defense and I have max tohit I'd want to hit at least 40% of the time.
For PvP if I'm defending with max defense and the attacker has max to hit I'd want to be missed at least 60% of the time.
I am an ebil markeeter and will steal your moneiz ...correction stole your moneiz. I support keeping the poor down because it is impossible to make moneiz in this game.
1) 50/50 seems to me to be a bare base number for a defender and an attack with zero buffs
2) If tohit capped and the defender has no defense, they should be hit at 95% accuracy
3) Likewise, an attacker who takes no +tohit should floor on a capped out +defense person
4) This is the tricky part: I would expect that insane ammounts of tohit is the "counter" to insane ammounts of defense, or some sort of heavy duty debuffs bring that defense down. Realistically, 50/50 would be the way to go, assuming each person can get the defense/+tohit cap.
The real problem isn't so much the fact that in some lab someplace, a build/aim/tactics counters elude. The problem is the fact that villains do not have as good of a +tohit selection as heroes do. Corruptors will never have as good of tactics running as the heroes do, and the heroes will always have (overall) better defenses. Couple that with the fact that heroes get power boosted fortitudes/force field bubbles along with focused accuracy and you can see why villains have a hard time competing in RV. Any good hero team can get capped +tohit AND defender, where as its a hell of a lot tougher to get the same on villain teams. Tangent, yes, but this is the real defense/tohit problem I believe.
The truth is the solution from an equation of lies. ~Maileah Kirel
I have a question for Castle. When you say "You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs)" do you wish us to take into account accuracy enhancements? For question 1 i would say 50/50, however if the question was "You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your attacks are slotted with 2 accuracy SOs, 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?", I would say i would want to hit 85% of the time. Since it is so easy to get high accuracy I feel the game is balanced around hitting most of the time when there is no defense involved. I don't want to hit 50% of the time, i want the base value to be 50% so i can hit most of the time once i slot accuracy enhancements.
Thanks for asking _Castle_.
1) Hit them about 50% the time.
2) Hit them about 80% of the time.
3) Hit them about 20% of the time.
4) Hit them about 50% of the time.
"Hi, my name is Ail. I make people sick."
A partial selection from my 50's on Freedom: Ail = Ice/Traps, Luck = Street Justice/Super Reflexes Stalker, Mist = Bane, Pixy = Trick Arrow/Archery, Pure = Gravity/Energy, Smoke = Fire/Fire Dominator
[ 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 it being no added to hit/acc vs no defense, I would expect 50% on both sides or fewer hits (no lower than 35% though). I wont be worried about missing a little more often, with no to hit or acc. Same for defender, I would expect to be hit at most 50% of the time. Even less would not be unreasonable.
[ 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 ]
With max tohit/acc, I should rarely miss. 5% is about right. On the reverse, I would expect to get eaten up (5% missed).
[ 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 ]
This is a hard question. However, I should very rarely hit max defense with no added to hit/acc. Im saying hitting 5% would be reasonable. As a defender with max defense vs no tohit/acc added, I should very rarely get hit.
[ 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 ]
This is harder. Off hand, I would say 50/50. Max vs max = same as default. However, I can see some mitigating circumstances for this. For instance, status effects can be stopped with BFs, melee types have mez protection, AND they cant be hit due to defense. Defense is stronger than resistance in this way, for status effects. Another qualifier is how hard is it to meet the max?
All in all, the main problem I see with defense builds are having more to hit powers (tactics, FA) with a greater effect than defense powers. I think pool powers tend to mess up the balance on some things. For instance, if tanks are balanced where invul is best vs le/SM, and a fire tank is better vs elemental or energy attacks, the fire tank can take tough to round out their Le/SM resistance, while the invul tank cant boost his fire/cold resistance at all.
In the same way, tactics + FA and 3 enhancements in acc tend to remove pure defense as a decent option, while pool defense powers dont seem very effective to me.
On the other hand, I think its wrong that status affects can be avoided with defense builds, while resistance builds end up having mez stacked and their hold protection can be overcome. In other words, an SR scrapper has much better mez protection that an invul tank, unless his entire def is nuked via some power. A dom or controller cant hit them to overcome thier mez resistance via stacking, so they become immune to holds, plus can hit a BF to break the hold on top of it all.
Lots of issue to balance.
[ QUOTE ]
First off, this post is *NOT* a precursor of any particular impending change. The topic is strictly informative and for discussion.
[/ QUOTE ]
Understood. I will answer these questions to the best of my ability with the knowledge that this is only an informative exercise.
[ QUOTE ]
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.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ 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 expect to hit said target and be hit 50% 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 want to hit him 95% of the time. I expect to be hit 95% of the time if he has the max tohit buff and I have no defense.
[ 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 expect to miss that person with max defense 95% of the time. If I have max defense, I expect to be missed 95% 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 ]
I expect to hit that person with max defense 50% of the time. With that defense, against max tohit buffs, I expect to be missed 50% of the time.
Hmmm, how do we get to that? We set a hard cap on defense at 45%. We set a hard cap on tohit buffs at 45%. We do away with accuracy completely. All accuracy insps become tohit buffs.
Defense based builds are then redesigned to remove tier9s so that they can maintain 45% defense at all times.
We make it as difficult to get 45% tohit buffs after these changes as it is NOW for a defense based build to get 45% defense outside of running a tier9.
Done.
Having fun fixing this, Castle. It's a tough nut to crack. I like Arcanaville's plan, but I think what I've proposed is far simpler.
Be well, people of CoH.
[ 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 think a 50/50 split is about right here.
[ 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 ]
There should always be a chance to miss, so lets say 95% hits and 5% misses with this one.
[ 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 ]
Just as there should always be a chance to miss, there should always be a chance to hit. Say 5% chance of hitting and 95% chance to miss.
[ 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 ]
This is really the same thing as having default values in those areas, so back to 50/50.
My Deviant Art Page