1) I'm falling back on my D&D roots, but all things being equal (at zero) I think 50-50 is fine. IE: I don't have any accuracy bonuses, and my opponent has no defense bonuses I expect to hit about half of the time. I'm thinking in terms of PVP here, Heroes should have a better chance to hit mere thugs and minions. And of course, I'd expect to get hit roughly half the time.
2)Well, I'd WANT to hit every single time if I have the maximum to-hit value, but I don't realistically expect that. 95% of the time feels right to me. Getting hit nearly constantly by someone with perfect accuracy seems fair (if really painful) if I have absolutely no defense.
3)I'd want to hit them about 80% of the time, but then if I managed to perfect my defenses, I'd really only want to get hit 5% of the time.
4) Both sides maxed out, perfect accuracy vs. perfect defense, I think I should have a 40% chance of hitting them. Yes, I think defense should count more than accuracy rather than the current design of defense being much harder to acquire while being much easier to negate.
Castle, I did a whole bunch of thinking about this over the weekend... and I simply feel answering these questions isn't going to help. The question of "what should happen" expectations is clouded irrevokably by what happens elsewhere in the game. In PvP, the defense question has a huge impact on the resistance question, and vice versa.
With that in mind, I have created a different thread highlighting the mathematical differences I see between the two.
- Protea
And for a while things were cold,
They were scared down in their holes
The forest that once was green
Was colored black by those killing machines
1) 75%
2) 99%
3) 5%
4) 75%
IMHO
[ 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 ]
50% (note, this is problematic because there are two types of buffs that affect the current equation).
[ 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%
[ 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%
From the defenders role I'd want the same 1 in 20 chance to be 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 ]
50% and 50%
Thorizdin
Lords of the Dead
Old School Legends
I never did answer the original question
having both "to hit" and "accuracy" I think is part of why the system is so borked, besides the tohit numbers being so much higher.
I don't think the floor should be any lower than about 15%.
50%chance to hit, assuming no accuracy is slotted.
80-85% chance to hit
80-85% chance to miss
50%, but the problem is there doesn't seem to be any caps right now.
Thanks for starting this topic, Castle. Much good discussion to be had.
1) No buffs To Hit vs. No Defense - in other words, how one might start playing your typical game. I'd really want to have better than average chances of hitting, for the sheer psychology of wanting to feel like I'm not spinning my wheels. I'd like at least a 60% chance of hitting, unaided, or possibly a 70% chance. Conversely, if I'm a defender with no Defense whatsoever, I'm pretty much expecting to get hit.
2) Maximum To Hit vs. No Defense - this should pretty much be the maximum chance to hit. Most game mechanics I know of effectively set this at a 95% chance to hit, with a 5% chance of screwing something up royally. But if it were possible to change this ratio to something like 99% chance of hitting and 1% chance of missing, I would. If a sniper is aiming at me and I am completely oblivious to him, I would be seriously surprised if he missed on his opening shot.
3) Default To Hit versus Maximum Defense - I pretty much feel like this should be the exact opposite of scenario 2). Admittedly, this may be a gut reaction from being part of a D&D campaign, where a natural 1 on a d20 always misses, and a natural 20 always hits. There should always be a chance that someone can hit the target from sheer dumb luck, just as it makes sense that an overwhelming Defense should be able to avoid just about any conventional attack.
4) Maximum To Hit versus Maximum Defense - ouch. This one is really tricky. My gut reaction is to say, the exact converse of scenario 1) - below average chances of hitting. That is, a 30% - 40% chance of hitting the target. That allows the attacker to feel like he's making _some_ progress, but it's an uphill battle. Of course, the situation could be swayed dramatically if someone else tips the scales by reducing the attacker's Accuracy, or the defender's Defense. This also fits what I view as the comic book dynamic - battles are often decided by a key moment that deprives one side of its strength.
1) No buffs To Hit vs. No Defense - To me this means I'm a subpar, untrained combatant fighting another office clerk or something. I'd expect to see a pair of untrained fighters not landing many solid blows. I'd recommend hitting about 35% so that the two really feel like they have no skills in the area.
2) Maximum To Hit vs. No Defense - 95% easy hits. Most resistance sets should be around this area.
3) Default To Hit versus Maximum Defense - 95% miss chance. No skill trying to hit spider man...
4) Maximum To Hit versus Maximum Defense - This is where it has all been breaking down right? That is because of question #2 above, a resistance set doesn't care if it gets hit. Here you need the magic number that enables a defensive set to hang in long enough to be a problem to a resistance set. I would have the attacker be at about a 35% chance to hit. This should make it where it is in the defenders favor and if he has other help or aid self etc he can compete. It will also have the attacker respecting the defenses of his opponent.
Classic Dungeon Crawl Arc ID: 2232-"A satirical look at your average dungeon"
Down the Rabbit Hole Arc IDs: 24346 24397-"Rescue a little girl from an insidious dream invader."
[ 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 ]
Hitting: 80% of the time. Dodging: 20% 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 ]
Hit: 95%. Dodging: 5-10% (I would "like" to avoid more, but if the attacker is maxxed out, and I've got nothing helping, I ought to accept my lumps.)
[ 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 ]
Hit: 33% - only landing 1 of 4 feels terrible. Dodging: 85%
[ 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 ]
Hit: 33% - it's less a reasoned position than one stemming from irritation at "whiff-whiff-whiff." One feels very ineffective. Dodging: 90%
It is critical that you pay attention at this time.
Gaming in Limited Times
Guide to Plant/Ice Doms
[ 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 ]
You asking about the psychophysical -- see, for instance, Fechner's Law. Related: the streak-breaker in CoX, where designers create an illusion of probability that is more compatiable with belief/perception than with fact/reality.
You can see from the replies to this post that players draw analogies between what happens in game to what happens outside the game. When you ask someone how often they should hit something, they think, well, how often would I hit a paper bag, or a cardboard box, or a rattlesnake... etc.
Once inside the game, however, these real world analogies tend to be eventually replaced with what's "fair" (first) and what's "effective" (ultimately).
Designers will tend to replace the real world with what's fair and implement "balanced" designs. Players will tend to support such an environment until they begin to play within it, at which point, their preferences obviously become much more selfish.
What's "effective" within a game then really depends on play and players, not expectations -- like those expectations of how often I would hit a paper bag, or those expectations of what is and isn't fair, for instance.
During play, we often want something different than what we say we want AND different than what we think we want. If you knew what you wanted -- what you ARE -- during play, then you wouldn't need to play to find out what you are. You could just think about it -- like for instance, some of the more meticulously detailed posters in this forum tend to do.
But you can't.
So you have to play to find out about play (and yourself), and designers have to observe play to find out about play (and their games). If a phenomenon is unable to be articulated, if it exists prior to and beyond articulation -- and play is good example of such a phenomenon -- then a survey really isn't going to tell you very much about it.
[ 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?
I would want to hit 2 out of 3 attacks, and as the defender expect to be missed 1 out of 3 attacks from an opponent. Though a 50/50 split would make sense under the criteria, an encounter that results in a large percentage of misses can be infinitely more frustrating than being hit a lot(dmg can be mitigated through healing and resistance as well, when hit).
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?
I would want to hit 9 out of 10 times, leaving a chance to miss for unpredictability. As a defender, I would expect to be hit with every attack with an occasional lucky miss.
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?
I would want to hit 1 out of 5 times. As a defender, I would expect to be missed by a large majority of the attacks, 4 out of 5.
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?
I would want to hit 5 out of 10 times, and as the defender expect to be missed by half of the attacks. Capped defense should never negated by To Hit alone, rather by To Hit and -def debuff, IMO.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds right to me.
My understanding is that everything is based on 75% with a ceiling of 95% and floor of 5% which works for me.
1) 75%, 25%
2) 95%, 5%
3) 5%, 95%
4) 75%, 25%
----------------------------
You can't please everyone, so lets concentrate on me.
[ QUOTE ]
In a perfectly balanced system, Defense should have the same expectation for performance that Resistance has, regardless of accuracy and/or ToHit buffs. This, currently, is not true.
[/ QUOTE ]
I like this one =)
Take a scrapper with a max resist set and hit it with the whole chain. It should take that many clicks of power to kill a max def build using a max ho-hit build. I too feel there are way too many +to-hit buffs and powers and not enough def. I play both resist and def based toons and I know my resist toon can survive long enough to have a little fun fighting several opponents while my def toon only gets to play long enough to run away and hope opponent's travel supression lets me get far enough away since my life bar is gone.
I'ld think it should be:
1: 50/50
2: 95/5
3: 5/95
4: 50/50
However, I think a far bigger concern is the differences between positional defense and damage type defense. More often then not is is far better to have positional defense.
From what I can tell Ice and Energy Armor have no defense in PvP versus:
Web Grenades, Smoke Grenade, Taunt/Confront, Hand Clap, Detention Field, Transfusion, Siphon Power, Siphon Speed, Transference, Sonic Siphon, Sonic Cage, Thunder Clap, Entangling Arrow, Flash Arrow, Poison Gas Arrow, Acid Arrow, Salt Crystals, Dimension Shift, Gravity Distortion Field, Wormhole, Flash, Spore Burst, Seeds of Confusion, Vines, Bile Spray, Web Envelope, Web Cocoon, Poisonous Ray, Earth Mastery > Fossilize, Envenom, Weaken, Neurotoxic Breath, Paralytic Poison, Pulsar, Blinding Powder and a couple of pet powers.
Where as of all the powers that have no positional type listed, only Fearsome Stare is defended by damage type defense. The others are Psionic and thus not defended against by either defense types.
Neither positional nor damage type seem to work in PvP against Smoke, Smoke Flash and Unchain Essence .
I still love my EA Stalker, but PvE is annoying enough against Blue Inkman, that I really don't want to bother PvPing with it on a even semi-regular basis.
I also agree. Defense based sets have the short end of the stick.
Really, in zone pvp, things die way too fast. I am up for anything the extends the battle.
Endurance is too low, cost for attacks too high, damage too great per attack. All this contributes to the feeling that the attack MUST hit. So, people maximize the burst damage and chances to hit. People probably realize that if they fight under this condition most of the time, then they stand the best chance of winning. If the base chance to hit is reduced, and the cost of the attack is reduced, then battles will focus more on what happens after build-up and aim etc.
As it stands right now, my squishy will jump into battle, get two shotted and thats it. Wheres the fun in that? I don't mind losing, but it would better if I got more than a few licks in.
Maybe defense sets would be better if there was some middle ground between being hit and not being hit. Maybe a glancing blow with damage dependent on the to hit chance and the defense.
Dark Bard, Zoobait, Debacle
jmsb
Por vezes d� vontade...
chucknorriss
speak american godamnit
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a perfectly balanced system, Defense should have the same expectation for performance that Resistance has, regardless of accuracy and/or ToHit buffs. This, currently, is not true.
[/ QUOTE ]
I like this one =)
Take a scrapper with a max resist set and hit it with the whole chain. It should take that many clicks of power to kill a max def build using a max ho-hit build. I too feel there are way too many +to-hit buffs and powers and not enough def. I play both resist and def based toons and I know my resist toon can survive long enough to have a little fun fighting several opponents while my def toon only gets to play long enough to run away and hope opponent's travel supression lets me get far enough away since my life bar is gone.
[/ QUOTE ]
In a perfect world this is great, but how would one put that in? If the attack you dodge is brawl and then they hit you with ET it just doesnt work. Look at Ice tanks, they arent good at PvP because of their def at all. It is their huge res to slows and hibernate. In the arena an Ice tank is almost never missed yet they have one of the highest base def with all their toggles on. This carries over huge to PvE, Ice Tanks really arent viable in PvE as an AV agro machine. AVs to hit is so high, like players in PvP, that they dont miss, and with their only decent res being to cold then their def is almost always totally negated.
|� |�| |�| |� |�| |�����| |����| |� |�| |��� /���
~SNES, NES, GCN, N64, GB, Wii, GBC, GBA, SP, DS~|
|_| \_| |_| |_| \_| .. |__| .. |____| |_| \_| |___/ \___/
[ QUOTE ]
In a perfectly balanced system, Defense should have the same expectation for performance that Resistance has, regardless of accuracy and/or ToHit buffs. This, currently, is not true.
[/ QUOTE ]
This line of reasoning is exactly why I wrote this post.
- Protea
And for a while things were cold,
They were scared down in their holes
The forest that once was green
Was colored black by those killing machines
[ QUOTE ]
having both "to hit" and "accuracy" I think is part of why the system is so borked, besides the tohit numbers being so much higher.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well ...
The current system is also borked because def buffing can become equally absurd.
A team of 8 FF defenders can buff their own defense to somewhere in the neighbourhood of 325 def. Without huge gobs of ToHit bonuses, nothing could consistently touch them since FF has both postion and typed defense (a kludge to fix yet another bug in the system). If those same defeders all took dark blast, things get even weirder.
Long term, both ToHit / accuracy and defense should be reigned in, with numbers rejigged so that small and moderate amounts of defense are always worthwhile, but folks can still beat on each other.
I have to classify melee and ranged since I feel differently about them. Mainly for the no defense examples since I think melee should have a higher chance to hit and be hit than ranged.
1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value.
Melee -- chance to-hit ~80%
Ranged -- chance to-hit ~60%
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value.
Melee -- chance to-hit ~99%
Ranged -- chance to-hit ~95%
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value.
Melee -- chance to-hit ~15%
Ranged -- chance to-hit ~10%
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value.
Melee -- chance to-hit ~50%
Ranged -- chance to-hit ~50%
Basically at max to-hit and max defense it should be 50/50 but with the other examples if you stand in melee you should have a higher to-hit and higher chance of being hit.
I personally do not like to miss. That is my biggest complaint of playing lower level characters is the horrible accuracy. I also do not believe that any defense is impenetrable and therefore accuracy should always beat defense.
**All comments are based on a theoretical situation and not on current mechanics of the CoH/V game.**
If we're talking about a system that I would make as the game designer, my answer will be little more complex than the question, but not by much.
I think Max Def and Max ToHit should have 2 separate values each: Sustainable and Spike. Sustainable would be levels attainable by toggles and long-duration (maybe perma-able) clicks. Spike would be levels attainable with shorter duration clicks (5-15 seconds for Max ToHit, 30-90 seconds for Max Def) that can't be made perma.
With that in mind, what I'd like to seein PvP will resemble several other posters' desires.
Base ToHit v Base Def
50/50 hit/miss
Max Sustainable ToHit v Base Def
85/15 hit/miss
Max Spike ToHit v Base Def
95/05 hit/miss
Base ToHit v Max Sustainable Def
15/85 hit/miss
Max Sustainable ToHit v Max Sustainable Def
50/50 hit/miss
Max Spike ToHit vs Max Sustainable Def
75/25 hit/miss
Base ToHit v Max Spike Def
05/95 hit/miss
Max Sustainable ToHit v Max Spike Def
25/75 hit/miss
Max Spike ToHit v Max Spike Def
50/50 hit/miss
Edited to use the same terminology as everyone else. 
This post brought to you by the Thunderfire Campaign to Out-Weird the Internet.
Score so far: Thunderfire-0, Internet-157893678
The current system is fine short of inanimate objects. If I'm in jail there is no reason I should MISS the door when attacking it.
This is blowing my mind. How can people quote a hit/miss ratio that doesn't add up to 100%?
[ QUOTE ]
This is blowing my mind. How can people quote a hit/miss ratio that doesn't add up to 100%?
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats simple: For when you assemble a number of men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views.
Benjamin Franklin
I seem to be using that quote a lot lately. Anyways, the question posed is one where you are to put yourself in the shoes of the person facing the particular circumstances at hand. If you are the one trying to hit then you of course do not want to miss, and it seems many people think of this one far more than the one with defense. Everyone who plays CoH has experienced missing like crazy. Every time I roll a new toon I get frustrated with how much I miss. But, few people in this game have played a purely def based set such as Ice tank, pre 32 Stone tank, SR.... So many people dont realize how frustrating it is to be hit no matter what.
|� |�| |�| |� |�| |�����| |����| |� |�| |��� /���
~SNES, NES, GCN, N64, GB, Wii, GBC, GBA, SP, DS~|
|_| \_| |_| |_| \_| .. |__| .. |____| |_| \_| |___/ \___/
Solos, you had me friggin rolling, I love you dude =]
and Accualt, I TOTALLY agree, doors, objects, etc (even including all those summoned crap objects like Runes and DE pulsars)
it's BS to sit and MISS an AS on a friggin door in a police station (not to mention hitting it for AS dmg doesn't really make much sense either, but then it would take a LOT longer to take down as well (I'd just as soon it be treated as Held)
ok sorry to stear off-topic, just had to say that
btw lemme plug this again:
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat....;vc=1&nt=17
IF YOU'RE READING THIS FORUM, GOTO THE ABOVE LINK, PLEASE!!
On the Care and Feeding of Your Scrapper (V2.0)
Martial Arts - A Comprehensive Guide
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?
Assuming "no buffs" means no enhancements for accuracy, I think that an attack should have 75% chance of hitting. It is not fun to miss. Ever.
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?
I would expect a 95% hit rate to be reasonable.
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?
It is reasonable to expect to hit 5% of the time.
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?
I feel that again, this should become a 75% chance to hit.
The issue I think is that the sets should be re-worked so that each set has a primary focus (as they do now) in either of Defense, Resistance, Healing, but also that every set has access to all damage mitigation types.
The fundamental issue here is that it is more fun to 1) have to work to kill an opponent, hitting more frequently than not, than 2)to either annihilate an opponent quickly or be unable to effect him at all.
I feel that the current implementation of power sets results in scenario (2) and so it is a deeper issue than "fixing defense" here. Combat is a system and should be treated more wholistically, not trying to change each component independently.
I favor hitting my opponent with some frequency no matter what, but having the opponent able to cope and not just be crushed by the rock-paper-scissors type of play.
1) Default To Hit vs. default Defense
With no buffs in either area I would want to hit around 60% of the time. As a defender with no Defense I would expect to be hit 50% of the time
60/50
2) If I have taken the effort to maximize my To Hit then I would expect to hit almost every attack - 95-98%. As a defender I would expect to be hit that much as well.
95/98% Hit / 2-5% Miss
3) Just as in situation 2, I would expect to miss 95-98% of the time and my defender would expect to be missed the same.
2-5% Hit / 95-98% Miss
4) Here is where I differ with most of the people who have posted above. I think full active Defense should have an edge on accuracy. Ignoring game mechanics - and even game setting - in fighting, shooting, fencing (well true free form sword fighting - not as much linear rapier fencing) it is easier to defend and not be hit than it is to score those crucial hits.
If I had maxxed Defense against maxxed To Hit, I would still expect to be missed 60% of the time. As an attacker I would expect to hit 50% of the time.
50% Hit / 60% Miss
I know my numbers are uneven but I think that this is what Castle was asking for. What I would expect if I was the attacker and what I would expect as the defender. As much as I hate missing, I DO think that Defense should trump To Hit.