It would be nice if specific powers, such as Aim, would allow you to breach the 95% hit crap for a few attacks.. It feels completely silly to pop a power called "Aim", only the miss on your next attack..
Quote:
Yes, a heal failing to heal is annoying, and possibly even detrimental to the survivability of the team... but that's a risk you take when you use that power! So again I reiterate...
|
Originally Posted by seebs
So far as I can tell, it got to a 5% miss chance a long time ago, and nothing I ever do can improve on that.
Even with everything slotted, removing the 5% miss chance guarantee wouldn't mean that TG could never miss. It'd just mean that there'd have to be some kind of unusual defense in place for it to miss. Since a heal failing to go off can be a pretty serious problem for the team, I'd actually rather have it be pretty unusual. |
Quote:
| If you don't want a heal to have a chance to miss, you should look into other power sets. |
Quote:
Not necessarily... yeah it's frustrating as hell, on my blaster who has Aim and Build Up, I can pop them both, and still miss on my attack. But if I went to a shooting range, picked up a gun, and aimed at the target... doesn't mean I'm going to hit the target. I just had bad aim.
|
Originally Posted by Primantiss
It would be nice if specific powers, such as Aim, would allow you to breach the 95% hit crap for a few attacks.. It feels completely silly to pop a power called "Aim", only the miss on your next attack..
|
SO u miss a few times, unless ur team is terrible or u lack some sort of defence, insips u shouldnt be having problems
Quote:
Which is really the crux of the whole "I shouldn't miss!" argument. We're in a world with variables, physics and other stuff. Stuff *can* miss, super or not. Unless your super power is tying a hose on the enemy and feeding bullets directly to them, there is air, obstacles, *powers*, other bullets, etc that can interfere with your aim or projectiles as they travel.|
Originally Posted by Maniac_Raid
Not necessarily... yeah it's frustrating as hell, on my blaster who has Aim and Build Up, I can pop them both, and still miss on my attack. But if I went to a shooting range, picked up a gun, and aimed at the target... doesn't mean I'm going to hit the target. I just had bad aim.
|
There really is no guarantee except death...and even then, I'll just use Soul Transfer...
Quote:
And enemies who are actually deft enough to do so, sure - a Paragon Protector on a last-ditch adrenaline rush, sure, why not? Ordinary mooks that go down by the hundred? Not so much.|
Originally Posted by BrandX
Don't look at it as you missing, look at it as the enemy dodging or deflecting your attack.
 |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
Which is really the crux of the whole "I shouldn't miss!" argument. We're in a world with variables, physics and other stuff. Stuff *can* miss, super or not.
|
"Never miss" also takes a backseat to game balance. 
There are certain things that you have to give in to it being a video game instead of a story sometimes.
Dec out.
But to your question - how would the ability to slot for 100%, instead of 95% chance to hit {against most enemies, at least} harm game balance? Or to turn your argument back to you, what balance purpose does the current 5% chance to miss serve?
I'm not opposed to a select few powers bypassing the 5% rule. As mentioned, snipes and assassin strike would be strong candidates for such a thing.
I'm also not opposed to select buffs bypassing the 5% rule by certain degrees. Like aim could take you up to 100%, build up up to 96%, targeting drone up to 97%.
I dunno, it always sort of bothered me that aim doesn't actually do what it says if you have moderately slotted your toon.
At the same time, while I see a reasonable enough argument to allow such things, I don't see a compelling enough game reason to do it. In fact if someone was pressed they could probably come up with some balance reasons why not to allow it, though I think if it was used sparingly those reasons would fall flat.
Quote:
And in the superhero genre, if all a superhero faced was normal mooks, he really isn't a *super*hero, now is he?|
Originally Posted by Quinch
In real world, that would certainly be a good explanation. But in superhero genre, physics and other stuff tends to take a back seat to enjoyment and flair.
|
TL;DR ver: The enemies are *not* normal.
Quote:
I don't have a problem with them hitting all the time. I don't see why this has to extend to them missing all the time.
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
No, I'm not confused at all. If we get to hit all the time, so do they.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
You know when I fell in love with the old Teen Titans cartoon? When I saw Robin clinging to a ceiling upside down like he were the God Damn Spier-Man. He has no reason to do this. He doesn't cling to walls, he doesn't have sticky shoes, he doesn't have super powers. He was just hanging upside down on a ceiling because it looked cool. Because he's just that cool.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
Which is really the crux of the whole "I shouldn't miss!" argument. We're in a world with variables, physics and other stuff. Stuff *can* miss, super or not. Unless your super power is tying a hose on the enemy and feeding bullets directly to them, there is air, obstacles, *powers*, other bullets, etc that can interfere with your aim or projectiles as they travel.
|
People keep bringing up this argument that "well there's always random chance." Maybe. But that's not cool for a fictional universe. When did Alucard screw up and miss because he sucked? If he did, I don't remember it, because he doesn't suck. Some vampires have been able to dodge his billets, sure, but that's not because he's missing through bad luck, it's because the vampires are dodging.
That's all I'm saying. You shouldn't miss an enemy unless the enemy has some skill in avoidance or deflection. I don't have a problem if most enemies did - at least it would make sense. But doors, crates and lab equipment do not have skills in evasion or deflection, or at the very least they shouldn't be. How much do I need to suck to swing at a door and MISS?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
So you're saying there's no chance your bullet could glance off a metal door without doing any significant damage?|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
You know when I fell in love with the old Teen Titans cartoon? When I saw Robin clinging to a ceiling upside down like he were the God Damn Spier-Man. He has no reason to do this. He doesn't cling to walls, he doesn't have sticky shoes, he doesn't have super powers. He was just hanging upside down on a ceiling because it looked cool. Because he's just that cool.
People keep bringing up this argument that "well there's always random chance." Maybe. But that's not cool for a fictional universe. When did Alucard screw up and miss because he sucked? If he did, I don't remember it, because he doesn't suck. Some vampires have been able to dodge his billets, sure, but that's not because he's missing through bad luck, it's because the vampires are dodging. That's all I'm saying. You shouldn't miss an enemy unless the enemy has some skill in avoidance or deflection. I don't have a problem if most enemies did - at least it would make sense. But doors, crates and lab equipment do not have skills in evasion or deflection, or at the very least they shouldn't be. How much do I need to suck to swing at a door and MISS? |
"Defense" covers both evasion and deflections as you said above. Inanimate objects should have a chance to deflect, if only to counter the fact that there's no ingame way of representing variable types of damage on objects or people.
Quote:
There's a reason why D&D, the grandfather of all current RPGs both table-top and computer based, has been around for almost 40 years now.|
Originally Posted by Quinch
As the title says - there are few things more annoying than investing heavily into accuracy and still missing one in twenty attacks anyway through no fault of your own. The idea of random fumbles with something you're supposed to excel at might work in D&D, but has no business being in superhero genre.
{note: keep critical hits for both players and NPCs - being able to spec for total defense would be gamebreaking in so many ways} |
It's because it managed to introduce fundamental concepts of game balance that work.
Critical Misses are one of those concepts.
Your argument that Critical Misses have "no place in a superhero game" is baseless.
What makes a superhero RPG any different than any other RPG in that regard?
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
Quote:
They are both RPGs.
|
Originally Posted by Quinch
Back at you... what makes D&D and CoH similar?
|
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
Quote:
Two points:|
Originally Posted by Carnifax_NA
So you're saying there's no chance your bullet could glance off a metal door without doing any significant damage?
|
1. It says "Miss" and the system message is "but you missed." That's about as close to "you suck so you missed" as it gets.
2. Random missing in general is like introducing fumbles in a soccer game or weapon jams in UT3. Yes, these things might happen in real life, for as far as games are like real life, but they're the sort of things we DON'T WANT to happen.
You can just as easily argue that we should have a chance to trip over and fall on our faces. I mean, it happens. YouTube is full of incredibly talented athletes fumbling their feet and dropping on their ***** accidentally, but does anyone actually believe that this should be part of the game?
Let me put it this way - if I can accidentally miss a clear, easy shout because-because, does that logic not also follow that I should have a chance to accidentally drop my gun? Or a chance to accidentally bump into a wall and fall down? Or a chance to accidentally twist my ankle? Or a chance to accidentally pull a muscle, suffering damage and debilitating effects? Or a chance to suffer a stroke or an aneurysm? These things happen all the time, especially under the physical and mental stress of combat, but we generally don't want to see them in our games.
3. More than a couple, as it turns out... Acceptable breaks from reality. If we can believe that our characters never have to pee and poo on-screen, that eldritch abominations speak perfect English, that we can drop off the top of the Empire State building and survive, that people can run without tripping over, then why is it so hard to believe that people don't miss unless their target is somehow protected?
And again - what part of a crate of books did a high explosive grenade miss?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
"Miss" is a relic from i0 or i1. It means "You failed to do significant damage", that's all.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Two points:
1. It says "Miss" and the system message is "but you missed." That's about as close to "you suck so you missed" as it gets. 2. Random missing in general is like introducing fumbles in a soccer game or weapon jams in UT3. Yes, these things might happen in real life, for as far as games are like real life, but they're the sort of things we DON'T WANT to happen. |
"We don't want to happen"? Who is this we you talk about? Doesn't bother me in the slightest that occasionally an attack will fail to destroy a pile of books / crate or whatever.
Quote:
| Let me put it this way - if I can accidentally miss a clear, easy shout because-because, does that logic not also follow that I should have a chance to accidentally drop my gun? Or a chance to accidentally bump into a wall and fall down? Or a chance to accidentally twist my ankle? Or a chance to accidentally pull a muscle, suffering damage and debilitating effects? Or a chance to suffer a stroke or an aneurysm? These things happen all the time, especially under the physical and mental stress of combat, but we generally don't want to see them in our games. |
This is called "logic" you say?
I think I'll stick with common sense.
Quote:
| And again - what part of a crate of books did a high explosive grenade miss? |
I'm willing to accept that if I swipe at a low enemy he'll get lucky and stumble out of the way. I'm also willing to accpet that if fire a bullet at a car on a mayhem that occasionally it'll do insignificant damage or glance off or whatever. I'm not particularly willing to make sweeping changes to one of the fundamental mechansims of the the game to make exceptions for things like piles of books. Why bother? It's not that much of an issue to justify the amount of work and QA associated with it.
Quote:
Because our damage is "auto hit" (if you hit, you do x damage [modifiable]), if you can make your accuracy (or to-hit, whichever applies...I can never keep that straight) 100% as well, you've just removed any element of chance from the game. This is, of course, bad for the obvious reason. It makes a small narrowly focused "I WIN!" button. It's a game. There must be chances for failure, even if it's small.|
Quinch wants to know: But to your question - how would the ability to slot for 100%, instead of 95% chance to hit {against most enemies, at least} harm game balance? Or to turn your argument back to you, what balance purpose does the current 5% chance to miss serve? |
Casual, easy game is already casual and easy. How easy do you need it to be?
Dec out.
Quote:
It is to me. Know what's dry and boring? "Hey, I'm always perfect, and things always work out for me." |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
People keep bringing up this argument that "well there's always random chance." Maybe. But that's not cool for a fictional universe.
|
Oh, and you made the "made sense" argument:
Quote:
| I don't have a problem if most enemies did - at least it would make sense. |
I'm not talking about the "We have people who can fly, jump a half a mile, teleport, shoot lasers from their eyes" bit. If you want "make sense," then:
- Why does the enemy who ran from the group you just beat up walk calmly back to take his beating, instead of gathering everyone else on the level to beat on you?
- Why do the groups that guy runs by, on fire, trailing ice/radiation/tendrils of the netherworld, etc, not bother investigating? "Hey, he's on fire!" "Yeah. Jim does that all the time. What a kidder."
- Why can the boss - who obviously is going to kill the hostage - not react to the sound of fighting two rooms away (or see you *standing in the doorway*) and just shoot the hostage? (Or the group that has taken time to gather around the crate/desk/computer just stand there staring at it instead of destroying it on arrival?)
- Why did the designer of the various office buildings in the game keep his job?
- Why is Longbow allowed to face down thugs who are obviously armed with pistols, knives and baseball bats and counterattack with flamethrowers, miniguns, etc? (see "Excessive force")
- How is it that powers like Smoke Grenade don't cause aggro, or at least some concern on those it's used on? ("Hey, it's suddenly really smoky here." "Eh, it's cool. Probably just Jim again. Just hang out.")
Seriously. "Making sense" is not an argument that really flies well in this game.
Quote:
Bill, you forgot:|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
("Hey, it's suddenly really smoky here." "Eh, it's cool. Probably just Jim again. Just hang out.")
|
Sword slicing through Jim's chest and collapsing in horrible death - placate "Oh, that Jim, always doing the silliest things to get attention... Slice!
Quote:
You know? That actually sounds fun. Especially, like in D&D, there were modifiable stats, skills and/or powers that lessen the chance of this or possibly increase the chance of stuff like that happening for a specific advantage. Probability manipulation that might screw over the enemy and make them constantly flub while making your team seem like a constant stream of luck? The reason I think it's interesting is because, if bad luck strikes and I go down? "Crud! You got lucky! If x and y didn't screw me up, you'd have been mine!" If bad luck strikes and I *still* win? "w00T! Not even fate could save your behind from being kicked...by my *sprained* foot! HA!"
|
You can just as easily argue that we should have a chance to trip over and fall on our faces. I mean, it happens. YouTube is full of incredibly talented athletes fumbling their feet and dropping on their ***** accidentally, but does anyone actually believe that this should be part of the game? Let me put it this way - if I can accidentally miss a clear, easy shout because-because, does that logic not also follow that I should have a chance to accidentally drop my gun? Or a chance to accidentally bump into a wall and fall down? Or a chance to accidentally twist my ankle? Or a chance to accidentally pull a muscle, suffering damage and debilitating effects? Or a chance to suffer a stroke or an aneurysm? These things happen all the time, especially under the physical and mental stress of combat, but we generally don't want to see them in our games. |
I like the idea of certain attacks having a 100% chance to hit, provided there is a reasonable draw back to compensate. For me , the draw back would be a lower base accuracy, something in the 30-40% range. That means you would need a higher Acc slotting just to break even, but could promise a hit every time at the expense of spotting for other enhancables.
Like I said though, I believe only certain attacks should get this ability. Sniper, AS, and other interuptable attacks. Non-attack powers that have a "need" to hit, such as heals, could probably do with something similar. A lower base accuracy in exchange for a higher (or nonexistent) to-hit cap.
This is by no means an admission that I feel this is a needed change, but is more of a compromise of how I feel it should be implemented, should push come to shove.
Even with everything slotted, removing the 5% miss chance guarantee wouldn't mean that TG could never miss. It'd just mean that there'd have to be some kind of unusual defense in place for it to miss. Since a heal failing to go off can be a pretty serious problem for the team, I'd actually rather have it be pretty unusual.