Graze gotta go, no?

[thelee]

Missing it, thelee - he's not saying PCs have been nerfed compared to NPCs, he's saying that Accuracy has been nerfed compared to Deflection. Hence more grazes...

 

This is a silly argument.

 

 

I think you're missing it, too. I don't see any evidence to back up "more grazes" which basically amounted to either specious reasoning not backed up by actual experience of playing 301 or wild speculation. Second, I'm making the claim that, as a game system of classes, accuracy *hasn't* been nerfed (which was sensuki's basis for making his specious claim), see my other posts, which I've not actually heard a counter-argument to. I could be wrong in my reasoning, but no one has actually addressed my points.

 

 

I think you're still missing what I'm saying. It doesn't matter that they have character classes - that actually favors *my* argument, because unless humanoid enemies are cheating, they are equivalently affected by any stat change/rebalancing.

Sigh, once again you're missing my original point.

 

This thread was about grazes, the OP complained about grazes. I explained WHY there are more grazes, because Accuracy as a base is 10 less.

 

The end.

 

As for my "I think the values need tweaking", all attributes have been nerfed. The maximum Might bonus you can get now is quite small to previous, so is the maximum duration and AoE values, Concentration ... etc

 

Everything is weaker. People did not want weaker attributes, they wanted meaningful attributes. Therefore, raising the per-point bonuses of everything to be higher would accomplish this.

 

 

You make the claim that we are probably going to see a lot more grazes, a claim that is hard to actually back up with any actual experience with the game. I mean, have you played 301? Are you actually making the claim that you can statistically determine from your combat log, beyond random noise, that you are getting a lot more grazes? Even anecdotally, are you claiming that combat is more tedious now (since by definition by having more grazes you will be doing less damage to enemies), which goes counter to my own experience and also some other first-impressions I've read? If not, your base claim is wrong. 

 

And while I also do not have a statistical comparison to make of before and after 301, anecdotally and my own sampling of enemies (EDIT: and now elerond's) suggests your base claim is wrong. There are no more grazes because despite the "nerfing" of accuracy, the neutral point has been moved in some way - either because NPCs have been deliberately weakened (like if enemies didn't use classes [or special non-player-accessible classes with custom base values] and needed manual downgrades), are equivalently affected (because they use the same system), or because who knows the deflection bug was overly rampant in 278 and the game was never intended to play like that to begin with. 

 

EDIT: regarding "Everything is weaker. People did not want weaker attributes, they wanted meaningful attributes. Therefore, raising the per-point bonuses of everything to be higher would accomplish this." I don't disagree that higher per-point values would be better (the marginal benefit from Might and Intelligence are way worse than before, 2% vs 3%, and something like 3% vs 5%) - but Obsidian did make them more stats meaningful (if not necessarily more of a stat meaningful) by spreading out combat benefits across stats (spreading Intelligence across Resolve, moving Dex to Perception).

Edited September 29, 2014 by thelee

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Average accuracy is lower, fact. The zero point has been moved from 0 to 10 and the base accuracy value has not been adjusted to compensate for that.

 

And I think you're ignoring what I am saying. Humanoid creatures have character classes. Medreth as a Ranger will have less Accuracy than he did before.

Medreth is a Ranger? Huh, I thought the Ranger was the dude standing next to the boar. Edited September 29, 2014 by KaineParker

[Sensuki]

You make the claim that we are probably going to see a lot more grazes, a claim that is hard to actually back up with any actual experience with the game. I mean, have you played 301? Are you actually making the claim that you can statistically determine from your combat log, beyond random noise, that you are getting a lot more grazes? Even anecdotally, are you claiming that combat is more tedious now (since by definition by having more grazes you will be doing less damage to enemies), which goes counter to my own experience and also some other first-impressions I've read? If not, your base claim is wrong.

............................ seriously?

 

I didn't make the claim that people are going to see a lot more grazes, the OP did and I said that's probably because ACC-DEF is 10 lower, which would result in more grazes. For humanoid enemies, they will follow the rules of the system. A Level 5 Ranger will have his base accuracy, (Level-1)*3 Bonus Accuracy from Progression, Perception bonus to accuracy and bonuses from buffs and items. I doubt they would have changed any NPCs base stats around that much, but once again - I can check as I am saving all of the files from the different versions.

 

Of course I've played the new version, are you kidding me? I never encountered the defenses bug, because I never fought a Paladin in my testing. I haven't said sfa about combat either, you're putting words in my mouth.

 

The DoT bugs are fixed, so poison isn't as bad now. I think they also fixed Deep Wounds too. The Dyrford Crossing is way easier because they removed a lot of the beetles from the map, and your characters now have more health. That's probably why it feels more breezy.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Sensuki

[thelee]

Average accuracy is lower, fact. The zero point has been moved from 0 to 10 and the base accuracy value has not been adjusted to compensate for that.

There are two components to graze. Accuracy and deflection. (See many above posts discussing this, including apparently actual evidence of deflection.)

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Average accuracy is lower, fact. The zero point has been moved from 0 to 10 and the base accuracy value has not been adjusted to compensate for that.

There are two components to graze. Accuracy and deflection. (See many above posts discussing this, including apparently actual evidence of deflection.)

If anything, Deflection is now higher because INT boosts it.

 

With roughly 10 lower accuracy and higher deflection, you will see more grazes.

Edited September 29, 2014 by KaineParker

[Sensuki]

Beetles have the same Deflection and yeah Base Deflections would mostly be higher due to INT bonus.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Sensuki

[thelee]

 

You make the claim that we are probably going to see a lot more grazes, a claim that is hard to actually back up with any actual experience with the game. I mean, have you played 301? Are you actually making the claim that you can statistically determine from your combat log, beyond random noise, that you are getting a lot more grazes? Even anecdotally, are you claiming that combat is more tedious now (since by definition by having more grazes you will be doing less damage to enemies), which goes counter to my own experience and also some other first-impressions I've read? If not, your base claim is wrong.

............................ seriously?

 

I didn't make the claim that people are going to see a lot more grazes, the OP did and I said that's probably because ACC-DEF is 10 lower, which would result in more grazes. For humanoid enemies, they will follow the rules of the system. A Level 5 Ranger will have his base accuracy, (Level-1)*3 Bonus Accuracy from Progression, Perception bonus to accuracy and bonuses from buffs and items. I doubt they would have changed any NPCs base stats around that much, but once again - I can check as I am saving all of the files from the different versions.

 

Of course I've played the new version, are you kidding me? I never encountered the defenses bug, because I never fought a Paladin in my testing. I haven't said sfa about combat either, you're putting words in my mouth.

 

The DoT bugs are fixed, so poison isn't as bad now. I think they also fixed Deep Wounds too. The Dyrford Crossing is way easier because they removed a lot of the beetles from the map, and your characters now have more health. That's probably why it feels more breezy.

 

 

Even if you didn't make the claim (though I quote "Due to the recent Attribute system changes, you now get absolutely fark all Accuracy from Dexterity, therefore you are going to see A LOT MORE grazes in this build.") you certainly have been arguing that viewpoint.

 

Again, ACC-DEF is not 10 lower necessarily because accuracy and deflection are now a zero-sum game (to an extent), and the neutral point may have been further adjusted (these has been the crux of my argument).

 

My combat breeziness has had nothing to do with the Deep Wounds bug (essentially I had to kill off those archers rapidly anyway in 278 because of its severity, so ironically they didn't factor much into my fighting). Beetles may or may not be true, but the Skaen temple definitely seems to have all the same encounters.

[thelee]

 

 

Average accuracy is lower, fact. The zero point has been moved from 0 to 10 and the base accuracy value has not been adjusted to compensate for that.

There are two components to graze. Accuracy and deflection. (See many above posts discussing this, including apparently actual evidence of deflection.)

If anything, Deflection is now higher because INT boosts it.

 

With roughly 10 lower accuracy and higher deflection, you will see more grazes.

 

 

Deflection may also be lower because INT also penalizes it.

 

EDIT: Deflection may also be lower because it's been manually adjusted through some mechanism.

Edited September 29, 2014 by thelee

[Sensuki]

Go and watch my Sensuki vs the Beetles videos and then go play The Dyrford Crossing on Hard - there's less beetles.

 

It will most of the time be lower for humanoids

 

The only cases where it won't be are:

 

Case 1: Previous character had a Perception score 10 points or more higher than Dexterity

 

Case 2: Enemy had Intellect lower than 10 and Previous character had a Perception of 10 higher than Dexterity minus the Deflection deficit from Enemy

 

And as for monsters, as I've stated multiple times I can check in the game files later.

 

You are clutching straws tbh.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Sensuki

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

 

Average accuracy is lower, fact. The zero point has been moved from 0 to 10 and the base accuracy value has not been adjusted to compensate for that.

There are two components to graze. Accuracy and deflection. (See many above posts discussing this, including apparently actual evidence of deflection.)

If anything, Deflection is now higher because INT boosts it.

 

With roughly 10 lower accuracy and higher deflection, you will see more grazes.

Deflection may also be lower because INT also penalizes it.

At most Deflection is going to be 7 lower then.

 

Accuracy is going to be 10 lower on average for Fighters using melee weapons, for everyone else accuracy is even lower because it is now combined instead of being split into "Ranged" and "Melee".

Edited September 29, 2014 by KaineParker

[Seari]

I would like if they increased the chance of misses compared to hits and grazes.

[Sensuki]

btw

 

some classes have had their base accuracy increased by between 5 and 10. So in some cases they will have the deficit taken into account (Ranged Rogues for example), and others haven't, such as the Barbarian, Fighter and Monk unless they're using ranged weapons.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Sensuki

[curryinahurry]

@ Sensuki

 

Have they adjusted range base accuracy for fighters?  They no longer show the accuracy range/melee split in 301 and When I look at the combat logs, my range accuracy with fighter using arquebus is definitely higher than it was before, but still different from melee bonus...its a bit confusing tbh

[Matt516]

From what I've read, the melee/ranged split in base Accuracy is gone. Kaput. All classes now have the same base proficiency with ranged and melee weapons. Or so I've heard.

 

A bit of an odd change IMO, though not one I mind particularly. I'm fairly indifferent on the matter.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Matt516

[curryinahurry]

Well, it certainly allows for a bit more flexibility.   The problem then is that Weapon Spec.  isn't being applied properly, or possibly something else because my melee + is 10 points higher than ranged.  Both of these are weapons within the 'soldier' specialization group.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Medreth as a Ranger will have less Accuracy than he did before.

 

 

Medreth is a he!

I always thought it was a sheila. No wonder I often misspell his name as Merdeth and Merdith, like in, you know, Meredith.

Edited September 29, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Sensuki]

Your melee bonus is prob different because 1H single gets +15 accuracy, some 1H melee weapons get an accuracy bonus and firearms give an accuracy penalty

[Matt516]

Yeah all the feedback and various UI displays and mouseovers are still borked. It'll be easier to figure out where all of that comes from when they finally get the UI worked out. Seems to break in new ways each patch even as they fix the old problems. xD

[Caladian]

Yeah all the feedback and various UI displays and mouseovers are still borked. It'll be easier to figure out where all of that comes from when they finally get the UI worked out. Seems to break in new ways each patch even as they fix the old problems. xD

 

Fully agree, and I am hopeful that they will sort that out soonish (soonish as in number of builds not time).  I like the concept, but the concept needs to be fixed, then polished.

[teknoman2]

i also think that if DT>damage then damage = 0

but graze has to stay. there is no valid reason for it not to

let's say you have 10 acc, a weapon that does 10 damage and do 5 attacks vs 10 def with 0 DT

with the current system you get 

hit, miss, graze, hit, graze for a total of 30 damage. it takes 5 lines in the combat log and 13s to complete all 5 attacks

with what you propose it would be

hit, miss, miss, hit, miss for a total of 20 damage. it takes 5 lines in the combat log and 13s to complete all 5 attacks

now explain to me how the first is attrition and log spamming and the second is not

[Captain Shrek]

Both are log spamming and the first has attrition. 

 

You are right that besides the unnecessary attrition there are no arguments against Graze. But at the same time there are no arguments for it either. 

[IndiraLightfoot]

Besides... Who want to read 2.7, 1.3, 4.4 in damage from graze all the time?

[archangel979]

Both are log spamming and the first has attrition. 

 

You are right that besides the unnecessary attrition there are no arguments against Graze. But at the same time there are no arguments for it either. 

I think my arguments vs Graze were good enough.

Edited September 29, 2014 by archangel979

[Sensuki]

Here's all the creature values

 

CharacterClass;,BaseDeflection,BaseFortitude,BaseReflexes,BaseWill,MeleeAccuracyBonus,RangedAccuracyBonus,MaxHealth,MaxStamina,HealthStaminaPerLevel

 

Undefined,15,0,0,0,40,40,36,36,12
Fighter,25,0,0,0,25,10,42,42,14
Rogue,15,0,0,0,20,15,36,36,12
Priest,15,0,0,0,20,15,36,36,12
Wizard,10,0,0,0,10,25,30,30,10
Barbarian,5,0,0,0,25,10,48,48,16
Ranger,10,0,0,0,10,25,36,36,12
Druid,10,0,0,0,20,15,36,36,12
Paladin,20,0,0,0,25,10,42,42,14
Monk,15,0,0,0,25,10,42,42,14
Cipher,10,0,0,0,15,20,30,30,10
Chanter,20,0,0,0,20,15,36,36,12
Troll,15,20,10,10,25,10,48,48,16
Ogre,25,20,20,20,50,35,128,128,48
Wolf,15,10,10,10,25,10,36,36,12
Spider,15,10,10,10,25,15,36,36,12
Ooze,5,10,10,10,20,20,48,48,16
Stelgaer,15,20,20,0,20,20,42,42,14
Imp,15,10,10,10,20,20,36,36,12
DankSpore,0,10,0,10,20,20,36,36,12
SwampLurker,25,20,0,10,20,20,36,36,12
Eoten,15,20,10,10,20,20,48,48,16
Xaurip,15,10,20,10,20,20,36,36,12
Vithrack,15,0,10,20,20,20,36,36,12
WillOWisp,30,10,25,25,20,20,36,36,12
Delemgan,15,10,10,20,20,20,36,36,12
Pwgra,15,10,10,20,20,20,36,36,12
Wurm,15,10,20,10,30,30,36,36,12
Skuldr,15,10,10,10,20,20,36,36,12
Drake,25,20,20,20,30,30,48,48,16
SkyDragon,55,20,20,20,30,30,48,48,16
AdraDragon,55,20,20,20,30,30,48,48,16
Blight,15,10,10,10,20,20,36,36,12
Animat,15,20,10,20,20,20,30,30,10
FleshConstruct,15,30,0,10,20,20,48,48,16
Shadow,15,10,10,10,30,30,36,36,12
Phantom,15,10,10,10,20,20,36,36,12
CeanGwla,15,10,10,20,20,20,42,42,14
Skeleton,25,10,0,10,20,20,36,36,12
Revenant,5,10,0,10,20,20,48,48,16
Gul,15,10,20,10,20,20,42,42,14
Dargul,15,10,20,10,20,20,42,42,14
Fampyr,25,20,20,20,20,20,48,48,16
Wicht,15,10,20,10,20,20,30,30,10
Beetle,15,20,0,10,20,20,42,42,14

[gkathellar]

EDIT: Oh, hey, six pages of thread I somehow failed to notice. Guuahsdfusaufhuf

 

Grazes are fine, health damage from grazes is not

 

This.

 

As others have pointed out, removing grazes would only remove granularity, not change statistical averages. I don't really care about damage averaging and how it ultimately works, but right now grazes feel like a totally artificial way to increase party attrition - ideally, I think they'd be a way to reduce attrition without eliminating it entirely, because even if attrition does have a role, it's pretty obnoxious at the moment.

 

 

The less random spike damage, that may force reloads from a xvart crit or make battles a miss-fest, the better. Lets please focus the fun of the game on the tactics and the epicness, not on the dice rolls.

 

That is practically what is MMO thinking. Bringing all gameplay down to banal but "balanced" level. You can have consistent gameplay there, true. But it is also assured to be boring and repetitive. 

 

"MMO thinking," as you call it (although plenty of MMOs don't do this), is just the easiest way to achieve superficial balance. Moreover, it creates a false dichotomy between balance and interesting, dynamic gameplay. My finding has been just the opposite that a lack of balance creates very uninteresting gameplay for large swaths of the game in creation.

 

Neither of these two extremes are a good thing, but then, extremes often aren't. True balance in a customization-friendly game can only be achieved asymmetrically. It's an extraordinarily difficult task, but a worthy one nonetheless, because the result is fantastic.

 

Using MMO as a pejorative isn't really useful. Some features of MMOs are good and some are bad. If you don't like the more normalized damage, criticize it on those terms, not by calling it "MMOish" and expecting that to settle the argument.

Also realize that it really is a matter of personal preference. Some people prefer more random combat, some people prefer less. Myself personally, I like a balance. I found the BG combat system far too RNG for my liking. Any system in which a battle can have an entirely different outcome purely based on RNG is flawed IMO. I shouldn't be playing my fights by reloading until the dice roll in my favor (which is what BG demanded in many cases). That said, I do like a bit of RNG and lucky crits are fun. Hence why I like the current system.

But this is all personal preference - as is yours. We can talk all day about why we have our preferences, but it's important to recognize that there's not necessarily a "best" way to do it.

 

In fairness, while BG's swingy RNG could be a pain in the ass, that was a feature, not a bug. A lot of character abilities were essentially ways to manipulate or eliminate the presence of the RNG, because the risks of failing to do so were too great. I agree that a lot of this comes down to preference, but it does bear noting that it's not just more RNG vs. less RNG - there's also the question of how player abilities interact with the RNG.

 

aeonsim is correct in assuming the Cowled Dwarf had very high defenses. It would be nice if people posted their own combat logs. Graze spam doesnt happen against lions for instance.

 

Yeah, that Cowled Dwarf was stupidly tough. Reflex attacks were pretty much the only way to reliably hurt it.

 

I really don't understand why some people on these forums backed PoE. It seems they barely liked IE games. Is it because of loving later Obsidian games?
Anyways there are too many of you here and you are too loud and it will kill this game for the real fans of the IE games. More time I spend here it makes me more and more worried for the final product.
I been wating too long for the next BG quality game and it seem I might be getting next DA:O instead.

 

Stop. Please, just stop. This "real fans" nonsense (what does that even mean?), the oversimplification of others' critiques into statements of dislike, the fearmongering about how those people are the source of all of PoE's real and imagined ills, the unjustified prophesying about how it's going to be too similar to XYZ-modern-game-that-we-are-all-supposed-to-hate ... stop. It's not helpful, it's not fair to anyone in the discussion, it reduces nuanced opinions down to us-and-them diatribe, and it's frankly insulting.

Edited September 29, 2014 by gkathellar