Jump to content

Graze gotta go, no?


IndiraLightfoot

Graze asks herself:  

97 members have voted

  1. 1. Should I stay or should I go?

    • Stay
      65
    • Go
      32


Recommended Posts

Misses are just as much promotions of attrition.

No. In a well-balanced system if you miss too often you're doing something wrong (most probably attacking an enemy who is too powerful for your level).

 

Conversely, attrition is a constant stream of low (but nonzero) damage that under certain conditions may be a winning strategy on its own. Usually the conditions are:

1. very high overall damage reduction and/or deflection on everyone in the party (often also crit immunity);

2. combat system that reduces incoming damage to negligible levels when condition 1 is met.

 

If you don't take any noticeable damage and still deal some you're probably going to win the fight. Maybe later rather than sooner but still. In fact, even if you do take damage but always in predictably low amounts, it's no different. As long as you're certain you can kill them before they kill you, it's just calculated losses. And "calculated" is really the key word here. An ultimate attrition-based party may be godmode powerful (if the system allows that) but playing such party will be boring as hell because it removes all surprises, pressure and tactical choices from combat.

 

I'm not in beta so I don't know how much the above applies to PoE at the moment. But grazes spam in combat log is a bad sign and a cause for concern. Why? Because what looks odd and unnecessary on lower difficulties may easily end up being the only way to go on higher difficulties.

Edited by prodigydancer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like this. RNG was a feature in IE games, not something to fix. At this rate, PoE might be worse than NWN2... good thing beamdog make BG2EE, at least I can continue play that until mods come for PoE. 

 

RNG is still a feature. Theres just more options for the diceroll to choose from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Yeah, RNG is definitely still a feature. You just don't have insane wild swings of it, which is just fine.

And that is the problem. When Miss is only 5% chance and only if your accuracy is not 5 or more over deflection, it is not longer a real RNG system.

If it relies on random numbers, it is a RNG system. PoE relies on random numbers.

"TL;DR: Schlongs make you catch the gay and are too woke." - majestic

"I'm gonna hunt you down so that I can slap you square in the mouth." - Bartimaeus

"if you behave we will let you visit the adoption event" - InsaneCommander

"You cracked the case, it wasn't meant to be nice." - Malcador

"Obi-Wan Kenobi - Whelp, that was a waste of time." -Hurlshort

"I was just waiting to see what bad thing was going to happen when they went through Serbia, but thankfully it seems like the creators like Hungary less this time around." - Sarex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, RNG is definitely still a feature.  You just don't have insane wild swings of it, which is just fine.

 

And that is the problem. When Miss is only 5% chance and only if your accuracy is not 5 or more over deflection, it is not longer a real RNG system.

You should be thankful there's a miss chance at all. IIRC there wasn't going to be misses in PoE at all originally, just grazes, hits, and crits.

"Wizards do not need to be The Dudes Who Can AoE Nuke You and Gish and Take as Many Hits as a Fighter and Make all Skills Irrelevant Because Magic."

-Josh Sawyer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seari: I was a proponent for critical misses/fumbles as well, and as things are now, I'd love to see these "misses" be replaced with critical misses with some "fun" negative effects attached to them depending on what kind of attack it is.

*** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your ACC-DEF is less than -5 you'll have a lot of chance to miss.

 

Miss isn't gone, you'll miss a crap load if your accuracy is a fair bit lower than an enemy defense.

It is still too low. Also if your accuracy that low, you lose critical hits. I want miss, hit and critical hits to always be possible at same time.

Luck must be part of these game, it is what brings best excitement. Just like in games like Xcom where missing that 95% shot or hitting that crucial 20% shot is what brings out the biggest emotions and makes you remember it.

Edited by archangel979
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your ACC-DEF is less than -5 you'll have a lot of chance to miss.

 

Miss isn't gone, you'll miss a crap load if your accuracy is a fair bit lower than an enemy defense.

if ACC is 6 or more than DEF you dont miss, you get more crit and the chance to graze reduces

if DEF is 6 or more than ACC you dont crit, you miss more often and the chane to hit decreases

so if you try to kill someone with 15 more DEF than your ACC, you will miss and graze a lot with rare hits. isnt it better to be able to slowly grind down the enemy's health than just miss all the time and pray for a hit? it's better to make slow progress than just wait for the one lucky shot that may win the fight... at least for me

  • Like 3

The words freedom and liberty, are diminishing the true meaning of the abstract concept they try to explain. The true nature of freedom is such, that the human mind is unable to comprehend it, so we make a cage and name it freedom in order to give a tangible meaning to what we dont understand, just as our ancestors made gods like Thor or Zeus to explain thunder.

 

-Teknoman2-

What? You thought it was a quote from some well known wise guy from the past?

 

Stupidity leads to willful ignorance - willful ignorance leads to hope - hope leads to sex - and that is how a new generation of fools is born!


We are hardcore role players... When we go to bed with a girl, we roll a D20 to see if we hit the target and a D6 to see how much penetration damage we did.

 

Modern democracy is: the sheep voting for which dog will be the shepherd's right hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like grazes. I think they are cool. Kinda seems more realistic and gives you something other than Hit. Miss. Hit. Hit. Miss. Seems like a good idea to me.

 

And was randomness really THAT much of a factor in Baldurs Gate1/2? I remember when I first starting playing (mustve been 12 or something) I had no idea what 2d6 meant but just looked at damage and descriptions and went from there. Figured 2-handed swords would do the most damage (i.e. BIGGER = BETTER! YAY MINSC!) and just kinda rolled with it. But I wasn't a combat junkie either, calculating all the combat stats and stuff (at least not til I got older and understood the system haha). 

 

And to base hows the biggest fan off of how many times you played it or specific pieces of the game or "loving the whole package" isn't cool. Everybody took away something a little bit different. THATs probably the reason why everyone loved it. It was unique, you felt connected to it, it had a good story, and it was FUN. That all wrapped up = great game. Doesn't mean we need a copy and paste of all systems or anything. I loved them, but they can always be improved, and personally I look forward to trying some new stuff. If everything was exactly the same, it wouldnt be boring per se, but new things can be good, you just have to give them a chance.

 

And if you don't like how the system is, offer some ways to improve it, or just wait until the game is released. Right now, everything is liable to change, so if you want a clear-cut, obviously finished game that has great mechanics and playability, you should probably just wait until its released.

 

YMMV though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

since someone anti-graze mentioned the priests that raise DEF with their spells eaarlier. how would eliminating graze, make a fight against a priest with a huge DEF buff less tedious?

well here's an extreme idea on how to make the game less log spammy an tedious: if roll+ACC-DEF > 89 the enemy dies (or you die if the enemy rolled) with a roll of 100 being a critical (ignore 50% DEF), else it's a miss. no hp, no damage rolls no stamina, no healing. whoever is lucky enough to get that roll first wins the fight 

  • Like 2

The words freedom and liberty, are diminishing the true meaning of the abstract concept they try to explain. The true nature of freedom is such, that the human mind is unable to comprehend it, so we make a cage and name it freedom in order to give a tangible meaning to what we dont understand, just as our ancestors made gods like Thor or Zeus to explain thunder.

 

-Teknoman2-

What? You thought it was a quote from some well known wise guy from the past?

 

Stupidity leads to willful ignorance - willful ignorance leads to hope - hope leads to sex - and that is how a new generation of fools is born!


We are hardcore role players... When we go to bed with a girl, we roll a D20 to see if we hit the target and a D6 to see how much penetration damage we did.

 

Modern democracy is: the sheep voting for which dog will be the shepherd's right hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. In a well-balanced system if you miss too often you're doing something wrong (most probably attacking an enemy who is too powerful for your level).

In a well-balanced system, if you graze too often, you're doing something wrong. That's kind of my point. If you're not doing something wrong, and you're grazing too often, then the system needs some tweaking. Not the removal of the thing that happens to be occurring too often.

 

Miss or graze, it matters not. Either could be out of whack, and either would need to be brought back into whack, rather than outright removed, in response.

 

Lephys: I like your alternate spread for hits/misses/etc - though it'd require some balance changes as doing so would greatly buff Might indirectly by raising the average effective damage from Accuracy (and therefore the marginal benefit of each point in Might) since (by default) you'd now be hitting a lot more. Not that I don't think it's a good idea, just that it might be prudent to also suggest a buff to Perception. Maybe +2 Accuracy per point and increase Might to +3% per point. That gives Perception more weight.

Oh, definitely. I just whip examples up to convey the basic idea of the change. Actually changing the spread would require a lot more thought and calculation, and almost definitely changes to other factors/values in the system, to make it work.

 

Really, though, just dropping the graze threshold, while not the perfect solution, would probably show some huge improvement in regard to this issue people are having. I mean, with the current spread, when ACC-DEF = 0, you're grazing almost half the time, and hitting almost half the time. I don't mind going up against a tougher enemy that means I graze a lot more often, but grazing almost half the time even against just a perfectly average foe is basically just half-as-frustrating as missing 30+ percent of the time (which was the original thing they implemented grazes for).

 

Or, to put it another way, if grazes were thought up in response to the frequency of missing in the older games, and the frustration that caused, then you wouldn't think leaving the whole not-hit range at a whopping 50% (5% for miss now, and 45% for graze) would be the way to go. I mean, even in the IE games, you typically had better than a 50% to hit, right? Unless you were attacking dragons in melee with your untrained Wizard. It was probably more like 60-70%, at least. So, really, you should be splitting up something like 30% into misses and grazes.

 

That, and you really want the base frequency of something like not-hits to be relatively low in your exact-middle/average scenario (my Accuracy is exactly the same as the foe's Defense). That way, you can STILL decrease it (with higher Accuracy/bonuses) to maximize actual hits (not to mention crits), but you're at least still hitting more often than you're not-hitting, be default. Then, if the enemy has high defense, or your character just has crap Accuracy, you'll run into more grazes (and misses).

 

But, doing half-damage is pretty frustrating, even though it's way better than doing no damage. So, I don't think 50/50 is really the baseline to use, since grazing half the time is not what someone wants to be doing just because they don't have far-above-average Accuracy.

 

And yeah, I definitely think Accuracy bonuses need to be more significant.

 

*shrug*. There are all kinds of adjustments that can be made there, depending on the exact goal desired. I don't know how you would do it, exactly, with an equation (off the top of my head), but maybe misses stay locked at 5% for a 10-point stretch, instead of just ticking away the second you start gaining an Accuracy advantage. Basically, you could have a reduced chance to Graze, but STILL have a 5% chance to miss. Maybe every THREE points reduces your chance to miss by 1%, instead of every point? Same with crits. Maybe your ACC is 7 less than your enemy's DEF, but you actually still retain a small crit chance?

 

*shrug*. Seems like the shifting scale of attack resolution works quite well in general, but it could use a little finesse, perhaps. Again, I'd have to check the effects of those actual changes to tell you "this would be a good number to use," but the general idea remains.

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...