|
|
|
journeyman
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
cheese the environment
why?
why should melee take the backseat to range? Consider that at lower levels we are all weaker. I am fairly sure that melee will be much more useful as we progress in levels. Unless you are a combat expert, would you want to be surrounded by enemies? I would think that you would get more creative and avoid putting yourself in a situation where you are guaranteed to take damage. 1. a s a melee fighter i should have good mitigation via armor and passively from dodge/parry block 2. why should melee with ac 17 to 19 be hit with a 90%+ chance by mobs? its rigged-- there is not rng-- is pure and simple--- too many people playing are saying the same thing, and where there is smoke there is fire. 3 why do iahve have to play ranged? to be successful without have to save everytime i hit with a melee attack because its so damned rare to hit with melee weapons? the mobs are +/- 1 level from us-- there arent experts-- yet they are much more adept than players in combat. the same mobs often have a. lower ac b. lower atk stats than our singular rolled characters-- yet their atk success rate is much higher. listen i like the game -- im not bashing it. I stating that there is something wrong with the algorithm vs players. why wouuld they do it? simple--- with limited content they want players to struggle so the play through lasts longer. We are always going to have the outliers who want find hacks/cheats/bugs/ etc to speed run through with no combat We are going to have the players who would rather solo the game from ranged stealth-- good for them. id prefer to to take a party and get up front and personal with the mobs-- IE Elrdrith Knight main + Eldritch kngiht lael + pure rogue astarion + wyll-- at times its gets verydifficult because you constantly roll natural 1-4 over and over and over for melee attacks. That is not rng when it happens from thge start to finish of the earyl access.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
To avoid people whining there should be an option where you can see a mini 20 sided dice in the combat log with the number you rolled in the attack.
Early levels are like this you don't have enough gear to improve your to hit bonuses. Probably they will add a story mode for people that don't want to enjoy D&D combat. granted i havent played dnd since 3.5 but + 6 to hit has alw I feel like this thread is too focused on the arbitrary percentage in the lower left corner. I personally didn't pay much attention to it since it isn't explained anywhere how it's calculated.
SOMETIMES you see modifiers next to it, like " ^ High Ground" but you don't always do, and most of the time I have very little idea why my hit chance is only 50% while I'm standing in a well lit room next to an Ogre the size of a barn door.
You can check this some in the combat log, at least it displays advantage/disadvantage. Low hit chances next to an opponent are typically ranged attacks, as you gain disadvantage with any ranged attack if the enemy is (too) close. It could be simply a high armor class though, a buff on the enemy or a debuff on the character. So, like others mentioned, there are factors affecting your hit chance that are not expressed in the numbers and are not very clear. Characters who can't see enemies fully due to darkness have disadvantage on their roll, which is calculated into the percentage displayed. E.g. Lae'zel who doesn't have darkvision targets a phase spider clouded in darkness. The phase spider has an armor class of 13, Lae'zel an overall attack bonus of +5. Therefore she would need to roll an eight, which is a 65% chance. Due to the disadvantage, you roll the dice twice and are forced to take the lower one, which makes this but a 42% chance. This is being displayed correctly, it also says in the combat log that the character was at a disadvantage (due to not seeing the enemy properly). Ideally there should be a turtorial how the more basic things work, too. I dancing lights eveywhere with the same terribad roll results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
cheese the environment
why?
why should melee take the backseat to range? Consider that at lower levels we are all weaker. I am fairly sure that melee will be much more useful as we progress in levels. Unless you are a combat expert, would you want to be surrounded by enemies? I would think that you would get more creative and avoid putting yourself in a situation where you are guaranteed to take damage. 1. a s a melee fighter i should have good mitigation via armor and passively from dodge/parry block 2. why should melee with ac 17 to 19 be hit with a 90%+ chance by mobs? its rigged-- there is not rng-- is pure and simple--- too many people playing are saying the same thing, and where there is smoke there is fire. 3 why do iahve have to play ranged? to be successful without have to save everytime i hit with a melee attack because its so damned rare to hit with melee weapons? the mobs are +/- 1 level from us-- there arent experts-- yet they are much more adept than players in combat. the same mobs often have a. lower ac b. lower atk stats than our singular rolled characters-- yet their atk success rate is much higher. listen i like the game -- im not bashing it. I stating that there is something wrong with the algorithm vs players. why wouuld they do it? simple--- with limited content they want players to struggle so the play through lasts longer. We are always going to have the outliers who want find hacks/cheats/bugs/ etc to speed run through with no combat We are going to have the players who would rather solo the game from ranged stealth-- good for them. id prefer to to take a party and get up front and personal with the mobs-- IE Elrdrith Knight main + Eldritch kngiht lael + pure rogue astarion + wyll-- at times its gets verydifficult because you constantly roll natural 1-4 over and over and over for melee attacks. That is not rng when it happens from thge start to finish of the earyl access. I didn't think you were bashing the game, even if you were it is an opinion you should be allowed to have. Perhaps I am comparing too much with other types of games I play and I see nothing wrong with having to be creative and stay out of trouble as much as possible until growing stronger, even if it means not playing with your desired playstyle until then. (For example, don't rush into a town full of supermutants armed with only a machete and basic leather armour even if you want to play melee, instead use whatever crap rifle you picked up, find a point out of reach and start picking them off slowly, moving position so they don't find you.) I still don't feel the dice are rigged here, have many times seen the constant miss and also frequent nat 20s, for both myself and the enemies and often in the same long fights. It is frustrating if you are right on top of the enemy, go to stab them and miss but this is the same in DnD but here you can reload if the fight does not go the way you wish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
cheese the environment
why?
why should melee take the backseat to range? Consider that at lower levels we are all weaker. I am fairly sure that melee will be much more useful as we progress in levels. Unless you are a combat expert, would you want to be surrounded by enemies? I would think that you would get more creative and avoid putting yourself in a situation where you are guaranteed to take damage. 1. a s a melee fighter i should have good mitigation via armor and passively from dodge/parry block 2. why should melee with ac 17 to 19 be hit with a 90%+ chance by mobs? its rigged-- there is not rng-- is pure and simple--- too many people playing are saying the same thing, and where there is smoke there is fire. 3 why do iahve have to play ranged? to be successful without have to save everytime i hit with a melee attack because its so damned rare to hit with melee weapons? the mobs are +/- 1 level from us-- there arent experts-- yet they are much more adept than players in combat. the same mobs often have a. lower ac b. lower atk stats than our singular rolled characters-- yet their atk success rate is much higher. listen i like the game -- im not bashing it. I stating that there is something wrong with the algorithm vs players. why wouuld they do it? simple--- with limited content they want players to struggle so the play through lasts longer. We are always going to have the outliers who want find hacks/cheats/bugs/ etc to speed run through with no combat We are going to have the players who would rather solo the game from ranged stealth-- good for them. id prefer to to take a party and get up front and personal with the mobs-- IE Elrdrith Knight main + Eldritch kngiht lael + pure rogue astarion + wyll-- at times its gets verydifficult because you constantly roll natural 1-4 over and over and over for melee attacks. That is not rng when it happens from thge start to finish of the earyl access. You know, I once played Aion. As an Asmodean, I had to run a 4 person dungeon once a week trying to get my extendable weapon for PvP. I ran that dungeon every week for 2 years, and I never got it. People in my Legion got their weapons, even got weapons for alts, but I never got mine. The running joke was that it could have a 100% drop rate, and I still wouldn't get it. But I'm not going to stop there, in a little Korean Grinder I used to play, taming pets had a small percentage chance to succeed. It took me a little over a year, and about 300 cards, to catch one Salamander. The RNG gods have hated me for as long as I've played games with RNG, unless, as per your theory, the dice in every RNG game I've played in the last 30 years has had it's dice weighted against me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
cheese the environment
why?
why should melee take the backseat to range? Consider that at lower levels we are all weaker. I am fairly sure that melee will be much more useful as we progress in levels. Unless you are a combat expert, would you want to be surrounded by enemies? I would think that you would get more creative and avoid putting yourself in a situation where you are guaranteed to take damage. 1. a s a melee fighter i should have good mitigation via armor and passively from dodge/parry block 2. why should melee with ac 17 to 19 be hit with a 90%+ chance by mobs? its rigged-- there is not rng-- is pure and simple--- too many people playing are saying the same thing, and where there is smoke there is fire. 3 why do iahve have to play ranged? to be successful without have to save everytime i hit with a melee attack because its so damned rare to hit with melee weapons? the mobs are +/- 1 level from us-- there arent experts-- yet they are much more adept than players in combat. the same mobs often have a. lower ac b. lower atk stats than our singular rolled characters-- yet their atk success rate is much higher. listen i like the game -- im not bashing it. I stating that there is something wrong with the algorithm vs players. why wouuld they do it? simple--- with limited content they want players to struggle so the play through lasts longer. We are always going to have the outliers who want find hacks/cheats/bugs/ etc to speed run through with no combat We are going to have the players who would rather solo the game from ranged stealth-- good for them. id prefer to to take a party and get up front and personal with the mobs-- IE Elrdrith Knight main + Eldritch kngiht lael + pure rogue astarion + wyll-- at times its gets verydifficult because you constantly roll natural 1-4 over and over and over for melee attacks. That is not rng when it happens from thge start to finish of the earyl access. You know, I once played Aion. As an Asmodean, I had to run a 4 person dungeon once a week trying to get my extendable weapon for PvP. I ran that dungeon every week for 2 years, and I never got it. People in my Legion got their weapons, even got weapons for alts, but I never got mine. The running joke was that it could have a 100% drop rate, and I still wouldn't get it. But I'm not going to stop there, in a little Korean Grinder I used to play, taming pets had a small percentage chance to succeed. It took me a little over a year, and about 300 cards, to catch one Salamander. The RNG gods have hated me for as long as I've played games with RNG, unless, as per your theory, the dice in every RNG game I've played in the last 30 years has had it's dice weighted against me? the rate of die roll 1-4 is too staggering to be that rng. i look at my rolls and mob rolls every atk nowdays. i think we all we be surprised how much 1-4 is being by players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2018
|
I think the RNG is fine. Rather, I believe the issue is they are not doing the math correctly on the tooltip when you are disadvantaged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
For fun I reloaded a 95% hit chance for Lae'zel 70 times. The enemy had an AC of 7, Lae'zel has an overall attack bonus of +5 (+2 proficiency, +3 from strength). A 95% chance is akin to rolling at least a 2 on the D20. In other words, Lae'zel can only fail to hit on a critical miss (rolling a 1). This is a bit long, but may show a couple things: 1) how streaky things can be over the short to mid-term 2) that only over many many many rolls, the 95% chance would actually "apply". 3) Things for sure aren't as obvious as people make it sound in here (which would be majorly stupid on Larian's behalf anyways) We were actually slightly below the 95%, as out of 70 attacks, only 63 hit (which is a 90%). The more rolls, the closer to the 95% you'd get. Generally, you'd need to roll at least 100 attacks to say anything of added value. The average attack roll was a 9.2, which too was slightly below the expected 10 -- again, only in the long-term you'd be getting there. I had collected ~50 attack rolls in a prior attempt for an average of 12. Neither of this is a mistake, this is randomness at work. 11 hit 14 hit 19 hit 1 critical miss 19 hit 3 hit 4 hit 5 hit 2 hit 14 hit 1 critical miss 3 hit 2 hit 7 hit 5 hit 1 critical miss 9 hit 6 hit 4 hit 20 critical hit 3 hit 8 hit 14 hit 6 hit 15 hit 4 hit 13 hit 10 hit 1 critical miss 4 hit 11 hit 19 hit 2 hit 3 hit 13 hit 20 critical hit 5 hit 17 hit 13 hit 2 hit 16 hit 15 hit 1 critical miss 1 critical miss 14 hit 10 hit 14 hit 1 critical miss 18 hit 18 hit 14 hit 7 hit 11 hit 4 hit 19 hit 5 hit 3 hit 11 hit 18 hit 20 critical hit 3 hit 2 hit 7 hit 19 hit 18 hit 6 hit 2 hit 9 hit 19 hit 4 hit
listen i like the game -- im not bashing it. I stating that there is something wrong with the algorithm vs players.
why wouuld they do it?
simple--- with limited content they want players to struggle so the play through lasts longer.
There's a thousand ways to ensure that other than riggin the dice though, which destroys all player trust. Larian have complete control over not only opposition stats, but also the encounter design. If you can show that a high AC character is actually hit 90% of the time in the long-run, I'll start listening though. From my experience, this is completely false. There is nothing this obvious going on, neither in terms of bugs or otherwise. And that's not defending the game. As a D&D game, I don't want them to listen to players who are badly rubbed by actual RNG (see the Tim Cain talk, where he talks about that players would actually prefer something else, even though they talk "randomness".)
Last edited by Sven_; 20/10/20 09:43 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
this is the count for each number you reported for easy viewing:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
7 6 6 6 4 3 3 1 2 2 4 3 6 2 1 1 4 6 3
I know people you would expect that every number has the chance of 1/20 times 70. So the most common count "should" be 3-4. But randomness doesnt really work like that with small numbers such as 70. Here are some other d20 rolls for 70 times ( https://rolladie.net/ ):
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
1 5 9 5 2 2 2 2 3 2 5 5 7 2 4 2 4 3 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
1 6 4 4 5 3 5 1 6 4 1 9 5 5 1 1 3 1 3 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
4 2 4 5 4 7 5 1 4 2 3 3 3 6 2 3 1 6 2 3
the second dice roll gave me 9 times 12 and only 1 time 11.. thats only 10% chance while it should be the same for 12 and 11! this is a d20 roll for 9999 times, should be farely equal right?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
493 487 516 521 491 537 489 491 558 491 576 470 508 488 471 512 499 483 468 450
even now you see still differences from 470 (dice result 12) to 576 (dice result 11) although each dice result has the same chance! But still only 80% chance compared. Here are 100000 times a d20 roll (generated with excel because the website crashes with such high numbers): 1 4947 2 4968 3 5059 4 4931 5 5084 6 5143 7 5044 8 4973 9 5030 10 5032 11 4896 12 5004 13 5109 14 5100 15 4931 16 4960 17 4954 18 4989 19 4895 20 4951 now you can see the reuslts are more like the "expected" ones. each dice number has the same chance and should average 5000 times (20 * 5000 = 100000). Still you see lows such as 4895 (dice result 19) and highs such as 5143 (dice result 6) - meaning a 95% chance compared although the "virtual dice" is not weighted at all. I just trust excels random generator here. If you have excel here you can generate endless results for yourself: german version: =ZUFALLSMATRIX(100000;1;1;20;1) english version: =RANDARRAY(100000;1;1;20;1) The higher the number of rolls the lower the extreme differences get. for science 1 million times: 1 50318 2 49848 3 49769 4 49885 5 49901 6 50148 7 50179 8 50236 9 50011 10 50031 11 50228 12 49868 13 49831 14 49725 15 49834 16 50106 17 49587 18 50020 19 50115 20 50360
Last edited by Tav3245234325325; 20/10/20 11:07 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The game doesnt have that strategic feel; when your min maxed warrior misses more than a healer backline cleric with crossbow, you start to get a feeling of something is wrong with your build when its actually rng stopping you from enjoying your custom character.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
The game doesnt have that strategic feel; when your min maxed warrior misses more than a healer backline cleric with crossbow, you start to get a feeling of something is wrong with your build when its actually rng stopping you from enjoying your custom character. This may happen in the short, to short mid-term of a battle. D&D mechanics are that way. However in the longer run, the Maths is against the Cleric. The game may actually introduce character stats the way Pillars Of Eternity has them. How often characters hit over an actual playthrough, how much damage they make, etc. This was really insightful and useful when doing different builds and playing characters with various strategies. ![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/RhZSu23.jpg)
Last edited by Sven_; 20/10/20 10:52 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Well, my gripe is that you cannot do anything deterministically. Everything has a rng layer to it. When you hit with 90% accuracy it should fall into your crit range (19-20). But in this game it misses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
With 90% you will Hit 9 Times out of 10. Just do it 1 Million Times to See this result averaging.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Some people have clearly never had the dice gods against them for a D&D session...in my experience missing every attack in an encounter is very possible
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The real culprit here may be the fact that the tooltip is showing you a percentage chance of success. If instead it was showing the true roll to beat along with your corresponding roll, you would possibly feel less slighted by the outcome. Also remember that these aren't cumulative roll percentages here. Your percentage change to hit doesn't go up bacuase you missed the first time. It stays exactly the same if no other conditions change. You have to think of every single roll in isolation as its own outcome which has no bearing on the roll before or after it. So to say you can't believe that you would repeatedly miss something with a 75% change to hit might be a little naive. I personally don't like the hit percentage and would much rather see roll i need and be shown the roll outcome in the combat log. I also hate the current roll system which doesn't add my bonuses to my roll, rather shows it in reverse. Larian could you change both of these things for me please and thank you  Take your medicine when you roll poorly. It just makes the hits even sweeter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cleric of Innuendo
|
|
Cleric of Innuendo
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Some people have clearly never had the dice gods against them for a D&D session...in my experience missing every attack in an encounter is very possible The Lore about the Luck that your dice are imbued with is known to just about every table RPGer out there. It is one of the important first instructions; other people's names; how to find the loo; DO NOT touch someone else's dice without permission! There is probably money to made developing an computer overlay that allows you to take your virtual dice and wash them in (un)holy water to recharge their luck.
Last edited by Sadurian; 20/10/20 12:37 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
The real culprit here may be the fact that the tooltip is showing you a percentage chance of success. If instead it was showing the true roll to beat along with your corresponding roll, you would possibly feel less slighted by the outcome.
If this was included, I hope they'd make it optional. I'm fine with the percentages, however I also appreciate the nature of the dice very much.  Thinking about it though, would it really be much better? The odds as such are not that intuitively to grasp in particular on advantage/disadvantage rolls -- at the moment the game does all that Math and displays the correct probability. People may be very bad with probability, but they intuitively grasp that higher percentages are better than lower ones. Plus on the 95% to hit chance, you'd need to roll a 2 at least, which as shown in my big post on this page, can still go wrong not only in sequences, but also in a row. Thus people who wanted to believe the dice were rigged would still insist they were rigged even if they weren't.
There is probably money to made developing an computer overlay that allows you to take your virtual dice and wash them in (un)holy water to recharge their luck.
First DLC just got announced. 
Last edited by Sven_; 20/10/20 01:14 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jun 2019
|
How does a 1st or 2nd level character ever get a 95% hit chance in the first place? I am used to the older to-hit-AC0 (THAC0) tables, but the probabilities should be about the same in 5e. A 1st level fighter's base score hits a monster with a modest +4 armor class on a roll of 17 - 20 out of 20. That's 4 possible rolls out of 20, or a 20% chance. Throw in a couple bonuses OK, but there is no way this character should ever get a 95% hit probability. That's why that first wolf in BG was so tough to beat!
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2015
|
How does a 1st or 2nd level character ever get a 95% hit chance in the first place? I am used to the older to-hit-AC0 (THAC0) tables, but the probabilities should be about the same in 5e. A 1st level fighter's base score hits a monster with a modest +4 armor class on a roll of 17 - 20 out of 20. That's 4 possible rolls out of 20, or a 20% chance. Throw in a couple bonuses OK, but there is no way this character should ever get a 95% hit probability. That's why that first wolf in BG was so tough to beat! Your calculation is a bit weird. A level 1 fighter would have +2 to attack from proficiency, then let's say he/she has +2 in strength. It makes a +4 bonus on attack roll. If he/she tries to hit a AC 14 monstrer, he/she would need a 10+ on a dice roll, which is a 55% chance to hit. If you count any advantage, which is calculated with probabilities in bg3 and not by throwing 2 dice, the fighter would need to roll even smaller numbers and so would have higher chances to hit.
Last edited by Nyanko; 20/10/20 01:38 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Some people have clearly never had the dice gods against them for a D&D session...in my experience missing every attack in an encounter is very possible The Lore about the Luck that your dice are imbued with is known to just about every table RPGer out there. It is one of the important first instructions; other people's names; how to find the loo; DO NOT touch someone else's dice without permission! There is probably money to made developing an computer overlay that allows you to take your virtual dice and wash them in (un)holy water to recharge their luck. I laughed, and then called R&D... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jun 2019
|
Yeah, nobody likes the old THAC0 system, but that's all I know. I was just reading off the tables in the old Dungeon Master's Screen, Fighter THAC0 = 20 at level 1, hoping that the basic probabilities would be similar in 5E. But even 55% is nowhere near 95%. I think it is still safe to say that 1st level characters should not hit very often, so if I ever see a 95% chance on my screen feedback in Chapter 1, I would not be inclined to believe it. Once again, the Mists of Leira shroud us with unknowing.
|
|
|
|
|
