|
|
|
journeyman
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I think this conversation can be put to bed. Nice work everyone. Color me Impressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
You fellas can try to color me but I doubt you could land a hit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
I'd be actually very interested in other people's reports now also aware of the no-damage rolls being hits. In particular those who suspect there's still something obviously wrong. That, and possible other bugs aside, is why this topic to me isn't done yet. Collecting 30-50 throws takes like 10-15 minutes max, about the time you may spend venting frustration in similar threads or in front of your pc during your gameplay. There must be now close to a 1,000 throws recorded and linked to in this thread, but they are all from very few sources given that this is argued to be a core game flaw. I'm personally doing this because I'm interested in stats and numbers, the psychology at play I also know from other games (Football Manager, anyone?), because I want a good game with none of such obvious issues as claimed (who would want an experience such as that?) -- and because I hope they won't go with a pseudo-random system by the time of the release that ensures no bad streaks ever happen (or even one that rigs the dice in favor of the player so that trust is not lost as easily), as that is not particularly D&D. There are games that are doing such things, as player trust is lost easily in particular regarding RNG. The human brain is awful with RNG -- that's the way we're all wired. Remember that Larian have presumably already nerfed some armor classes, because missing isn't fun.  https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-will-combine-the-best-of-divinity-and-dandd-5th-edition/
Last edited by Sven_; 23/10/20 09:44 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
There remain two ranges in particular that are intriguing, at least some. The 90-95% one, as ~10% below the expected (though I was 9% above the expected in my 81% hit chance test -- came out at 90% after 50 rolls). And the 50-55% one. You personally also rarely come out above the expected in your bigger samples, whilst for me it was a mixed experience of being above and below. Excluding the damage roll and AI vs player bias tests I did: 70 rolls 90% hits expected 95% -5%50 rolls 76% hits expected 75% +1%50 rolls 90% hits expected 94% -4%50 rolls 90% hits expected 81% +9%40 rolls 50% hits expected 49% +1%75 rolls 93.33% h expected 94% -0.67%35 rolls 71.42% h expected 66.54% +4.88% 50 rolls 100% hits expected 100% +/- 0% 100rolls 88% hits expected 90% -2% TOTAL: +4.21% (not weighted accordingly) I may just do that 55% one over a really big sample of data in the hopes of getting multiple bad and good streaks, and showing what they may mean in the bigger picture. The supposedly "buggy" bugbears may again be a good target for that, so two birds with one stone.  edit: Starting good so far, of the first 30 rolls only about a third are hits. Let's see what this may mean in the long run. NOt that'd convince anybody who isn't convinced yet -- I actually kind of find this fun.
Last edited by Sven_; 24/10/20 08:45 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
There are two kind of attacks. The 55% ones are unbuffed Shadowheart and my equally unbuffed main attacking the bugbears melee. The 56% one is Lae'zel on disadvantage range attacking a goblin. I was getting exceptionally unlucky for the first 50 rolls with a couple bad streaks. At that point, only a third of all attacks hit, when you'd expect half of them plus to hit. Did 250 rolls total, maybe I'll make this an even longer term project to see how this goes. My pet theory is: What happened in the first 50 rolls is exactly what some people wouldn't want to happen (and what a pseudo-RNG would avoid). I wouldn't want pseudo, personally.
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
55% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
56% miss
56% miss
55% miss
55% miss
55% hit
55% miss
55% hit
56% hit
55% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
55% hit
56% miss
56% miss
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
55% hit ----> first 50: 17 hits, only 34% hits
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
56% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% hit
56% hit
56% miss
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
56% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
56% hit
55% miss
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
56%dw miss
55% hit
55% miss
55% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit ---> 43 hits of first 100: only 43% hits
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
55% hit
56% hit
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
56% hit
55% miss
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
56% miss
56% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
56% miss
56% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% hit
55% hit
55% miss ----> 71 hits of 150, still only 47,33% hits
56% miss
55% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
55% miss
55% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% miss
55% miss
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
55% hit
56% hit
56% hit 97 of 200 hits ->> still only 48,5% hits
55% hit
56% miss
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
56% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit
56% hit
56% hit
56% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% miss
55% miss
55% hit
55% miss
55% hit
55% miss
56% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% hit
55% hit
56% miss
55% hit
55% hit ----> 128 hits of 250= 51,2 %
TOTAL ROLLS: 250 TOTAL HITS: 128 TOTAL HIT RATIO: 51.2% EXPECTED: 55.x% LONGEST STREAK WITHOUT A HIT: 8 LONGEST STREAK WITHOUT A MISS: 7
Last edited by Sven_; 24/10/20 10:26 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
You fellas can try to color me but I doubt you could land a hit. I just crit miss with firebolt and do 12 damage with the lingering surface effect anyway like a chad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
|
There remain two ranges in particular that are intriguing, at least some. The 90-95% one, as ~10% below the expected (though I was 9% above the expected in my 81% hit chance test -- came out at 90% after 50 rolls). And the 50-55% one. You personally also rarely come out above the expected in your bigger samples, whilst for me it was a mixed experience of being above and below. Excluding the damage roll and AI vs player bias tests I did:
The 90-95 range was even worse for a time with around 14% behind the expected hit rate. Even though my numbers are lacking a bit behind I think it is fine over all. The game won't have "true" random generation, as this is quite the challenge in computer science. I assume there are no correction mechanisms implemented to force expected hit ratios. If so, I would say a sufficient number of rolls for a certain percentage range would need to be around 1000 (just an arbitrarily chosen high number). Bad/Good streaks are comon with rolling dice (simulated and irl). Thus, those streaks can easily ruin expected ratios. It is also important to note, that a difference of 2.5% in my analysis should be considered okay, because so far I do not account for the spread of expected values within a certain percentage range. NOt that'd convince anybody who isn't convinced yet -- I actually kind of find this fun. Same here^^ Also, before recording my rolls I was convinced the rolls are incorrect (especially one encounter where all my 70% failed and the enemies below 50% [according to the log] hit me). But now I believe it is mostly alright. There might still be issues in some places (for instance, I don't know if chances with the lucky trait are displayed correctly) but overall I am satisfied with the RNG so far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
I assume there are no correction mechanisms implemented to force expected hit ratios.
Well if there was one, it wasn't random anymore. I think my next project is going to be a possible bug. Somebody had observed, although over a tiny sample size, that the Great Weapon Fighting Style wouldn't work correctly or that there was something screwy with the RNG there. If you roll a 1 or 2, you get to roll another time (but have to take the new roll). Over that small sample size, he rolled a couple 1s and 2s again, apparently.
Last edited by Sven_; 24/10/20 11:42 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Just got a critical miss out of a 98% hit chance. Boy does this reminds me of fire emblem
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
Just got a critical miss out of a 98% hit chance. Boy does this reminds me of fire emblem This is actually exactly the same chance as rolling a critical miss on a 51%, 36% or 19% chance. From the probability you can tell that all are advantaged attacks, so you get to roll twice on each and have to take the higher roll. That means if both throws are 1, it's a critical miss on each. http://zerohitpoints.com/Articles/Advantage-in-DnD-5
Last edited by Sven_; 24/10/20 11:54 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Just got a critical miss out of a 98% hit chance. Boy does this reminds me of fire emblem This is actually exactly the same chance as rolling a critical miss on a 51%, 36% or 19% chance. ^^ From the probability you can tell that all are advantaged attacks, so you get to roll twice on each and have to take the higher roll. That means only if both throws are 1, it's a critical miss. http://zerohitpoints.com/Articles/Advantage-in-DnD-5Ewww math go away I finished highschool to not have to deal with you anymore
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
What I don't will ever get used to in RPG is that if a character has the max on some attribute it's supposed to be a master or a natural talent. So I don't get how a rogue with dexterity 18 (or 20 if modifiers are involved) can line up a long queue of miss or really low damage hits. Seriously, it's like a trained sharpshooter continuosly missing his target. Same goes for a fighter with 18 strenght that misses, when using big weapons that hardly can not hit a target, in a melee confrontation. i get there are modifiers, that the enemies are trained too, but come on. I lost count of how manytimes my characters miss or fail against lower level antagonists. (But again I have to cope with teh fact that my luck is really really bad ). At least I'm learning how to make the best of terrain, objects, and skills
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
It appears the feat Great Weapon FIghting style isn't considered in the combat log, sady. A new roll seems to happen automatically on the hit roll rolling a 1 or 2. It's really taking ages to see a 1 or 2 in the damage roll, not sure though? What I don't will ever get used to in RPG is that if a character has the max on some attribute it's supposed to be a master or a natural talent.
So I don't get how a rogue with dexterity 18 (or 20 if modifiers are involved) can line up a long queue of miss or really low damage hits. Seriously, it's like a trained sharpshooter continuosly missing his target.
Same goes for a fighter with 18 strenght that misses, when using big weapons that hardly can not hit a target, in a melee confrontation.
Yeah, but that's D&D. You have to also consider the enemy's Armor Class. An attribute of 18 gives you a modifier on the hit roll of +4, which is "but" a 20% to-hit chance increase over a character with Strength 10. With proficiency +2 you have an overall attack bonus +6. An opponent with an AC of 15 long-term is going to be hit 60% of the time assuming no advantage/disadvantage. AC15- Attack bonus 6=9, which is what you need to roll http://media.zerohitpoints.com/images/higherthan.png The same character with Strength of 0 would hit 40% of the time. That is over many many many attacks. If he has no weapon proficiency (+2 bonus) for the big sword being used (which would be a likely thing, say a caster type), he would only hit 30% of the time. On later levels that gap between characters increases, as proficiency bonus increases. The game currently only deals up to levels 4 (+2 bonus from proficiency). That's on the to-hit end. That strength bonus is also applied on the damage roll on each hit. That's a +4 damage on each succesful hit. So that 18 Strength character doesn't merely hit more consistently in the long run, he also consistently deals more damage. I'd really like for the game to track stats such as Pillars Of Eternity does. ![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/RhZSu23.jpg)
Last edited by Sven_; 24/10/20 12:59 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
|
What I don't will ever get used to in RPG is that if a character has the max on some attribute it's supposed to be a master or a natural talent.
So I don't get how a rogue with dexterity 18 (or 20 if modifiers are involved) can line up a long queue of miss or really low damage hits. Seriously, it's like a trained sharpshooter continuosly missing his target.
Same goes for a fighter with 18 strenght that misses, when using big weapons that hardly can not hit a target, in a melee confrontation.
[...] I'm finding myself in agreement having spent many hours playing with a virtual dice that seems to have a particular liking for rolling 3s. I don't know how it all fits in with the D&D rules as I'm not a player but it feels like the dice roll being by far the major deciding factor in any given succeed/fail situation with character skills being only a very minor influence seems completely the wrong way round.
J'aime le fromage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Well as I said it's my issue not only with D & D but any RPG. Had I better luck probably I wouldn'n even notice it
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jun 2019
|
Notes from the Great Gygax regarding the D&D dice roll:
"Of the two approaches to hobby games today, one is best defined as the realism-simulation school and the other as the game school. AD&D is assuredly on adherent of the latter school ... For fun, excitement, and captivating fantasy, AD&D is unsurpassed. As a realistic simulation of things from the realm of make-believe, or even as a reflection of medieval or ancient warfare or culture or society, it can be deemed only a dismal failure ... As the DM, the tools of your trade are dice - platonic solid-shaped or just about any other sort. The random numbers you generate by rolling dice determine the results based on the probabilities determined herein or those you have set forth on your own."
This enormous thread reinforces my preference to avoid percentages altogether, and focus on the die rolls. I'd rather see "you need an 8 or better on a d12 roll" as opposed to "you have a 41.66666% chance of success".
(Note that the d12 is vastly underused)
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I'm finding myself in agreement having spent many hours playing with a virtual dice that seems to have a particular liking for rolling 3s. I don't know how it all fits in with the D&D rules as I'm not a player but it feels like the dice roll being by far the major deciding factor in any given succeed/fail situation with character skills being only a very minor influence seems completely the wrong way round.
This is to be expected in lower levels. Currently the max bonus you can get to a roll is +6 (+2 proficiency, +4 stat modifier). Assuming a DC of 10 (easy) you will get an average success of 55% (no bonuses) up to an average of 85% (+6 bonus, would show up as a roll against 4). Those modifiers can get pushed quite far. In RAW dnd you could get a rogue on level 4 to +8 (+2 proficiency x 2, +4 stat modifier) on a skill via expertise (not in bg3 as far as I know). This would get the success change up to 95%. On lvl 5 that rogue would have a modifier of +10 (+3 proficiency x 2, +4 stat modifier) and basically could never fail an easy (DC 10) ability check. The modifiers still play a decisive roll, even on lvl 4. The table shows the average success chances for a level 4 character with attribute 8 (-1), 10 (0), 16 (4) and 16 + proficiency (6):
Modfiers -1 0 4 6
DC 5 75.00% 80.00% 100.00% 100.00%
DC 10 50.00% 55.00% 75.00% 85.00%
DC 15 25.00% 30.00% 50.00% 60.00%
DC 20 0.00% 5.00% 25.00% 35.00%
DC 25 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.00%
So the bonuses play a role, which only increases with proper character growth.
Last edited by TyPinOwly; 24/10/20 02:03 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Hi, guys! I have a question. And sorry for the auto-translation. Armor Class: 14. Attack Roll: 6(1d20, Advantage) + 3(Wisdom) + 2(Prof) = 11. Miss. Armor Class: 10. Attack Roll: 10(1d20, Advantage) + 3(Wisdom) + 2(Prof) = 15. Hit. In both cases, the guaranteed values in the log are +3 and +2. Five is substantially less than ten and fourteen. The minimum possible result of an attack roll is (if 1 is still a complete failure) +2, i.e. +2 to guaranteed +5 = 7. If the roll is allowed to be re-rolled, the minimum value will be +3. +3 to guaranteed + 5 = 8. But 7 and 8 versus 14 and 10 are not 84 and 96 percent of success chance. Do they add bonuses for the popup hit chance twice? Because the gray area in the tooltip appears to be correctly calculated, but the green area does not.
Last edited by kodirovshchik; 24/10/20 03:34 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cleric of Innuendo
|
|
Cleric of Innuendo
Joined: Oct 2020
|
(Note that the d12 is vastly underused) I literally bought the tee-shirt. Well, okay, the sweatshirt in my case. ![[Linked Image]](http://images4.cafepress.com/product/38652764v10_240x240_Front_Color-White.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](https://fastpic.ru/view/114/2020/1024/_b71fb3df58cd7d3e8f65ef229bfb651f.png.html)
![[Linked Image]](https://fastpic.ru/view/114/2020/1024/_2084e4871b037bd85a9671d886c093db.png.html)
![[Linked Image]](https://fastpic.ru/view/114/2020/1024/_8c6c505872404c4dae7fd6eba000c4a5.png.html)
![[Linked Image]](https://fastpic.ru/view/114/2020/1024/_17c60f1ddaf25374f2cd0c1675d723f1.png.html)
![[Linked Image]](https://fastpic.ru/view/114/2020/1024/_3ad5b306bea63baefd3c50b5608937c1.png.html)
![[Linked Image]](https://fastpic.ru/view/114/2020/1024/_becea7f54b988719c39515a2b288ca6f.png.html)
