Larian Studios Forums Divinity - Original Sin Divinity - Original Sin - General Archery mechanics are still broken and incorrect

This game doesn't apply archery traits correctly and where they need to be, so this needs to be fixed.

People who think 100% CHANCE TO HIT something, means an automatic hit are totally wrong.
People who think 100% ACCURACY means an automatic hit, are wrong.

A person who can throw/shoot something with 100% accuracy, all of a sudden does not stop being able to throw/shoot something with 100% accuracy just because a target is behind a wall, out of view, or has a 0% chance to be hit. 100% accuracy skill remains active at all times regardless of where a target is.

You can also have a 100% chance to hit something and never actually be able to hit it a target.

So in order for this to be correct here is how it would have to be:
Since dexterity increases CHANCE TO HIT with Ranged based weapons, someone having an 11 in Dexterity with a target directly next to them on the map, the target should read as having a 100% chance to be hit.

So please fix this.

Make sure your target glows red when you click him. Problem solved.

Go troll a different topic you meatstick.

Totally not trolling.

This is honestly the answer to your problem. The percent to hit applies ONLY when the target is red. Keep that fact in mind the the archery system works just fine.

You clearly did not read anything I posted you moron. What you're going on about is absolutely not even relevant to what I'm talking about.

So go troll somewhere else or at least don't be so obvious!

If it's not relevant to what you're talking about, maybe the problem is in how you're describing what you see as a problem? I've read over your post twice, and I still don't know what exactly you're complaining about.

What percentage is it showing when you are targeting something close to you? It sounds like you're complaining that you don't have 100% chance to hit with a 11 dex.

What's your perception? How far away is the target exactly? It should give an exact number. I don't think I've ever targeted something and had it indicate "right next to me" as the distance.

Vardis
What I explained is very clear and simple to understand.

Since you refuse to knock off the trolling, I'm now ignoring you for not knowing how to comprehend what you read.

Here's a tip - specifics when explaining your problem work wonders. Seriously. I'm a developer, albeit not a game developer, and it's *much* easier to understand what people mean when they explain a problem using a specific example rather than general complaints. Of course what you wrote is clear to you - you wrote it and know what you are trying to say. The rest of us aren't mind readers, and your post is a bit rambling.



From what I've seen so far, archery skills don't show a hit percentage. If you use something like Ricochet or a special arrow, they act like spells. You hit whatever it shows you are going to hit.

If you're talking about normal ranged attacks, and you think the percentage is wrong, look at the following: Offence rating, distance to target, character's perception (if to hit is affected by range penalties). If that number looks wrong compared to what you're calculating your to-hit should be, look at what the to-hit is for a melee character on that target. Also make sure you don't have any negative modifiers, like ranged power stance active.

So I'm looking at the starting ranged companion right now, and she has a crappy 53% chance to hit something 2.9m away. Her Offence rating is only 82 though, and at 2.9m away with a 6 perception, that's ((2.9 - (6 * .4)) / .2) * 1% = 2.5% penalty. So I would've expected a ~80% to hit, based on the info I see on the wiki.

The problem there is after doing some testing, I see she's showing a 53% chance to hit on everything within 9.2m. After that, it's a 1% drop for every .2 meters. So the wiki fails on that (I'll have to fix it later), but at least pretty clearly her base chance to hit is 53% when not affected by range.

Next I look at my melee character. She only has a 59% chance to hit. Her Offence rating is 88. Hmm. 88-59 = 29. 82-53 = 29. It looks like this enemy has an Defence rating of 29 (modified by difficulty - on normal it's only 19).

So in summary, you don't have a 100% chance to hit with ranged attacks when an enemy is standing next to you for the same reason you don't have 100% chance to hit with melee weapons.

If that's not what you were complaining about either, then please consider working on your communication skills.


Oh, and the chance that your reading comprehension exceeds mine is miniscule, but if it makes you feel better to think otherwise, then good for you. I'd normally say that's yet another example of how ignorance is bliss, but you seem to be anything but full of bliss. ;)

People here clearly don't know the difference between chance to hit, and Accuracy.

So let me explain the difference

People are applying the definition of HIT/connecting to CHANCE TO HIT which is wrong. just because something has a 100% CHANCE to BE hit, does not means IT'S AUTOMATICALLY GOING TO BE HIT.

The key wording in the phrase CHANCE TO HIT is CHANCE which means NOT GUARANTEED

If you play the lottery you have a 100% probability CHANCE of winning simply because you played it. The odds of you winning have nothing to do with CHANCE of winning. And chance to hit works the exact same way.

Using another example:
If there is a huge rock in the middle of a field protruding up 20 feet. THEN NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE ON THAT ENTIRE FIELD YOU HAVE A 100% CHANCE TO HIT THAT ROCK simply because the rock is out in the open and big enough. Whether or not something you throw at that rock is actually going to hit it, IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STORY and that's where people are getting confused and not understanding the problem

You can throw/shoot 1000 things at that rock and never hit that rock once simply because you have shitty aim/accuracy/poor reach. The probability of the rock BEING ABLE TO BE HIT is still set at 100% simply because it's out in the open.

Now lets place the rock behind an obstacle completely out of view and give the thrower 100% accuracy. Now no matter where that person stands on the field they will have 100% accuracy at all times. However they have a 0% chance to hit the rock because it's out of their view, but the rock being out of view HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PERSONS ACCURACY. The rock being out of view does not make the person all of a sudden stop being accurate when they throw/shoot something.


Chance to hit and accuracy have absolutely nothing to do with each other and do not affect each other.

The game has accuracy and chance to hit attached to each other and has chance to hit and impact meaning the same thing.

It's programmed wrong and doesn't work the way it's set up.

The game only makes one reference to it that I saw, in regards to the effect perception has on mitigating the distance penalty to accuracy. So yeah, it pretty much is synonymous with the offense rating in this game.

Offense rating (modified) - target's defense rating (modified) = % to hit


If you think archery is broken, maybe you should pick up the glass cannon trait to use with it. I heard it's pretty good.

Offense rating has to do with IMPACT, not chance to hit, chance to hit has absolutely nothing to do with IMPACT.

See the rock example above and you will see and finally realize that nothing has absolutely anything to do with whether someone can throw something with 100% accuracy,

Accuracy has absolutely nothing to do with CHANCE TO HIT, and CHANCE to hit has nothing to do with IMPACT.

So I don't think archery is broken, it actually is broken.

Your posts make absolutely zero sense.

Like really, I've read them all and I don't even know what your issue is

Let me clarify some logic issues for you though:



CHANCE: a possibility or probability of anything happening:
"a fifty-percent chance of success." - Dictionary.com

Therefore, a 100% chance to hit something means a guaranteed hit. If something is behind a wall as you say, you don't have a 100% chance to hit it. You're confusing your syntax.

You 100% have a chance to hit it (crazy shot over a wall or something, you do have a chance) BUT
You do not have a 100% chance to hit it.

You're arguing wording, not mechanics.

Your post is really nonsensical though, I don't even know what your issue really is with the game.

Perhaps there's a language barrier? If English isn't your first language, you write it well enough that it's not clear it isn't, but as Burgee said, you're using some terms incorrectly.

He's American and is fresh after a ban after his last spree.

Reasoning and common sense evade him as much now as they did before, so I'd advise people to spare themselves.

I'll explain this to all you morons so you cannot argue with this.

I have 4 pockets on my pants, and I put a dollar in one of my pants pockets, and told you you can have that dollar if you guess the correct pocket it's in. Then you now have a 100% chance of getting that dollar simply because the dollar is present and in one of my pockets regardless if you guess the wrong pocket or not.

Just because you have a 1 and 4 chance of guessing the correct pocket, doesn't change the fact that you still have a 100% chance to get the dollar off me simply because the dollar is in one of my pockets.

So as you can see what I quoted from burgee below is totally wrong.


100% chance does not mean or relate to guarantee/success in the context I'm talking about.

So taking everything I said above and applying it in the game correctly, that means since Dexterity increases chance to hit with dexterity based items, then a character with an 11 dexterity, is supposed to show a 100% chance to hit an enemy that is right next to that character on a map no matter what.

So as I said Archery is incorrectly programmed in this game.

If I have a 100% chance to get the dollar off you simply because the dollar is in one of your pockets, and if I have 1 and 4 chance of guessing the correct pocket, does that mean I have 100% chance to guess the correct pocket simply because the dollar is in one of your pockets?

If yes, time to get a Nobel prize, maybe you will be able to fund a game with it.

Wrong chrest:
Once the dollar is placed into a pocket, the guesser has a 100% chance to get the dollar 25% of the time. Since the dollar is present at all times. This situation sets it so there is a 100% chance for the guesser to get the dollar no matter what pocket they guess.

The CHANCE on getting the dollar is not the same thing as GETTING the dollar.

Saying the guesser only has a 25% chance to get a dollar that is present 100% of the time, is saying that the dollar is only presently on me 25% of the time.

People here and playing this game don't seem to get that Chance to hit and being able to hit something have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

I think people playing this game have mostly no opinion at all on this non-existent problem, and would not be quick to listen to a guy that has only one dollar in his pockets anyway.

Also, the guesser does not have a 100% chance to get the dollar 25% of the time, it depends the sample and the biases of the guesser.

What you don't seem to get is that you can tell me you have one dollar in your pocket BUT that is not a FACT. So that skews the percentage. You tell one thing and then another, so who tells me you will give me the dollar if I find it? You're just not somebody one can trust, and that's the crux of the matter.

Incorrect, the fact that the dollar is there makes what you just said false. The fact of the dollar is present alone means that there is a 100% chance for it to be pulled, every single time no matter what pocket the guesser chooses.

Adding in elimination factors does not change the dollar having a 100% to be pulled. What changes a 100% chance for the dollar to be pulled, is actually eliminating the dollar itself.

When it comes to chance to pull the dollar the guesser either has a 0% chance to pull it because it's not thee, or a 100% chance to pull it because it is there, there is no in between.


If I put a dollar in my pocket then it's a fact, it doesn't matter if someone thinks it's not there.

However it does matter if you think you put a dollar in your pocket, but you didn't. It doesn't matter if you think you did. This simple fact makes what you just said false.

Sorry, that's just how it is.