Game Mechanics: Mellee miss rate seems excessively high.

[Zordana]

Originally Posted by Haynar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I am going to try to push my patch out for how AC is calculated this weekend. Going to a softcap based formula, the same as classic was at the time. Using the same class modifiers and everything, based on best estimates. Warriors should get a nice boost. If the mitigation tables aren't off too far. Unfortuantely the way the mob stats are in the database, the mitigation shouldn't be the same for mobs, and PCs. So I have about 3 formulas I have been testing.

omg haynar i love you!

[Ruinous]

Originally Posted by girth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He didn't even lash out you stupid fuck. If you want to see lashing out let me know, you piss me off.

Lolumad? Really, are you going to say hurtful things towards me? I could give a fuck if you like me or not, or if you feel like going off on some nerd rage-fueled rant towards me.

Entertain me though if you wish. You're welcome to /tell me in game as well. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[rioisk]

I think OP is really concerned about player level vs mob level.

Monster levels translate to higher player levels as player level increases. So while at player level 1, level 1 mobs may be the norm for killing, by player level 5, level 5 mobs will be harder by comparison. This follows all the way to 50. Do you ever see lvl 50 melees soloing level 50 mobs? Level 40 mobs? Not sure on the exact translation but a lvl 12 shouldn't down a level 5 mob super easily.

[girth]

ruin-
I'm a tank. I taunt mobs off the important people. In this case, you're the mob and haynar is my cleric.

I'd much rather you annoy me than him.

[Desert]

honestly i love how the OP is nowhere to be found after Haynar spawned.

[Ruinous]

Haynar scowls at you, ready to attack! What would you like your tombstone to say?

Morndenkainen has gone linkdead.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[km2783]

Originally Posted by Ruinous [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Someone questioned him, and again someone backed him up to confirm that this is how it works. Even in the face of answers you're too set about your ways to consider that you are incorrect. I'm perfectly willing to accept facts that disprove what we're claiming here, yet these replies are fruitless and full of insults. The only attempt to provide evidence otherwise was from President, and despite him being jackassy with how he went about confronting us on the matter, I give him credit for it. However the screenshots he gave prove exactly what we're fighting here... whether weapon skill/offense is the strict deciding factor of hit/miss chances - in which case MY stance is that it should not be.

I don't intend to argue the matter further with any regular players here. It takes very little intelligence to consider that while a low level 5 sucks with his weapon, it is adequate to fight a low level 1 who sucks even worse at avoiding being hit with it.

I shall continue to research the subject and provide more evidence for devs to consider. In the meantime, I encourage everyone else that seems hellbent on screaming that this system is "working as intended" as per live to provide their own proof.

My point wasn't about him being questioned, and whether or not someone backed him up. My point was this: that thread provides absolutely nothing but hearsay, just like every non-dev posting in this one, and based off your quoted post and attitude in this thread, that's probably all you're going to provide for your vaunted evidence. You provide absolutely no real proof yourself and urge others to provide something you KNOW is pretty much impossible to do considering how long ago it was, insult people whose view is different from your own and that never insulted you in the first place, and then take this holier than thou tone after doing it which is just laughable.

The devs can only work with what they have. The burden of proof is NOT on the people who say it is working as intended. The burden of proof is on the people who say something is broken. To fix a bug one must know EXACTLY what is wrong and how to replicate it if possible.

[Desert]

Originally Posted by km2783 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My point wasn't about him being questioned, and whether or not someone backed him up. My point was this: that thread provides absolutely nothing but hearsay, just like every non-dev posting in this one, and based off your quoted post and attitude in this thread, that's probably all you're going to provide for your vaunted evidence. You provide absolutely no real proof yourself and urge others to provide something you KNOW is pretty much impossible to do considering how long ago it was, insult people whose view is different from your own and that never insulted you in the first place, and then take this holier than thou tone after doing it which is just laughable.

The devs can only work with what they have. The burden of proof is NOT on the people who say it is working as intended. The burden of proof is on the people who say something is broken. To fix a bug one must know EXACTLY what is wrong and how to replicate it if possible.

^^^ This, or at least know how to replicate it in order to find exactly what is wrong.

...is how I pad my post count [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Morndenkainen]

Originally Posted by Haynar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You have a fix?

Code it up. Submit it..

Thought I suggested a formula previously, but here's the basic idea of what it is. I dont know how the data is set in the server code, so I cant be more precise. Still, this formula should scale well, and still provide for adequate accuracy at all levels of play as the ClassBaseHitRate is a single number that can easily be changed for each class if necessary..
Hit/Miss Result = (PlayerOffenseSkill+PlayerWeaponSkill / 2 vs CreatureDefenseSkill = HitBonus, ClassBaseHitRate+/-Hitbonus vs Random100 = Hit or Miss)

The beauty of this solution is that it uses the players skill in the weapon theyre attacking with against the mob's defense skill to give a sliding boost to hit. As the players skill and level increases, they are more likely to hit a target that is lower level, just on the virtue of that creature having a lower defense skill compared to their attack skill, thus giving them a bonus to hit, rather than soley relying on a straight weapon skill check. Also, because of the way the formula scales, the end result can still be parsed out at 50 and be accurate at level 1 as well. Im sure you can also see where a character using a weapon they are not skilled in is going to have a REALLY hard time hitting something even as soon as level 5, if they dont start training it up, just as it was in live.

If the parsing dictates a 35% miss rate for an even level mob at whatever level, so be it. If the HitBonus, is applied at .5% per point, there are still no "Assured" hits until your about 18 levels above the target your attacking. Same thing goes in the manner of a negative amount for attacking a higher level mob, or an even level mob when your skill is lower than their defense.. They get a bonus to not be hit.

Sure, I can come up with a formula, perhaps its what you already have, again, I dont know. You asked for a suggested fix however, and thats the best thought I have that will apply evenly across the levels..

[Morndenkainen]

Originally Posted by km2783 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My point wasn't about him being questioned, and whether or not someone backed him up. My point was this: that thread provides absolutely nothing but hearsay, just like every non-dev posting in this one, and based off your quoted post and attitude in this thread, that's probably all you're going to provide for your vaunted evidence. You provide absolutely no real proof yourself and urge others to provide something you KNOW is pretty much impossible to do considering how long ago it was, insult people whose view is different from your own and that never insulted you in the first place, and then take this holier than thou tone after doing it which is just laughable.

The devs can only work with what they have. The burden of proof is NOT on the people who say it is working as intended. The burden of proof is on the people who say something is broken. To fix a bug one must know EXACTLY what is wrong and how to replicate it if possible.

We can go round and round on this all day long, all night long, and on into next year, the fact of the matter is, that no one has any proof from live except for endgame data, and the best your going to get for low levels, is the input and feedback from newer players before they become accustomed to the server and their memory fades or becomes skewed. Sure the low end of the level system works for the people at level 50, thats just like saying healthcare works for the wealthy because theyre happy with it, but not for the working poor who dont qualify for the state programs.

As far as real proof goes, I dont think there is any. I wish there was, but I for one, have not found it and I've spent a few hours checking around. Yeah, there's data out there for lev 50 stuff, but not for any of the lower levels. Hate to say it, but it seems the guys who did the parsing were already end game when they got it into their heads to do it and never bothered to get records from the lower levels.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, a 35% miss rate seems rather high when attacking something a good 7 levels lower. Even if they instituted my hit formula and used the ratio of .5% for the HitBonus, there would still be about a 17% miss rate on the lower level mob due to skill disparity.

Ahh well.. Even if nothing gets done, atleast I can say I tried.