# could we go back to having meaningful AC and to hit numbers?

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 12 Last
• 09-03-2013, 09:01 PM
redoubt
could we go back to having meaningful AC and to hit numbers?
We have lived with the "combat upgrade" for a while now and I do not think the new to-hit and AC calculations are better than the old way.

The dice roll on the screen is meaningless to me now. The more I read about it the less it makes sense. I'm not arguing that some of the smart people who understand the new formula are wrong. In fact, I am sure that they are correct.

My argument is that my to hit bonus plus the roll I see on screen should equal something that I can understand. If it does not, they why bother showing me either number? For the math, I can read them go through the formula that says a +76 and a roll of 10 is a hit and a +86 and a roll of a 2 is a miss. I can indeed follow that. But its stupid! My to-hit + my roll should mean something, but when a 76+10 (86) hits and a 86+2 (88) misses, then the numbers are meaningless.

AC has also lost considerable meaning when you read the numbers. Because it does not directly relate to how effective it is.

I guess the bottom line is that the logarithmic and relativistic formulas are frustrating. Can I figure them out? Yes, but I think it is overly complicated for no apparent reason. On the whole the last series of changes have simply complicated how we understand what our characters can and cannot do to the point that calculators are needed. I consider that bad. it has also simply shifted defense from an exercise in maxing out AC to maxing out dodge and PRR while dumping AC. Has that actually made things better? I this one person's opinion, the answer is no.

Thanks for reading and have a nice day.
• 09-03-2013, 10:00 PM
redspecter23
Quote:

Originally Posted by redoubt
We have lived with the "combat upgrade" for a while now and I do not think the new to-hit and AC calculations are better than the old way.

The dice roll on the screen is meaningless to me now. The more I read about it the less it makes sense. I'm not arguing that some of the smart people who understand the new formula are wrong. In fact, I am sure that they are correct.

My argument is that my to hit bonus plus the roll I see on screen should equal something that I can understand. If it does not, they why bother showing me either number? For the math, I can read them go through the formula that says a +76 and a roll of 10 is a hit and a +86 and a roll of a 2 is a miss. I can indeed follow that. But its stupid! My to-hit + my roll should mean something, but when a 76+10 (86) hits and a 86+2 (88) misses, then the numbers are meaningless.

AC has also lost considerable meaning when you read the numbers. Because it does not directly relate to how effective it is.

I guess the bottom line is that the logarithmic and relativistic formulas are frustrating. Can I figure them out? Yes, but I think it is overly complicated for no apparent reason. On the whole the last series of changes have simply complicated how we understand what our characters can and cannot do to the point that calculators are needed. I consider that bad. it has also simply shifted defense from an exercise in maxing out AC to maxing out dodge and PRR while dumping AC. Has that actually made things better? I this one person's opinion, the answer is no.

Thanks for reading and have a nice day.

If it makes you feel any better, the devs are quite capable of backtracking on changes made with MotU. They just recently did away with nearly every weapon and equipment effect they added at that time. Weapons are currently so bland, I don't even have to look at them to know they're useless. Random elemental effect + tactics or heartseeker type effect or ghostbane on the end. Here's hoping they have a similar feeling toward the AC pass eventually.

If the goal was to make AC useful in all content including endgame elite, then they failed miserably. If the goal was to make an average AC useful in normal content from level 1 to level 28 then they get a B- I suppose. I guess my point is that I don't quite understand what the incredibly confusing and convoluted AC pass was actually meant to do and if the devs feel they accomplished their goal.
• 09-03-2013, 10:21 PM
PermaBanned
Yah, redoubt I'm with ya on the funky formulas, tbh THAC0 made more sense to me. However, I must also admit I'm afraid of what, if anything, they would put in it's place...
• 09-03-2013, 10:52 PM
Archangel_666
One of these days I want to get a Dev to explain something to me.

Defence Chance At Level. What's the point?

If I have a 58% Defence Chance At Level, how the hell do I calculate my Defence Chance when fighting mobs 10 levels higher than me? (Anything on Elite after about level 9). Or 20+ Levels higher than me (Epic Elites).

Do I have 2% less per level? 20%? 200%?

Outside of Canith Challenges, we never actually fight anything At Level.
• 09-03-2013, 11:13 PM
redoubt
Quote:

Originally Posted by Archangel_666
One of these days I want to get a Dev to explain something to me.

Defence Chance At Level. What's the point?

If I have a 58% Defence Chance At Level, how the hell do I calculate my Defence Chance when fighting mobs 10 levels higher than me? (Anything on Elite after about level 9). Or 20+ Levels higher than me (Epic Elites).

Do I have 2% less per level? 20%? 200%?

Outside of Canith Challenges, we never actually fight anything At Level.

Exactly... the number are meaningless in the current system.
• 09-03-2013, 11:24 PM
kraaal
AC - whats that !
Ac is almost irrelevant to me in terms of damage mitigation.dodge > PRR > AC.Surely that wasnt the developers intended result ?Dodge and PRR are easy to understand and easy to see their effectivness ...AC however is not!
• 09-04-2013, 12:33 AM
goodspeed
Ho! I like the to hit. You just go mess with ac, that things already brokeded as hell. I like hitting things every time a swing. I can have pa and everything else going that sucks away to hit and I still hit.

I don't need turb screwn up my melee. AC, idc, I got dodge and DR, mess with that all ya want.
• 09-04-2013, 03:14 AM
redoubt
Quote:

Originally Posted by goodspeed
Ho! I like the to hit. You just go mess with ac, that things already brokeded as hell. I like hitting things every time a swing. I can have pa and everything else going that sucks away to hit and I still hit.

I don't need turb screwn up my melee. AC, idc, I got dodge and DR, mess with that all ya want.

To hit worked before. Changed it to make it easier for mobs to hit us at the same time the broke armor class.

Also, i'm not saying I don't hit things well enough... just that the numbers don't mean anything anymore, its more arcade game than mmo this way. If you hit well now, you'd hit well under an actual d20 system too.
• 09-04-2013, 04:14 AM
Valakai
Quote:

Originally Posted by kraaal
Ac is almost irrelevant to me in terms of damage mitigation.dodge > PRR > AC.Surely that wasnt the developers intended result ?Dodge and PRR are easy to understand and easy to see their effectivness ...AC however is not!

Agreed. Dodge,Incorporeal,Concealment and PRR are meaningful and quite easy to understand. Sure some mobs can bypass some of these but still these give certain percentage miss chance while AC after normal and especially in EE is just another 5-10% misschance if you dont hit the uberhigh AC numbers.

I'm not asking for rollbacks or anything like that but AC in 80-100 category should mean something even in EE content where currently it means you are protected by wet paper towel type of protection.
• 09-04-2013, 04:27 AM
DunkleNymphe
Quote:

Originally Posted by redoubt
... its more arcade game than mmo this way.

That was their point. The system is dumbed down in hopes to get more players who just don't understand, don't want to understand or don't have the time to understand anything that's more complex than: "push button to hit mob".

For the rest of us, there are fancy special abilities that give the illusion of tactics.

I actually don't care if a system uses a d20, d100 or d33 1/3 ;)
It just has to make a difference what kind of armor and weapon one wields. D&D was never too good or plausible at that either, though at least it was simple to play - it had to be simple so the game isn't bogged down on the table.
When a computer can do all the math, I am fine with more complex calculations, as long as they mean something and add more realism. At the moment, I sadly don't see that in DDO.

AC is a relic that isn't - and never was - plausible. AC is meant to be a number that defines whether you are hit or not. But in D&D and DDO it never worked plausibly:
Wearing heavy armor does not make you harder to hit. It makes you EASIER to hit. But the hit is less likely to cause serious damage. But that is handled with flat DR and the PRR system in DDO.
For whether you're hit or not, we now have dodge, which makes sense, as an agile combatant will move away from where the blow is going to land - and not take any damage at all.

Essentially, I think we could just completely get rid of AC and just keep DR and PRR.
On the other hand, PRR is unplausible, too. Why does a base-attack-bonus improve resistance to damage based on the armor worn? Where is the plausibility in that? Damage is resisted based on the quality of the armor worn. Base-attack-bonus means your ability to fight. Of course that also means your ability to defend yourself, no question, but if you defend yourself, that means dodging, blocking, parrying.
A plausible rework could be that PRR is a function of AC (but then again, we could just use AC): better armor = higher AC = better PRR.

Maybe also simplify PRR a bit, because I really see no point in calculating it to two-digit-fractions. How does taking 50 damage - 6,22% make a significant difference to taking 50 - 6,0%? (Unless of course, Turbine plans to go the way of certain other MMOs where characters eventually have 350 k HP.)

Personally, I'd use something like this:
Dodge - chance not to take damage; for agile characters, based on Dex and feats - the first line of defense, but most types of armor would make it hard to get more than a few %.
Parry - chance not to take damage; based on BAB and weapon and stance and tactics - the second line of defense, mostly independent of armor worn; bolstered by feats mainly used by fighters, barbs and other frontline characters
Armor - reduces damage, both by a flat number (DR) or a percentage (PRR, based on AC), better armor will mean less damage
• 09-04-2013, 05:33 AM
AbyssalMage
Quote:

Originally Posted by DunkleNymphe
AC is a relic that isn't - and never was - plausible. AC is meant to be a number that defines whether you are hit or not. But in D&D and DDO it never worked plausibly:
Wearing heavy armor does not make you harder to hit. It makes you EASIER to hit. But the hit is less likely to cause serious damage. But that is handled with flat DR and the PRR system in DDO.
For whether you're hit or not, we now have dodge, which makes sense, as an agile combatant will move away from where the blow is going to land - and not take any damage at all.

Hit me in Leather, Chain, or Full Plate. I bet you can hit me like you stated, but did you "hit" me or the armor? That is what AC means in 2nd and 3.0 editions. It made perfect sense and they did great work describing it in 2nd edition. In 2nd edition they also had adjusted AC values for slashing, piercing, and bludgeoning weapons (dropped in 3rd :( ). This would be the DR breakers for specific armors AC. 'Cause you could hit a person in full plate, but unless the strike of your weapon found a crease or penetrated the physical armor you still missed (and added a nice scratch/dent/gouge to the enemies armor). So yeah, you can hit the person, but did you "hit" the person? That is what D&D AC means!

PRR makes sense in DDO, too cumbersome in P&P, but fine in a system where the computer does all of the calculations.

DR makes little to no sense honestly. How do you ignore damage?
"Yeah, I see those arrows dotting my body, but it doesn't matter, they wont leave a mark when I remove them, I have DR" as the Barbarian plows through the Goblins.
DR was a horrible inclusion in 3rd Edition IMHO.

O'well, I liked the D&D AC system, was upset they switched to the monstrosity they have now but we are stuck with it. AC was an all or nothing system before, now it doesn't mean anything in the new system. At least in the old system it could have been fixed with careful itemization and coding. Not sure it could be fixed now :(
• 09-04-2013, 05:57 AM
Dandonk
The new systemis indeed obscure and generally meaningless when showing the to hit roll. The DCaL is a joke and has no bearing on anything that happens in the game.
Other than that, it seems it isn't even WAI - I have gotten lots of misses on 2+ while wielding ewapons I'm proficient in. I have seen misses on a roll that I later missed on (both bonus and die roll exactly the same).

The system is annoying, meaningless and doesn't even do what it was meant to do - namely make AC meaningful in all content.

At the very least it needs a good tuning up, even if they don't want to throw it away and use one of the several proposals that came from the community at the time.
• 09-04-2013, 07:27 AM
voodoogroves
"We asked, you said you wanted to see the D20. We tried to explain it wasn't really that helpful, but you crazy kids like playing D&D with a D20 - so we're showing you one. Isn't that what you asked for?

I mean, we didn't say it would be particularly *helpful*."
• 09-04-2013, 08:11 AM
Thrudh
Quote:

Originally Posted by Archangel_666
One of these days I want to get a Dev to explain something to me.

Defence Chance At Level. What's the point?

If I have a 58% Defence Chance At Level, how the hell do I calculate my Defence Chance when fighting mobs 10 levels higher than me? (Anything on Elite after about level 9). Or 20+ Levels higher than me (Epic Elites).

Do I have 2% less per level? 20%? 200%?

Outside of Canith Challenges, we never actually fight anything At Level.

I agree with this... the number is meaningless, because we never fight anything at level.
• 09-04-2013, 09:02 AM
Chai
It would be meaningful if we knew how CR/levels affected the percent chance.
• 09-04-2013, 09:26 AM
FalseFlag
Quote:

Originally Posted by DunkleNymphe
AC is a relic that isn't - and never was - plausible.

You might have some decent points if you demonstrated any understanding of how AC is supposed to work and what it means. But your post tells me you don't, because I've literally seen it probably hundreds of times at this point. AC works fine as per 3E rules except for one easily correctable aspect - it doesn't scale proportionately to attack. And all that is require to fix that is a class & level based Defense Bonus.

The combat changes were unnecessary, poorly conceived, poorly executed and ultimately designed by people who also didn't actually understand the combat system they inherited. But then, I stopped believing the dev team, in it's recent incarnations, are even remotely interested in working on a D&D game. Hence the constant nerfing of things that help to make it D&D, specifically 3E-based.
• 09-04-2013, 09:30 AM
Teh_Troll
AC should be the most important aspect of the layered defense.

AC is now the LEAST important aspect of the layered defense.

NOBODY who is a serious end-gamer builds for AC at all.

We need a second defensive pass.
• 09-04-2013, 11:54 AM
Chai
Quote:

Originally Posted by Teh_Troll
AC should be the most important aspect of the layered defense.

AC is now the LEAST important aspect of the layered defense.

NOBODY who is a serious end-gamer builds for AC at all.

We need a second defensive pass.

Thats another of the myriad issues caused by inflated stats = higher difficulty formula we have seen for a while now. WHen your AC gives you an at level chance, the mobs you fight are well and beyond your level - which translates to your AC being converted into a useless semantic number.
• 09-04-2013, 01:11 PM
It would be nice if we knew what the numbers meant.
• 09-04-2013, 01:38 PM
DunkleNymphe
Quote:

Originally Posted by AbyssalMage
Hit me in Leather, Chain, or Full Plate. I bet you can hit me like you stated, but did you "hit" me or the armor?

Yes, I can hit you like I stated and with real armor and real weapons you WILL feel it. The question is just how much. But there is no such thing as "I hit the armor, but not you".

I've worn real armor and used (dull, of course) swords. You don't do fancy dodges in a 30 kg full plate. You might do it in soft leather though. If you're hit with a sword (3,5 kg, blunt, not at full speed of course), even in full plate, you'll feel it (yes, even through the padding underneath). It won't hurt you... much. A real weapon WILL hurt you, just not seriously. In contrast to soft leather, through which a real sword may well cut - and if it doesn't still break a couple of your ribs.

AC - no doubt - is an easy method to simulate combat and there'y no denying that it works. Noone wants to spend an hour and a half dozen rolls to resolve a single attack in PnP, so things must be simple to keep the game flowing. I'm fine with that rules are kept simple for reasons of playability. But AC added different modifiers, like armor AC, Dex AC etc. These are very different things.

Saying AC is plausible is something nobody would say after having fought with real medieval weapons and worn real armor.

Btw, I agree that DR make no sense at all without armor (i.e. Barb DR). This is just another simple solution to give barbs their stereotypical ability to take a lot of punishment in battle.

Other PnP systems have a different approach to armor: They only have DR (only applied to armor). Armor encumbers you, so makes you easier to hit compared to someone without armor and no encumbrance. But the consequence of being hit is a lot less serious in heavy armor than if you're nude (heavy armor = high DR, nude... well... sucks). So there's a tactical tradeoff between: "Do I want to be able to dodge/evade to get hit less often, but if I am, it really hurts?" or "I don't care that much if I am hit often, because most of the force of the blows will be softened by my armor?"
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 12 Last