Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 34 of 34
  1. #21
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forzah View Post
    Knowing more about the topic you troll about makes you the more effective troll. First you scare people with your knowledge and then you troll 'em hard.
    That's like trolling zen, a thing of beauty.

  2. #22
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nibor View Post
    This has nothing to do with ranged combat (although when the combat changes first rolled out with MOTU, ranged combat WAS broken in that you didn't get your +25% for being proficient).

    You didn't have an 88 to hit, you rolled a 10% when attempting to hit a monster with whatever AC it has and an attack bonus of +86.
    The formula is:
    Chance to hit = (player attack bonus +10.5) / (monster AC *2) + .25 (if proficient)

    This chance to hit is then rounded to the nearest 5% and converted to a target "to hit" number for your roll; if you roll under the target, you miss (graze).
    The way the math works out on this is that when you roll a 2, you are quite likely to miss regardless of what you do. 10% is quite low, after all.

    You can reverse engineer monster ACs this way, however. In your case, we can find a minimum AC the monster must have for you to miss on a 2 there. This means your chance to hit was less than 90% (actually it might mean less than 87.5% depending on if they actually round or just drop fractions when converting to the nearest 5% but close enough for now - I haven't bothered to figure that out. I *think* it was stated by a dev, but a) you can't search it up and b) you can't be sure that it works the way the dev thinks it works anyway).

    So:
    .9 > ( 86 + 10.5 ) / (AC * 2) +.25
    .65 > 96.5 / (2*AC)
    AC > 74.2

    Any mob with 74 AC or less, you'll hit on a 2. More than that, and a 2 will miss.
    an 86 + 2 will graze.

    a 76 + 10 will hit.

    Do I need to post a big picture of Chewbacca?

  3. #23
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    an 86 + 2 will graze.

    a 76 + 10 will hit.

    Do I need to post a big picture of Chewbacca?


    Better?

  4. #24
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Archangel_666 View Post


    Better?
    Chewbacca makes everything better, especially things that don't make sense.

  5. #25
    The Hatchery Nibor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oweieie View Post
    That is exactly what he had.

    The problem is, it's massively buggy. Like most of the game anymore.
    Try reading the rest of the post, because adding your die roll to your "to hit bonus" is no longer a meaningful number. The number "88" has absolutely nothing to do with his combat attack.

    The relevant numbers are:
    86 - to hit bonus
    "monster AC" - the monster AC, unknown
    2, aka 10% - the to hit roll

    He needed more than a 10% to hit, so he missed.

    To compare, let's say the monster AC was 75.
    If I swing at the monster with a to hit bonus of 50, and I roll a 10 - do I hit?

    Chance to hit = (50 + 10.5) / (2* 75) + .25
    = 60.5 / 150 +.25
    ~= .65

    So I have a 65% chance to hit, that means I need a 7 or higher on a d20 to hit. I rolled a 10, which is higher, so I hit!

    Yeah, his "to hit bonus" plus his "to hit roll" was 88 and my "to hit bonus" plus my "to hit roll" was 60, but the sum of your to hit bonus and your to hit roll have nothing to do with combat since MotU.

  6. #26
    The Hatchery Nibor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    an 86 + 2 will graze.

    a 76 + 10 will hit.

    Do I need to post a big picture of Chewbacca?
    It doesn't make sense to you because you keep putting a + sign in there.

    Rolling a 10% with an 86 attack bonus will miss.
    Rolling a 50% with a 76 attack bonus will hit.

    A 50% is a significantly better attack roll than a 10%, but an 86 isn't that much better than a 76. The die roll is a big part of if you hit. Makes sense. It isn't PnP D&D, and it's complicated and very hard to do in your head, but it can still make sense.

    PnP systems need to be simple enough to handle doing the math in your head or you get bogged down with calculators and looking at tables instead of playing the game. DDO has the advantage of the GM being a computer, and it can do the math just as fast either way, so that's not really a limitation anymore. It was decided that making a wider range of to-hit and AC relevant was more important than keeping the math simple enough to do in your head.

  7. #27
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    20,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Archangel_666 View Post
    It's going to be amusing watching the Forums explode when Turbine adds a Raid or something with a boss with Alignment DR, Metal DR and high Dodge. Trying to bypass all that to actually damage the mob should be interesting.
    We get feats/enhancements to mitigate dodge percent, as well as bypass fortification. Weapon metal + align is something we are well schooled in with this game, due to needing silver or cold iron + good for the demons and devils that were endgame bosses for 5+ years. Then we had adamantine + good for LOB. Peoples gripes will be that having to take those feats/enhancements gimps their toon, which will be completely false, as the way the game works now, those feats add more DPS than the previous set of cookie cutter feats everyone used to take.

    Part of the issue here is people dont like the fact that they cant build to always hit on a 2 roll or better on a d20 nowdays, which used to be possible pre-AC pass, due to the simplicity of an absolute system (versus the percentage based system we have today).

    The whole dodge mechanic smacks of Palladium games, not D&D.

    Yes, it will be amusing indeed.
    Last edited by Chai; 09-03-2013 at 09:50 AM.
    Advocating repeated nerfs in the name of "balancing the game" then complaining about how DDO is moving away from D&D, is a direct contradiction in logic - D&D 3.5 (what DDO is based on) is not a balanced game. We can either have a balanced clone MMO with homogenized classes, or we can have a D&D game. We cant have both.

  8. #28
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    The whole dodge mechanic smacks of Palladium games, not D&D.
    The dodge mechanic is stupid. This was already a part of AC and in some sense remains a part of it with the Dex bonus still adding to AC.

    PRR is nice and makes, it make sense that armor should absorb some of the damage. What's dumb is that your actual armor isn't that import with all the sheltering and other bonuses, and monk earth-stance is over-powered giving more protection than heavy armor.

    AC? NO end-game players build for it. It's the least important part of the layered defense.

    I hate to say this as Turbing will probably make things worse but we need a second defensive pass.

  9. #29
    Community Member Grailhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nibor View Post
    Try reading the rest of the post, because adding your die roll to your "to hit bonus" is no longer a meaningful number. The number "88" has absolutely nothing to do with his combat attack.

    The relevant numbers are:
    86 - to hit bonus
    "monster AC" - the monster AC, unknown
    2, aka 10% - the to hit roll

    He needed more than a 10% to hit, so he missed.

    To compare, let's say the monster AC was 75.
    If I swing at the monster with a to hit bonus of 50, and I roll a 10 - do I hit?

    Chance to hit = (50 + 10.5) / (2* 75) + .25
    = 60.5 / 150 +.25
    ~= .65

    So I have a 65% chance to hit, that means I need a 7 or higher on a d20 to hit. I rolled a 10, which is higher, so I hit!
    That explains a lot

    Quote Originally Posted by Nibor View Post
    Yeah, his "to hit bonus" plus his "to hit roll" was 88 and my "to hit bonus" plus my "to hit roll" was 60, but the sum of your to hit bonus and your to hit roll have nothing to do with combat since MotU.
    Was this explained in Eladrin's original post, or did you come to it on your own?

  10. #30
    The Hatchery Nibor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grailhawk View Post
    That explains a lot



    Was this explained in Eladrin's original post, or did you come to it on your own?
    The math was shown by devs - whomever it was that put the detailed formula thread up. I don't know if it was spelled out so plainly that "don't sum your to hit bonus and to hit roll" but they did very clearly give us the new formula, which replaced the old formula of adding your to hit bonus and your to hit roll.

  11. #31
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nibor View Post
    Try reading the rest of the post, because adding your die roll to your "to hit bonus" is no longer a meaningful number. The number "88" has absolutely nothing to do with his combat attack.
    It is in fact his combat attack roll.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nibor View Post
    It doesn't make sense to you because you keep putting a + sign in there.
    Turbine put the + sign there. Are you getting that this is a giant bug yet?

  12. #32
    Community Member bartharok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Far beyond the ravens gate
    Posts
    5,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oweieie View Post
    It is in fact his combat attack roll.



    Turbine put the + sign there. Are you getting that this is a giant bug yet?
    The + has always been there. they just havent removed it yet.
    Dystopia = utopia achieved

  13. #33
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bartharok View Post
    The + has always been there. they just havent removed it yet.
    Nor the tool tip telling you what your base attack bonus does.

    Nor gotten rid of the die roll where the numbers don't make any sense.

  14. #34
    Community Member bartharok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Far beyond the ravens gate
    Posts
    5,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oweieie View Post
    Nor the tool tip telling you what your base attack bonus does.

    Nor gotten rid of the die roll where the numbers don't make any sense.
    I think most people dont bother looking at the to hit rolls anyway, so why would they bother removing it when it might break something else.
    Dystopia = utopia achieved

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload