Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Angband > Vanilla

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 26, 2010, 17:46   #1
Ycombinator
Adept
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Age: 32
Posts: 156
Ycombinator is on a distinguished road
Hit probability calculation

I looked at the sources to find out the missile hit probability formula. Please, tell me if I got it right:

p_hit = 0.9 * (chance - 0.75 * AC_monster) / chance + 0.05,
where
chance = (character innate ability to shoot) + (total to-hit from character, launcher and ammo) * 3 - (distance to monster in tiles)

This is mostly archery vs magic question for me. Missiles often do more damage per hit than spells, but spells always hits the target and their fail probability is displayed in-game. Missile hit probability is unknown and can be quite low. So I think it can be interesting and useful to display missile hit probability against current target assuming its AC is already known to player.

What's your opinion? Is it worthwhile addition?

Last edited by Ycombinator; May 26, 2010 at 18:57.
Ycombinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2010, 18:44   #2
Jungle_Boy
Swordsman
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 434
Jungle_Boy is on a distinguished road
This does not make sense. With this formula p_hit, which I believe is % chance to hit, is always at least .95 or 95%. I think the middle term should be (chance -0.75 * AC_Monster)/chance, giving a number less than one instead of greater and making increased monster armor result in a lower chance to hit rather than greater.
Jungle_Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2010, 18:57   #3
Ycombinator
Adept
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Age: 32
Posts: 156
Ycombinator is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jungle_Boy View Post
This does not make sense. With this formula p_hit, which I believe is % chance to hit, is always at least .95 or 95%. I think the middle term should be (chance -0.75 * AC_Monster)/chance, giving a number less than one instead of greater and making increased monster armor result in a lower chance to hit rather than greater.
You're absolutely right. Edited.
Ycombinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2010, 19:36   #4
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,002
fizzix is on a distinguished road
I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think you should follow the same approach for melee attacks also.

While we're on this topic. I'd like to see larger penalties for:

1. monster is far away
2. monster is in adjacent square
3. monster is unseen (invis, in darkened area, only known by telep/detection)
4. monster is partially obscured (no reverse LoS)
5. monster was not the desired target

forgive me if some are already covered (I know 1 is)
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 03:13   #5
buzzkill
Prophet
 
buzzkill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 2,939
Donated: $8
buzzkill is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzix View Post
1. monster is far away
2. monster is in adjacent square
3. monster is unseen (invis, in darkened area, only known by telep/detection)
4. monster is partially obscured (no reverse LoS)
5. monster was not the desired target
I like all of this. It could also lead to interesting new (minor) abilities that could be added to launchers.
__________________
www.mediafire.com/buzzkill - Get your 32x32 tiles here. UT32 now compatible Ironband and Quickband 9/6/2012.
My banding life on Buzzkill's ladder.
buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 18:10   #6
Estie
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,673
Estie is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzix View Post
I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think you should follow the same approach for melee attacks also.

While we're on this topic. I'd like to see larger penalties for:

1. monster is far away
2. monster is in adjacent square
3. monster is unseen (invis, in darkened area, only known by telep/detection)
4. monster is partially obscured (no reverse LoS)
5. monster was not the desired target

forgive me if some are already covered (I know 1 is)
I like none of this. Imo, if archery is being toned down, the damage should be decreased instead of increasing the tedium of using shooter + ammo. It is already the most tedious to use, followed by magic and melee is simplest.

Edit: on second thought, point 2. might lead to something interesting.

Last edited by Estie; May 27, 2010 at 18:21.
Estie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 18:38   #7
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,002
fizzix is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estie View Post
I increasing the tedium of using shooter + ammo.
A *lot* of the tedium can be overcome by macros. The fact that h has been changed to fire at nearest is a huge reduction in tedium. But yeah, archery without macros can be annoying.
fizzix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 19:17   #8
miyazaki
Adept
 
miyazaki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: BC, Canada
Age: 43
Posts: 227
miyazaki is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzix View Post
I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think you should follow the same approach for melee attacks also.

While we're on this topic. I'd like to see larger penalties for:

1. monster is far away
2. monster is in adjacent square
3. monster is unseen (invis, in darkened area, only known by telep/detection)
4. monster is partially obscured (no reverse LoS)
5. monster was not the desired target

forgive me if some are already covered (I know 1 is)
I think these would mesh well with the nerfing of missile weapons. As for #2, you should not be able to shoot a monster in an adjacent square at all. (This was a feature in the combat of Ultima V, if anyone remembers.)
miyazaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2010, 23:11   #9
Estie
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,673
Estie is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzix View Post
A *lot* of the tedium can be overcome by macros. The fact that h has been changed to fire at nearest is a huge reduction in tedium. But yeah, archery without macros can be annoying.
Of course. Id still put archery on number one, mostly because you have to manage missiles (picking them up again after battle, risk of having them destroyed while they are on the ground, need to find them in the first place etc.)

Generally, a character who doesnt hit is not fun to play. It is one thing to nerf wizards ranged to hit - "you are wizard, use your spells" - but certainly rangers, warriors and rogues should count archery to their preferred means of combat. With points 1. and 2. in place that would lead to a situation where they can only shoot effectively when the target is 2-3 squares away.
Adding the rest of the suggestions could quickly lead to a situation where I, as a ranger, wouldnt bother with missiles at all and just use melee by default.
Estie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Blows Per Round Calculation Question billiam106 Vanilla 3 January 20, 2010 08:04
Blows calculation for warriors Timo Pietilä Vanilla 22 January 12, 2010 23:46
To hit calculation takkaria Vanilla 43 April 7, 2009 03:48
Question regarding good/great probability ChodTheWacko Vanilla 4 October 3, 2008 19:28
Probability of using Rods of Teleport Other? Dragonboneman Vanilla 9 February 7, 2008 19:55


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:29.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.