Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > Obsolete > v4

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 22, 2011, 19:23   #11
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,060
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikko Lehtinen View Post
Normally to-hit would be 70%-95%, depending on both finesse and prowess. It would not depend on the monster at all.

If the monster had an evasion score, (evasion - finesse) would be reduced from to-hit. (No effect if finesse > evasion.)

If the monster has an absorption score, it would be reduced from damage.
This is pretty much what I said. Your "70-95%" covers roughly the range I gave for cl1 magi up to cl50 warriors (my proposed range is a little longer but not much, 60-90%). Evasion does indeed reduce to-hit, though I don't see why any significant number of monsters should have zero evasion. I'm with fizzix - let the average be nonzero, say 25, and allow rare low values for immotiles etc.

Anyway, that all sounds fine.
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 19:42   #12
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,024
Derakon is on a distinguished road
I think the main thing is that characters with effectively zero finesse should still be able to hit (most) monsters reliably (more than 50% of the time); it's just that characters with high finesse can hit monsters almost all the time and/or reliably hit monsters that have high evasion.

So how's this for a proposed starting point on actual equations? Assume finesse ranges from 100 to 800 for finesse-oriented characters, 25 to 300 for prowess-oriented characters, and less for mages and priests.
Code:
static int get_hit_chance(player_state state, monster_type* m_ptr)
{
    base_chance = 75 - m_ptr->evasion + (state.dis_to_finesse / 25);
    if (base_chance < 50) {
        base_chance = 50;
    }
    if (base_chance > 100) {
        base_chance = 100;
    }
    return base_chance;
}
(We enforce the minimum 5% hit/miss chances elsewhere anyway)

Functionally this means that every 25 points of finesse increases to-hit chance by 1%, or counters 1 point of monster evasion. By midgame (assuming linear gains in finesse) a finesse character will have about 400 points, or +16% to-hit; a prowess character will have only +4%.

Of course, we can scale the divisor if we want to have more freedom to play with monster evasion values. If the divisor were 10 then those midgame characters would have +40% and +10% respectively.

On an unrelated note, stylistically I much prefer to do "int* foo" than "int *foo" since the * is part of the type. It's a bit late to go about changing the entire codebase, though. And of course if you want to do something like this:
Code:
int* foo, bar, baz
you'll end up with one pointer to an int, and two ints. Silly C spec...
Derakon is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 20:10   #13
Magnate
Angband Devteam member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 5,060
Magnate is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Magnate Send a message via Yahoo to Magnate
That's fine with me. But I think you meant state.to_finesse rather than state.dis_to_finesse. If the displayed value is different from the real value (because of unIDd kit, for example), the combat algorithm should still use the real value.
__________________
"3.4 is much better than 3.1, 3.2 or 3.3. It still is easier than 3.0.9, but it is more convenient to play without being ridiculously easy, so it is my new favorite of the versions." - Timo Pietila
Magnate is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 21:41   #14
fizzix
Prophet
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Madison, Wisconsin, US
Posts: 3,023
fizzix is on a distinguished road
Making some small adjustments to Derakon's code

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
Code:
static int get_hit_chance(player_state state, monster_type* m_ptr)
{
    base_chance = 75 - m_ptr->evasion + (state.to_finesse / 25);
    if (base_chance < 40) {
        base_chance = 40;
    }
    if (base_chance > 100) {
        base_chance = 100;
    }

    return base_chance;
}

In either the above function or elsewhere we need (in pseudo-code)
Code:
  if (player is stunned)
   base_chance -= 10

  if (player is not adjacent to monster)
   base_chance -= distance/2 

  if (player can't see monster){
    base_chance /= 2
Since to hit is based on finesse will be scaled by monster level as well. This gives monster evasion range between -25 (immobile) and 28 (harowen). I can work on putting this into monsters.txt relatively soon, and gives me something to work on in parallel to Derakon's combat.
fizzix is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 21:46   #15
andrewdoull
Unangband maintainer
 
andrewdoull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 872
andrewdoull is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derakon View Post
I think the main thing is that characters with effectively zero finesse should still be able to hit (most) monsters reliably (more than 50% of the time);
Why? What's wrong with a trade off where you have a weapon where you frequently miss, but when you connect it does a lot of damage?
__________________
The Roflwtfzomgbbq Quylthulg summons L33t Paladins -more-
In UnAngband, the level dives you.
ASCII Dreams: http://roguelikedeveloper.blogspot.com
Unangband: http://unangband.blogspot.com
andrewdoull is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 21:53   #16
Mikko Lehtinen
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,246
Mikko Lehtinen is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewdoull View Post
Why? What's wrong with a trade off where you have a weapon where you frequently miss, but when you connect it does a lot of damage?
Nothing as such. I believe the effect is just too pronounced here because the characters/weapons with the worst to-hit also have only one blow.

Having only one blow is enough to reduce to-hit chance radically even if to-hit percentage stays the same.

Against especially good dodgers, though, heavy weapons should be ultra bad.
Mikko Lehtinen is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 21:59   #17
Mikko Lehtinen
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,246
Mikko Lehtinen is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnate View Post
This is pretty much what I said.
Good! The discussion is moving so fast that I have some difficulties following your jargon.
Mikko Lehtinen is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 22:04   #18
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,024
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewdoull View Post
Why? What's wrong with a trade off where you have a weapon where you frequently miss, but when you connect it does a lot of damage?
Mostly I suspect it'll be very frustrating to be playing as that kind of character, especially when fighting groups of dodgy monsters (c.f. blink dogs, who are bad enough even when you have multiple blows/round). As always, we'll need to playtest and see, but it's not unreasonable to try to aim our first pass at where we think the balance is (both in terms of mechanics and in terms of fun).
Derakon is offline  
Old December 22, 2011, 22:06   #19
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 Mikko Lehtinen View Post
Nothing as such. I believe the effect is just too pronounced here because the characters/weapons with the worst to-hit also have only one blow.
In with Andrew. That's why these exact characters either have a spell handy to increase chance to hit, or shouldn't be engaging in physical combat to begin with. I'm beginning to lose faith in this whole over-analyzed concept.
__________________
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  
Old December 22, 2011, 22:27   #20
Mikko Lehtinen
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,246
Mikko Lehtinen is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzkill View Post
I'm beginning to lose faith in this whole over-analyzed concept.
Have faith! It all will come clear after endless hours of (fun) playtesting, balancing & rebalancing. This design has enough nuts and bolts to tweak.
Mikko Lehtinen is offline  
 


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
to-hit jens Development 4 June 28, 2011 09:14
Hit and Run.... Fendell Orcbane AAR 16 June 24, 2010 21:03
13 levels in one hit slinberg Vanilla 18 December 14, 2009 18:14
To hit calculation takkaria Vanilla 43 April 7, 2009 03:48
hit dice etc vorondil Vanilla 8 December 20, 2008 19:23


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:21.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.