It's annoying but I like when there are a lot of stats if are well made it gives me the sense of realistic xd
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
The accuracy stat in RPGs needs to fuck off
- Thread starter AuthenticM
- Start date
Yeah, that's the issue with binary 'always miss physical attack' skills like blind - what is balanced for four adventurers vs four monsters just doesn't work when the boss has 1-2 attacks per turn and needs to be inflicting damage across the board to challenge the party defences. And so they turn off status effects, leading to the player thinking 'ah well, nevermind tactics, I'll just go with high damage and trade blows vs healing until it's dead.
That's one thing I've never liked in RPGs, where damage is unavoidable and the party gets half-killed each turn while the healer constantly spams healing spells. Can you imagine being a fighter and having your arms and ribs broken each turn while the guy in white behind you says 'it's fine, I've got loads of mp. For now'. You'd end up asking your mage if she can shut down it's attacks somehow, but no, 'you keep hitting it, it keeps hitting you, but you're getting healed each turn while I zap it with lightning!'.
Would it really be less annoying if instead of miss it said blocked for zero damage, or glancing blow for zero damage or even HIT...for zero damage.
Accuracy stat is literally about raising your average damage numbers.
But why actually think about what stats effectively mean in gameplay when you can act smug and condescending?
This me with all percentage based stats in honesty - I like having systems I can rely on. When I'm leveling something up and I have a choice between increasing critical hit chance by 1.5% or increasing my damage by 5 HP for every hit, without exception, I'm taking the latter - strength over luck.
To me, percentage stats are like bad controls - imagine the dodge or attack buttons in an ARPG had a fail percentage calculated on a dice roll and occasionally, when you pressed the dodge button, nothing would happen.
Some will argue it adds balance to OP weapons, but that's just heaping bad design on bad design, balance weapons naturally, make them difficult to master quick to degrade or limited in use (a predictable, accountable system), but truth be told, I'll take a mid-powered reliable weapon over a OP'd and unreliable weapon any day.
To me, percentage stats are like bad controls - imagine the dodge or attack buttons in an ARPG had a fail percentage calculated on a dice roll and occasionally, when you pressed the dodge button, nothing would happen.
Some will argue it adds balance to OP weapons, but that's just heaping bad design on bad design, balance weapons naturally, make them difficult to master quick to degrade or limited in use (a predictable, accountable system), but truth be told, I'll take a mid-powered reliable weapon over a OP'd and unreliable weapon any day.
There is no difference in this stat between turn or action RPG lol
Your attack miss in action RPG too.
When you miss in an ARPG it's your fault (assuming the controls are responsive), when you miss in turn-based it's a the roll of dice.
It should affect damage and how the enemy avoid or not your attack... you can aim at vital point that take huge damage but just barely hit the enemy hands with little damage... you can all miss the enemy too because the movement of both.
Luck is part of real life too.
No.
There is calcs behind your action attack... the same roll of dice is happening.
It happens all the time in Bloodborne lol
If you have 90% accuracy, you have a 10% chance to miss. Whether you hit will ultimately be decided (as with D&D) by a dice roll. There's no way to predict it, no way to account for it or avoid it.
Exactly like in action games.
It is fair and simulate real life.. you can call luck or miracle.
Ya do realize DnD's calculation to hit is based on the strength or dexterity stat, right?
Original Sin 2 is extremely generous with accuracy. The only times I got below 95% accuracy in the game is if my character was blinded, the enemy has very high leadership/an evading modifier or my character was using a severely overleveled weapon.
And if you have trouble hitting the enemies, you can just use one of the many, many skills that never misses (like all magic attacks).
If you miss or not an attack is based in a dice roll... the master decides what numbers will be miss or hit.
But talking about real life... if you get a sword and slash in somebody else you have 100% chance to hit or kill him? Nope... even specialists trained in that will miss sometime and there is some miraculous luck in the victim like when he/she is saved without damage due a pen in his/her pocket.
Last edited:
This sounds like an animation problem.
I like it, but I play DnD. To me, it's more realistic and interesting if I'm not literally perfect at hitting enemies for the whole game. But it should still be a contest; don't just give my weapon accuracy. Give my opponent an AC score, and make me beat it. Then you get to late game and weaker enemies do get hit every time. That's fair. But just saying "I'm in melee range of this ninja/demon/whatever, so my attacks should always do damage" is nuts (even if it's reduced damage). Sometimes, even in CQC, you won't land your attack.
I like it, but I play DnD. To me, it's more realistic and interesting if I'm not literally perfect at hitting enemies for the whole game. But it should still be a contest; don't just give my weapon accuracy. Give my opponent an AC score, and make me beat it. Then you get to late game and weaker enemies do get hit every time. That's fair. But just saying "I'm in melee range of this ninja/demon/whatever, so my attacks should always do damage" is nuts (even if it's reduced damage). Sometimes, even in CQC, you won't land your attack.
I actually kinda like it in Octopath, but mostly because it benefits the player overall - the Accuracy stat is kinda useless as there's very few enemies you'll ever miss, but Evasion can be hella useful if you stack it (especially when using the Challenge/Provoke field skills).
So I guess I like it when you just keep the annoyance on the NPC side while you simply get to benefit from being harder to hit.
Having it be a sliding scale thing might be more logical - have a full miss be rare but have accuracy determine where on the damage scale you land, signifying how well you aimed your strike.
So I guess I like it when you just keep the annoyance on the NPC side while you simply get to benefit from being harder to hit.
Having it be a sliding scale thing might be more logical - have a full miss be rare but have accuracy determine where on the damage scale you land, signifying how well you aimed your strike.
l You make a dice roll and then add your attack bonus and the GM compares it to the target's AC. There is randomization and the system has its own major issues, but the designers were smart enough to realize that asking a fighter to invest points into a stat besides strength just to hit things with their sword is probably not great game design.
Though DnD is weird because spells and weapons work under completely different damage/hit systems.
Last edited:
The master says the chances to you kill him are low only if you get 4 or more on dice... otherwise you will miss.
Or the mater says if you get 1 you will miss the attack otherwise it will be added to the damage multi.
DnD is opened to all kind of random things.
Last edited:
Accuracy can be great in RPGs provided the game was balanced well enough around it.
And the same can be said to any other stat.
Most FF games are not exactly the paragon of balanced gameplay and they mostly use accuracy because "rpgs needs to have them". In this case, i agree with op.
And the same can be said to any other stat.
Most FF games are not exactly the paragon of balanced gameplay and they mostly use accuracy because "rpgs needs to have them". In this case, i agree with op.
Action games are reliable - fast moving enemies might be harder to hit (and sensibly so), but with a little practice enemies can be reliably taken down without otherwise well-positioned, connecting hits, suddenly not being so, or the enemy teleporting away from you.
When this happens in Souls series games, it's due to broken hit-boxes and it's infuriating; to have adequately dodged an attack only to be teleported into place for the hit animation sucks and shouldn't happen. Imagine if your dodges in the Souls series were nothing to do with timing, skill or practice and were decided solely on your dexterity stat - that collision played no part; that regardless of how well-timed a dodge was, regardless of hit boxes or collisions, dependent on dexterity you'd still take damage in some cases.
That's not how ARPGs work - you know it and you're not arguing honestly.
If you consider Accuracy should cover the defenders ability to get out of the way of the incoming attack, the is a very relevant roll.
As an good example watch a miss mated fight video you know a member public tries to land a punch on a pro boxer while they try and dodge. They can barely land a punch and when they do it has been deflected in such a way it has not chance of doing any damage. In fights people do their best to get out of the way, even if in the game the animations do no show it.
As an good example watch a miss mated fight video you know a member public tries to land a punch on a pro boxer while they try and dodge. They can barely land a punch and when they do it has been deflected in such a way it has not chance of doing any damage. In fights people do their best to get out of the way, even if in the game the animations do no show it.
I don't think you realize what I'm saying.
DnD does not have a separate accuracy stat. It has accuracy tied to your character's offensive stats. If your strength/dexterity is higher, you can roll lower to hit.
It is certainly random, but it's designed in a fashion that doesn't require people to invest in a stat just to hit the broad side of a barn.
But you are will only changing the name of stats when you are still missing/hitting in a random fashion.
Fate/Luck in DnD can make you hit/miss too.
What OP is taking is about how random the hit/miss is independent of the stats used to calc that... action RPGs rely on the same but like you are moving people things it is not calculated the hit/miss.
That happens since Secret of Mana until the actual Bloodborne.
The engine of RPGs (and shooters, strategy, etc) do a lot of random calcs based in dices to decide what will happens.
Anytime there is a thread about "improving" the design of RPG's and strategy games on this forum, it makes my skin crawl.
I appreciate it on Pokemon, otherwise few moves would be simply too op to have. I do agree with the idea of a sloppy attack, op.
Never forget:
Never forget:
I've thought for a long time that it would be interesting to see what a turn based RPG with no RNG would look like. Buffs/debuffs/and status effects would all work 100% of the time, even on bosses, with the game balanced around that.
I don't think it is a problem in general though. All this is derived from dice rolls and hey, sometimes you swing and miss.
I don't think it is a problem in general though. All this is derived from dice rolls and hey, sometimes you swing and miss.
All or nothing accuracy checks are trash. If you have 50% accuracy, you should deal less damage half of the time, not just 0
Accuracy and evasion are an essential part of good rpgs! You just have to plan you strategy accordingly, it's not hard
was going to post that, akward zombie is so good
Think a well implemented accuracy mechanic is fine. It can fuck off in arpgs though when there is a skill/dexterity element for the player.
While I definitely don't agree with the idea of removing accuracy, this statement is pretty jarring in how you failed to think about the impact such a change might have on a game. It's hard to take this post seriously when it seems like you just had some bad luck in a specific game just now and are just venting, rather than trying to have a reasonable discussion about game mechanics in RPGs.
That's actually what made me stop playing KOTOR2. It's fucking ridiculous to watch a character swinging his sword for two minutes AT A FUCKING DOOR because 30% of the blows "miss".
NO IT DIDN'T MISS, YOU FUCK, I SAW THE SWORD DIRECTLY CONNECT WITH THE TARGET IN QUESTION, COMPLETE WITH A CLANG SOUND EFFECT AND SPARKS AND EVERYTHING
I agree with OP.
NO IT DIDN'T MISS, YOU FUCK, I SAW THE SWORD DIRECTLY CONNECT WITH THE TARGET IN QUESTION, COMPLETE WITH A CLANG SOUND EFFECT AND SPARKS AND EVERYTHING
I agree with OP.
That's XCOM, baby.
I can see the argument that certain combat systems don't need a "miss" function and can reduce player frustration (without sacrificing depth) by rolling the "accuracy" check into the damage or status effect calculation. Pillars of Eternity offers a middle ground where a portion of the attack distribution that would "miss" in other games becomes a "graze," doing reduced damage and weaker status effects.
But some games benefit from a sharper miss/hit divide. Misses in XCOM are costly, so setting up high-odds shots is one of the primary tactical goals. Part of the drama comes from knowing, in a game where you take many hundreds of shots, that you're going to miss some 90%ers and you're going to pray for some 20% shots you need to recover.
I can see the argument that certain combat systems don't need a "miss" function and can reduce player frustration (without sacrificing depth) by rolling the "accuracy" check into the damage or status effect calculation. Pillars of Eternity offers a middle ground where a portion of the attack distribution that would "miss" in other games becomes a "graze," doing reduced damage and weaker status effects.
But some games benefit from a sharper miss/hit divide. Misses in XCOM are costly, so setting up high-odds shots is one of the primary tactical goals. Part of the drama comes from knowing, in a game where you take many hundreds of shots, that you're going to miss some 90%ers and you're going to pray for some 20% shots you need to recover.
Agreed. Something like Octopath, where that Cait enemy would yield high rewards...…..if you could connect
Meeeh no, accuracy is that little anoying rock in your shoes that forces you to think "accuracy, balance, self-control" before "rrrraaaage berzerk powaaa" when you tune your the equipement. But I agree that in combat it can be annoying if you haven't any control on it. Evasion/Dodge/Hit malus are also the best possible damage mitigation for a player...
Secret of Mana? That suggests to me that the people you're watching don't get the stamina mechanic. If you attempt an attack on low stamina it will connect, but it'll only do something like 10% of the damage it ought to (I think it can register a hit for zero damage, too). That what you're seeing?
Last edited:
I mentioned Desktop Dungeons earlier in the thread, that's not a bad benchmark to look at - pretty much everything is deterministic, the challenge comes from manipulating the resources you have to get the best result.
I think an accuracy stat can add a lot of risk vs reward tension in games.
I couldn't imagine Fire Emblem, for example, without it. The ability for your character to dodge an attack can make for a very exciting win. And the fact that your character can be hit with a low percentage attack can yield a very dramatic loss.
It all adds to the drama of the experience. Dice rolls in classic pencil and paper RPGs are the same sort of thing.
OP, you can't tell me that moments like this aren't satisfying:
I couldn't imagine Fire Emblem, for example, without it. The ability for your character to dodge an attack can make for a very exciting win. And the fact that your character can be hit with a low percentage attack can yield a very dramatic loss.
It all adds to the drama of the experience. Dice rolls in classic pencil and paper RPGs are the same sort of thing.
OP, you can't tell me that moments like this aren't satisfying:
also, in that gif the player unit has presumably only committed to combat becuase they are benefiting from a severely low accuracy on the enemy unit's part that also has a higher raw damage stat, in the event that a crit doesn't happen and they get to counter-attack. I don't see him going on AIforum.com and moaning about it :DI think an accuracy stat can add a lot of risk vs reward tension in games.
I couldn't imagine Fire Emblem, for example, without it. The ability for your character to dodge an attack can make for a very exciting win. And the fact that your character can be hit with a low percentage attack can yield a very dramatic loss.
It all adds to the drama of the experience. Dice rolls in classic pencil and paper RPGs are the same sort of thing.
OP, you can't tell me that moments like this aren't satisfying:
Depends on the combat system that action RPG is using (Stat-based vs. Skill-based?). I guess maybe Kingdom Hearts or FFXV (haven't played FFXV) or Diablo(?), but not Dark Souls, Horizon Zero Dawn, Witcher 3.
note: I started playing Divinity: OS and I like the game. Not a huge fan of the combat, so I kinda just push through it and it satisfies.
But that doesn't describe older FF games.
The real problem with older FF games is that there's so little feedback on if something can work or not.
Hum? You can increase accuracy in these action games... like in Horizon if you hold R2 you are increasing accuracy for the calcs... The Witcher 3 when you hold the attack button and get in slow motion it increases the accuracy... in Dark Souls different weapons has different accuracy... etc etc etc.
Just because you don't see a stat like accuracy didn't mean there is no calc with it.
So you want to remove accuracy stats because missing makes you feel frustrated? If we removed every mechanic in RPGs that had a negative effect on the player there wouldn't be much of a game left. I don't see how missing an attack because of your accuracy stat is any different than getting destroyed because your defense or resistance to a certain element is low. It's not much different than being hit by any number of status effects or being out sped because of agility stats.
It adds a challenge and level of depth to the game. Most games I've played where stats determine how often you hit or miss also apply to the enemy so it's not like it's automatically only ever a negative thing.
It adds a challenge and level of depth to the game. Most games I've played where stats determine how often you hit or miss also apply to the enemy so it's not like it's automatically only ever a negative thing.