Author Topic: An honest question about the RNG  (Read 2908 times)

intensity

  • Probably not a Spambot
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
An honest question about the RNG
« on: January 30, 2014, 12:28:44 am »
Random number generator for those who are wondering...

Anyway, my question is:

When it displays 60% to hit, is it really 60? Or are dodge/evasion bonuses applied after? I know this is gonna sound cheap, but I have played more rpg games than I can remember, and I always cherish the ones that display all the information, but with that can come the possible frustration of not hitting things even tho your odds were massive.

I spent nearly a 100 hours on underrail and I can honestly say: There is something wrong going on with the average chance to hit. The displayed chance seems to be higher on average by 15% than the actual, and having 90% chance to hit someone can result in 2 consecutive misses in one turn more often than than you can imagine. As an experiment I saved before shooting someone with 20% chance to hit, on average it took me at least 10 loads to make it happen, sometimes longer. Never did I get 2 hits in a row and never did I manage to hit before at least 6 tries. I kept doing this for about an hour and I know that it sounds really sad, but I just cannot shake the feeling that either the game cheats somehow, doesn't give out the correct information or has a bad case of RNG sickness.


Elhazzared

  • Tchortist
  • ****
  • Posts: 491
  • Karma: +7/-20
    • View Profile
Re: An honest question about the RNG
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2014, 12:45:05 am »
I cannot tell you whether or not the RNG displays the proper to hit chances or if it's working as intended. I belive I can tell you that it does not include any dodge chances and this is why. First you need to roll to hit the target and manage a success before the target is actually allowed to make a dodge roll to try to avoid the shot... Ok it might not work like this but I'm almost absolutly sure that it would work as such cause it's the most logical way. Dodge chances are obviously not displayed but I'd assume that if you attack an enemy and he dodges, you'd get a indication of a dodge rather than just a miss. Same thing as when you dodge an enemy attack... So when you see a dodge it wasn't that your attack missed, it actually would hit, but the enemy avoided the hit by dodging.

Styg

  • Administrator
  • Godman
  • *****
  • Posts: 2368
  • Karma: +506/-30
    • View Profile
Re: An honest question about the RNG
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2014, 10:19:00 am »
As epeli said, the chance to hit displayed is final after taking into account all factors save for the special ones like the uncanny dodge. The same code is used to calculate the displayed chances and the actual attack so I really doubt there's a mismatch there. Someone brought up the same thing a long while back and I remember testing it where the shown chance is really the one checked against the RNG and it was.

The shooting range is indeed the easiest way to put this into test so let me know if you decided to give that a try.

Btw, there's currently a bug with evasion not applying correctly, but that's reflected in the displayed chance to hit as well.

Fenix

  • Godman
  • ******
  • Posts: 1211
  • Karma: +58/-25
    • View Profile
Re: An honest question about the RNG
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2014, 01:51:26 am »
I have question about it too.
When I used Psionic Headbands, that should give me +crit%, instead I felt like, my crit became smaller.
Of course, it's likely my bugs, but...

Fenix

  • Godman
  • ******
  • Posts: 1211
  • Karma: +58/-25
    • View Profile
Re: An honest question about the RNG
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2014, 11:43:14 pm »
I know, displayed numders are correct.