UI: base-to-hit for shoot and melee are not intutitive

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Pete Mack
    Prophet
    • Apr 2007
    • 6883

    UI: base-to-hit for shoot and melee are not intutitive

    These are currently shown in cyan. They used to be shown in graded colors. It's only because a long time ago I did angband development that I know that 25.6 is a lousy to-hit. Also, the to-hit displayed is not affected by bless/hero/shero.
    [this is a bug.]
  • fizzix
    Prophet
    • Aug 2009
    • 3025

    #2
    Which version are you talking about. 3.4.1, current dev version or v4?

    Changing colors can certainly be done, and if it's not it's definitely an oversight. However, it might be worth trying to figure out if there was an intuitive way to describe fighting ability that's at least of some use. Currently if you know the monsters AC, you can see your probability of hitting, but if you don't you're out of luck. Perhaps we can do something equivalent like PHAC50 or probability of hitting AC 50?

    I'm also of the opinion that AC should be something that's noticeable at first attack on a monster. After swinging at one you know roughly how hard it is to hit it. This would solve some of the problems of the fighting values being less than obvious. Shooting of course is still a problem though. The only reasonable solution here is to either show chance to hit with current arrows in the 0 slot, or remove all to hit bonuses from arrows.

    Comment

    • Raajaton
      Swordsman
      • May 2012
      • 296

      #3
      Perhaps allow you to hit the letter for your quiver slot to check values for that particular type of ammo?

      Comment

      • fizzix
        Prophet
        • Aug 2009
        • 3025

        #4
        Originally posted by Raajaton
        Perhaps allow you to hit the letter for your quiver slot to check values for that particular type of ammo?
        The question is what value do you choose to display on the character sheet, and what value should be displayed when examining a monster.

        Comment

        • Derakon
          Prophet
          • Dec 2009
          • 9022

          #5
          I like the idea of just removing to-hit bonuses from ammo. It's needless complexity IMO. While, yes, I could imagine a self-guiding ammo type (or just ammo that's more/less better-made), I really don't think we need compounding bonuses from the bow and the ammo together. Honestly I think getting rid of the to-dam bonus would also be a good idea but that would require significantly more rebalancing work.

          Comment

          • Raajaton
            Swordsman
            • May 2012
            • 296

            #6
            I would say have the character sheet display to-hit and to-dam values for shooting purely based on your launcher without any benefit from ammo. Then when examining a monster, have the ability to assume usage of your different ammo, being able to see with which you'll have the best chance to hit vs. the highest damage on that particular monster.

            I do agree that getting ready of to-hit from ammo makes sense as well. I would say the launcher has more to do with accuracy than the ammo itself, but I guess IRL there are some properties in top quality ammo that would improve accuracy as well.

            Comment

            • scud
              Swordsman
              • Jan 2011
              • 323

              #7
              (3.3.2 die-hard)

              I rarely bother looking at my 'to hit' versus a particular beast, because once I've hit enough of them to know that info I'll already have a feel for how many of them I can (should) take on sequentially: basically a 'my damage' versus 'their damage and HP' equation.

              When I do look at the 'chance to hit' I'm always surprised at how little difference is made by magical enhancement...

              Bare-handed (+21 to hit) I've a 53% chance of hitting a greater bogroll (AC210)
              With my +14 weapon (so +35) it rises to 59%
              Add a ring with +7 (so +42) it's 62%

              Seems very marginal to me.

              But that's a different thread altogether.

              Sorry.

              Comment

              • fizzix
                Prophet
                • Aug 2009
                • 3025

                #8
                Originally posted by scud
                When I do look at the 'chance to hit' I'm always surprised at how little difference is made by magical enhancement...

                Bare-handed (+21 to hit) I've a 53% chance of hitting a greater bogroll (AC210)
                With my +14 weapon (so +35) it rises to 59%
                Add a ring with +7 (so +42) it's 62%

                Seems very marginal to me.

                But that's a different thread altogether.

                Sorry.
                Heh, we tend to drift a lot so it's ok. Most of this comes from a basic design principal in angband that "you should hit most of the time." and "battles should take multiple rounds." So, the difference from going to 53% to 62% results in roughly a 20% increase in damage over the course of battle. A 10 round battle might last 8 rounds. That might mean that you need to use less healing or have a lower chance of suffering a negative effect.

                Comment

                • scud
                  Swordsman
                  • Jan 2011
                  • 323

                  #9
                  Originally posted by fizzix
                  stuff
                  Yes indeed.

                  The scaling vs AC is interesting. Great Wyrms, black reavers and bronze golems are all AC255 (is this the maximum for non-uniques?) and +42 to hit gives me a sad 55%, whereas at +21 it's a miserable 44%.

                  Brown yeeks (AC21) are 91% with either to hit modifier.

                  Comment

                  • half
                    Knight
                    • Jan 2009
                    • 910

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Derakon
                    I like the idea of just removing to-hit bonuses from ammo. It's needless complexity IMO. While, yes, I could imagine a self-guiding ammo type (or just ammo that's more/less better-made), I really don't think we need compounding bonuses from the bow and the ammo together. Honestly I think getting rid of the to-dam bonus would also be a good idea but that would require significantly more rebalancing work.
                    I think this is a great idea, and it is what I did with Sil. It also solves the problem of ammo being spread over many slots (though you can probably keep using the old solution). Having arrows of each of the base types is plenty for anyone (39 types!). Allowing hit and dam bonuses to vary increases this to more than 8,000 types, which is totally unnecessary. See here for more:

                    Comment

                    • fph
                      Veteran
                      • Apr 2009
                      • 1030

                      #11
                      Originally posted by fizzix
                      I'm also of the opinion that AC should be something that's noticeable at first attack on a monster.
                      Personally, I would get rid of the whole monster memory mini-game, and make everything known by default.

                      It is a subsystem that adds no value to experienced players, and its only noticeable effect is to unfairly kill newcomers that have no idea that dracolisks breathe nexus, master mystics paralize, or titans are heavy melee hitters.
                      --
                      Dive fast, die young, leave a high-CHA corpse.

                      Comment

                      • LostTemplar
                        Knight
                        • Aug 2009
                        • 670

                        #12
                        Personally, I would get rid of the whole monster memory mini-game, and make everything known by default.
                        I think in the same way more or less, If character can recognize an object it shall know anything about it.

                        Comment

                        • Narvius
                          Knight
                          • Dec 2007
                          • 589

                          #13
                          Originally posted by fph
                          Personally, I would get rid of the whole monster memory mini-game, and make everything known by default.

                          It is a subsystem that adds no value to experienced players, and its only noticeable effect is to unfairly kill newcomers that have no idea that dracolisks breathe nexus, master mystics paralize, or titans are heavy melee hitters.
                          Dunno. I actually enjoyed lugging along a Rod of Probing just to learn more and more about the dungeon's denizens. It's another thing you need to prepared for, simply - the first time I survived for a prolonged time at DLVL99 (and the first time I killed all uniques minus Morgy) I actually had almost no monster info about things deeper than DLVL 40 or so.
                          If you can convincingly pretend you're crazy, you probably are.

                          Comment

                          • takkaria
                            Veteran
                            • Apr 2007
                            • 1951

                            #14
                            Originally posted by fph
                            Personally, I would get rid of the whole monster memory mini-game, and make everything known by default.

                            It is a subsystem that adds no value to experienced players, and its only noticeable effect is to unfairly kill newcomers that have no idea that dracolisks breathe nexus, master mystics paralize, or titans are heavy melee hitters.
                            I'm definitely interested in moving towards having more information be visible more quickly. e.g. damage, life rating and AC bonuses should be visible after the first attack (or maybe before).
                            takkaria whispers something about options. -more-

                            Comment

                            • Narvius
                              Knight
                              • Dec 2007
                              • 589

                              #15
                              Originally posted by takkaria
                              I'm definitely interested in moving towards having more information be visible more quickly. e.g. damage, life rating and AC bonuses should be visible after the first attack (or maybe before).
                              That, yes. But completely getting rid of that subgame - no.
                              If you can convincingly pretend you're crazy, you probably are.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              😀
                              😂
                              🥰
                              😘
                              🤢
                              😎
                              😞
                              😡
                              👍
                              👎