the problem with FE mechanics

[Zkirsche]

eh what?

Growths have nothing to do with this at all. Growths have no effect on bases and little to no effect on the first few chapters.

He said the whole game. I thought that meant mid-late game.

Increase their avo base then.

0.01536*4 = 0.06144

Sorry, must've made a typo.

Not that it changes anything, it just reduced the numbers slightly.

[Reikken]

"Just increase the avo base" doesn't actually fix anything. If an average base stat is 6, and strong characters have like 9-10 base str, but then dodgy characters have to have like 20 base spd? That's just ridiculous. And it leaves no room for in-betweens either. "Somewhat dodgy" characters/enemies are instead of being a bit on the fast side are uber fast (like 14 base spd or soemthing) and double attack everything that's not also uber fast.

Edited June 20, 2009 by Reikken

[Zkirsche]

"Just increase the avo base" doesn't actually fix anything. If an average base stat is 6, and strong characters have like 9-10 base str, but then dodgy characters have to have like 20 base spd? That's just ridiculous. And it leaves no room for in-betweens either. "Somewhat dodgy" characters/enemies are instead of being a bit on the fast side are uber fast (like 14 base spd or soemthing) and double attack everything that's not also uber fast.

Makes sense.

Then I'll have to go with the crowd here and agree that weapon hit rates should be lower.

[-Cynthia-]

If you want to change the Avo base, it's probably to do so via Luck rather than spd, since luck has less important other effects.

[Rodykitty]

If you want to change the Avo base, it's probably to do so via Luck rather than spd, since luck has less important other effects.

I agree with this.

[Reikken]

So now we have 40 luck bases. Great. That's even more ridiculous. Total crit immunity, and massive hit too. No, just changing bases does not fix the problem.

There's a similar problem with crit rates, but crit doesn't come into play as often, so I haven't mentioned it.

Anyway, I'm trying to think of a way to get the hit window to be dynamic like hp is, but I haven't thought of any good way to do that yet.

[Vykan12]

Hit * Hit * Hit * Hit = 0.4^4= 0.0256

Hit * Hit * Miss * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6 = 0.01536

Hit * Miss * Hit * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6 = 0.01536

Miss * Hit * Hit * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6 = 0.01536

Hit * Hit * Hit * Miss * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6 = 0.01536

Hit * Hit * Hit * Miss * Miss * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Hit * Hit * Miss * Miss * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Hit * Hit * Miss * Hit * Miss * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Hit * Miss * Miss * Hit * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Hit * Miss * Hit * Miss * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Hit * Miss * Hit * Hit * Miss * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Miss * Miss * Hit * Hit * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Miss * Hit * Miss * Hit * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Miss * Hit * Hit * Miss * Hit * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Miss * Hit * Hit * Hit * Miss * Hit = 0.4 ^ 4 * 0.6^2 = 0.009216

Have you studied permuations yet? You're leaving out a lot of possibilities.

[Reikken]

Have you studied permuations yet? You're leaving out a lot of possibilities.

oh? like what? I didn't notice any holes.

[Vykan12]

There should be a total of 1+ 6 + 15 = 22 combinations, and only 15 are listed.

[Reikken]

1 for first term

4!/3! = 4 for second term

5!/(3!*2!) = 10 for third term

I'm not seeing the problem, sir.

[Vykan12]

There's 6 attacks though.

Eg/ Boyd dies in 4 hits at 40% true. Calculate the odds of him dying in 6.

(6 C 4) = 6! / (4!2!) = (6 x 5) / 2 = 15

(6 C 5) = 6!/ 5! = 6

(6 C 6) = 1 obviously

Edited June 20, 2009 by Vykan12

[Reikken]

(6 C 4) = 6! / (4!2!) includes stuff like hit hit hit hit miss miss, which can't happen. He dies at hit #4 (making it term #1, hit hit hit hit). The fourth hit will always be the last thing. So to calculate the number of combinations that fit that, we just cut off that last hit, since it's fixed, and address only the parts that are variable. Thus it is instead 5 C 3 = 5! / (3!2!).

Edited June 20, 2009 by Reikken

[Vykan12]

I tried both your method and mine of calculating the probability and got the same result:

(5 C 3)(0.4^4)(0.6^2) + (4 C 3)(0.4^4)(0.6^1) + (3 C 3)(0.4^4) = 17.92%

(6 C 4)(0.4^4)(0.6^2) + (6 C 5)(0.4^5)(0.6^1) + (6 C 6)(0.4^6) = 17.92%

[Jaybee]

What...the...hell?

Seriously, I don't think even DT could explain this to me properly without me falling asleep. And I'm supposed to be good at math in my class.

[Zkirsche]

What...the...hell?

Seriously, I don't think even DT could explain this to me properly without me falling asleep. And I'm supposed to be good at math in my class.

Don't feel too bad, this is AS level stuff. You're 11, I don't think anyone expects you to understand it.

On topic, maybe The problem lies in the weight of a weapon, take FE9, lots of enemies were weighed down for the first half of the game. Cutting into their avoid, if weapon weights were lower, Tehy'd have more speed and thus be able to avoid better.

This however, works two-ways, with the AS of your own units increasing due to the drop in wt.

This would make enemies dodging more common earlygame.

[Reikken]

Ok, I think I may have an answer:

Instead of the hit window being 100, have the window be 2/3 of the attacker's hit. Also, weapon hit should typically be about the same as hit from stats.

How can that be manitained at all? Have weapon levels add substantially to hit. For example, if iron lance base hit is 20, you could have it by 50% per weapon level. So up to 150% of its original value (30) on the second weapon level. Then 200% for the next weapon level (40). 250% next, and so on. That's just one possiblity, but I think this is better than, say, having higher level weapons just have much higher hit since that way lower level weapons become 100% obsolete having not only lower power but also much much lower hit. This way, however, lower level weapons can still retain usefulness, which I think is an important part of Fire Emblem. Having more viable weapon options without needing 9001 different weapons is good anyway. And this also gives more in betweens again without needing 9001 different weapons.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Reikken

[Meteor]

So if your unit has a weapon with 20 hit, and his skill bumps his hit up to 40, his chance to hit is then a maximum of 26%? I really hope I'm misunderstanding you.

[Reikken]

You are. Normally hit chance is out of 100. 100 hit means you hit always, 50 hit means you hit half the time, etc. In that example you gave, hit chance is out of 26.667. 26 if you truncate; I'll use that since it's easier. So now, 26 hit means you always hit; 13 hit means you hit half the time, etc. If your oppnent has 20 avoid, that means you have 20 (out of 26) hit. That's roughly 77%. (75% on the dot if that 26.6666.... isn't rounded)

Edited June 25, 2009 by Reikken

[Meteor]

Okay now I see what you're doing. Still, it seems like an overly complicated way of fixing hit/avoid. Do you have any way of testing whether or not such a change would be beneficial?

On another note, would I be wrong to think the major objective of all these proposed changes is to make every stat as worthwhile as the others?

[Reikken]

Hm. Sorta. This is to make hit and avoid stats as important early as they are late.

And it's really not that complicated. Just putting it over 2/3 hit instead of over 100. And I can't even imagine how there could be something simpler while still actually working. But if there is something, that would be great. Awesome, even.

Edited June 26, 2009 by Reikken

[Aether7]

You are. Normally hit chance is out of 100. 100 hit means you hit always, 50 hit means you hit half the time, etc. In that example you gave, hit chance is out of 26.667. 26 if you truncate; I'll use that since it's easier. So now, 26 hit means you always hit; 13 hit means you hit half the time, etc. If your oppnent has 20 avoid, that means you have 20 (out of 26) hit. That's roughly 77%. (75% on the dot if that 26.6666.... isn't rounded)

Using your example, you should have a hit rate of 6 out of 26, not 20. Your opponents avoid should not be your hit rate. ie. If they had a higher avoid of 26 you don't get 100% hit.

I do like the idea of hit being less dependent on weapon; this formula just needs more work.

[Zkirsche]

Would the weapon triangle still be active in all of this?

[Rehab]

There's always taking the RNG out entirely, but would it be Fire Emblem if it could be 100% deterministic?

edit: has more to do with "Fire Emblem's problems" than Reikken's specific "make avoid as good early as it is late", just thought I'd throw something out there

Edited June 29, 2009 by Mac

[uzy5o]

I don't see why this is a problem. Hit/avoid doesn't have to work the same way as atk/def. In fact, I kinda like the asymmetry.

[Reikken]

Using your example, you should have a hit rate of 6 out of 26, not 20. Your opponents avoid should not be your hit rate. ie. If they had a higher avoid of 26 you don't get 100% hit.

I do like the idea of hit being less dependent on weapon; this formula just needs more work.

Actually, you miscalculated or something.

It's not (2/3 hit) - avoid, out of 2/3 hit

It's hit - avoid, out of 2/3 hit

In this example...

40 - 20, out of 26(.6666...)

Would the weapon triangle still be active in all of this?

yes

might need some modification, though. Like have the weapon triangle bonus be affected by your weapon level, something already hit on a bit in FEDS