Accuracy – The Last Remnant of Action?

"

konfeta wrote:

"

I wont comment on the first part since its once again "Accuracy is different because I don't like it" kind of stuff as before.

Well, so much for an attempt at conversation. If you refuse to even put effort into the act of examining why the gameplay mechanics of accuracy are different, any discussion with you on the subject is pointless.

For me it was pretty pointless from the first post of this thread, I'm glad we have agreed (=

P.S. The discussion has got as far as it could, really. I understood that you don't like accuracy. But that alone is far from enough for a reason for me to think it should be removed, since just like before I see nothing wrong with it. I've heared your opinion, but mine hasn't changed.

There's some REAL HATE going on in this thread.

That said, I'm on the "get rid of accuracy" side. Why? Because, as stated, it's a frustrating/boring mechanic.

"

konfeta wrote:

A simple contrast:
A. Player swings for 100 damage, hits 100% of the time.
B. Player swings for 150 damage, hits 67% of the time.
C. Player swings for 75 damage, hits 100% of the time, crits for 150 damage 33% of the time.
D. Player swings for 125 damage, gets glancing blows for 50 damage 33% of the time.

THIS!!!

If accuracy is "balanced" around a 10% miss rate and degrades by 1% per level, then decrease all damage by 10%, decrease all scaling by 1% per minimum level, and remove accuracy.

Boom. The game was NOT made easier. But players can put points into skills that Improve their character instead of skills the Prevent Deterioration.

Its a concept of fun-ness. Would you rather have a character that had 30 cool skills that upped your stats, or a character with 30 skills that up your accuracy?

Oh, did I just describe the difference between playing a Witch and a Ranger?

Speaking of Witches. Dual-wield wand is supposed to be viable. But with the number of Accuracy skills in the Int tree, it isn't. You have to spend TONS of points into Dex just to hit. And thanks to off-spec nodes giving so many fewer stat points, that feels like I'm getting kicked in the junk over and over.

The point of the passive skill tree is that you SHOULD BE FREE TO BUILD THE CHARACTER YOU WANT TO. Whether that is a mixed-stats build, or putting everything into 1 stat. Whether it's having a glass cannon build, or one with some survival. How well you do SHOULD be affected, but the game should be viable with any non-troll-level build.

Currently, if you ignore accuracy, especially as a melee character, the later difficulties are just unplayable.

Please, GGG, remove the mechanic that is nothing but anti-fun, and just nerf damage/scaling across the board to keep the current balance/difficulty.
Instead of investing in Accuracy to "gain" dps, players will be able to invest in skills that actually interest them, further their build, and/or lie in spots on the skill tree they like.

I've only played a Witch, so I don't really know how good or bad Accuracy is.

That said, commentary on some of the anti-Accuracy responses, namely that the game would be 'better' if the "luck-based" Accuracy was replaced with "skill-based" tactical skills.

For me, this is missing the point in a huge way. Path of Exile (like Diablo and Diablo II, but notably unlike Diablo III) challenges the player to create a viable character. Challenges the player to place their points intelligently, to have a plan and enough system mastery to know what works, what doesn't, and what flaws a given build will have that will need to be compensated for.

I'm new to Path of Exile, so I'll be using a game I know better for the sake of demonstration: Diablo II.

Consider the Sorceress. She maximizes her damage if she puts all her points in Blizzard (and its synergies) or Lightning/Chain Lightning (and their shared synergies): These skills are powerful, and benefit from having a long list of synergistic skills so they can be pumped throughout the Sorceress's lifetime.

However, Diablo II also has Immunities: by Hell difficulty, every monster is immune to something (and sometimes more). A pure-Blizzard or pure-Lightning Sorc will have a very hard time soloing the game, because she will be forced to rely on her mercenary for the Cold or Lightning immune monsters. Instead, a well-built Sorceress recognizes that she must also have a secondary element. She also needs to know what skills can be viable with fewer skill points: Blizzard requires a lot of skill points, so a Lightning Sorc couldn't go into that, but Frozen Orb works very well on just 20 skill points.


By the same token, characters in Path of Exile must be built to meet the challenges of the game. This means that "making sure your character has enough Accuracy" is a question of skill — just a different type of skill from "make sure you're physically hitting the monster". And this is crucially important — this game is about, at least in large part, character building skill rather than straight gameplay skill.

And this is what Diablo III lacks (the character building component) that has me looking for alternatives (and very happy, so far, with Path of Exile). This is something I've heard echoed a lot on Global chat. This is something that is important to the game, and important to the people playing it.


Accuracy may have problems. It may not be well-designed. It may not, even, be desirable at all — the OP may be correct. I haven't played an Accuracy-dependent character yet, so I couldn't say.

But I do know that "it's better because it's about your skills while playing" is a false statement. That does not automatically make it better. The need for — the challenging of — character building skills is also important to this game. If they were all replaced with "active" mechanics (running, dodging, sniping, etc.), I probably would move on to another game; this would not be what I'm looking for. And I think, based on conversations in Global, that I'm far from alone in this.

"

DragoonWraith wrote:

I've only played a Witch, so I don't really know how good or bad Accuracy is.

That said, commentary on some of the anti-Accuracy responses, namely that the game would be 'better' if the "luck-based" Accuracy was replaced with "skill-based" tactical skills.

For me, this is missing the point in a huge way. Path of Exile (like Diablo and Diablo II, but notably unlike Diablo III) challenges the player to create a viable character. Challenges the player to place their points intelligently, to have a plan and enough system mastery to know what works, what doesn't, and what flaws a given build will have that will need to be compensated for.

I'm new to Path of Exile, so I'll be using a game I know better for the sake of demonstration: Diablo II.

Consider the Sorceress. She maximizes her damage if she puts all her points in Blizzard (and its synergies) or Lightning/Chain Lightning (and their shared synergies): These skills are powerful, and benefit from having a long list of synergistic skills so they can be pumped throughout the Sorceress's lifetime.

However, Diablo II also has Immunities: by Hell difficulty, every monster is immune to something (and sometimes more). A pure-Blizzard or pure-Lightning Sorc will have a very hard time soloing the game, because she will be forced to rely on her mercenary for the Cold or Lightning immune monsters. Instead, a well-built Sorceress recognizes that she must also have a secondary element. She also needs to know what skills can be viable with fewer skill points: Blizzard requires a lot of skill points, so a Lightning Sorc couldn't go into that, but Frozen Orb works very well on just 20 skill points.

"

BilboBeastlyBaggins wrote:

In Path of Exile you can spec all your points into one spammable lightning skill and never have to worry about any kind of immunities through the hardest difficulties of this game. So how does this prove your point that -physical based characters need accuracy?

We need to see what happens in the next big patch before saying that this is fundamentally broken.

That said, comparing the 3 damage increase types is not proper.

I like exmples.

1) Hit 3 times for 100 damage.
2) Crit 1 time for 200 damage, hit 2 times for 50 damage.
3) Hit 2 times for 150 damage. Miss once.

The above three scenarios seem equal, but they are actually are not. The third person is doing much worse. Why?

The first person has an even keel of damage. There is a small chance he'll crit for bonus damage perhaps, but more importantly: He has a reliable stun.

The second person has a lot of variation. He's going to get additional effects from his crits more often than the first person (stun/freeze/burn), and he has a reliable stun.

The third person hits like a truck but he misses somewhat too. That miss means no stun procced, and for the purpose of that swing not only does it mean 100% miss, but 0% chance to crit, 0% chance to proc any addiional effects (leech, burn, whatever). So this person seems to do the same DPS, but that doesn't account for additional effects, missed crit opportunities, and greater damage taken due to missed stuns.

Simplified:
100% damage, 100% hit rate, 5% crit chance = 100% damage with a crit 5% of the time.
200% damage, 50% hit rate, 10% crit chance = 100% damage with a crit 5% of the time? No, because you're dead.

"

bilbobeastlybaggins wrote:

In Path of Exile you can spec all your points into one spammable lightning skill and never have to worry about any kind of immunities through the hardest difficulties of this game. So how does this prove your point that -physical based characters need accuracy?

You didn't read my post. I didn't say physical characters need accuracy. I explicitly stated repeatedly that I didn't know if physical characters need accuracy.

What I said was that if accuracy needs to be removed, it is not because it is a "skill-less" or "luck-based" mechanic, or that a mechanic that relies more on "real-time skill" is inherently superior. An ARPG must strike a balance, and I think for a substantial part of this community, the balance should be skewed towards making character building the more important skill.

Hopefully the end of the game will be challenging one's character building and tactical skills.


However, you raise a good point (my Wizard is still in Normal difficulty, so I couldn't comment on that) — the Wizard is a little too brainless for building. Pick an element, pick a weapon, decide how much you're going to use minions, and go. Flat-out immunities may not be necessary — though I am of the opinion that they worked somewhat well in Diablo II (the primary problem was not their presence but the abrupt way in which they appeared). But yes, there does need to be a mechanic in the game whereby there is some purpose for speccing two simultaneous elements. If there currently is none, that should be addressed.


Another issue I thought of while I was out: the Wizard's "counterpart" to Accuracy, at least in terms of "boring passive number you have to make sure you have enough of in your build", is Mana. But unlike Accuracy, a Wizard can "shore up" a weak Mana pool by having and using (abusing) Mana Flasks.

Which maybe means there needs to be a third type of Flask: a Flask that gives a temporary Accuracy boost. Fantasy-styled Pentazem, if you will. A physical character who doesn't want to spend Skill Points on Accuracy can sacrifice some of his healing ability to get more of it the same way that a Wizard can sacrifice some of her healing to get Mana back (my Wizard currently runs 2 Healing/3 Mana).

Overall, that may not be the best answer. Physical characters still need Mana while Wizards still don't need Accuracy; that should probably be addressed as well or instead of. But I think it's an interesting idea.

Building accuracy into your character is not a skill. Its simply a reaction to game mechanics.

Currently, "top end" weapons all have 50% or more Increased Physical Damage.

What if all weapon base damages were reduced 90%? Then "top end" weapons would have different stats.

This has nothing to do with skill.

Accuracy is a non-fun stat. Increased attack speed, critical chance, armor penetration etc are fun.
Why?
Because they don't make the player feel like they did something wrong.

Here are two games. Game 1 you begin play doing 100 dps, with a 95% chance to hit. Game 2 you begin play doing 95 dps, with a 100% chance to hit.
In game 1, every time you level, your chance to hit goes down 1%.
In game 2, every increase in monster level, they gain an additional 1% health.
In both games, you have the same skill options. You can either put a point into Accuracy for 2% to hit, damage for 2% more dps, or crit chance for 2% more chance to crit.
BUT! What happens if you level up to level 21 and don't spend any points?

In game 1, you now have only an 75% chance to crit. One fourth of the time, you miss. 1/16 you miss twice. 1/64 (that's pretty often considering how often you attack 3 times) you'll miss 3 attacks in a row and hate your life.

In game 2, the monsters have gained 20% more hp than in game 1. So it takes you 20% longer to kill them relative to if they were Game 1 monsters. But you still have reliable results.

But in both games, the average time-to-kill the mob is the same.
Now lets spend some points. Player 1 has to spend his points in accuracy just to stop from being "worse", while player 2 gets to spend his points in order to "be better".
One of those feels better than the other.

"

Building accuracy into your character is not a skill. Its simply a reaction to game mechanics.

Wheres the logics? Eerything you do with you character is reaction to game mechanics, it makes it no less of a skill - some will do it better some worse.

Also we can make a conclusion that many of PoE mechanics are not fun (in your book anyway). On you character sheet (note that it doesn't actually go down, just that it compares to a higher level monster after levelling up, except Armor has been found to be bugged atm):

Crit goes down when you level
Spell Crit goes down when you level
Evasion goes down when you level
Damage reduction goes down when you level
Accuracy goes down when you level

Basically everything that factors in your level is not fun.
Obviously they should all be taken out, because each time you level up you feel like you did something wrong and hate yourself?

Increase monster hp instead? That sounds like a really boring idea. That isn't even something I can affect, less statistics to manage - easier, but more boring game.

Sorry, I don't agree with you at all (=

I love getting the puzzle called "Character" done and I know I cannot ignore some pieces and still do it.

I feel that accuracy/evasion, block /chance to bypass block, spell intensity/chance to resist spells, are all VERY necessary for this game. This is because this is a hardcore PVP game as well as PVE game. How do you think the sword and shield temp is going to stand up to a two-handed sword wielding marauder? Hes probably gonna have to have high block. Hows the assassin type melee character gonna compete with the ranger ? Hes probably going to have to have high evade. Hows the ranger going to compete with the ice witch ? Hes probably going to have to have some kind of cold/freeze resistance.

The only real issue here is balance which is why we have the beta.

"

nermind wrote:

"

Building accuracy into your character is not a skill. Its simply a reaction to game mechanics.

Wheres the logics? Eerything you do with you character is reaction to game mechanics, it makes it no less of a skill - some will do it better some worse.

Also we can make a conclusion that many of PoE mechanics are not fun (in your book anyway). On you character sheet (note that it doesn't actually go down, just that it compares to a higher level monster after levelling up, except Armor has been found to be bugged atm):

Crit goes down when you level
Spell Crit goes down when you level
Evasion goes down when you level
Damage reduction goes down when you level
Accuracy goes down when you level

Basically everything that factors in your level is not fun.
Obviously they should all be taken out, because each time you level up you feel like you did something wrong and hate yourself?

Increase monster hp instead? That sounds like a really boring idea. That isn't even something I can affect, less statistics to manage - easier, but more boring game.

Sorry, I don't agree with you at all (=

I love getting the puzzle called "Character" done and I know I cannot ignore some pieces and still do it.

1) Not everything is a reaction to game mechanics. If I choose to play a Ranger, that is not a reaction to game mechanics. If I kite the mobs, that is not a reaction to game mechanics. If I choose +4% attack speed over +5% projectile damage, that is not a reaction to game mechanics.
Each of those issues is a choice that I'm making to create and play a character the way I want to. When the game says "but because you didn't make the character how WE want you to, you are now worse".

2) You raise a valid point about numbers going down because they scale relative to the monster you are fighting. This is NOT a fun way to present this information. At least in the current implementation, it actually means that you do *worse* against the same (now lower level relative to you) monsters if you do not improve passives/skills/gear. In an ideal setup, the monsters would all have the proper scaling built into them so that the character's sheet only goes up each level. However, accuracy is the worst culprit because it has such a drastically NOTICED impact on the game. When you take 13.1 damage instead of 10.3 damage because you haven't gotten better armor, you don't notice too much (partially due to hp increase, partially due to it just feeling like an increase in difficulty as you leveled up). When you are missing 9% instead of 6%, you DO notice. Taking more damage feels like "these monsters are higher level, they hit harder", while missing more feels like "I got worse".

3) I used monster hp as the generic, easy to understand example of how to balance out changes or how to compare two different situations. Everyone understands effective hp and dps. And how is "you miss 10% of the time" any MORE enjoyable than "monsters take 11% longer to kill"?
Sure, tougher monsters to compensate for removing accuracy isn't interesting. But neither is whiff whiff whiff.

And not a reply to you:
4) What is the difference between a Critial Rate and a Miss Rate? Level of reward. If you played this game starting at a 5% chance to hit and worked your way up (but it didn't decrease each level), it would feel BETTER than it does right now. You'd be noticing the "lucky streaks" where you hit 5 times in a row as you got to 10%. The same logic applies to Criticals. They're fun because you START LOW AND GET BETTER.
Accuracy starts at the cap, and can only get worse. You have to spend points to stay as "good" as you were at level 1.