Accuracy – The Last Remnant of Action?

"

wyldmage wrote:

Attack Speed and Damage do not create streaks based on the RNG.
THAT is how it is different on a mechanics level.

Well, by that metric doesn't that also mean that they should remove the minimum damage from weapons? What if the RNG gives you a streak of 3 hits in a row for minimum weapon damage? That is also the RNG creating a streak that negatively impacts the player and he/she has no control over, therefore it's 'unfun', right?

"

shadowtwin wrote:

"

wyldmage wrote:

Attack Speed and Damage do not create streaks based on the RNG.
THAT is how it is different on a mechanics level.

Well, by that metric doesn't that also mean that they should remove the minimum damage from weapons? What if the RNG gives you a streak of 3 hits in a row for minimum weapon damage? That is also the RNG creating a streak that negatively impacts the player and he/she has no control over, therefore it's 'unfun', right?

nicely done. /thread

"

shadowtwin wrote:

"

wyldmage wrote:

Attack Speed and Damage do not create streaks based on the RNG.
THAT is how it is different on a mechanics level.

Well, by that metric doesn't that also mean that they should remove the minimum damage from weapons? What if the RNG gives you a streak of 3 hits in a row for minimum weapon damage? That is also the RNG creating a streak that negatively impacts the player and he/she has no control over, therefore it's 'unfun', right?

I know the answer. "It feels more negative".

Edit@post below: But.. but.. filling a tub of water "feels better"!

There is no difference between,

(a) putting points into accuracy to raise the skill

-and-

(b) putting points into accuracy to diminish the effect of the % lost for every level gained.

Just as there is no difference between.

(a) racing to fill a tub of water

-and-

(b) racing to empty a tub of water.

"

shadowtwin wrote:

"

wyldmage wrote:

Attack Speed and Damage do not create streaks based on the RNG.
THAT is how it is different on a mechanics level.

Well, by that metric doesn't that also mean that they should remove the minimum damage from weapons? What if the RNG gives you a streak of 3 hits in a row for minimum weapon damage? That is also the RNG creating a streak that negatively impacts the player and he/she has no control over, therefore it's 'unfun', right?

Again, if a miss did 50% damage, the issue would be largely mitigated.

A if you roll a 70 for damage instead of a 90, it isn't as big a difference. Plus, you're not even likely to notice it considering that the variable amount of your damage is actually pretty minor, even at low levels.

But yes, technically the streaks you can get from bad damage rolls are "unfun". However, they are under the carpet so to speak.

"

Wittgenstein wrote:

There is no difference between,

(a) putting points into accuracy to raise the skill

-and-

(b) putting points into accuracy to diminish the effect of the % lost for every level gained.

Just as there is no difference between.

(a) racing to fill a tub of water

-and-

(b) racing to empty a tub of water.

You don't understand, and never will.

Wittgenstein, next time you go to a restaurant, I want you to do something. When you sit down, put 10 $1 bills on the table. Every time the waiter or waitress isn't prompt enough, or makes a mistake, remove one.
That is accuracy. You are showing someone what they "should" have (100% or 95% to hit), and then slowly removing it.

If you normally tip 15% ($3-$7 depending on the restaurant and # of people), chances are that your host will still get the same amount (or more), but when you leave they will HATE you.

I take my leave of this thread, because half of you are just trolling and/or making fun of me while I make an effort to flesh out explanations and actually make points without insulting people (though I have dipped down and swung back already).

P.S. This wasn't my OP. And you all think I have some vested interest in it. I don't. I think the game would be better if it changed, but will still play it with accuracy in it. Just because you can't understand the concept of what makes a mechanic positive vs negative is no reason to throw around insults and degradations.

Seems I was wrong about you not coming up with anything better than "feels negative":

"

wyldmage wrote:

You don't understand, and never will.

Completely reasonable statement, thats even better.

Your example doesn't work, and here's why.

(A) In the restaurant, the server had something they were supposed to do, and didn't. So, they lost a dollar.

(b) In the game the player has a choice she should have made, but didn't, so now she can't hit things.

In (a) the server was at a disadvantage, she didn't know exactly what was expected of her (some people like a server to engage in conversations, others never want to see or hear them for example) she may just hate being a server, she may be distracted (she may be a great number of things.)
In (b) the player is at no disadvantage, she knows exactly what is expected of her, and will only "suffer" if she CHOOSES not to put points into accuracy.

Nah Witt.

The problem here is (at least for me) there's no gain from lower accuracy ->

-> Points that you could 'save' by not investing into accuracy connected passives and invest them into something else (damage, attack speed whatever) won't provide you a fraction of dps that you could gain by taking those accuracy ones.
At least until you hit late 80 or 90% of to hit chance.
That 'point' should be placed much lower like on 75 or 80% to hit chance.

There is no choice here* and if there's no choice because you have to take certain option or your char will suck that's a bad mechanic.
Devs are providing all those passives and stats to let ppl choose their build not make all builds uniform (invest your hard earned passive points into this - it's required to play further).
Would you like to hit always (almost) but with slower attack speed and/or lower dmg (per hit) or just hit frequently but with a higher damage (per hit) and/or better attack speed.
In short do you like predictable outcomes or more random.
That's how accuracy mechanic should work imo.

* Ok technically that's a choice but of a would you rather get a milion $ or your arm cut type not a standard two pretty equal options one.

I like how people are trying to 'prove' that accuracy is a good thing (or not).

Some people dislike it and find it unfun. This is an inarguable fact. You can't tell them "you're actually having fun with this, trust me!".

GGG is thankfully going to look into a way to improve things for those who dislike the current mechanic without getting rid of the things people like currently: aka having to make smart choices and balance DPS stats. Present accuracy is not the only way to provide those things.

"

ness wrote:

Nah Witt.

The problem here is (at least for me) there's no gain from lower accuracy ->

-> Points that you could 'save' by not investing into accuracy connected passives and invest them into something else (damage, attack speed whatever) won't provide you a fraction of dps that you could gain by taking those accuracy ones.
At least until you hit late 80 or 90% of to hit chance.
That 'point' should be placed much lower like on 75 or 80% to hit chance.

There is no choice here* and if there's no choice because you have to take certain option or your char will suck that's a bad mechanic.
Devs are providing all those passives and stats to let ppl choose their build not make all builds uniform (invest your hard earned passive points into this - it's required to play further).
Would you like to hit always (almost) but with slower attack speed and/or lower dmg (per hit) or just hit frequently but with a higher damage (per hit) and/or better attack speed.
In short do you like predictable outcomes or more random.
That's how accuracy mechanic should work imo.

* Ok technically that's a choice but of a would you rather get a milion $ or your arm cut type not a standard two pretty equal options one.

All said is completely based off current closed beta skill tree and game balance, which is by no means complete, Chris already said in this same thread theyve changed a lot. So all that says nothing about accuracy as a mechanic.

"

aimlessgun wrote:

I like how people are trying to 'prove' that accuracy is a good thing (or not).

Some people dislike it and find it unfun. This is an inarguable fact. You can't tell them "you're actually having fun with this, trust me!".

GGG is thankfully going to look into a way to improve things for those who dislike the current mechanic without getting rid of the things people like currently: aka having to make smart choices and balance DPS stats. Present accuracy is not the only way to provide those things.

Its a good thing when you have enough of it and bad when you don't (=

I'm just mostly trying to say here that theres no reason to remove it just like other game mechanics.