confused about HIT vs FLEE

probably the level difference and mp stuff i guess

 

but yeah 100 - 50 = 18% not 50% git gud kthx bye

 

Nah. All of this is because
1. You did not READ.
2. You understood everything wrong.
3. You tried to insert even more overly complicated stuff uselessly when literally nobody has to.

Let's start again.

• First, about hit and miss.

Unlike most games where their devs want to use all kinds of formulae with division and perhaps even logarithm and stuff so the "chance to hit" result would not be linear and harder to reach 0% or 100%, Toram devs chose to use a more simple formula with just some direct substraction:

Player's chance to hit = 100 - ([monster's dodge value] - [player's hit value])/3 + MP cost of skill/10

"Dodge value" is the FLEE/dodge stat, and "hit value" is the HIT/accuracy stat. "Monster's dodge value" means the monster's FLEE/dodge stat, and "player's hit value" means the player's HIT/accuracy stat.

In a very basic understanding, "chance for someone to hit something" also means "chance for that something to get hit by that someone" if we change the perspective. "Chance for the player to hit the monster", if change the POV to the monster, will be "chance for the monster to get hit by the player". The same thing applies for the opposite (or "chance for the monster to hit the player").

The reason FLEE/dodge stat exists is to counter HIT/accuracy stat. Hence in literally every game that has hit/miss, they all use these 2 stats (or 2 similar stats) in order to determine "chance to hit". And all formulae works in a way that it would make sure raising one's accuracy will increase "their chance to hit" while raising one's dodge would reduce "their chance to get hit".

• Second, about minimum/maximum

"Chance to hit" has a minimum and a maximum value. As it's a "chance", just like any other kinds of "chance", the value can only go between 0% and 100%, with 0% being "ain't gonna happen at all" and 100% means "will absolutely gonna happen". And since it's "chance", negative chance would be no different from 0%, and chance higher than 100% would be no different from 100%, thus if the value goes over those min/max, they would be set to the respective min/max.

And because of the "simple substraction" formula Toram uses, it's very easy for the "chance to hit" value to go lower than 0% or higher than 100%, and thus make the "set to 0%/100%" thing happens.

Probably because of how easy it is for "chance to hit" to reach 0%, Toram devs decided to add a different minimum. But nah, they don't let players and monsters have the same minimum value. Yeah, both sides use the same formula to calculate their respective hit chance, but they don't apply the same minimum value.

For the players, they don't receive a direct change in minimum chance, just an "indirect change" that is generally known as "graze threshold". If the player's "chance to hit" is 100%, they will always hit the monster (or in other words, the monster will never dodge the player's attacks); but if the player's "chance to hit" is 0% or at least lower than the "graze threshold", then the game will start applying the "graze threshold" as a "secondary chance to hit". Just think of "graze threshold" as your second chance to toss a dice when your attack misses with the aforementioned condition (chance to hit is lower than "graze threshold").

For example, you use bow (which has a graze threshold of 20%), your accuracy is 100, the monster's dodge is 400, and you use a skill with 300 MP cost. Applying the formula, you will have 100 - (400 - 100)/3 + 300/10 = 30, which means 10% chance to hit. Then you will have 10% chance to hit with that skill.
Now with the same stuff but you use auto attack instead, then you will have 100 - (400 - 100)/3 = 0, which means 0% chance to hit, which also means your auto attacks will never be able to "hit" the monster with an accurate hit. But since this is below your "graze threshold" (20%), your auto attacks will still get another 20% to "hit" the monster with a "graze" hit instead of a normal hit.

Now for the monster. Unlike the player's "chance to hit", the monster's "chance to hit" receives a direct change in minimum chance, which is 25%. Which means no matter how much FLEE/dodge the player has, monsters will always have at least 25% chance to hit the player. And if we change to the player's POV, it would mean "the player will always have at least 25% chance to get hit by the monster", which in turn means "the player will always have at most 75% chance to dodge the monster's attacks".

For example, let's assume that the monster also use the same formula to calculate their chance to hit you, and you have 310 dodge, and the monster has 100 accuracy. With those, the result will be 100 - (310 - 100)/3 = 30, which means 30% chance to hit. Then the monster will have 30% chance to hit you, which can also means "you have 70% chance to dodge the monster".
Now we increase your dodge to 400. The result will be 100 - (400 - 100)/3 = 0, which means 0% chance to hit. But since monsters gets a hard minimum of 25%, their hit chance gets set to 25% instead of 0%. As a result, the monster will have 25% chance to hit you instead of the supposedly 0% from the calculation.

And that is the reason why some skills such as Foresight has to specifically mention MONSTER'S MINIMUM ACCURACY so that player's would not misunderstand.

• Now third, we move to the Foresight passive

WHAT THE FORESIGHT SKILL SAYS IS THAT IT REDUCES MONSTER'S MINIMUM ACCURACY.
Or to be more precise, it reduces "monster's minimum chance to hit the player".
If we change that to the player's perspective, it can be understood as "player's minimum chance to get hit by the monster".
Which, in turn, can also mean "player's maximum chance to dodge the monster".
The info on some places like Coryn's Club mentions both "enemy's minimum accuracy" and "player's maximum dodge", but that is just them mentioning the same thing twice, just on two different perspective. That's about it.

 

why are you assuming minimum hit is 0% and maximum is 100% though?

 

Deal with it. That's just how hit chance calculation in Toram works.

In fact, that's pretty much how a lot of stuff in every games work. Sometimes the devs just want to put something "seemingly unrelated" into the formula.

What do you expect?

Accuracy and dodge, or similar stats, has always been included in hit chance calculation in literally every games that has hit/miss mechanism.

Toram devs chose a simple substraction formula for that, then include skill MP cost as a way to give skills better chance to hit.

Or do you prefer something like random number * Accuracy/Dodge?

Or "better", something like [Hit rate = ((1 + Attacker's Luck / 25) / 150) ≤ ((1 - (0 ≤ ((Defender's Melee - Attacker's Bonus) / 150) ≤ 1)) * (1 - (0 ≤ ((Defender's Block - Attacker's Bonus) / 150 * (1 - Attacker's Crit / 200)) ≤ 1))) ≤ 0.9933]?

 

I'll word it in an easier to understand way even tho they have pretty much done so already.

minimum accuracy is not accuracy. Maximum dodge is not dodge. These are the THRESHOLDS of each respective stats' possible values. Its common in coding actually. If your min is 15% so 15 and your max is 85% do 85, exceeding these thresholds will result in rounding down or up respectively.


Edit - replied to the wrong one

 

Then what else do you expect? Chance below 0% as chance for you to hit your own ass? Chance above 100% as chance to hit twice?

 

not really, idk why you're thinking about hitting your own ass to begin with but.... i'm assuming a monster never has 0 flee and a player never has 0 hit?

 

They did answer you. Understanding is a problem. With something such as min and max you are working with thresholds thats about as simple as it gets. Of a theoretical 0 to 100 threshold, those are how low and high the game will let your respective stat be. Apply foresight and this simply raises the minimum and apply boss minimum hit, this will apply to your maximum. Bam now you have your graze/hit threshold. But like the others said this is an over simplification and while the actual formula isnt complicated i think your understanding is.

 

really though... look at the english translation on the supposed japanese toram wiki site.... it doesn't translate to hit or flee when it mentions 100% at all it specifies some random thing called "under rate" if i'm thinking logically that would be some type of balance shit where the damage is 100% within stability, but that means if you land a hit inside that under rate you're at 100% of your stability, not that you're guaranteed 100% to fall in that rate .... otherwise there would absolutely not be a graze area.

 

Well, he tried to include differentiating and then for god know reason he add economy into a very simple add/substract formula, after all.

 

Perspective can matter too. Same explanation wont work for every person but I do think he chose the argumentative route rather than asking better questions or even just looking at it all simpler.

 

the number 1 to 100 is random you don't get to calculate it by subtracting flee from hit it doesn't say you can anywhere.

and there are formulas that even though written the same way are not tackled the same way as problems.... for example in biology 100 ml of 1 liquid + 100 ml of another liquid = not 200 ml liquid

 

Well my statement is purely hypothetical to help with understanding. Do your thing i guess lol. U can search up threshold explanations on google if its that tough...

 

for the record you can't blame an argument on whoever asked the question just because they didn't agree with your answer,

like all i did was say you're wrong, you're the one that got mad about it first what the hell?

 

i started the question, not the argument =)

 

You cant disagree with information tho...disliking answer is ok but if info is true its true. Also yes it takes two to make a conflict but it takes 1 person to use tools to get info. It all could have been prevented is what I am saying. You seem smart enough so use your tools if you dont like the answers given. Alternatively there are ways of testing these given information in game yourself but it takes a long time hahaha

 

Nobody can help you at this point. People answer one way and you understand things another while blaming them.

This isn't the level where ELI5 (explain like i'm 5) can help anymore. Gotta be ELIM (explain like i'm monkey) now.

Or just need someone who is far better than me at explaining.

 

i literally posted a new formula and you completely disregarded it though... like 0 comments on it

 

and don't even deny the fact that frosthydra is toxic af