26 replies to this topic

[Ascension64]

I've been looking carefully at how attacks are determined using the RNDBASE#.BMP files in conjunction with the binary code. We have some rather interesting (and skewed) results.

The first row represents the nth attack in the round. The first column represents the number of attacks a creature has in the round.
<table border="1"><tr><td></td><td>1st</td><td>2nd</td><td>3rd</td><td>4th</td><td>5th</td></tr>
<tr><td>1</td><td>Ar</td><td>n</td><td>n</td><td>n</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>2</td><td>Ar</td><td>Al</td><td>n</td><td>n</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>3</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Al</td><td>n</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>4</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Al</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>5</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Al</td></tr>
<tr><td>0.5</td><td>0.5Ar</td><td>n</td><td>n</td><td>n</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>1.5</td><td>Ar</td><td>0.5Ar</td><td>n</td><td>n</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>2.5</td><td>Ar</td><td>Al</td><td>0.5Ar</td><td>n</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>3.5</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Al</td><td>0.5Ar</td><td>n</td></tr>
<tr><td>4.5</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Ar</td><td>Al</td><td>0.5Ar</td></tr></table>

A = an attack is made
n = no attack is made (obviously because the nth attack won't exist for a certain m number of attacks)
r = right hand attack
l = left hand attack
0.5 = 50% probability of an attack

There are a few things to note:

• Attacks are heavily biased towards the right hand. In an integer number of attacks, only one left-handed attack is made per round. For 1 attack per round only, the left hand is never used. In a non-integer number of attacks, the similar is the case. For 0.5 and 1.5 attacks per round, the left hand is never used.
  
• The 0.5 attacks are a statistical probability (this is implemented as a rand(2) in the code). This means that if you are having a really lucky day, and knowing the random number generator isn't so good anyway, you could possibly roll the Heads on the coin and attack every round.

[Miloch]

Odd. Why did they use bitmaps instead of 2da tables for this?

[10th]

In an integer number of attacks, only one left-handed attack is made per round.

Isn't that part of the rules? Dual-wielding nets you one bonus attack with your left hand. Therefore it stands to reason that Al is only used if # of attacks is > 2.

10th

[Ascension64]

The biggest quirk I have with the attack system is that the animations hack-n-slash more often that they actually do a statistical attack (roll to hit, etc.). I've managed to tweak the RNDBASE system so that the creatures will only make an attack animation when they actually roll to hit. Combat looks much more like standing around that way, but it plays out more appropriately.

Isn't that part of the rules? Dual-wielding nets you one bonus attack with your left hand. Therefore it stands to reason that Al is only used if # of attacks is > 2.

You are correct. For reference, this is the quote from the DnD2E Revised Handbook.

The use of two weapons enables the character to make one additional attack each combat round, with the second weapon. The character gains only one additional attack each round, regardless of the number of attacks he may normally be allowed. Thus, a warrior able to attack 3/2 (once in the first round and twice in the second) can attack 5/2 (twice in the first round and three times in the second).

However, this doesn't explain the fact that someone with 3/2 attacks (because of something that reduced the number of attacks per round of a dual-wielder with normally 2 attacks per round) will never attack with the offhand. In fact, according to the rules, the attacker would normally have 1/2 attacks with one hand, with the offhand adding an extra 1 attack (hence, 1 offhand attack in the first round, and then 1 offhand and 1 main hand attack in the second). Or, at least if you think that 3/2 means 3 attacks in 2 rounds, one of those attacks should be with the offhand.

The random 50% probability of attack system is probably the major flaw. It would be have been easy to make a toggle boolean value that will alternrate whether the extra attack is made or not.

Edited by Ascension64, 08 April 2012 - 03:38 PM.

[Salk]

I think you have a point, Ascension64 (by the way, welcome back!)

Is there anything that ToBEx can do about it?

[aVENGER]

I've managed to tweak the RNDBASE system so that the creatures will only make an attack animation when they actually roll to hit. Combat looks much more like standing around that way, but it plays out more appropriately.

Awesome!

I wanted a tweak like that since I first played BG all those years ago. The cosmetic attacks serve no purpose but to confuse the player.

[Ascension64]

Sure can. The question is what?
1. RNDBASE corrections - that requires no hacking, so a tweak mod can easily take this up.
2. 50% prob of 0.5 attack. This can be changed to use a toggle boolean instead. Needs hacking.
3. Dual-wield with 3/2 attacks. This can be changed so that one offhand attack is made every 2 rounds. Needs hacking.

[Sasha Al'Therin]

Sure can. The question is what?
1. RNDBASE corrections - that requires no hacking, so a tweak mod can easily take this up.
2. 50% prob of 0.5 attack. This can be changed to use a toggle boolean instead. Needs hacking.
3. Dual-wield with 3/2 attacks. This can be changed so that one offhand attack is made every 2 rounds. Needs hacking.

all three and let players choose

[phordicus]

#3. Hack away. There's already problems with randomization in effects & spells. I don't think luck should play any part in whether or not a bought-and-paid-for (half) attack is supposed to happen.

Edited by phordicus, 08 April 2012 - 09:56 PM.

[Galactygon]

I've managed to tweak the RNDBASE system so that the creatures will only make an attack animation when they actually roll to hit. Combat looks much more like standing around that way, but it plays out more appropriately.

Awesome!

I wanted a tweak like that since I first played BG all those years ago. The cosmetic attacks serve no purpose but to confuse the player.

Those many jabs serve a purpose: in PnP a combat round is meant to have several jabs, feints, and other combat moves in addition to one or more sincere attempts to hit the opponent.

-Galactygon

[aVENGER]

Those many jabs serve a purpose: in PnP a combat round is meant to have several jabs, feints, and other combat moves in addition to one or more sincere attempts to hit the opponent.

I know, but it looks silly in-game and feels confusing, at least to me.

A tweak to remove those cosmetic swings would be most welcome.

[Salk]

To me the cleanest solution looks like 1.

Second best, 3.

Surely not 2.

Edited by Salk, 09 April 2012 - 04:40 AM.

[Ascension64]

Those many jabs serve a purpose: in PnP a combat round is meant to have several jabs, feints, and other combat moves in addition to one or more sincere attempts to hit the opponent.

I know, but it looks silly in-game and feels confusing, at least to me.

A tweak to remove those cosmetic swings would be most welcome.

#1 would definitely be a tweak, and probably won't be part of TobEx (since any old munchkin can make changes to the RNDBASE files). I find the "feints and jabs" very confusing, especially when I don't display attack roles. Makes me feel my character is so bad that he/she can only hit one out of 6 or 7 times (or more).

[Sasha Al'Therin]

#1 would definitely be a tweak, and probably won't be part of TobEx (since any old munchkin can make changes to the RNDBASE files). I find the "feints and jabs" very confusing, especially when I don't display attack roles. Makes me feel my character is so bad that he/she can only hit one out of 6 or 7 times (or more).

yes, but the enemy is in the same boat too. as long as both sides behave the same and any adjustment is optional, doesn't really matter to me.

I do kinda find it odd when I SEE like 10 daggers thrown at me and the enemy only used 1 in actuality. Then again I think I'd feel even more odd with 'em just standing there waiting for that one swing they can take and do damage with..

[Ascension64]

Hence, cosmetic tweak...

[GeN1e]

I assume 2nd solution applies to both left and right hands, right? Go for it. We do have a d20 roll at the foundation of the DnD system to determine the success of an attack, fine with random determining whether it would launch at all.

I do kinda find it odd when I SEE like 10 daggers thrown at me and the enemy only used 1 in actuality.

I thought bonus swings only apply to melee headers? Because ranged attacks launch a projectile, and you can't just ignore it without additional coding to empty the PRO before sending it. Ingame observations show that too.

Edited by GeN1e, 10 April 2012 - 05:34 AM.

[Sasha Al'Therin]

re-read the thread GeN1e

There are actually TWO things being talked about

1) The off hand use
2) the animations between attacks

It's #2 that my post was talking about. Even ranged weapon users have 'fake attacks' just to make it look like they are fighting.
If #1 can be adjusted separately from #2 that would be great.

[GeN1e]

I've read and understood it fairly well

Even ranged weapon users have 'fake attacks' just to make it look like they are fighting.

And unless A64 proves me wrong, I'm saying it isn't true. Haven't you ever seen an archer to release a volley of arrows, then stand idle for the rest of the round?

In fact, years ago I was wondering why ranged attacks always hit, while melee ones miss half the time. Turned out to be due to fake melee swings.

Edited by GeN1e, 10 April 2012 - 10:17 AM.

[Sasha Al'Therin]

I mentioned THROWING DAGGERS specifically. Been testing a mod for Miloch and the creatures have throwing daggers. They're given a set of 10 throwing daggers. If I approach them and let them throw 'ten daggers' at me before killing them, when I loot their remains they typically have on average 8 daggers remaining.

A64 can delve further into it and determine which weapons are actually affected, if he so chooses. Could be all but launchers...

[Ascension64]

Launching ammo are all true attacks. Not sure about throwing daggers or things like throwing maces/axes that masquerade themselves as ranged weapons. I think the difference is that ammo needs a launcher, whereas throwing Xers are the ammo and the launchers themselves.