Because there is a Confirmation Bias that has been observed by devs, which is why there are games like XCOM 2 that deliberately lie to the players about Hit% on all Difficulties except Legend because they know players get b***hy about their "TOTALLY SURE 60% SHOT" misses (and conversely get super satisfied when their 2% shot hits). Basically what said.
>which is why there are games like XCOM 2 that deliberately lie to the players about Hit% on all Difficulties except Legend because they know players get b***hy about their "TOTALLY SURE 60% SHOT" misses (and conversely get super satisfied when their 2% shot hits).
Almost every game with percentage-based accuracy fudges the results like this. Pokémon is a rare exception.
Usually they generate two numbers from 1-100 and average them, causing the results to follow a bell curve rather than a straight line - i.e. 50% is still 50%, but 1% is actually 0.01%.
Some games go even further and include hidden mercy mechanisms where they secretly increase your accuracy each time you miss.
>Usually they generate two numbers from 1-100 and average them, causing the results to follow a bell curve rather than a straight line - i.e. 50% is still 50%, but 1% is actually 0.01%.
why not just generate one random number and go with that though?
the human brain is bad at probabilities, especially when there is a lot of independent rolls, meaning that a game with "true probabilities" feels very punishing and frustrating for players
Humans are extremely, biologically, bad at understanding probability. Our pattern seeking brains just don't play nice with it at all.
80% is 80%, meaning it will fail around 1/5th of the time, maybe more maybe less, (if it failed 2/5 times would start to feel like 50/50, but that's a very real possibility), but for some reason we see 80% as 95% in our brains.
Some games like XCOM and Fire emblem literally lie to the player about their hit odds to make the value shown match what the we think the probabilities mean.
There are also games which don't use a direct RNG, but rather draw numbers from a deck and reset when the deck is empty. This to prevent the long winning or losing streaks that can happen with real RNG.
>There are also games which don't use a direct RNG, but rather draw numbers from a deck and reset when the deck is empty. This to prevent the long winning or losing streaks that can happen with real RNG.
Isn't that literally how SV worked if you never bothered to patch it after release by staying offline?
i don't think it was that, i think it was that every battle used the same seed for RNG checks, meaning doing the same battle twice would have the same results basically - for example if sheer cold missed turn 1 and 2 but hit turn 3, then that'd hold true for every battle (or something along those lines)
i don't think it was that, i think it was that every battle used the same seed for RNG checks, meaning doing the same battle twice would have the same results basically - for example if sheer cold missed turn 1 and 2 but hit turn 3, then that'd hold true for every battle (or something along those lines)
SV used to initialize online battles with the same seed every time.
I don't think it applied in-game.
If clicking an 80% move is the best possible choice and clicking anything else makes you lose, then you have in theory already won. If you roll the remaining 20%, then the loss doesn't count in spirit because objectively you should have won and your opponent only won through luck rather than skill.
"Unfowtunate" doesn't begin to descwibe my sewies, this game wewawds bwind wuck and nothing ewse, I am beyond convinced at this point. Aftew getting compwetewy toowed by scheduwing with my opponent changing times on me wast minute and wefusing to pwovide confiwmation pwiow to the day of the match as to pway times, wosing this way somehow fewt even wowse than I had thought possibwe. My pwepawation was supewiow, my pway was supewiow, and I wost, so I don't see a weason to continue engaging in an activity whewe what is within my contwow is ovewwhewmingwy outweighed by what is not. I am done with competitive Pokemon, and you won't get a fond faweweww. This community is infected to its woots with a degenewative disease that gwows stwongew ovew time but stops showt of kiwwing its host. Touwnaments used to have a competitive spiwit at theiw heawt, this has been twanspwanted and wepwaced with an awtificiaw owgan that feeds on vitwiow and mockewy fwom insecuwe wittwe boys that heckwe by the sidewines and teaw each othew to shweds ovew scwaps of attention. The enviwonment we fostewed has twapped us aww wike this in a vicious cycwe, and escaping it wequiwes acceptance of the hawshest weawity we aww scwambwe to expwain away, that none of the countwess stwaining effowts we put ouwsewves thwough hewe wiww evew amount to one singwe shining gwimmew of significance. I wouwd make this the end, but Wowwd Cup is stiww ongoing, and I wouwd nevew weave so many gweat fwiends out to dwy, so I'ww suffew thwough a few mowe games fow them. One wast thing befowe I weave you aww to weact with disdain, widicuwe, and sewf-wighteous fewvow, befowe you do evewything in youw powew to minimize my wowds and thoughts, box them up and shove them to some cobwebbed cownew of youw memowy, and hope they disappeaw fowevew as a stain on youw finite time gwound to dust. Fwom this moment on, nothing you say mattews to me. The fouwest insuwts you huww with intent to wound wiww cawmwy settwe at
The differences between Temtem and Pokemon's battle systems go something along the lines of... >Powerful moves have a Hold stat, your Temtem has to have been on the field for at least that many turns before they can use a move that has a Hold. >Instead of each move individually having its own PP, your Temtem has a Stamina stat and each move deducts a certain amount of Stamina. >If your Temtem can't pay the full Stamina cost of its move, it can still use the move, at the cost of its own HP
Stamina sounds interesting, but I think PP is a better fit for a single-player RPG, even if recent Pokemon games have made healing so abundant that only 5 PP moves ever get exhausted.
Hold sounds a bit shit tbh, like a cooldown but moronic
Reading further into the wiki, they also made it so that you can see the priority of your move before you select it, but priority here is a multiplier to your Tem's speed stat rather than "this move always goes first", although the highest priority bracket DOES take precedence over switching out.
Also, since Temtem is based around double battles, some moves have Synergy, where they have an additional effect if the other Tem on your side is a certain type.
There are also more status conditions that a Tem can have, and they can be positive, negative or neutral. There's only one neutral status condition and that's "Nullified", which removes type matchups from your Tem.
So Pokémon is Yu-Gi-Oh and Temtem is Magic the Gathering?
Back to back Draco Meteors are still stronger than using back to back 85 BP moves. Triple back-to-back-to-back Draco Meteors has the same damage output as doing three 80 BP moves in a row.
At +2? Sure
Unboosted? not at all, draco meteor's sin is that its above 120 bp, in practice your third draco meteor won't have much impact in the opponent's team much less against a proper team, having to boost yourself to use DM a third time reliably seems like a good drawback to me, which is ironically not practical either and maybe you will be using it only 2 times.
Dropping speed, negative priority, inflicting status on the user are better drawbacks for 120 bp moves than giving your opponent a free turn, these three examples can have team and mon setups that can diminish the impact of such drawbacks too. The result of missing a 120/70 is much worse than just using an hyper beam.
>At +2? Sure
No, neutral. Draco Meteor, stat drop, Draco Meteor again does more damage than Dragon Pulse twice in a row unless you roll the lowest damage range on both Meteors and the highest range on both Pulses. Any other time you're looking at 13.5-15.9% extra damage from double Meteor.
because it either misses or it doesn't
Because you remember the misses more than the hits, especially when they lose matches.
Because there is a Confirmation Bias that has been observed by devs, which is why there are games like XCOM 2 that deliberately lie to the players about Hit% on all Difficulties except Legend because they know players get b***hy about their "TOTALLY SURE 60% SHOT" misses (and conversely get super satisfied when their 2% shot hits). Basically what said.
>which is why there are games like XCOM 2 that deliberately lie to the players about Hit% on all Difficulties except Legend because they know players get b***hy about their "TOTALLY SURE 60% SHOT" misses (and conversely get super satisfied when their 2% shot hits).
Almost every game with percentage-based accuracy fudges the results like this. Pokémon is a rare exception.
Usually they generate two numbers from 1-100 and average them, causing the results to follow a bell curve rather than a straight line - i.e. 50% is still 50%, but 1% is actually 0.01%.
Some games go even further and include hidden mercy mechanisms where they secretly increase your accuracy each time you miss.
>Usually they generate two numbers from 1-100 and average them, causing the results to follow a bell curve rather than a straight line - i.e. 50% is still 50%, but 1% is actually 0.01%.
why not just generate one random number and go with that though?
the human brain is bad at probabilities, especially when there is a lot of independent rolls, meaning that a game with "true probabilities" feels very punishing and frustrating for players
confirmation bias.
Because RNG is RNG and you remember the times you miss and lose more than you hit and win.
Humans are extremely, biologically, bad at understanding probability. Our pattern seeking brains just don't play nice with it at all.
80% is 80%, meaning it will fail around 1/5th of the time, maybe more maybe less, (if it failed 2/5 times would start to feel like 50/50, but that's a very real possibility), but for some reason we see 80% as 95% in our brains.
Some games like XCOM and Fire emblem literally lie to the player about their hit odds to make the value shown match what the we think the probabilities mean.
There are also games which don't use a direct RNG, but rather draw numbers from a deck and reset when the deck is empty. This to prevent the long winning or losing streaks that can happen with real RNG.
>There are also games which don't use a direct RNG, but rather draw numbers from a deck and reset when the deck is empty. This to prevent the long winning or losing streaks that can happen with real RNG.
Isn't that literally how SV worked if you never bothered to patch it after release by staying offline?
i don't think it was that, i think it was that every battle used the same seed for RNG checks, meaning doing the same battle twice would have the same results basically - for example if sheer cold missed turn 1 and 2 but hit turn 3, then that'd hold true for every battle (or something along those lines)
SV used to initialize online battles with the same seed every time.
I don't think it applied in-game.
If clicking an 80% move is the best possible choice and clicking anything else makes you lose, then you have in theory already won. If you roll the remaining 20%, then the loss doesn't count in spirit because objectively you should have won and your opponent only won through luck rather than skill.
"Unfowtunate" doesn't begin to descwibe my sewies, this game wewawds bwind wuck and nothing ewse, I am beyond convinced at this point. Aftew getting compwetewy toowed by scheduwing with my opponent changing times on me wast minute and wefusing to pwovide confiwmation pwiow to the day of the match as to pway times, wosing this way somehow fewt even wowse than I had thought possibwe. My pwepawation was supewiow, my pway was supewiow, and I wost, so I don't see a weason to continue engaging in an activity whewe what is within my contwow is ovewwhewmingwy outweighed by what is not. I am done with competitive Pokemon, and you won't get a fond faweweww. This community is infected to its woots with a degenewative disease that gwows stwongew ovew time but stops showt of kiwwing its host. Touwnaments used to have a competitive spiwit at theiw heawt, this has been twanspwanted and wepwaced with an awtificiaw owgan that feeds on vitwiow and mockewy fwom insecuwe wittwe boys that heckwe by the sidewines and teaw each othew to shweds ovew scwaps of attention. The enviwonment we fostewed has twapped us aww wike this in a vicious cycwe, and escaping it wequiwes acceptance of the hawshest weawity we aww scwambwe to expwain away, that none of the countwess stwaining effowts we put ouwsewves thwough hewe wiww evew amount to one singwe shining gwimmew of significance. I wouwd make this the end, but Wowwd Cup is stiww ongoing, and I wouwd nevew weave so many gweat fwiends out to dwy, so I'ww suffew thwough a few mowe games fow them. One wast thing befowe I weave you aww to weact with disdain, widicuwe, and sewf-wighteous fewvow, befowe you do evewything in youw powew to minimize my wowds and thoughts, box them up and shove them to some cobwebbed cownew of youw memowy, and hope they disappeaw fowevew as a stain on youw finite time gwound to dust. Fwom this moment on, nothing you say mattews to me. The fouwest insuwts you huww with intent to wound wiww cawmwy settwe at
Accuracy is such a shit mechanic, if all these moves had drawbacks instead they would contribute to the game's depth.
Right because that wotked so well for temtem.
Accuracy is good because systems like yours lead to low variance and promotes solved systems.
And you think pokemon isn't solved? lol avoiding or gambling with low accuracy moves is not depth
All I actually know about Temtem is that it has utterly soulless monster designs and is an MMO.
What's wrong with the battle system?
Coping with RNG is a skill.
The differences between Temtem and Pokemon's battle systems go something along the lines of...
>Powerful moves have a Hold stat, your Temtem has to have been on the field for at least that many turns before they can use a move that has a Hold.
>Instead of each move individually having its own PP, your Temtem has a Stamina stat and each move deducts a certain amount of Stamina.
>If your Temtem can't pay the full Stamina cost of its move, it can still use the move, at the cost of its own HP
That's all I know from reading the wiki at least
Stamina sounds interesting, but I think PP is a better fit for a single-player RPG, even if recent Pokemon games have made healing so abundant that only 5 PP moves ever get exhausted.
Hold sounds a bit shit tbh, like a cooldown but moronic
Reading further into the wiki, they also made it so that you can see the priority of your move before you select it, but priority here is a multiplier to your Tem's speed stat rather than "this move always goes first", although the highest priority bracket DOES take precedence over switching out.
Also, since Temtem is based around double battles, some moves have Synergy, where they have an additional effect if the other Tem on your side is a certain type.
There are also more status conditions that a Tem can have, and they can be positive, negative or neutral. There's only one neutral status condition and that's "Nullified", which removes type matchups from your Tem.
I guess you could call it that, yeah
So Pokémon is Yu-Gi-Oh and Temtem is Magic the Gathering?
What drawbacks would you suggest? I don't consider Close Combats or Draco Meteors to be true drawbacks.
I get it for close combat but why not for draco meteor?
Back to back Draco Meteors are still stronger than using back to back 85 BP moves. Triple back-to-back-to-back Draco Meteors has the same damage output as doing three 80 BP moves in a row.
At +2? Sure
Unboosted? not at all, draco meteor's sin is that its above 120 bp, in practice your third draco meteor won't have much impact in the opponent's team much less against a proper team, having to boost yourself to use DM a third time reliably seems like a good drawback to me, which is ironically not practical either and maybe you will be using it only 2 times.
Dropping speed, negative priority, inflicting status on the user are better drawbacks for 120 bp moves than giving your opponent a free turn, these three examples can have team and mon setups that can diminish the impact of such drawbacks too. The result of missing a 120/70 is much worse than just using an hyper beam.
To add to this focus punch is a well balanced high bp move
>At +2? Sure
No, neutral. Draco Meteor, stat drop, Draco Meteor again does more damage than Dragon Pulse twice in a row unless you roll the lowest damage range on both Meteors and the highest range on both Pulses. Any other time you're looking at 13.5-15.9% extra damage from double Meteor.
the true play is to use focus energy + scope lens for guaranteed crits that ignore the damage drops
>Pokemon is changed to use an Armor Class system like in D&D
What changes?
Humans percieve bad things as more bad than good things are good, even if both things are the same worth.
Murphy's Law
If something has the slightest chance to go wrong, then it will