It’s probably just a result of your sample size. Personally I find that hard to believe, but it's possible.īrocktree, I doubt that any randomness you're seeing is because of a reduction in Quick Action's overall effectiveness. While there are many skills where we KNOW he has given up lookup tables, I guess it is possible they were preserved for something like QA. Weapon skills, for example, would go up by 10-20% for the first few points, then 5% for a bit, then slowly decrease down to tiny percentage increases as you neared 20. One possibility: in Exile, Jeff used lookup tables rather than formulas for most skills. The point about observing the same thing for ME and LB is interesting. That suggests that either (1) something else affects QA efficacy as well, (2) QA results include a large random factor, or both. These results are striking since they are not close to yours at all and they are both higher. They were similarly sized (30 successful attacks each) and I got results of 37% for 10 QA and 60% for 20 QA. To prove the point about testing numbers, I posted some QA tests for A6 a long time ago. The next question is: How would I confirm or refute this hypothesis? I know that my hypothesis is a bit 'out there', but it's the only one which really fits with my observations. The benefit you receive from each point has effectively *reset* to a lower value upon reaching the X point threshold. However, once you hit X points of quick action, the benefit for each point you have invested drops to 2.5%. Up until somewhere between 6 and 10 (let's call this point X) points of quick action, each point you have invested grants you roughly a 5% chance to double strike. What am I trying to say? I'll put it simply: I've noticed the exact same phenomenon in the past for magical efficiency and lethal blow! 5 points gives you a better cumulative benefit than 10 points, but 20 points grants you a better cumulative benefit than 10 points. Perhaps a sample size of 37 isn't enough, and I'll be damned if I'm going to repeat the test 100 times. Now, I would usually brush off the drop at 10 points as a statistical aberration. 10 points in quick action invested should give you: (5%*5) + (2.5% * 5) = 37.5% Even if you received diminishing returns after investing 5 point, you should *still* have a greater chance to double strike at 10 points than at 5 points.įor example, let's assume quick action grants you 5% to hit for every point invested up to 5, and then every second point invested up to 10. However, the traditional explanation doesn't fly. Clearly quick action gives diminishing returns. Quick action is clearly *not* capped, as a 20 point investment grants you a greater chance to double strike than a 5, 10, and 15 point investment. No further bonus is obtained after investing more than the capped skill level. For example, adding 1 to melee always gives you +5% to hit, and +1 die damage -Ĭlearly there is a decline in the benefits you receive from quick action after investing somewhere between 6 and 10 points.Ģ. A flat, constant bonus for each point added. My testing does not gel with any of the above three explanations.ġ. Note the precipitous drop in your chance to double strike when you invest 10 skill points. QA 20 = Hit 44% of the time (2.2% per skill point) QA 15 = Hit 38% of the time (2.5% per skill point) QA 10 = Hit 22% of the time (2.2% per skill point) QA 5 = Hit 30% of the time (6% per skill point) I invested 5, 10, 15 and 20 points of quick action in the same character, and attacked an enemy 37 times on each skill level. After 10, each *two* points grants you a +5% to double strike. For example, each point invested up to 10 grants you a +5% bonus to double strike. No further bonus is obtained after investing more than the capped skill level.ģ. For example, adding 1 to melee always gives you +5% to hit, and +1 die damage.Ģ. The three most common explanations for the way skills work is either:ġ. +4% chance of double strike on all melee/pole attacks (10-cap) For quick action, he had deduced the following: I was reading through the effects of some skills in Avernum 6 that Slarty had posted.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |