04-18-2018, 07:27 AM | #11 | ||
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
I know, feint results are not fully intuitive.
Quote:
Quote:
Five or more difference in attackers favor comes about 14.5% of the time and when starting really high defensive values even smaller reductions help a lot and on average a feint will give you 1.68 benefit. But at defense 13 or higher at equal skill feinter will be better off. At defense 14 he will get through defenses on average of about 13.7% vs the straight attacker 11.1%, so is about 1.24 times as likely to hit. At 13 the numbers are closer at about 18% for feinter and 16.2% for straight attacker so is about 1.11 times as likely to hit. I put up a copy of the sheet in https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing. It is not the clearest(did not polish it for publishing) but the "% at least this much" on the right side is how often you will get at least success by that many more than the defender on feint and the defense scenarios fro defense 14 and 13 are below on left. The numbers are also approximate as the dice probabilities are rounded to 2 digits after decimal point. Last edited by weby; 04-18-2018 at 07:32 AM. |
||
04-18-2018, 08:10 AM | #12 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY, USA. Near the river Styx in the 5th Circle.
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
No, they're not. But, basically, if you are equally skilled you have the breakdown is roughly 45%/45%/10% - 45% of the time you will succeed with a MoS of 1+, 45% the defender will succeed with a MoS of 1+, and 10% of the time there will be a tie. Any time the defender wins or there's a tie the feint was a failure, so really it's just 45% in the attackers favor. And, obviously, the 45% is split between MoS 1, 2, 3, etc....
These odds change dramatically if the attacker has higher skill than the defender; if the Attacker has skill one higher than the defender the split is 55%/36%/9%, if he has skill two higher it's 64%/28%/8%. This means that feinting really works best if you have a higher skill than the opponent, even a margin of only one higher makes a big difference. However, the one advantage that feinting does have is that you normally know whether or not the feint was a decent success, meaning you can wait until you have a reasonably high MoS before you strike. Quote:
As an aside, another interesting tidbit I found regarding Deceptive Attacks is that it is almost never advantageous to take an attack penalty that reduces the attackers skill skill below 12. This is because the bell curve is so steep from 12-11-10-9 that any margin by which the attacker is reducing their skill almost certainly is worse for for the attacker than the margin by which they are reducing their opponent's defenses. So take a penalty that reduces your skill to 13 or 12, but not any lower than that. I'll also add, as others have said, that the problem here is one of tactics. If the defender is constantly All Out Defending then he's not even trying to win the fight; change the attack tactics to something that will change the results dramatically such as a shield bash. If he is constantly retreating then make him retreat into a corner or rough terrain or a fire pit or into one of your companions. Or back off from him far enough that he has to do a Move and Attack just to try to get to you... then taunt him for being a coward. Or take an All Out Attack (Determined) for the +4 to hit, and use that +4 to Deceptive Attack to give him -2 defenses. Change it up and do something different.
__________________
Eric B. Smith GURPS Data File Coordinator GURPSLand I shall pull the pin from this healing grenade and... Kaboom-baya. Last edited by ericbsmith; 04-18-2018 at 08:35 AM. |
|
04-18-2018, 09:40 AM | #13 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
Quote:
Quote:
OK I'll be honest I'm really not seeing how you get your figures for 5+ @ 14.5% Have you added up the individual chances of each combination of one winning by 5, so 'attacker rolls 3, defender rolls 8' + 'attacker rolls 4, defender rolls 9'.... etc, etc? I'm not sure that right, because half those outcomes will be the defender wining by 5? I.e your probability table is the total of all possible combinations of the QS, but the results don't distinguish between who get's what score. So the average difference may well be 1.68 MoS between the two sides in the QS, but that's not the same as saying the fienter wins by an average of 1.68 MoS over the defender. I'm just not seeing how two equal skill QS and net MoS can have net benefit for one over the other. Which your figure of 1.68 suggests. As in all instances the defender is just as likely to get the same range of MoS as the attacker. And while the net MoS position can't improved the defenders result, it does effect the attackers. (am i just going mad here, it's been a long day ;-), I could well be wrong!) EDIT, yes, yes I am ignore the above, I see what you've done you have only counted half the results so only the attacker getting net 5+ MOS sorry! EDIT, EDIT, I still think I'm right about the 1.68 thing though, I just can't see how one side can be net favoured here! gahh I'm having a stats senior moment, but is it that in terms of overall likelihood of end result all these chances of the feinter getting 5+ MoS (or any MoS) get countered by the same number of chances of the defender getting 5+ MoS (or any MoS) Anyway a couple of points, At higher defences small reductions aren't actually that effective. Because the chances of successfully defending don't drop as much as they do closer to the midline of the distribution. e.g 16 dropping to 15: 16 or less is 98.15%, 15 or less is 95.37% that is a 2.78% drop in successful defence chance.* 11 dropping to 10: 11 or less is 62.5%, 10 or less is 50%, that is 12.5% drop in successful defence chance Then there's the point that while you might see an individual increase in success per attack which is preceded by a feint, you have half the number fo attacks to add this benefit to *the trick here is although your comparative chances of getting past their defence more than doubles (from 1.82% up to 4.27%) you still have very little chance of actually getting through. Look at 11 dropped to 10, your chance of getting through goes from 37.5% to 50% which is only a 33% proportional increase, but in terms of overall increases in chance of it happening it's a way bigger change. Last edited by Tomsdad; 04-18-2018 at 10:22 AM. |
||
04-18-2018, 10:16 AM | #14 |
GURPS Line Editor
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montréal, Québec
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
Comparing editions, you shouldn't see that big a difference.
In Third Edition, Parry was (skill/2) and low-tech fighters could add up to +4 for armor PD and up to another +4 for shield PD. Thus, active defenses were (skill/2) at +0 to +8, or (skill/2)+4 on average, which reflected the typical skirmisher with a PD 2 small shield and PD 2 leather armor. In Fourth Edition, Parry is (skill/2)+3 and low-tech fighters can add up to +3 for shield DB. Thus, active defenses are (skill/2) at +3 to +6, or (skill/2)+4.5 on average. Not really a big difference. That fighter with a small shield would get DB 1 and have the same (skill/2)+4. Either edition allows a single retreat. This gave +3 to all parries in Third Edition. It gives only +1 in most cases in Fourth Edition, save for a subclass of parries that Third Edition would call "fencing parries" . . . those still get +3. But in Third Edition, those parries were at 2/3 skill and not 1/2 skill, so at skill 14, they'd start at 9 instead of 7, and be at an effective +2 anyway. No real change. Fourth Edition does allow a fighter to use All-Out Defense to get an extra +2. That's new. But it also means that fighter isn't attacking. And Fourth Edition introduces Deceptive Attack, which effectively means that someone with skill 14 could still attack at 12 or 10 to give -1 or -2 to defend, canceling out the bonus. All told, the two editions are fairly evenly matched. At the high end, Third Edition actually makes it much easier to defend, as you can have a low-tech fighter with total PD 8 retreating for +3 and effectively rolling (skill/2)+11, while in Fourth Edition that's DB 3 and retreating at +1, for (skill/2)+7, or +9 with All-Out Defense. I think the key difference to note is Deceptive Attack, which in my experience results in more hits in Fourth Edition.
__________________
Sean "Dr. Kromm" Punch <kromm@sjgames.com> GURPS Line Editor, Steve Jackson Games My DreamWidth [Just GURPS News] |
04-18-2018, 10:38 AM | #15 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY, USA. Near the river Styx in the 5th Circle.
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
Quote:
[1]Down to attack Skill-12. Below 12 it depends on how high the Active Defenses are.
__________________
Eric B. Smith GURPS Data File Coordinator GURPSLand I shall pull the pin from this healing grenade and... Kaboom-baya. Last edited by ericbsmith; 04-18-2018 at 10:41 AM. |
|
04-18-2018, 10:51 AM | #16 | |||||||
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Total hit probability 34.14% hit probabilit/round 17.07% and the 1.85% critical chance is there as: attacker crits 0.93% thus getting the total/ round of: total hit probability/round 18.00% Whereas on the strike the things would obviously be 34.14%+1.85%=37.99%. |
|||||||
04-18-2018, 10:57 AM | #17 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
Quite a lot more. Third edition at high skill levels usually turned into fishing for criticals because that was the only way you ever hit anything.
|
04-18-2018, 11:12 AM | #18 |
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Behind You
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
Feints compounded on Deceptive Attack are deadly. It's rare to see defenses hold for very long in play.
Feints have the advantage of success giving you a rough idea of how badly your enemy messed up. When you add this to deceptive attacks and hit locations a successful feint is usually doom for the defender. Vital Hits and attacks of these nature almost always follow feints in our game as enemies struggle to get a critical roll on any defense necessary to stop incoming attacks. We also started playing with an optional roll to trade skill for damage in one game because we'd end up with some feints and enemies having no defense and high DR or mitigations. Rapid strikes don't always cut it so we just decided it's probably believable someone can telegraph for power or take a wild swing with all their might.
__________________
RPG Jutsu.com - Ninjas Play GURPS |
04-18-2018, 11:40 AM | #19 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
It's actually somewhat rare for feints to be useful. The main use is when you want a called shot against someone with significantly lower skill than you, otherwise two attacks is usually better than one feint and one attack.
|
04-18-2018, 12:51 PM | #20 | |||||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: High defenses in 4th edition
Quote:
This is why neither side is favoured in terms of probability of net result here (although ties go to the defender). Because if the skill levels are the same there is an exact same probability of MoS for each. In terms of probable net outcome they cancel each other out. The attacker has to get more MoS than the defender, now there is a chance of that happening (ie combinations of results as you table shows) but there are an equal frequency of the opposite combinations occurring. And because the skills are equal and thus chances of MoS are equal those frequencies are equal. I think you are hung up on there being no equal and opposite effect in terms of an end result in regards to penalties inflicted on a failed attacker. I.e the attacker winning by net 3 MoS and the defender winning by Net 3 MoS are not the same in terms of who get's what penalty. But that doesn't matter it's that each one has the same frequency or distribution of MoS that matters, because it's the net margin of victory of both of their roles that determines the effect of the feint. Quote:
Quote:
Because it's the net MoS of both that gives the final result, not just the attackers MoS. So say the attacker gets 5 MoS on their roll, and the defender gets 4 MoS on their roll, end result isn't a -5 feint, but a -1 feint. If the Defender got 5 MoS the feint would be negated. Now if the Defender got 6+ at that point there's no further positive benefit, but there doesn't need to be one because the feint has already reached it's maximum failure state. I.e it can't get any less good than no effect and a wasted action. If you and your foe both succeed, but you succeed by more, subtract your margin of victory from the foe’s defense. For instance, if your skill is 15 and you roll a 10 (success by 5), and your foe’s skill is 14 and he rolls 12 (success by 2), you win by 3, so he will defend at -3 if your next maneuver is to attack him Campaigns pg365 Quote:
In terms of reducing the chance of successful defence by penalising by 1 yes, but the effect of the DA is different than the Feint because it doesn't have the QS that evens the effect out. And unless you have really high defences most defence scores are grouped closer to the bell curve peak, and generally speaking most attacking scores are higher than them so you tend to get more 'bang for your buck' trading 2 off you attack for 1 of your target's defence. But yes the closer your target's defence score is to your attack score the less benefit you see from DA's (unless you are over 17 on the attack in which case it's a free penalty even if it's not a big one) Quote:
even leaving aside the effects of multiple chances, you have two chances of critical hit and that chance is likely static for each event. Either-way in terms of comparing it to two attacks it really depends on how much you increase your chances of getting through with a feint. That depends on where the defence scores are on the bell curve and the chances of net MoS on the feint. That's before we get into questions of what happens if person A hits person B and inflicts a shock penalty after person B feints but before that feint is capitalised on (what you gain in penalising the opponent's defence you might well lose in penalised attacks, and that's leaving aside the other issues of being hit!) Last edited by Tomsdad; 04-19-2018 at 12:11 AM. |
|||||
|
|