ranged to-hit is borked

[Cyr]

We'll look into this. It's not entirely clear what's going on. I personally saw myself hitting with a crossbow when rolling a 2 sometimes in the past 24 hours (with live characters).

We did change grazing hits to happen on any roll of 2+ when you would normally miss, both for melee and ranged combat.

In live-fire situations, there may be penalties to enemies that make you hit with a roll you missed on previously (Sunder, etc.), or possibly other effects (Precision). Regardless, the combat formula should essentially be the same for both melee and ranged, so if that's not true or if the combat log feedback isn't reflecting that properly, there may be a bug there.

It is horribly messed up atm.

It is very clear that melee and ranged are not going by the same rules atm.

[Isolani]

Its very, very broken at the moment. Unless Ranged Combat has lost its Attack Sequences, there's also something wrong there. My Combat Log and Dice will sit showing me +55 Attack Modifier for every attack I make, and against 'high' AC Mobs I'll graze on anything 2 - 8. I've been testing this in Level 20 Buying Time on Devashta, and a 63 should be more than enough to hit her unless her AC against Ranged Attack has been upped hugely, because I can hit her with my Scimitars no issue with a lower Attack Bonus.

I can provide screen shots and all that, though I haven't bug reported this in game because, well, you know... And if you don't, see the links in my signature.

Yeah, whatever is going on doesn't impact melee it seems. My gimpy rogue hardly ever misses in melee even when I'm not sneak attacking, and my ranged character with about +12 to hit more than the rogue grazes all the time instead of hits.

[Shade]

Wow..

I posted this in beta several times.

Can't believe it's still not figured out. It's not that hard to test.

The NEW combat system was implemented for ranged. (Lots of "grazes" on 2-9 versus high AC monsters, as intended)

It is NOT implemented for melee.
(No grazing hits below rolls of 10, hard MISS on a 2-9, hit more often then ranged)

Simple as that.

IMO the solution to this is to disable it for ranged too. No one asked "could we please miss nearly everything on a roll of 2-4 even on our high to hit character"? They asked for a new AC system for players. It doesn't need to apply to monsters.

The new system will ensure even the best to hit chars will only graze on a 2-4 versus certain high AC monsters. Thats not fun.

[BananaHat]

The NEW combat system was implemented for ranged. (Lots of "grazes" on 2-9 versus high AC monsters, as intended)

It is NOT implemented for melee.
(No grazing hits below rolls of 10, hard MISS on a 2-9, hit more often then ranged)

Simple as that.

See, that is odd. I tested the new system with my wizard (for the low to-hit) swinging a club and a non-proficient kukri during the beta against my wife in a PvP arena (not the tavern pits). Both seemed to work just fine then and match up with the formula that was provided.

% = [(10.5 + Attack Roll)/Target AC] + 25% when proficient

I don't recall my exact attack roll numbers or my wife's AC, but I definitely remember testing it because I thought the system was producing too many grazes in quests on another character. I was checking the system because on the in-quest character, the enemies would have had to have an AC of about 120 to get grazes where I did on the d20. Something is definitely screwy.

I wonder if the new system (or only parts of it) is only applied in the PvP arena. From my testing of the Exhalted Angel ability Astral Vibrance, it only seems to work properly in the PvP arena (just submitted the bug report for that one).

[apep1412]

The NEW combat system was implemented for ranged. (Lots of "grazes" on 2-9 versus high AC monsters, as intended)

It is NOT implemented for melee.
(No grazing hits below rolls of 10, hard MISS on a 2-9, hit more often then ranged)

Simple as that.

Nope.
If that were the case, the monster in the initial post would have both more than 56 AC (from ranged combat, assuming proficiency, under the new system) and less than or equal to 41 AC (from melee, under the old system).

At the very least, the new combat system is not completely implemented for ranged.

% = [(10.5 + Attack Roll)/(Target AC*2)] + 25% when proficient

One missed part in the formula.

[Isolani]

Wow..

I posted this in beta several times.

Can't believe it's still not figured out. It's not that hard to test.

The NEW combat system was implemented for ranged. (Lots of "grazes" on 2-9 versus high AC monsters, as intended)

It is NOT implemented for melee.
(No grazing hits below rolls of 10, hard MISS on a 2-9, hit more often then ranged)

Simple as that.

IMO the solution to this is to disable it for ranged too. No one asked "could we please miss nearly everything on a roll of 2-4 even on our high to hit character"? They asked for a new AC system for players. It doesn't need to apply to monsters.

The new system will ensure even the best to hit chars will only graze on a 2-4 versus certain high AC monsters. Thats not fun.

I dunno, I get grazes even on low AC mobs like trash wizard mobs on normal in heroic quests. Anything less than 5 or 6 (yes, I know it's some convoluted % roll now, but if the d20 shown is a low number you graze) seems to graze no matter what the mobs AC might be. I used to hit those mobs 95% of the time. What's fun about a combat system where I either miss or graze 30+% of the time when I used to miss them 5% of the time?

[apep1412]

I dunno, I get grazes even on low AC mobs like trash wizard mobs on normal in heroic quests. Anything less than 5 or 6 (yes, I know it's some convoluted % roll now, but if the d20 shown is a low number you graze) seems to graze no matter what the mobs AC might be. I used to hit those mobs 95% of the time. What's fun about a combat system where I either miss or graze 30+% of the time when I used to miss them 5% of the time?

Odd.

20 AC vs. 18 to-hit => 95% to hit (raw number around 96%)
30 AC vs. 28 to-hit => 90% to hit (raw: ~89%)
40 AC vs. 38 to-hit => 85% to hit (raw: ~85.6%)
50 AC vs. 48 to-hit => 85% to-hit (raw: 83.5%)
60 AC vs. 58 to-hit => 80% to-hit (raw: ~82%)
70 AC vs. 68 to-hit => 80% to-hit (raw: ~81%)

You should be seeing hits on a 4 on any mob with less than 57 AC, assuming you were hitting on a 2 before and their AC hasn't changed.

Looking at the attack sequence, even the 70AC vs. 68 to-hit gets bumped up to 85% on the third attack and 90% on the 4th attack.

Iirc, some 'trash casters' have more AC than the melee around them.

[krackythehoodedone]

Grazing hits with me seem to come and go at random

I hit everything that I know of on a 2 so its a bit strange especially when you hit something then seconds later get a grazing hit on a better roll

[mikesharpshooter]

now lvl 18, had a lot or this hit in meridia slayer..........never seen this before.
and what about the new sub feat (precise shot)? quite useless for an acher (maybe can use on few boss when not multishot)
so i stop play ddo from last update
i will be back when:
archery will not loose hit (not miss-grazing.......arrow disappear after shot)
lateral moving target will be hit
bow will do some damage (not half damage of meele in double the time) (caster do not even compare)

[apep1412]

Grazing hits with me seem to come and go at random

I hit everything that I know of on a 2 so its a bit strange especially when you hit something then seconds later get a grazing hit on a better roll

That depends what you mean by 'better roll'. The d20 and your attack bonus don't get added, like they used to. Your attack bonus determines a chance to hit and your roll determines if you hit, based on that chance.

In some cases, a +5 to hit, from your attack sequence, or a -4 to hit, from moving, will apply a +/- 5% chance to hit. So, if you hit in the final attack in your chain on a 2, you may graze on your first attack, directly after that, on a 3.

In the old system, this difference would have been more apparent in its extreme case, where the first attack may miss half the time and the last attack would hit on a 2. The difference was that before, it was a miss instead of a graze.

[crypto177]

I am a tempest ranger (3rd life), with a high melee and ranged to hit. Before the combat changes I rarely missed with bow or swords. After the changes it feels like I miss less with melee than before (but that is probably due to some grazes looking similar to hits) but I have definitely noticed a lot more grazes on ranged, especially with manyshot. Went from the occasional miss, to nearly half grazing hits.

On the monster side, both melee and ranged are more likely to hit you. But ranged feels like they got the higher boost. Archers that would hit me once every few minutes now hit/graze almost every other hit.

[Kaisoni]

The NEW combat system was implemented for ranged. (Lots of "grazes" on 2-9 versus high AC monsters, as intended)

It is NOT implemented for melee.
(No grazing hits below rolls of 10, hard MISS on a 2-9, hit more often then ranged)

Simple as that.

No grazing hits below rolls of 10 on melee, eh?

Acid Wit on Hard:

Maul:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 5 (+35): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 6 (+35): you hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+35): you hit!

Also on the Maul:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 5 (+40): you hit!
But to prove it's not just a case of being the old to hit system:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 3 (+45): you grazing hit!
(if it were on the old system, then if a 5 +40 had been a hit then a 3 +45 would have definitely been a hit.)

Single Short Sword:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 6 (+33): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+33): you hit!

However both the times where I've tested TWF I've had misses instead of grazing hits.
Still Acid Wit on hard, but dual wielding:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 6 (+33): you miss!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+33): you hit!

Yet with a much higher to hit on my ranged attacks, I still hit less often:
(Still Acid Wit on Hard, with a bow)
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+46): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 8 (+46): you hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+51): you hit!

[Isolani]

No grazing hits below rolls of 10 on melee, eh?

Acid Wit on Hard:

Maul:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 5 (+35): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 6 (+35): you hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+35): you hit!

Also on the Maul:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 5 (+40): you hit!
But to prove it's not just a case of being the old to hit system:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 3 (+45): you grazing hit!
(if it were on the old system, then if a 5 +40 had been a hit then a 3 +45 would have definitely been a hit.)

Single Short Sword:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 6 (+33): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+33): you hit!

However both the times where I've tested TWF I've had misses instead of grazing hits.
Still Acid Wit on hard, but dual wielding:
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 6 (+33): you miss!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+33): you hit!

Yet with a much higher to hit on my ranged attacks, I still hit less often:
(Still Acid Wit on Hard, with a bow)
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+46): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 8 (+46): you hit!
(Combat): You attack Acidstone Elemental. You roll a 7 (+51): you hit!

Been playing my rogue for 2 days now since he's the only character I have that seems to still work properly. I still haven't seen a graze in 2 days (TWF), and I've been watching for them. I just miss or hit. Mostly hit. So I don't know what's going on with all this =/

[Kaisoni]

I saw some people on the forums saying that sneak attacks apply on grazing hits, I don't know if it's true, but if it is true then they might have made it so that TWF can't get grazing hits (only misses) so that rogues can't just ignore making their character able to hit yet still do sneak attacks on anything but a 1 with the amount of hits that TWF gives.
I suppose it might not be WAI that TWF doesn't get grazing hits on anything over a 1, but it still seems to be using the new attack system's to hit formula.

[Therrias]

Totally borked.

My epic archer was grazing HEROIC CASUAL Lailat in ADQ.

[munificence]

With a +50 attack bonus on my mechanic/arti, I'm getting grazing hits 30-40% of the time on non elite level 16-18 quests. If this was an "upgrade" to the system, I'd like the old one back please.

[katz]

did more testing, this time with ranged-centric characters, and my findings are baffling.

first up, my 20th level AA/Clonk. high wisdom low strength, zen archery. melee testing used +3 frost handwraps of bleed. ranged testing used a litII longbow. only guard active was nightmare guard on mabar cloak. vs CR 22 dogs in Lords of Dust epic normal. buffs used: mass aid and divine power.

melee:

(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 8 (+31): you hit!
(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 7 (+31): you hit!
(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 6 (+25): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 7 (+30): you hit

---------------------------
ranged:

(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 7 (+45): you hit!
(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 6 (+50): you hit!


(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 5 (+46): you grazing hit!
(Combat): You attack Attack Dog. You roll a 8 (+41): you hit!

___________________

next, my 16th level arti
no buffs whatsoever, only guard is light guard on templar's bastion armor. ranged weapon used was hellfire crossbow (everything else i had on me damaged stats or caused other effects that would tamper with testing), melee was a random +2 bastard sword (not proficient). testing performed in vale of twilight slayers on normal. rats were CR 12, troll was CR 16


(Combat): You attack Twilight Giant Rat. You roll a 5 (+18): you miss! (melee)

(Combat): You attack Fiend-Blood Troll. You roll a 4 (+42): you hit! (ranged)
(Combat): You attack Fiend-Blood Troll. You roll a 2 (+42): you grazing hit! (ranged)

We did change grazing hits to happen on any roll of 2+ when you would normally miss, both for melee and ranged combat.

it doesn't seem this is true yet, because: (Combat): You attack Twilight Giant Rat. You roll a 5 (+18): you miss!

[MRMechMan]

This needs a thorough look at by a dev.

Getting grazes on a ~2-7 regularly against all mobs regardless of AC or attack bonus when using ranged weapons.

[apep1412]

Finally got some time to test this. It does seem that the only issue with ranged weapons is that they are not applying their proficiency bonus to chance to hit (from what I can tell).

The reason Shade assumed that the new system was not implemented (no grazing hits) is that grazing hits don't seem to appear while in some combat stances, while meleeing. I've only had the chance to test power attack, so far.
Oddly enough, even without power attack off, I was still missing instead of grazing while blocking and shield bashing. With power attack off, I was getting grazing hits while THF and S&B. I haven't checked the passive shield bash while S&B or TWF, yet.

While THF, I noticed a hit on 7(+34) and a miss 4(+40) against a single mob in a single instance. This further proves that the new combat system is implemented for melee combat.

Reviewing the numbers from the first post with more exact calculation:
Either the dogs had at least a 1 point difference in their AC (perhaps semi-random stat distribution on trash mobs?), or the chance to hit calculation doesn't round exactly (common for computing). Assuming they had the same AC, it would have either been 36 or 37, with a higher chance of 36, as the 37 calculation was ceil'd from 36.06.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those wanting to double-check my method, I am using the formula:

(AB+10.5)/2AC=P [-.25].

The -.25 is added on assuming proficiency. Modifying this to get the estimated AC:

AC = (AB+10.5)/2(P[-.25])

AB is easy enough to find (the + after your d20). The P value is estimated using your roll and whether it was a miss/graze or hit.
For a miss, it is:
P < .05(21-D)+.025
For a hit, it is:
P > .05(21-D)-.025

The +/- .025 is to offset that while calculating your chance to hit, they will round to the nearest 5%. For a miss, the final AC value should always be ceil'd, while for a hit, it should always be floor'd. i.e ceil(0.2)=1, floor(3.8)=3

A lot of these values include decimals, which are nearly never exact for computing. Given that there are a few calculations, I'd expect some rounding errors while computing the player's chance to hit, for edge cases (those very near a 62.5% or 47.5% chance to hit, for example). This also assumes that the calculation rounds to the nearest 5%, and not floors or ceils.

[donblas]

Finally got some time to test this. It does seem that the only issue with ranged weapons is that they are not applying their proficiency bonus to chance to hit (from what I can tell).
.

Not the only issue. A lot of shots heading for the ceiling instead of the target when line of site from player or from toon is blocked is also an issue in my opinion.