06-23-2017, 01:21 AM
I feel that for the sake of clarity, it should be HIT - EVADE, then your scaled CEL could be subtracted from that total. Then you roll the 1d100; if the number is above the forecasted chance, it's a hit. If the rolled number is between your forecasted chance and your chance minus scaled CEL, it's glancing. Below that is a miss.
So 275 HIT - 200 EVADE = 75% Chance to hit.
Assuming 50 scaled CEL,
100-76 = Hit
75-26 = Glancing Blow
25-1 = Miss
It's the exact same thing, but I think that going Miss > Glance > Hit rather than Glance > Hit > Miss would be more intuitive for any battle outputs. Also, how would glancing blows factor in Defense and other reductions? With how large HP pools can be and how lots of attacks and skills can function off of defensive stats, I can see a problem with builds optimizing their defense while also being able to put out respectable damage becoming more of a problem.
Other than that, I feel like this is definitely worth a shot, though separate adjustments might be needed for Ice-based skills and magic, considering how Skill affects both accuracy and Ice attack.
So 275 HIT - 200 EVADE = 75% Chance to hit.
Assuming 50 scaled CEL,
100-76 = Hit
75-26 = Glancing Blow
25-1 = Miss
It's the exact same thing, but I think that going Miss > Glance > Hit rather than Glance > Hit > Miss would be more intuitive for any battle outputs. Also, how would glancing blows factor in Defense and other reductions? With how large HP pools can be and how lots of attacks and skills can function off of defensive stats, I can see a problem with builds optimizing their defense while also being able to put out respectable damage becoming more of a problem.
Other than that, I feel like this is definitely worth a shot, though separate adjustments might be needed for Ice-based skills and magic, considering how Skill affects both accuracy and Ice attack.