[1.1b] To Hit Chance tests: terrible new formula

[alpaca]

I ran some tests with 50 corvettes of one weapon type against 50 with another at different evasion and sensor levels. All ships were as barebones as possible (3 weapons of the same type and reactors only in addition to the thrusters, etc). I cheated to get all technologies, enough minerals and credits, instant build, then set fleets to attack each other. Here are the results

Test #  Weapon 1    Weapon 2     To Hit Mod  Evasion  To Hit W1  To Hit W2  Comments
1  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       0    5%    94%    93%   Base scenario
2  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     0    5%    94%    87%   Base scenario

3  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       0   20%    74%    74%   Thrusters lvl 4
4  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     0   20%    75%    48%   Thrusters lvl 4

5  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       0   40%    50%    47%   + Precog Interface
6  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     0   40%    51%    0%    + Precog Interface

7  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       6   40%    54%    51%   + Sensor lvl 4
8  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     6   40%    55%    14%   + Sensor lvl 4

Frankly, I don't see a scenario where these numbers make sense, so there is clearly something very wrong with the calculation somewhere. In the base scenario, there is no significant difference between mass driver and lasers, even though the latter is 10% more accurate. Point defense, which is half accurate, only has a small difference of 7%pt when compared to lasers.

Adding evasion and looking at the point defense numbers indicates that chance to hit is proportional to (accuracy - evasion), however it seems that actual chance to hit is now (acc - evasion)/acc, which is even worse than before. At least the bug where to hit chance modifiers set accuracy to 100% appears to be fixed.

Predicted by (acc - evasion)/acc:

Test #  Weapon 1    Weapon 2     To Hit Mod  Evasion  To Hit W1  To Hit W2  Comments
1  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       0    5%    93.9%    93.4%   Base scenario
2  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     0    5%    93.9%    87.5%   Base scenario

3  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       0   20%    75.6%    73.7%   Thrusters lvl 4
4  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     0   20%    75.6%    50.0%   Thrusters lvl 4

5  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       0   40%    51.2%    47.4%   + Precog Interface
6  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     0   40%    51.2%    0.0%    + Precog Interface

7  Laser (82%)    Mass Driver (76%)       6   40%    54.5%    51.2%   + Sensor lvl 4
8  Laser (82%)    Point Defense (40%)     6   40%    54.5%    13.0%   + Sensor lvl 4

As you can see, the model fits the observed data almost perfectly, as such, we can conclude that the formula is very likely correct. This new formula is terrible, however, as it almost eliminates any difference between weapon types until you get close to the evasion threshold. This makes evasion the only relevant number and even more overpowered.

 

[Xangreen]

EDIT: Sorry, wrong information. I's thinking about the other formula.

 

[tom_jones]

This new formula is terrible, however, as it almost eliminates any difference between weapon types until you get close to the evasion threshold. This makes evasion the only relevant number and even more overpowered.

I'd argue it makes evasion not so much relevant, but making it very much irrelevant unless stacked as high as possible. 80% accuracy weapon striking a craft with little evasion 95% of the time, or 20% evasion eliminating 10% of incoming shots isn't exactly intuitive. At this point may as well hide the % numbers because they mislead the player, rather than help.