EP mass shock "potency" problem in RNG
Could you PLEASE look at your AI's use of "potency" in arena? Every time I go up against an EP lead, that EP stuns 4 or 5 of my team and when my mass shock is done, I mostly stun 1 or 2. My potency ...
Forum Discussion
"Whatelse73;c-1566610" wrote:"crzydroid;c-1561366" wrote:"Whatelse73;c-1561334" wrote:"Poxx;c-1561183" wrote:
Palpatine in a lead slot has 85% potency b4 any mods so unless u have toons w/ over 85% tenacity...again, b4 mods, u have a 15% chance to resist.
Right, but again, if I have MORE potency from mods and base before that 85% hits, then I should be stunning 4-5 more often than I am. Especially since the AI's EP stuns 4-5 as often as I stun 1-2. It just tells me that the AI favors itself in RNG, way too much and that shouldn't be the case.
I want to face another team and beat that TEAM. Not beat a suped up cheating AI.
At a certain point, it doesn't matter who has more potency. Once you hit the base 15% chance to resist, that's that. EP has a 70% chance to stun, so 0.70*.085 = 59.5% chance to stun any given toon. Your brain pays more attention to when rng is against you.
In your example of CLS, he gets 40% potency from his unique, so that would completely override 40% tenacity just there.
And, I understand that. All things being equal, our teams "should" be equal and my EP should mass shock 4 or 5 of the other team as often as the AI does it to me. However, that is not the case. My EP is shocking 1-2 most often, while your AI is shocking 4-5 most often. Since "it doesn't matter who has more potency", it means your AI is getting boosted, giving itself better odds, cheating, programmed to cheat, etc etc. :)
And your arguments would be one thing if we could see the numbers. So far we have your word, but knowing what we know about the human mind, while you may fully believe the computer out stuns you at an unnatural rate, it is not necessarily so. If you were to sit down for a week or two and for every arena battle you played, recorded the number of stuns per attempt for both you and your opponent (also recording potencies, tenacities, and whether certain characters dodged rather than resisted), then people could run the numbers and investigate the veracity of the claims that the computer cheats.
