EP mass shock "potency" problem in RNG

"leef;c-1567625" wrote:

"Whatelse73;c-1567613" wrote:

"crzydroid;c-1566939" wrote:

"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.

Hey good idea! CG, show us the numbers. Same for ships and AI fleet wins vs players. We know they have the data and they can track the data and can pull the data. So, show us the numbers for AI EP stuns vs player EP stuns. :)

I'll test it for them, if they pay me to just play mirror matches for two weeks. But I'd much rather have chances to win and climb in arena if they won't. ;-)

ea/cg have stated in the past that the AI doesn't have a RNG advantage, people just don't believe them.

"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.

"Goodgil;c-1561438" wrote:
Here's how it actually works. Ignore anything else people tell you, it's just wrong.

EP has a 70% chance to inflict stun when using his aoe. That means that 30% of the time, you won't even go to the potency/tenacity check, but it just won't happen.

If it does apply, you go to the check. The way it's calculated is chance to resist, minimum 15%. That is, if tenacity-potency > 15%, than that's the chance to resist. If tenacity-potency
Almost completely correct - and that middle part is the important thing. Palpatine's AoE isn't even guaranteed to try to stun the targets. On a particularly bad roll of RNG, he may never even do a potency/tenacity check against any of them, because they all hit that 30% chance for him to just not attempt to apply the stun. That's why there such a huge variance to how effective Palpatine's AoE is.

And the one error in the calculation is that it's 100+P-T = chance debuff is applied in %, minimum 15, where P = attacker's potency and T = defender's tenacity. Yes, the odds of a debuff being applied start at 100% (or 85%, technically, due to the minimum). See this video (link) where one of the Game Changers explained it last year after getting that information from the devs themselves. That's why tenacity is largely a useless stat - you need it to be huge to actually have an effect past the built-in advantage potency has in the equation.

"Goodgil;c-1561438" wrote:
Here's how it actually works. Ignore anything else people tell you, it's just wrong.

EP has a 70% chance to inflict stun when using his aoe. That means that 30% of the time, you won't even go to the potency/tenacity check, but it just won't happen.

If it does apply, you go to the check. The way it's calculated is chance to resist, minimum 15%. That is, if tenacity-potency > 15%, than that's the chance to resist. If tenacity-potency

So, for example:

My Palpatine, as leader, is 120% potency. If he faces CLS with a 40% tenacity, there's a negative 80% chance to resist so they just default to a positive 15% resist chance? That's bull. Why bother with increasing potency?

"Boba_The_Fetter;c-1561457" wrote:
Potency means nothing RNG is everything

"Vendi1983;c-1561402" wrote:
The way I thought it worked was: (made up example)

Step 1: EP has 100% potency. Game randomly assigns a number between 1-100. Congrats. Stun will hit, but...

Step 2: Target has 35% tenacity. Game randomly assigns 1-100. If it's between 1-35, stun is resisted.

Hence why it's not just a direct 40% tenacity cancels 40% potency problem.

I don't know maybe I'm overly simplifying it or completely wrong but it would explain the "bad" RNG people talk about.

"crzydroid;c-1561366" wrote:

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.