Posting some housekeeping for future viewers that slipped by me in editing: SOURCES --Serenes Forest - serenesforest.net/general/true-hit/ --The Humble Grandmasters - fire-emblem-strategy.tumblr.com/post/143452625727/how-fates-handles-hit-rates Crits in EVERY game are SINGLE ROLL FE15 (Echoes) being single roll is not confirmed
I didn't get why the hybrid is inconsistent and lead to frustration. If you as a player get buffed and hit more easly what's the problem? The player will be happier, and i don't think he rly feel the difference.
Speaking of lying hit rates, in Thracia, if a plot-necessary, non-Leif character is being attacked by an attack that would kill them, the attack will NEVER hit. This affects Eyvel up through chapter 6, Olwen and Fred in chapter 10 when they appear as enemies, and Kempf in chapter 11. Thracia hides this fact by capping hit rate at 99%, meaning it is impossible to get a guaranteed hit, and thus making it seem like the player is incredibly lucky/unlucky instead of actually being manipulated.
Yeah my theory (and it sounds like yours too) is that the 99 hit ceiling exists to give these units their plot armor, although I don't know enough about looking into the code to prove it.
Wait, does that mean you can literally just throw a unit with plot armor into the fight to deal with four units at once? I know I'm a little bit late here but I've only recently started getting into fire emblem.
@@lieutenantbites5739 eyvel is a pre promote that only is available in chapters 1-3, part of 5, 24x and final, so if you abuse her, your others units end underlevel, ced in 4x is a green unit that don't gain exp, and tanya in 8x is a thracia archer, but you can train her in 8x without problem.
Fire Emblem: Fates is a game I simultaneously love immensely, but also hate with similar fervor. This analysis only cements my emotional duality on the issue.
Mega Sodarayg Tbh that sounds like an awesome Lunatic mode, just add in some exclusive units/characters. And the players will learn to fear FE again. Lol
I've learned more about probability from FE than in school. Regardless of the hit rate structure, you will eventually miss with a 99%. I'm one who likes single roll, but you especially have to go in with a risk evaluating mind set. Awesome video man!
That's actually a "single roll" system in a sense, anything with a lower than 100% hit will hit the actual accuracy percent on the attack, now you can see why it's so brutal. Even with a 90% hit rate, there is still a 1 in 10 chance to miss which can make all the difference in a decisive turn.
I personally prefer double roll, simply because it's what I've grown accustomed to. While I understand that the shown hit rate isn't the actual hit rate, I prefer being confident that a 90 will hit as opposed to a 90 missing 1 time in 10. The closer something is to a certainty, the better the chance of a plan's success.
It feels incredibly satisfying when you roll the dice on a low hit chance and get lucky. That was the first major con I thought of when he talked about double rolls and I'm guessing it's probably why Fates uses the hybrid roll system. I think the problem with it's inconsistency arises when the enemies abide by these hit calculations too. Getting an unexpected RNG result feels great when it's in your favor, but can get frustrating when it's not.
Thats almost a useless buff, you rarely if ever have a unit with less than a 60% hit chance against anything even take part in a battle especially on higher difficulty levels.
kian, idk what you're thinking but that's not a bad idea. archers being green units in fates makes it a slightly bad idea though bc of lowered hit rates
Oh, so that's why I get so many critical in Fire Emblem Fates. Also, jeez that formula. I can only guess the one for FE16 When below 50% [RAN1(RAN2×RAN3)+(RAN4/RAN5)]+[(4×RAN1)/(4×RAN2)] When above 50% [RAN1(RAN2×RAN3)+(RAN4/RAN5)]+[(RAN1+RAN2)/(RAN5-RAN4)]-[RAN3+(RAN1×RAN4+RAN5/RAN2)×4]^2
I think I remember reading somewhere that Critical and Skill activation RNGs have always used single roll, even if the game they're in uses a different rolling method.
Its actually really not so complicated as it looks. Really its just a weighted average, meaning they're placing 3 times as much importance on one value than the other. Basically, it's really just saying take the average of 4 numbers, and compare them to the hit rate(just in this case, 3 out of the 4 are the same). While I'm not sure how they decided on that exact formula, its pretty straightforward
I think the thing they did right with Echoes is to have single roll, but to have a way to reverse it if things go horribly wrong (Mila's Turnwheel). I think it gets a little too strong end game by allowing you to do it like 11 times or whatever, especially when it allows you to go back as far as you want, but it seems like a pretty easy solution. Plus it allows you to get a feel for what true random is without you having to erase 40 minutes of your life.
Solis 8300 I get what you mean. On one hand, it’s nice to use if you accidentally misplaced a unit, on the other hand it gets a bit ridiculous when you can just redo an encounter until you win. I still think there should be some form of Mila’s Turnwheel in the next FE, but not to the extent or strength it has in Echoes.
My favorite way that some games mess with probability is to silently improve your odds of hitting each time you miss, so you don't feel like your 70% hit rates are missing too often just because three important ones in a row were part of the 30%. Similar intent to double-roll, but obviously different effects. I wonder why IS went for the hybrid-roll they did instead of just keeping the 50+ weighted-average-roll for 1-50%. That would still blunt the double-roll's effects, without causing the vastly different results seen in the Fates hybrid-roll system.
DarthR0xas I'd assume it was across player units: if unit 1 misses, unit 2 has a greater (hidden) chance to hit. If they miss, unit 3 has an even bigger chance to hit than normal. Whenever a hit is landed, the bonus is set back to 0. Not sure if I'm a fan of this since players can easily exploit this.
I would prefer, in the sale type, a "guaranteed" precision, it's used in other games like LoL crit rates and that's actually a good compromise. It works quite like single roll, but with a little difference. Let's say you have a 1% hit chance, and you missed 99 hit, the 100th will be guaranteed hit. I think a system like that could be used for
This is known as Pseudo RNG - Basically, if the displayed hit rate is 40% then the actual hit rate is slightly below that, say 30%. However, each time you miss the chance to hit increases by 10% or so so you don't have cases where, like you said, a player simply gets unlucky and misses 5 times in a row with a 40% hit rate.
Yunotchi: "Not sure if I'm a fan of this since players can easily exploit this" And if that 80% hit rate actually hits? Yeah, it's very easy to exploit randomness. That aside I'd take something exploitable over pure rng.
Another Thing: with the shakey hitrates and true hit roles being 0-100 instead of 0-99 when concerning fe 6, this has led players to believe that fe 6's rng is different. But it is not. Its the same true hit, but the hitrates and gamblers fallacy make the "unlikely to happen" rng moments more likely. Because you experience lower rates more often. Just thought I would put that out there.
I personally like single roll the most because it's honest and i can conceptualize my hits by fractions for instance 60% is 3/5 so I'm more likely to hit than not but there's a fair chance I'll miss. It's fair. If i have a 25% chance that's 1/4 im likely to miss but i can still hit instead of 25% being 10 lower(or something) than it should be.
I actually really like hybrid hit rate structure. It handles avoid just like you said, so I can't simply put some sword wielder and expect them to be immune to everything with 5 defense and 20 HP on the semifinal level. It's not nearly as beneficial to the player in most instances, but some units, like Charlotte, really appreciated having a reasonable chance to hit at 30%. Crits, as well, I don't mind; the game even gives you Percy in the hardest and most tightly-knit path in the game, so you can completely invalidate that threat to your run, anyhow. If I ever do have to rely on a dodgetank to survive through enemy phase, I will actually compute the approximate chance, approximating hit rates above 50, that I have of dodging enough to survive. raising low hit rates in their actual value also means that some of the most threatening enemies in the game, ninjas, swordmasters, and some snipers, aren't always a death sentence. In my opinion, the hybrid system keeps the realistic feeling of war to an extent, while also weakening some of the strongest classes in the game, but still allows for consistent strategies to be employed in the hardest levels of the game, such as chapter 10; I can still be reasonably sure that I can hit a few 80% hits in a row, and, even if I don't, it's rather likely that I could pull it off on the second attempt.
Oooh, that’s why crits in fates happen so often. Like this one time in conquest, I remember Charlotte was attacked by a Kinshi Knight in chapter 14. It had a 1% crit chance.... and Charlotte got criticaled.... the salt was real...
I had a Death Blow Berserker Charolette with a Killer Axe. About 70% average crit on player phase once. Needless to say, she was critting every attack.
2RN doesn't apply to crit rates. and even if it does, it would only make crits happen far less likely additionally fates uses a different 'version' of true hit such that hits below 50 doesn't have true hit whereas hits above 50 has true hit
I loved the fact that Echoes used single number RNG and implemented the unique Mila's turnwheel feature so that hardcore players could play single RNG with no turnwheel while others could experience the old games raw RNG with the option to go back. But that's just me.
I prefer single roll, not because I don't like consistency but, because I know that 80% mean 8/10 which means that I have 2 chance out of 10 to miss and the reverse is also true so I know that if I have 10% chance of hitting I have 1 out of 10 chance to hit. Before I knew that fire emblem simply lied to me my strategies where based on those chance which created situation where I perceived that I was extremely lucky or unlucky. I would agree that consistency can be good, even if I tend to prefer more realistic chances of error but, to really appreciate consistency I would like to know the real chance I have to hit.
Yeah I understand that, I prefer game with realistic RNJ but, it's still possible to reduce RNJ without lying. All you have to do is gave better hit rate and/or reduce evasion rate, so basically you can even do double roll but, you show the resulting hit chance instead of lying. I know the main reason they do it is because generally most people have problem with percentage but, the problem is that it makes the game less fun for persons who are used to other tactical game that don't lie and I will had that it make player who're used to modern fire emblem look like idiot when they complain that other games or FE Echos roll are weighted against them ( not all do but some do ), because instead of forcing them to learn real statistic they are reinforced in their false view of 80% will almost never miss. Plus it make it harder to introduce them to old fire emblem or Echos.
I too prefer single roll. I want the true numbers shown so that I know what to work with. Before I learned about the different hit calculation systems in FE, I was perplexed at times at how strange results I got. Mostly how, in the double roll games, 90+ hit rates just never seemed to miss.
the thing is that we naturally tend to overestimate high/low% hits. we usually think 90+ hit should pretty much always hit even though that is absolutely not the case - play a kaga game and you'll see that you'll miss 90 hits a lot more often than you feel like you should and enemies hitting like 30% hits too often than you feel like you should.
We naturally tend to overestimate it it's true, but as you said other games don't lie to the player. So player who play a lot of video are used to how they need to interpret those numbers, which lead them to make mistakes or strategize in sub optimal way when they start playing a game that lie about the numbers. Sure double roll are better for new player who don't know much about strategy games, but in the long run it doesn't do anything other than making them do really bad move in game where they have to deal with real number.
Love single roll. Am okay with double roll. Really don't like hybrid roll. I want single roll in FE16, but I wouldn't mind double roll. EDIT: Still love Fire Emblem Fates (all three) like all Fire Emblem games though.
I always had a feeling that something was off about Fates. I definitely prefer double hit rules; anything to make the odds feel more like the odds, with no inconsistencies.
Fates RNG is closer to the actual odds than double hit is. By your description it would seem that you prefer single hit since that one is the most accurate to the odds.
The interesting thing is, it's only REALLY a lie in Awakening and Fates. Those are the only games that place a % sign next to the hit rate. All the other games only IMPLY that the hit rate is a percentage, so they're not REALLY lying. Of course, when you see a number that can range from 0 to 100 that signifies a chance to hit, assuming it's a percentage is the most logical assumption to make. So still very misleading, just not an outright lie.
I'll always find dumb how the Fire Emblem community has decided to call the 2RN system "True Hit", despite it being the complete opposite: it is the hit system that LIES to you.
Because the 'true' hitrate is the average of those two numbers. So, even though on the surface the game is lying to you, the mechanic is named that due to how it works under the hood. ...mind you, this is just my own take on the situation, not a confirmed result.
Lykill Correli I always thought it was because double RNG "feels" more correct to them: high hits land almost all the time, while low hits barely landed at all.
It's a shorthand for "a method to find true hit rate". It was popularized by character debates between 2005-2011. The debaters knew what it meant and it spread from there.
In the graph shown for the 2RN system, the two lines are "displayed hit" and "true hit". The "displayed hit" line is the hit rate "displayed" to the player, whereas the "true hit" line is the "true" hit rate of the attack.
Great video. So long as the game is designed with the hit mechanic in mind, it doesn't matter to me, it's only when the enemy or units are designed contrary to the mechanics it starts to frustrate.
Wow, thanks for making this. It was extremely informative...and it explains SO MUCH. xD It always did seem like the enemy was hitting WAY too often in Fates at sub-50 Hit when I was coming off of Awakening. I guess it just never occurred to me that Awakening was actually being more lenient.
I honestly prefer Double RNG. Instead of getting flat-out annoyed that low-range hit rates seemingly hit all the goddamn time, they're a legitimate shock when they do hit. I wouldn't like planning around an RNG that seemingly hates me, it's way easier to put a unit somewhere and go "I'm gonna hope I can kill this guy with a double attack but I have options in case that somehow fucks up." Still, regardless of RNG I always treat an enemy having 1% Crit as them having 99% and NEVER like putting a unit somewhere they couldn't survive a crit.
One thing to note about FE6's RN system is that there seems to be a bug where due to a rounding error, the system actually generates RNs of 100. So basically if you roll an RN of 100 and a second RN of 99 or 100, then it is statistically possible to miss a 100% hit. Though this is much easier when inflicting status staves since those hit rates even in GBA are 1 RN.
For those interested I found the equation that you can use to find your true probability of hitting (for those who do not know probability is just like percentage chance but is between 0 and 1 instead of 0 and 100 so 70% is 0.7 etc): If they tell you your probability (p) is between 0 and 0.5 then the real probability is 2p^2 If they tell you your probability (p) is between 0.5 and 1 then the real probability is 1-2(p-1)^2 Someone pls use so my work wasnt pointless. Thankz!
Honestly, I highly doubt anyone would notice the difference between a 5% chance to hit, and a 1.6% chance to hit. There aren't that many situations where enemies do have such a low hitrate on you. And if they do actually hit with a 5% chance, I think that is perfectly fair.
Jonathan it is bad when crits on top of it. Say its 1% hit but the crit is higher than 50% O well. But to get crit by a brigan with a fir thats dodge tanking on a double roll, with a 2% crit. Makes my blood boil.
5% in single roll is 1 out of 20. Which is not insignificant. If I told you that if you go over the speed limit you would get a ticket 1 out of 20 times, most people would probably never in their lives try to even go near the speed limit. While 1.6% is actually 1 out of 63. Which I bet would probably be a "reasonable" risk to take in the aforementioned situation if you were running late to work for example. The difference is dramatic.
Except, as soon as something bad happens, usually a character death, the standard play is to flip the on-off switch and restart the chapter. Randomness isn't really doing anything in Fire Emblem other than extending the time it takes to get through the game.
Perhaps what they could do is have single roll tied to Classic more, and have double roll tied to Casual mode. You can appeal to both while having Casual be solidified as more of a simple mode for those just looking for a fun time and Classic mode being even more like the older Fire Emblem games.
I have to disagree. Casual vs Classic really doesn't directly affect map gameplay. It doesn't make any stage easier than another, it only really touches whether death sticks (post-map, so the unit still can't help you on that map) and allows mid-map saving. If they were going to change roll method in a game, it should be tied to the actual difficulty mode, since that does have a direct effect on how difficult battles are.
to be clear with how the maths works single roll: (rand)/1, i.e. a whole random number double roll: (rand1+rand2)/2, i.e. half of two random numbers added togethet hybrid roll: (3(rand1)+rand2)/4, i.e. three quarters of one random number and a quarter of the other added the hybrid roll seems to weight one of the random numbers more than the other, as opposed to the double roll which takes both percentages equally
Hey Pavise, just found out about your channel, it makes me really happy to see a dedicated Fire Emblem channel here on youtube, I'm subbing, thanks for making these videos!
This was really enjoyable. For a fun story, during a Fates Conquest Lunatic run, I got hit by 25% and 15% so often (as much as eight times in a row) I just started accounting for it. Random chance is a fickle master
This explains everything... I always felt like the hit rate in Awakening was in my favor while Fates straight up felt like it was fucking with me 24/7.
1:37 That's how it should always be. 8:30 It explains how my Kaze died to a 2% hit rate. I heard about the double roll thing in Awakening and thought it was the same for Fates. 10:15 I mean hit rate is hit rate. 90% shouldn't mean and 5% shouldn't mean 0.1%. It should mean 90% and 5%. Single Roll should be the only style that gets used in my opinion.
Huh. I was under the impression most players were aware of this since I'd been linked to the True Hit sheet on SerenesForest about a year after I'd started playing FE, but looking at the comments, it looks like most people were unaware of single/double rolls. I find this quite interesting as how hit is calculated is an integral part of the FE franchise.
First off, I'd like to say "Thanks for this video." It's a convenient reference point for something I bring up a lot, and I'll be linking it to a lot of people in the near future. My biggest issue with double roll - and it IS an issue - it that it's trained a generation of gamers to expect bull. I play a lot of games with Single Roll RNG, and the forums for those games are full of shrieking players proclaiming that the RNG HAS to be bork, because it's supposedly IMPOSSIBLE to miss two 80% chances in a row. It's especially eggregious in games like Mordheim that SHOW YOU THE ROLL, and people STILL shriek about RNG on the forums due to confirmation bias and being trained to expect nonsense from FE. Here's a tip to make single roll incredibly manageable and not a problem at all: Play smart. Account for misses. If someone has 25 HP and your average damage is 13, don't allocate only two people to attack it, in case one misses. If you have an enemy that will be defeated if 4 people land that 10% crit, instead set up a defensive perimeter to defend your squishier units and defeat it over two turns since you're NOT getting those crits. In fact, even in FE games with Dual RNG, I've avoided using units like Swordmasters much simply because I refuse to leave my "strategy" to chance. Give me heroes and generals, not the unit that defeat can hinge on chance for. I think this is the big problem; people gamble on those crit rates, and in a long battle, they CAN and WILL fail more than they hit (Unless you have a 100% crit rate Henry or something absurd.) It can work with FE's Dual Roll, but in any other game, it's absurd to expect.
That is actually really important to know, as I normally calculate at least two or three successive chances before deciding an important play. I don't really care what system is used, but I still want to know what the chances actually are.
Oh my god, I thought I was crazy thinking the hit rates between FE games was different. I noticed that crits would land more often despite lower odds in Fates, while my Matthew in Blazing Blade would NEVER get hit.
Honestly, one of the reasons I play Fire Emblem Heroes so much more than I have other Fire Emblem games is simply that they took all the randomness out of everything but (that damn) summoning system. I don't care if randomness is "realistic" in my fantasy game with little girls who turn into dragons, randomness is terrible for strategy. Strategy should be about planning ahead, not just throwing the same characters into the same situations over and over again and resetting until I get good stats on a levelup so I'm insulated from my next bout of bad luck. Restarting until I get a good outcome is not fun. People can say that FEH is "simpler" all they want, but when it uses a system where I can actually do the math and determine the outcome of any given clash, and can deduce the AI's movement patterns and use it against them to control the flow of battle several turns in advance, I'm actually *using* *strategy* to win, rather than just rerolling until I get godly stats and curbstomp the game.
I got into Fire Emblem back in Blazing Blade as the series's first western release. At the time, I was also playing Advance Wars, and noticed the heavy similarities in the game engine (they at least reused a ton of code between those games, if not made it on the same engine), but while Fire Emblem definitely had the story that would stick with me, and characters I would love more, Advance Wars was the better GAME. It was more strategic, it was more fun. I could play every single map of Advance Wars, hunting for perfect 300 score in them all, then buy up the sequel without getting tired of it. I couldn't force myself to finish a Fire Emblem until Path of Radiance because that game had a much more lenient save system that didn't waste hours of my life if I needed to restart a chapter, whether due to losing a character or persistent bad levels. (And, for clarity, I say "more strategic" because strategy depends upon knowing what the outcome of your choices will be. Chess is a famously strategic game because you need to plan your moves out several turns in advance, requiring predicting not only the outcome of your moves, but also how your opponent will react. Arguably the deepest strategy game of all time, Go, is simply placing tokens on a board in the attempt to surround your opponent's tokens, and it takes planning dozens of moves in advance. This requires *deterministic* gameplay, because randomness tends to force players to just wing it, since all strategies are ruined by the RNG over and over again, and that is directly counter to proper strategic thinking. Worse still, in Fire Emblem, the strategy always just amounts to "Rally Effie and let her tank everything physical". There isn't any real strategic depth in the game because one unit with extremely good stats - gained through luck, which is all the more reason to savescum for good levels - is the answer to every problem.)
It's a valid point, but the fundamental difference between Heroes and other Fire Emblem games, is that Heroes *isn't* a strategy game. By removing RNG from the equation, you're turning a strategy game, where things may go awry at any point no matter how ahead you plan and you're forced to adapt to a new situation, into a puzzle game, where there's always a limited number of perfect solutions. I have nothing against Heroes, I love it! But it's not a strategy game, it's a puzzle game, and even when I'm being subjected to the whims of the RNG, I rather main Fire Emblem titles remain as strategy game. Besides, no Fire Emblem game forces you to restart. If you feel like you need a good level up to make it through the game, I'm sorry, but you're just bad.
Lacking RNG does not suddenly remove the word "strategy" from a strategy game. I don't see real-time strategy games be called not real strategy games because people can't randomly miss. You do not NEED accuracy and evasion to call something strategy. Hell, if that's the reason you call Heroes not a strategy game, then chess isn't strategy either because you always kill something in one hit guaranteed.
I find it the perfect compromise. It's more fair than Double Roll and more user friendly than single roll. It also helps curb dodgetanking cheese which, while it can be fun, can also ruin the fun. I was disappointed on how it was talked down about as much as it was in the video because it really is an elegant compromise. It keeps the fairness of single roll for the first half, then provides a buff to the second half without it being broken like double roll where any reasonably high rate becomes almost perfect. I actually want to see more hybrid roll in future games.
That would explain why in fates when an enemy unit has less than 20% chance of landing but yet it still connects because it it delivered the killing blow awakening had this to but it wasn't as bad as in fates
In fates. After missing an attack with 90% chance, my oponenet landed a 15% hit with a 5% crit chance. The only way to kill me. This happened a second time after resetting the mission.
During the endgame of Fates Birthright I had Ryoma miss Garon with a 72% chance and then Azura was killed the next turn by an enemy at a 49% chance. I was livid
Maybe a difficulty-esque choice in future games for Raw, Tide, and Wave chance options (along with descriptions on how they effect hit, crit, and possibly skill trigger chances.) in future games…? It's an idea…
this had me thinking. what if a Fire emblem game's difficulty had a lot of little options. In the Halo series, you can add unique challenges by activating 'skulls' that can change thinks like how often enemies throw grenades or double their health. So what if a fire emblem game had it so you could have different challenges in it. imagine playing through the story but the weapon triangle is reversed, it would change how you play every level.
I could see them going with both in future games. Have single roll on harder difficulties and double roll on easier. They did that with reinforcements and whether or not they get an action on their spawn turn.
The problem is the binary hit or miss system, there should be near miss effects where damage can be lowered with almost hits rather total missed. And the same can be done with criticals, allowing extra damage to scale from hit damage rather than dramatic multipliers.
The Hybrid rolls in Fates is exactly what I despise the most about the game, and why I still haven't overcome my bitterness over it yet. It's just very frustrating to think you'll hit with an 80% hit rate, to then miss twice in a row and have the enemy with their 10% hit and 1% crit destroy your unit. Nice video, and thanks for explaining all that!
My personal pitch: weighted double roll. Take ave of two numbers generated by rng, but one number has double the weight of the other. This way it still has a double curve, but softer
I'll never forget that one time in Fates where I got slapped with a 2% crit by the very last enemy in a chapter I had spent 5 hours on, and had to restart. I was aware of Double Roll at the time, but I didn't know about Hybrid Roll. Glad to know that it really was a 2% chance! That makes me feel 1.9989% better... That said, I have noticed that in Fates, my characters also seem to roll ridiculously improbable crits way more often than in other games. That's something that I can appreciate.
If the only problem is perception of low probability, then hybrid roll doesn't seem too bad. You can get critted on 5% on single roll too and it feels just as frustrating there than on hybrid roll. On the other hand, if we follow what you say and consider that hybrid roll wraps our perception of low percent rolls, then it means that when we get an "unlikely" 5% crit on an enemy that just makes it a lot more satisfying. Imo single roll and hybrid roll are both pretty good, but I prefer hybrid because it's more consistent on high percent that single roll. That is, if I'm attacking with 75% chance to hit then I'm feeling confident, failing that is frustrating, and that's more likely to happen on single hit than on hybrid. Double roll just seems like the shittiest, it lets you avoid tank very easily and makes it impossible to get a lucky hit/crit on low percent.
I dunno, most games with double rng don't have "very easy" avoid tanking in them to my knowledge. Awakening has avoid tanking, but that's just because of the superinflated stats you can acquire. I guess with training you can avoid tank with myrmidons in most of the games but you could just as easily blow through with paladins in all of those games. Also you don't get a ton of myrmidons/swordmasters and realistically those are the units you will be avoid tanking with. Avoid tanking is less viable than other cheesy strats and is still somewhat unreliable. Not sure if you have tried it on the gba games but of the times I tried it would work for a while and then I would get unlucky and lose my dodge tank. Double rng is perfectly fine if the game's balance keeps it in mind, like fe6 does. (Although that is probably one of the only times I will put fe6 and balance in the same sentence)
Dodge tanks and avoid units in general are completely ridiculous in the GBA games to the point I used fucking Clarine as a frontline unit in FE6 because she would never get hit period. Never mind the rest of the games where units who miss all day just suicide into speedy squishies dealing no damage at all unless you're on a hard mode.
If they want to strike a balance, maybe use the two different RNGs under different difficulty levels. That way the player gets to choose their experience.
Though it's no longer around, the MMO City of Heroes did something interesting in regards to attack accuracy. At some point in the game's development they had put in a streak breaker system, to prevent long streaks of misses you could get when attacking. If the attack(s) you were using all had a 90% or higher chance to hit (after any buffs or debuffs) the system would only allow 1 miss before it forced the next attack to hit. If the attacks were 80% to 90% it would allow 2 misses, etc... They mainly did it because having poor hit rolls really isn't any fun, and even though it's just the nature of RNG it really does suck when your attack which has a 95% chance to hit misses 5 times in a row. It's also important to note that this was done after they added in extremely detailed chat logs for accuracy, and the game would tell you whenever this happened.
My god, THANK you for this! It won't stop me screaming *"SHENANIGANS!!!"* at the tv when I get hit by a 2% but at least I can calm myself down quicker!
My only question is why they didn't just continue using single roll for every game? It's mathematically correct and it aligns perfectly with the player's perception of the odds, e.g. a hit of 20 always has a 1 in 5 chance of succeeding.
Averages are not reality you nutjob. 2RN objectively has better player feel, play the games and you’d know. People who think 2RN only ever benefits the player need to play fe6 and shut their pie hole. It’s just as disorienting, random and deceiving as 1RN. Because no, 20%=20/100 or 1/5 is simply a mathematical observation. In reality it’s not as clear cut and pretty like that. This is far more than any other rpg will give you.
Honestly I prefer theming over making the game accessible to a casual audience. I never really thought about it but, the idea that single rng making the game more like actual war since sometimes you actually are just unlucky and as a straigest will need to adapt to a new situation constantly is really cool. Even if it makes the game hard
There is another important thing to consider with the effects the hybrid roll system has: how it encourages players to play. The hybrid roll system, as explained in the video, buffs higher hit rates and does nothing to lower hit rates. This has a paradoxical effect of making lower hit rates seem more effective than they actually are, since they are not correspondingly nerfed as much as higher hit rates are buffed. What does this encourage in the average player, who uses experience and gut instinct in most lax situations of otherwise incomprehensible complexity? It makes the player prioritize offense. The player naturally grows to fear even low hit rates and seeks to capitalize on their buffed higher hit rates, even if they don't realize it. Too many poor memories of getting crit at 1% will ingrain that fear into the average player. However, armed with the sense that their higher hit rates are worth their confidence, they will seek to take initiative and attack first to minimize getting attacked. I firmly believe that this was an intentional design decision to counter the defense and bait-heavy kind of gameplay that has been popularized due to the double roll system. The completely defensive and baiting playstyle was never worse than in Awakening, which further encouraged it with its incredibly powerful permutation of the Pair-Up System, which provided both offensive aid and defensive aid capabilities to paired up super-soldiers. Both capabilities could be taken advantage of in that wholly defensive playstyle, which sucked most strategy and all immersion from the warfare. Fates sought to nerf this system and make it less one-dimensional by splitting its offensive and defensive components into standing separately side-by-side versus actually pairing up, respectively. Taking the offensive approach, however, leaves both units very vulnerable, and without the defensive aid or buffs that pairing up normally provides. Couple this objective vulnerability with the fear of getting attacked, and you suddenly have a compelling risk-reward playstyle. Fates adding the hybrid roll system, reworking the Pair-Up system, and adding debuffs when attacked by (and attacking with) certain types of weapons all encourage and reward the risky, tactical, offensive teamwork playstyle, a harsh contrast to the lone-hero-pair defensive meta Awakening pushed. Thus, I believe the hybrid roll system was developed with pushing this playstyle in mind.
Then just make all three of those rolls settings that the player can choose from when starting a new game; and give accurate descriptions of what each setting does and how the player might want that specific roll.
I think a more elegant solution would be to tie-in the dice roll systems with player difficulty. IE the hardest difficulty should use single roll that's mathematically fair while the easiest difficulty should use the double roll system.
This video is incredibly interesting. I've known FE with Awakening, then I played some of the older games and Fates so I'm not a pro or an expert player by any mean, but I found this video super interesting and easy to comprehend. Good job!
I am in favor of single roll. Maybe with a behind the scenes randomness control (everytime someone misses they get a secret positive modifier, everytime they hit, they get a negative modifier, depending how far their average has strayed) If i attack 10 times with 70 % i expect 7 of them to hit^^
Posting some housekeeping for future viewers that slipped by me in editing:
SOURCES
--Serenes Forest - serenesforest.net/general/true-hit/
--The Humble Grandmasters - fire-emblem-strategy.tumblr.com/post/143452625727/how-fates-handles-hit-rates
Crits in EVERY game are SINGLE ROLL
FE15 (Echoes) being single roll is not confirmed
Can I ask who the character on the thumbnail is?
I don't recognise them at all.
It is Morgan from Fire Emblem Awakening. The specific image is her portrait in Fire Emblem Heroes.
Echoes has since been confirmed as hybrid.
I didn't get why the hybrid is inconsistent and lead to frustration. If you as a player get buffed and hit more easly what's the problem? The player will be happier, and i don't think he rly feel the difference.
How does it work in engage?
Player: "Wait, are you messing with me?"
Game: " _Probably_ "
Argo Leaf lol
That's definitely a hit.
I don't know which footage was Mangs', so I'm just gonna assume that whenever a units dies, that was Mangs playing
jedimasterpickle3 Probably not wrong, honestly.
alexnuzlocker12 If there was an enemy that lived on 1 health than I think that footage would have an even higher chance of being Mangs' lol
If there were Devil Axe clips in there, those would all be Mangs
Speaking of lying hit rates, in Thracia, if a plot-necessary, non-Leif character is being attacked by an attack that would kill them, the attack will NEVER hit. This affects Eyvel up through chapter 6, Olwen and Fred in chapter 10 when they appear as enemies, and Kempf in chapter 11. Thracia hides this fact by capping hit rate at 99%, meaning it is impossible to get a guaranteed hit, and thus making it seem like the player is incredibly lucky/unlucky instead of actually being manipulated.
Yeah my theory (and it sounds like yours too) is that the 99 hit ceiling exists to give these units their plot armor, although I don't know enough about looking into the code to prove it.
MythrilZenith wow, I never knew that. That game was still pretty tough though
MythrilZenith thats really interesting but i kinda wish i didnt know that since i havent played thracia and that wouldve lead to some epic moments
Wait, does that mean you can literally just throw a unit with plot armor into the fight to deal with four units at once? I know I'm a little bit late here but I've only recently started getting into fire emblem.
@@lieutenantbites5739 eyvel is a pre promote that only is available in chapters 1-3, part of 5, 24x and final, so if you abuse her, your others units end underlevel, ced in 4x is a green unit that don't gain exp, and tanya in 8x is a thracia archer, but you can train her in 8x without problem.
Plays a game with double roll RNG.
"Nothing but lies... Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies. *LIES!*"
At least 50% is 50%
no, 50% displayed hit is 50.5% true hit3
I knew disgaea 1 was lying to me - 99% chain chance my ass, throughout the entire campaign it only failed 2 or 3 times.
That line seem like the line Hazama/Terumi said in BBCS
berkut during echoes
Fire Emblem: Fates is a game I simultaneously love immensely, but also hate with similar fervor. This analysis only cements my emotional duality on the issue.
Well spoken
This is exactly how I feel
Now I wanna see a mod that makes it random which system you use each engagement
Mega Sodarayg that would be hell
Don't give the hacking scene in Fire Emblem any more ideas. Have you seen some of the insane things they've done?
Fire Emblem: Kaizo
Mega Sodarayg
Tbh that sounds like an awesome Lunatic mode, just add in some exclusive units/characters. And the players will learn to fear FE again. Lol
True Chaos achieved
oh. I had always assumed fates ran on double-roll, but that explains the overabundance of crits lol. interesting and eloquent as always!
_Yeah like how Ryoma can solo the whole game_
@@LunaLuminary pretty much anybody can solo Birthright
@@LunaLuminary especially the 15 chapters he doesn't even exist in
I've learned more about probability from FE than in school. Regardless of the hit rate structure, you will eventually miss with a 99%. I'm one who likes single roll, but you especially have to go in with a risk evaluating mind set. Awesome video man!
yes, youre also the sort of person who's shocked out of their mind at a 1% hit and hits, but also laughing because it hit
Single-Roll is pretty brutal IMO. 20% chance to hit looks low until you realize that such a hit with single roll will land 1 out of 5 times....
👀
Lesson of the video: don't trust sub-100% hit rates.... Wait, that's just my 18 years of Pokemon experience.
That's actually a "single roll" system in a sense, anything with a lower than 100% hit will hit the actual accuracy percent on the attack, now you can see why it's so brutal. Even with a 90% hit rate, there is still a 1 in 10 chance to miss which can make all the difference in a decisive turn.
I personally prefer double roll, simply because it's what I've grown accustomed to. While I understand that the shown hit rate isn't the actual hit rate, I prefer being confident that a 90 will hit as opposed to a 90 missing 1 time in 10. The closer something is to a certainty, the better the chance of a plan's success.
Let's not forget that the hybrid roll gives lower leveled units a stronger chance of landing hits below 50%, so that's pretty nice!
It feels incredibly satisfying when you roll the dice on a low hit chance and get lucky. That was the first major con I thought of when he talked about double rolls and I'm guessing it's probably why Fates uses the hybrid roll system. I think the problem with it's inconsistency arises when the enemies abide by these hit calculations too. Getting an unexpected RNG result feels great when it's in your favor, but can get frustrating when it's not.
Thats almost a useless buff, you rarely if ever have a unit with less than a 60% hit chance against anything even take part in a battle especially on higher difficulty levels.
In my first playthrough of Fates Birthright, Hinoka missed two 99% hits on an archer and she died the next turn :(
Bewear Gaymer
Why you having a Winged unit fight an Archer
because the fliers weakness to arrows means little if the flier can kill the archer before they get a chance to attack
very mad guy that was your fault. You know that right? Having hinoka attacking an anti-flier lmao😂😂😂
kian, idk what you're thinking but that's not a bad idea. archers being green units in fates makes it a slightly bad idea though bc of lowered hit rates
on the other hand my selena once got a critical when there was a 0% of getting one
Oh, so that's why I get so many critical in Fire Emblem Fates. Also, jeez that formula. I can only guess the one for FE16
When below 50% [RAN1(RAN2×RAN3)+(RAN4/RAN5)]+[(4×RAN1)/(4×RAN2)]
When above 50% [RAN1(RAN2×RAN3)+(RAN4/RAN5)]+[(RAN1+RAN2)/(RAN5-RAN4)]-[RAN3+(RAN1×RAN4+RAN5/RAN2)×4]^2
I think I remember reading somewhere that Critical and Skill activation RNGs have always used single roll, even if the game they're in uses a different rolling method.
Yami Gianor Hmm, interesting. I'll have to look into that.
This is true, the video was poorly worded. I meant to say that low % hits now have the opportunity to roll for crits. Not that crits use hybrid roll.
Pavise Oh, yeah, I can see what you're saying. Still explains the amount of critical hits.
Its actually really not so complicated as it looks. Really its just a weighted average, meaning they're placing 3 times as much importance on one value than the other. Basically, it's really just saying take the average of 4 numbers, and compare them to the hit rate(just in this case, 3 out of the 4 are the same). While I'm not sure how they decided on that exact formula, its pretty straightforward
I think the thing they did right with Echoes is to have single roll, but to have a way to reverse it if things go horribly wrong (Mila's Turnwheel). I think it gets a little too strong end game by allowing you to do it like 11 times or whatever, especially when it allows you to go back as far as you want, but it seems like a pretty easy solution. Plus it allows you to get a feel for what true random is without you having to erase 40 minutes of your life.
You may as well not have RNG if you have Mila's Turnwheel.
But the cool thing about the Turnwheel is that is optional.
Solis 8300 I get what you mean. On one hand, it’s nice to use if you accidentally misplaced a unit, on the other hand it gets a bit ridiculous when you can just redo an encounter until you win. I still think there should be some form of Mila’s Turnwheel in the next FE, but not to the extent or strength it has in Echoes.
i mean, thats what players do either way, you just dont have to waste as much time restarting the game and replaying up to that same point.
Echoes actually has Fates style RNG
My favorite way that some games mess with probability is to silently improve your odds of hitting each time you miss, so you don't feel like your 70% hit rates are missing too often just because three important ones in a row were part of the 30%. Similar intent to double-roll, but obviously different effects.
I wonder why IS went for the hybrid-roll they did instead of just keeping the 50+ weighted-average-roll for 1-50%. That would still blunt the double-roll's effects, without causing the vastly different results seen in the Fates hybrid-roll system.
So, how would that work? Every time a character misses, internally, their hit rate goes up?
DarthR0xas I'd assume it was across player units: if unit 1 misses, unit 2 has a greater (hidden) chance to hit. If they miss, unit 3 has an even bigger chance to hit than normal. Whenever a hit is landed, the bonus is set back to 0.
Not sure if I'm a fan of this since players can easily exploit this.
I would prefer, in the sale type, a "guaranteed" precision, it's used in other games like LoL crit rates and that's actually a good compromise.
It works quite like single roll, but with a little difference.
Let's say you have a 1% hit chance, and you missed 99 hit, the 100th will be guaranteed hit. I think a system like that could be used for
This is known as Pseudo RNG - Basically, if the displayed hit rate is 40% then the actual hit rate is slightly below that, say 30%. However, each time you miss the chance to hit increases by 10% or so so you don't have cases where, like you said, a player simply gets unlucky and misses 5 times in a row with a 40% hit rate.
Yunotchi: "Not sure if I'm a fan of this since players can easily exploit this"
And if that 80% hit rate actually hits? Yeah, it's very easy to exploit randomness.
That aside I'd take something exploitable over pure rng.
Another Thing: with the shakey hitrates and true hit roles being 0-100 instead of 0-99 when concerning fe 6, this has led players to believe that fe 6's rng is different. But it is not. Its the same true hit, but the hitrates and gamblers fallacy make the "unlikely to happen" rng moments more likely. Because you experience lower rates more often. Just thought I would put that out there.
I personally like single roll the most because it's honest and i can conceptualize my hits by fractions for instance 60% is 3/5 so I'm more likely to hit than not but there's a fair chance I'll miss. It's fair. If i have a 25% chance that's 1/4 im likely to miss but i can still hit instead of 25% being 10 lower(or something) than it should be.
I actually really like hybrid hit rate structure. It handles avoid just like you said, so I can't simply put some sword wielder and expect them to be immune to everything with 5 defense and 20 HP on the semifinal level. It's not nearly as beneficial to the player in most instances, but some units, like Charlotte, really appreciated having a reasonable chance to hit at 30%. Crits, as well, I don't mind; the game even gives you Percy in the hardest and most tightly-knit path in the game, so you can completely invalidate that threat to your run, anyhow. If I ever do have to rely on a dodgetank to survive through enemy phase, I will actually compute the approximate chance, approximating hit rates above 50, that I have of dodging enough to survive. raising low hit rates in their actual value also means that some of the most threatening enemies in the game, ninjas, swordmasters, and some snipers, aren't always a death sentence. In my opinion, the hybrid system keeps the realistic feeling of war to an extent, while also weakening some of the strongest classes in the game, but still allows for consistent strategies to be employed in the hardest levels of the game, such as chapter 10; I can still be reasonably sure that I can hit a few 80% hits in a row, and, even if I don't, it's rather likely that I could pull it off on the second attempt.
Oooh, that’s why crits in fates happen so often. Like this one time in conquest, I remember Charlotte was attacked by a Kinshi Knight in chapter 14. It had a 1% crit chance.... and Charlotte got criticaled.... the salt was real...
I had a Death Blow Berserker Charolette with a Killer Axe. About 70% average crit on player phase once.
Needless to say, she was critting every attack.
2RN doesn't apply to crit rates. and even if it does, it would only make crits happen far less likely
additionally fates uses a different 'version' of true hit such that hits below 50 doesn't have true hit whereas hits above 50 has true hit
Charlotte was useless to me
I loved the fact that Echoes used single number RNG and implemented the unique Mila's turnwheel feature so that hardcore players could play single RNG with no turnwheel while others could experience the old games raw RNG with the option to go back. But that's just me.
I prefer single roll, not because I don't like consistency but, because I know that 80% mean 8/10 which means that I have 2 chance out of 10 to miss and the reverse is also true so I know that if I have 10% chance of hitting I have 1 out of 10 chance to hit. Before I knew that fire emblem simply lied to me my strategies where based on those chance which created situation where I perceived that I was extremely lucky or unlucky. I would agree that consistency can be good, even if I tend to prefer more realistic chances of error but, to really appreciate consistency I would like to know the real chance I have to hit.
double roll, however, makes it less RNG.
Yeah I understand that, I prefer game with realistic RNJ but, it's still possible to reduce RNJ without lying. All you have to do is gave better hit rate and/or reduce evasion rate, so basically you can even do double roll but, you show the resulting hit chance instead of lying. I know the main reason they do it is because generally most people have problem with percentage but, the problem is that it makes the game less fun for persons who are used to other tactical game that don't lie and I will had that it make player who're used to modern fire emblem look like idiot when they complain that other games or FE Echos roll are weighted against them ( not all do but some do ), because instead of forcing them to learn real statistic they are reinforced in their false view of 80% will almost never miss. Plus it make it harder to introduce them to old fire emblem or Echos.
I too prefer single roll. I want the true numbers shown so that I know what to work with. Before I learned about the different hit calculation systems in FE, I was perplexed at times at how strange results I got. Mostly how, in the double roll games, 90+ hit rates just never seemed to miss.
the thing is that we naturally tend to overestimate high/low% hits. we usually think 90+ hit should pretty much always hit even though that is absolutely not the case - play a kaga game and you'll see that you'll miss 90 hits a lot more often than you feel like you should and enemies hitting like 30% hits too often than you feel like you should.
We naturally tend to overestimate it it's true, but as you said other games don't lie to the player. So player who play a lot of video are used to how they need to interpret those numbers, which lead them to make mistakes or strategize in sub optimal way when they start playing a game that lie about the numbers. Sure double roll are better for new player who don't know much about strategy games, but in the long run it doesn't do anything other than making them do really bad move in game where they have to deal with real number.
Love single roll.
Am okay with double roll.
Really don't like hybrid roll.
I want single roll in FE16, but I wouldn't mind double roll.
EDIT: Still love Fire Emblem Fates (all three) like all Fire Emblem games though.
I always had a feeling that something was off about Fates. I definitely prefer double hit rules; anything to make the odds feel more like the odds, with no inconsistencies.
Fates RNG is closer to the actual odds than double hit is. By your description it would seem that you prefer single hit since that one is the most accurate to the odds.
Or you prefer the bigger lie of double roll because it's usually in your favor.
The interesting thing is, it's only REALLY a lie in Awakening and Fates. Those are the only games that place a % sign next to the hit rate. All the other games only IMPLY that the hit rate is a percentage, so they're not REALLY lying. Of course, when you see a number that can range from 0 to 100 that signifies a chance to hit, assuming it's a percentage is the most logical assumption to make. So still very misleading, just not an outright lie.
I'll always find dumb how the Fire Emblem community has decided to call the 2RN system "True Hit", despite it being the complete opposite: it is the hit system that LIES to you.
Because the 'true' hitrate is the average of those two numbers. So, even though on the surface the game is lying to you, the mechanic is named that due to how it works under the hood.
...mind you, this is just my own take on the situation, not a confirmed result.
it's because it's in their favor
Lykill Correli I always thought it was because double RNG "feels" more correct to them: high hits land almost all the time, while low hits barely landed at all.
It's a shorthand for "a method to find true hit rate". It was popularized by character debates between 2005-2011. The debaters knew what it meant and it spread from there.
In the graph shown for the 2RN system, the two lines are "displayed hit" and "true hit". The "displayed hit" line is the hit rate "displayed" to the player, whereas the "true hit" line is the "true" hit rate of the attack.
I'll take single or double, maybe triple. But not hybrid for fe 16 please IS.
Great video. So long as the game is designed with the hit mechanic in mind, it doesn't matter to me, it's only when the enemy or units are designed contrary to the mechanics it starts to frustrate.
Wow, thanks for making this. It was extremely informative...and it explains SO MUCH. xD It always did seem like the enemy was hitting WAY too often in Fates at sub-50 Hit when I was coming off of Awakening. I guess it just never occurred to me that Awakening was actually being more lenient.
I honestly prefer Double RNG. Instead of getting flat-out annoyed that low-range hit rates seemingly hit all the goddamn time, they're a legitimate shock when they do hit. I wouldn't like planning around an RNG that seemingly hates me, it's way easier to put a unit somewhere and go "I'm gonna hope I can kill this guy with a double attack but I have options in case that somehow fucks up."
Still, regardless of RNG I always treat an enemy having 1% Crit as them having 99% and NEVER like putting a unit somewhere they couldn't survive a crit.
The hybrid roll works fine, it prevents player from exploiting low hit rate, but also reduce fustration of missing high percent hits.
I love dying against the Odds.
It's part of the game. I took a risk. And the risk was there and the numbers didn't lie to me :)
One thing to note about FE6's RN system is that there seems to be a bug where due to a rounding error, the system actually generates RNs of 100. So basically if you roll an RN of 100 and a second RN of 99 or 100, then it is statistically possible to miss a 100% hit. Though this is much easier when inflicting status staves since those hit rates even in GBA are 1 RN.
For those interested I found the equation that you can use to find your true probability of hitting (for those who do not know probability is just like percentage chance but is between 0 and 1 instead of 0 and 100 so 70% is 0.7 etc):
If they tell you your probability (p) is between 0 and 0.5 then the real probability is 2p^2
If they tell you your probability (p) is between 0.5 and 1 then the real probability is 1-2(p-1)^2
Someone pls use so my work wasnt pointless. Thankz!
This is for working out double roll hit chance
So the common outrage towards hit rates is actually inverted, where attacks with an 85% to hit are more accurate than you’d think, not less.
Honestly, I highly doubt anyone would notice the difference between a 5% chance to hit, and a 1.6% chance to hit.
There aren't that many situations where enemies do have such a low hitrate on you. And if they do actually hit with a 5% chance, I think that is perfectly fair.
Jonathan it is bad when crits on top of it. Say its 1% hit but the crit is higher than 50% O well. But to get crit by a brigan with a fir thats dodge tanking on a double roll, with a 2% crit. Makes my blood boil.
5% in single roll is 1 out of 20. Which is not insignificant. If I told you that if you go over the speed limit you would get a ticket 1 out of 20 times, most people would probably never in their lives try to even go near the speed limit. While 1.6% is actually 1 out of 63. Which I bet would probably be a "reasonable" risk to take in the aforementioned situation if you were running late to work for example. The difference is dramatic.
Except, as soon as something bad happens, usually a character death, the standard play is to flip the on-off switch and restart the chapter. Randomness isn't really doing anything in Fire Emblem other than extending the time it takes to get through the game.
Haha that Mangs moment was great
Shadow Striker the video is full of it XD
+Blake Blast After seeing multiply of Mangs clips and relieving that, was to lazy to edit
Perhaps what they could do is have single roll tied to Classic more, and have double roll tied to Casual mode. You can appeal to both while having Casual be solidified as more of a simple mode for those just looking for a fun time and Classic mode being even more like the older Fire Emblem games.
As a person that loves double roll, and permanent death, I hate your idea.
I have to disagree. Casual vs Classic really doesn't directly affect map gameplay. It doesn't make any stage easier than another, it only really touches whether death sticks (post-map, so the unit still can't help you on that map) and allows mid-map saving. If they were going to change roll method in a game, it should be tied to the actual difficulty mode, since that does have a direct effect on how difficult battles are.
The hybrid roll is a great example as to something that works on paper, but not as much in execution.
Thanks Intelligent Systems for giving me trust issues in RNG
I hear him say, "Bad luck is inevitable on the battlefield."
I immediately think of, "Luck doesn't exist on the battlefield, Snake."
This was really interesting! I love stuff like this. Great editing and presentation!
I did not realize you did stuff like this btw that's so cool
Lol, Mangs footage of getting wrecked by Kempf at 0:20
Really enjoyed this video. Very interesting to learn what's happening behind the scenes, and hear your input on them. Subbed.
to be clear with how the maths works
single roll: (rand)/1, i.e. a whole random number
double roll: (rand1+rand2)/2, i.e. half of two random numbers added togethet
hybrid roll: (3(rand1)+rand2)/4, i.e. three quarters of one random number and a quarter of the other added
the hybrid roll seems to weight one of the random numbers more than the other, as opposed to the double roll which takes both percentages equally
I couldn't tell you how many times I had a character miss in Fates with a 99% hit chance, and enemies in Fates hit with low hit chances. Crazy.
Hey Pavise, just found out about your channel, it makes me really happy to see a dedicated Fire Emblem channel here on youtube, I'm subbing, thanks for making these videos!
Glad you enjoy the content :)
This was really enjoyable. For a fun story, during a Fates Conquest Lunatic run, I got hit by 25% and 15% so often (as much as eight times in a row) I just started accounting for it. Random chance is a fickle master
This explains everything... I always felt like the hit rate in Awakening was in my favor while Fates straight up felt like it was fucking with me 24/7.
1:37 That's how it should always be.
8:30 It explains how my Kaze died to a 2% hit rate. I heard about the double roll thing in Awakening and thought it was the same for Fates.
10:15 I mean hit rate is hit rate. 90% shouldn't mean and 5% shouldn't mean 0.1%. It should mean 90% and 5%. Single Roll should be the only style that gets used in my opinion.
To solve the Hybrid roll issue, I'd likely just make it so the enemies have a reverse Hybrid role, where x>50 is single and x
Huh. I was under the impression most players were aware of this since I'd been linked to the True Hit sheet on SerenesForest about a year after I'd started playing FE, but looking at the comments, it looks like most people were unaware of single/double rolls. I find this quite interesting as how hit is calculated is an integral part of the FE franchise.
Accuracy is my biggest pet peeve when it comes to video games. Missing even one attack drives me up the wall.
Neat video, it was needed!! i've always been curious but not informed?? so thanks my dude.
First off, I'd like to say "Thanks for this video." It's a convenient reference point for something I bring up a lot, and I'll be linking it to a lot of people in the near future.
My biggest issue with double roll - and it IS an issue - it that it's trained a generation of gamers to expect bull. I play a lot of games with Single Roll RNG, and the forums for those games are full of shrieking players proclaiming that the RNG HAS to be bork, because it's supposedly IMPOSSIBLE to miss two 80% chances in a row. It's especially eggregious in games like Mordheim that SHOW YOU THE ROLL, and people STILL shriek about RNG on the forums due to confirmation bias and being trained to expect nonsense from FE.
Here's a tip to make single roll incredibly manageable and not a problem at all: Play smart. Account for misses. If someone has 25 HP and your average damage is 13, don't allocate only two people to attack it, in case one misses. If you have an enemy that will be defeated if 4 people land that 10% crit, instead set up a defensive perimeter to defend your squishier units and defeat it over two turns since you're NOT getting those crits.
In fact, even in FE games with Dual RNG, I've avoided using units like Swordmasters much simply because I refuse to leave my "strategy" to chance. Give me heroes and generals, not the unit that defeat can hinge on chance for. I think this is the big problem; people gamble on those crit rates, and in a long battle, they CAN and WILL fail more than they hit (Unless you have a 100% crit rate Henry or something absurd.) It can work with FE's Dual Roll, but in any other game, it's absurd to expect.
That is actually really important to know, as I normally calculate at least two or three successive chances before deciding an important play. I don't really care what system is used, but I still want to know what the chances actually are.
Oh my god, I thought I was crazy thinking the hit rates between FE games was different. I noticed that crits would land more often despite lower odds in Fates, while my Matthew in Blazing Blade would NEVER get hit.
Honestly, one of the reasons I play Fire Emblem Heroes so much more than I have other Fire Emblem games is simply that they took all the randomness out of everything but (that damn) summoning system. I don't care if randomness is "realistic" in my fantasy game with little girls who turn into dragons, randomness is terrible for strategy. Strategy should be about planning ahead, not just throwing the same characters into the same situations over and over again and resetting until I get good stats on a levelup so I'm insulated from my next bout of bad luck. Restarting until I get a good outcome is not fun.
People can say that FEH is "simpler" all they want, but when it uses a system where I can actually do the math and determine the outcome of any given clash, and can deduce the AI's movement patterns and use it against them to control the flow of battle several turns in advance, I'm actually *using* *strategy* to win, rather than just rerolling until I get godly stats and curbstomp the game.
Wraith I can see both sides of the argument but from a personal standpoint I agree. The random factor really turned me off from fire emblem.
I got into Fire Emblem back in Blazing Blade as the series's first western release. At the time, I was also playing Advance Wars, and noticed the heavy similarities in the game engine (they at least reused a ton of code between those games, if not made it on the same engine), but while Fire Emblem definitely had the story that would stick with me, and characters I would love more, Advance Wars was the better GAME. It was more strategic, it was more fun. I could play every single map of Advance Wars, hunting for perfect 300 score in them all, then buy up the sequel without getting tired of it. I couldn't force myself to finish a Fire Emblem until Path of Radiance because that game had a much more lenient save system that didn't waste hours of my life if I needed to restart a chapter, whether due to losing a character or persistent bad levels.
(And, for clarity, I say "more strategic" because strategy depends upon knowing what the outcome of your choices will be. Chess is a famously strategic game because you need to plan your moves out several turns in advance, requiring predicting not only the outcome of your moves, but also how your opponent will react. Arguably the deepest strategy game of all time, Go, is simply placing tokens on a board in the attempt to surround your opponent's tokens, and it takes planning dozens of moves in advance. This requires *deterministic* gameplay, because randomness tends to force players to just wing it, since all strategies are ruined by the RNG over and over again, and that is directly counter to proper strategic thinking. Worse still, in Fire Emblem, the strategy always just amounts to "Rally Effie and let her tank everything physical". There isn't any real strategic depth in the game because one unit with extremely good stats - gained through luck, which is all the more reason to savescum for good levels - is the answer to every problem.)
agreed, a system like that it would been nice to have in Awakening where you're player character is a strategist/tactician
It's a valid point, but the fundamental difference between Heroes and other Fire Emblem games, is that Heroes *isn't* a strategy game. By removing RNG from the equation, you're turning a strategy game, where things may go awry at any point no matter how ahead you plan and you're forced to adapt to a new situation, into a puzzle game, where there's always a limited number of perfect solutions.
I have nothing against Heroes, I love it! But it's not a strategy game, it's a puzzle game, and even when I'm being subjected to the whims of the RNG, I rather main Fire Emblem titles remain as strategy game.
Besides, no Fire Emblem game forces you to restart. If you feel like you need a good level up to make it through the game, I'm sorry, but you're just bad.
Lacking RNG does not suddenly remove the word "strategy" from a strategy game. I don't see real-time strategy games be called not real strategy games because people can't randomly miss. You do not NEED accuracy and evasion to call something strategy.
Hell, if that's the reason you call Heroes not a strategy game, then chess isn't strategy either because you always kill something in one hit guaranteed.
Am I the only one who is a fan of the hybrid system?
Fremen CC
No, I am too
I think it a necessity with all of fates high avoidance units.
It's either that or 1 RN for me
I find it the perfect compromise. It's more fair than Double Roll and more user friendly than single roll. It also helps curb dodgetanking cheese which, while it can be fun, can also ruin the fun. I was disappointed on how it was talked down about as much as it was in the video because it really is an elegant compromise. It keeps the fairness of single roll for the first half, then provides a buff to the second half without it being broken like double roll where any reasonably high rate becomes almost perfect. I actually want to see more hybrid roll in future games.
That would explain why in fates when an enemy unit has less than 20% chance of landing but yet it still connects because it it delivered the killing blow awakening had this to but it wasn't as bad as in fates
I've never played Fire Emblem, but game mechanics are always interesting. Nice video, dude
to me, I'd strongly rather have double role back for FE16. Above all else, absolutely no hybrid role. And no 20 avoid tiles. :p
I will NEVER for her when my Hana missed a 99 percent hit, but had a 3 percent avoid rate and got hit
In fates. After missing an attack with 90% chance, my oponenet landed a 15% hit with a 5% crit chance. The only way to kill me. This happened a second time after resetting the mission.
During the endgame of Fates Birthright I had Ryoma miss Garon with a 72% chance and then Azura was killed the next turn by an enemy at a 49% chance. I was livid
8:46 happens to me all the time
I remember even ordering pizza when this happened to me and this got my attention more than the pizza arriving
Maybe a difficulty-esque choice in future games for Raw, Tide, and Wave chance options (along with descriptions on how they effect hit, crit, and possibly skill trigger chances.) in future games…? It's an idea…
this had me thinking. what if a Fire emblem game's difficulty had a lot of little options. In the Halo series, you can add unique challenges by activating 'skulls' that can change thinks like how often enemies throw grenades or double their health. So what if a fire emblem game had it so you could have different challenges in it. imagine playing through the story but the weapon triangle is reversed, it would change how you play every level.
I could see them going with both in future games. Have single roll on harder difficulties and double roll on easier.
They did that with reinforcements and whether or not they get an action on their spawn turn.
I had vague knowledge of their existence but I was too lazy to research what they actually did. Thank you.
The problem is the binary hit or miss system, there should be near miss effects where damage can be lowered with almost hits rather total missed. And the same can be done with criticals, allowing extra damage to scale from hit damage rather than dramatic multipliers.
The Hybrid rolls in Fates is exactly what I despise the most about the game, and why I still haven't overcome my bitterness over it yet. It's just very frustrating to think you'll hit with an 80% hit rate, to then miss twice in a row and have the enemy with their 10% hit and 1% crit destroy your unit.
Nice video, and thanks for explaining all that!
Well this explains why I have to use Mila's Turnwheel everytime I fight terrors...
My personal pitch: weighted double roll. Take ave of two numbers generated by rng, but one number has double the weight of the other. This way it still has a double curve, but softer
I'll never forget that one time in Fates where I got slapped with a 2% crit by the very last enemy in a chapter I had spent 5 hours on, and had to restart. I was aware of Double Roll at the time, but I didn't know about Hybrid Roll. Glad to know that it really was a 2% chance! That makes me feel 1.9989% better...
That said, I have noticed that in Fates, my characters also seem to roll ridiculously improbable crits way more often than in other games. That's something that I can appreciate.
Well, this makes a few of those scenarios in fates make a lot more sense.
If the only problem is perception of low probability, then hybrid roll doesn't seem too bad. You can get critted on 5% on single roll too and it feels just as frustrating there than on hybrid roll. On the other hand, if we follow what you say and consider that hybrid roll wraps our perception of low percent rolls, then it means that when we get an "unlikely" 5% crit on an enemy that just makes it a lot more satisfying.
Imo single roll and hybrid roll are both pretty good, but I prefer hybrid because it's more consistent on high percent that single roll. That is, if I'm attacking with 75% chance to hit then I'm feeling confident, failing that is frustrating, and that's more likely to happen on single hit than on hybrid.
Double roll just seems like the shittiest, it lets you avoid tank very easily and makes it impossible to get a lucky hit/crit on low percent.
I dunno, most games with double rng don't have "very easy" avoid tanking in them to my knowledge. Awakening has avoid tanking, but that's just because of the superinflated stats you can acquire. I guess with training you can avoid tank with myrmidons in most of the games but you could just as easily blow through with paladins in all of those games. Also you don't get a ton of myrmidons/swordmasters and realistically those are the units you will be avoid tanking with. Avoid tanking is less viable than other cheesy strats and is still somewhat unreliable. Not sure if you have tried it on the gba games but of the times I tried it would work for a while and then I would get unlucky and lose my dodge tank. Double rng is perfectly fine if the game's balance keeps it in mind, like fe6 does. (Although that is probably one of the only times I will put fe6 and balance in the same sentence)
Dodge tanks and avoid units in general are completely ridiculous in the GBA games to the point I used fucking Clarine as a frontline unit in FE6 because she would never get hit period. Never mind the rest of the games where units who miss all day just suicide into speedy squishies dealing no damage at all unless you're on a hard mode.
If they want to strike a balance, maybe use the two different RNGs under different difficulty levels. That way the player gets to choose their experience.
Though it's no longer around, the MMO City of Heroes did something interesting in regards to attack accuracy. At some point in the game's development they had put in a streak breaker system, to prevent long streaks of misses you could get when attacking. If the attack(s) you were using all had a 90% or higher chance to hit (after any buffs or debuffs) the system would only allow 1 miss before it forced the next attack to hit. If the attacks were 80% to 90% it would allow 2 misses, etc...
They mainly did it because having poor hit rolls really isn't any fun, and even though it's just the nature of RNG it really does suck when your attack which has a 95% chance to hit misses 5 times in a row. It's also important to note that this was done after they added in extremely detailed chat logs for accuracy, and the game would tell you whenever this happened.
My god, THANK you for this!
It won't stop me screaming *"SHENANIGANS!!!"* at the tv when I get hit by a 2% but at least I can calm myself down quicker!
My only question is why they didn't just continue using single roll for every game? It's mathematically correct and it aligns perfectly with the player's perception of the odds, e.g. a hit of 20 always has a 1 in 5 chance of succeeding.
Averages are not reality you nutjob. 2RN objectively has better player feel, play the games and you’d know.
People who think 2RN only ever benefits the player need to play fe6 and shut their pie hole. It’s just as disorienting, random and deceiving as 1RN. Because no, 20%=20/100 or 1/5 is simply a mathematical observation. In reality it’s not as clear cut and pretty like that.
This is far more than any other rpg will give you.
people... are sheit at gambling
Honestly I prefer theming over making the game accessible to a casual audience. I never really thought about it but, the idea that single rng making the game more like actual war since sometimes you actually are just unlucky and as a straigest will need to adapt to a new situation constantly is really cool. Even if it makes the game hard
While playing Echoes I once missed on a 100 hit.
A. ONE. HUNDRED. HIT.
So what you're saying is that Kaga did it best? Got it.
Praise Kaga.
I'd like it if double roll was for normal mode, whilst single roll was for hard mode and lunatic.
When a player makes a game they could just ask if they want double roll, single roll, or hybrid roll.
As a person who played Fire Emblem 3H before Fire Emblem SoV
I complained A LOT about the hit rate when i was playing SoV
i knew the hit rate was lie because i am the "save-load" player, but now finally i know the reason
There is another important thing to consider with the effects the hybrid roll system has: how it encourages players to play.
The hybrid roll system, as explained in the video, buffs higher hit rates and does nothing to lower hit rates. This has a paradoxical effect of making lower hit rates seem more effective than they actually are, since they are not correspondingly nerfed as much as higher hit rates are buffed. What does this encourage in the average player, who uses experience and gut instinct in most lax situations of otherwise incomprehensible complexity?
It makes the player prioritize offense.
The player naturally grows to fear even low hit rates and seeks to capitalize on their buffed higher hit rates, even if they don't realize it. Too many poor memories of getting crit at 1% will ingrain that fear into the average player. However, armed with the sense that their higher hit rates are worth their confidence, they will seek to take initiative and attack first to minimize getting attacked.
I firmly believe that this was an intentional design decision to counter the defense and bait-heavy kind of gameplay that has been popularized due to the double roll system. The completely defensive and baiting playstyle was never worse than in Awakening, which further encouraged it with its incredibly powerful permutation of the Pair-Up System, which provided both offensive aid and defensive aid capabilities to paired up super-soldiers. Both capabilities could be taken advantage of in that wholly defensive playstyle, which sucked most strategy and all immersion from the warfare.
Fates sought to nerf this system and make it less one-dimensional by splitting its offensive and defensive components into standing separately side-by-side versus actually pairing up, respectively. Taking the offensive approach, however, leaves both units very vulnerable, and without the defensive aid or buffs that pairing up normally provides. Couple this objective vulnerability with the fear of getting attacked, and you suddenly have a compelling risk-reward playstyle.
Fates adding the hybrid roll system, reworking the Pair-Up system, and adding debuffs when attacked by (and attacking with) certain types of weapons all encourage and reward the risky, tactical, offensive teamwork playstyle, a harsh contrast to the lone-hero-pair defensive meta Awakening pushed. Thus, I believe the hybrid roll system was developed with pushing this playstyle in mind.
I’m pretty sure that hybrid hit is actually more complicated and that only recently a formula was actually created for it
just came across your channel, really enjoying all of the videos! Keep it up
I started suspecting this when I had characters with 30% hit chances never land a single attack, thanks for the video
It would have been neat if Fates' harder difficulties changed its hybrid roll into single roll.
I feel super lucky. I just finished playing a chapter in FE7 and Matthew got two 2% chance crits, and Rebecca got a 3% crit.
Then just make all three of those rolls settings that the player can choose from when starting a new game; and give accurate descriptions of what each setting does and how the player might want that specific roll.
so that's why my Kaze refuses to dodge a 40 below hit rate... That's good to know (seriously, he never learned how to dodge)
I think a more elegant solution would be to tie-in the dice roll systems with player difficulty. IE the hardest difficulty should use single roll that's mathematically fair while the easiest difficulty should use the double roll system.
This video is incredibly interesting. I've known FE with Awakening, then I played some of the older games and Fates so I'm not a pro or an expert player by any mean, but I found this video super interesting and easy to comprehend. Good job!
Glad to hear it :)
I am in favor of single roll.
Maybe with a behind the scenes randomness control (everytime someone misses they get a secret positive modifier, everytime they hit, they get a negative modifier, depending how far their average has strayed)
If i attack 10 times with 70 % i expect 7 of them to hit^^