|
On January 15 2012 00:47 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2012 00:45 anmolsinghmzn2009 wrote:On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
Stuff like 2 crits in a row with just 4% mastery, 3 dodges with tabi or 3 wriggles procs consecutively just happen way too much Don't say such things unless you made statistically relevant experiments. Human intuition is horrible when it comes to randomness.
Not to mention that if you traded the anti-randomness for pure randomness you'd only get *more* streaks of luck or unluck. That was the whole point of introducing anti-randomness in the first place.
|
On January 15 2012 00:43 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 19:24 JackDino wrote:On January 14 2012 19:09 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:02 JackDino wrote:
I didn't say cho needs to build MORE tanky than Irelia or Udyr, I said that a cho that doesn't itemize tank isn't tanky at all, after you said that a cho is tanky without itemizing for it, which pretty much means you only get hp from your ult and no resists(buying items with both damage and resists means you are actually itemizing to be tanky).
If a recurve is your only offensive item, you're better off getting stark's on cho/skarner over an ionic spark imo, it helps your team, gives you lifesteal and hp5 which should make you tankier than 250hp, you're alive longer, you do more damage. Same with wit's.
Ionic spark can't bounce to the same target more than once, wit's is better for single target output. Yeah, agree; it's pretty much Starks vs IS vs Wits. Uh, stupid question but how does the gold value of 250 health vs 30-50 mres look like? Unless I'm being stupid right now IS should always outdamage Wits whenever it hits more than one person. That is assuming you get all four attacks off which is kinda tricky again. -.-v The "you're alive longer, you do more damage"-argument always struck me as not that clever. Extreme case: I'm an Amumu with warmogs, Thornmail, FoN and Banshees. Will I live damn long? Most likely. Will me being alive actually accomplish shit by crying all day? Nope. Imo the goal of tanks/bruisers (huehue) should be to balance offense and defense in a way that if you try to ignore them they rape you but if you don't ignore them they give the real damage enough time to rain down on the enemy team. Too much emphasize on damage and you get killed too quickly, too much emphasize on tankyness and you can be ignored for too long. PS: Excuse me for always ruining the "lol riot is so stupid"-party, but I keep hoping that changes here and there actually make sense and are well thought-out. Sorry. =D Except you're not itemizing on doing damage for amumu, but your choice was to itemize for damage on cho, big difference. If you replace that banshees with a deathcap you'll live damn long and do tons of damage. Thing is, you don't need to really itemize for more damage on cho, itemizing for tank is almost always better since he's so damn big everyone can just hide behind you, do damage, and it's hard for them to get big. Try dpsing a fucking trist hiding inside a giant cho. Skarner already does insane amounts of damage without really building damage(just a triforce). Building more damage on him isn't really as good as building tankier on him and just sticking on your target(wether you want to kill it or peel it for your carries). Actually IS might be really nice on skarner if you're really tanky and are able to get 2+ champs on your Q. Ahh, here we got where we differ. =D The times where I feel as if I can build Triforce from a jungling Skarner only occur when I'm pretty damn fat. Considering people play stupid vs Skarner it's highly likely, but still... =P If you have a game with low kills something like Philo -> HoG -> IMGONNASQUEEZE2kGOLDINNOW -> Tank is way more likely imo. Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
A part of me wouldn't wonder if they fucked up that algorhythm along the way. If I understand their pseudo-random distribution correctly it should be LESS likely to get critted directly in a row, but MORE likely to get critted during longer fights. Since the math behind it isn't common knowledge (and even then tricky to explain) I'm still all in favour of making random truely random and see what happens.
well, the math is not exactly like that. Yea if you got critted then there is less of a chance you get crit'd on the next attack than the opponent's crit chance. But if you didn't get crit'd then the opponent will have a bigger crit chance on his next attack to crit, till he gets a crit.
In the long run the expected value of a pseudo random distribution and the expected value of a true random distribution should be around the same.
I believe people just don't get it how much difference the mastery change from 2 to 4 % makes.
Before the mastery changes, a crit in early game was considered a heavenly miracle. The gods smiled on you. You were the chosen one!
But this change doubled the chance to crit. At the bottom lane I usually get more than 2 crits on opponents in the laning phase.
|
On January 15 2012 00:47 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2012 00:45 anmolsinghmzn2009 wrote:On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
Stuff like 2 crits in a row with just 4% mastery, 3 dodges with tabi or 3 wriggles procs consecutively just happen way too much Don't say such things unless you made statistically relevant experiments. Human intuition is horrible when it comes to randomness.
Hmm I guess you're right, I'm probably not gonna recall normal stuff, only stuff that stands out.
|
It's pretty hard to remember the 213 times you crit once every 23-27 hits.
|
|
|
On January 15 2012 00:47 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2012 00:45 anmolsinghmzn2009 wrote:On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
Stuff like 2 crits in a row with just 4% mastery, 3 dodges with tabi or 3 wriggles procs consecutively just happen way too much Don't say such things unless you made statistically relevant experiments. Human intuition is horrible when it comes to randomness.
i am usually careful with this stuff, but i still think something is off.
maybe i should collect hard data :D
also, is it just me or viktor dealing quite the damage in lane with some serious range?
|
I kinda like how this whole Viktor debate reminds me of when I and someone else (who was my buttbuddy back then?) that Skarner is strong as fuck already against like everyone else. Then said champ gets a small buff and is close to OP status. :>
|
On January 15 2012 00:54 freelander wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2012 00:43 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:24 JackDino wrote:On January 14 2012 19:09 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:02 JackDino wrote:
I didn't say cho needs to build MORE tanky than Irelia or Udyr, I said that a cho that doesn't itemize tank isn't tanky at all, after you said that a cho is tanky without itemizing for it, which pretty much means you only get hp from your ult and no resists(buying items with both damage and resists means you are actually itemizing to be tanky).
If a recurve is your only offensive item, you're better off getting stark's on cho/skarner over an ionic spark imo, it helps your team, gives you lifesteal and hp5 which should make you tankier than 250hp, you're alive longer, you do more damage. Same with wit's.
Ionic spark can't bounce to the same target more than once, wit's is better for single target output. Yeah, agree; it's pretty much Starks vs IS vs Wits. Uh, stupid question but how does the gold value of 250 health vs 30-50 mres look like? Unless I'm being stupid right now IS should always outdamage Wits whenever it hits more than one person. That is assuming you get all four attacks off which is kinda tricky again. -.-v The "you're alive longer, you do more damage"-argument always struck me as not that clever. Extreme case: I'm an Amumu with warmogs, Thornmail, FoN and Banshees. Will I live damn long? Most likely. Will me being alive actually accomplish shit by crying all day? Nope. Imo the goal of tanks/bruisers (huehue) should be to balance offense and defense in a way that if you try to ignore them they rape you but if you don't ignore them they give the real damage enough time to rain down on the enemy team. Too much emphasize on damage and you get killed too quickly, too much emphasize on tankyness and you can be ignored for too long. PS: Excuse me for always ruining the "lol riot is so stupid"-party, but I keep hoping that changes here and there actually make sense and are well thought-out. Sorry. =D Except you're not itemizing on doing damage for amumu, but your choice was to itemize for damage on cho, big difference. If you replace that banshees with a deathcap you'll live damn long and do tons of damage. Thing is, you don't need to really itemize for more damage on cho, itemizing for tank is almost always better since he's so damn big everyone can just hide behind you, do damage, and it's hard for them to get big. Try dpsing a fucking trist hiding inside a giant cho. Skarner already does insane amounts of damage without really building damage(just a triforce). Building more damage on him isn't really as good as building tankier on him and just sticking on your target(wether you want to kill it or peel it for your carries). Actually IS might be really nice on skarner if you're really tanky and are able to get 2+ champs on your Q. Ahh, here we got where we differ. =D The times where I feel as if I can build Triforce from a jungling Skarner only occur when I'm pretty damn fat. Considering people play stupid vs Skarner it's highly likely, but still... =P If you have a game with low kills something like Philo -> HoG -> IMGONNASQUEEZE2kGOLDINNOW -> Tank is way more likely imo. On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
A part of me wouldn't wonder if they fucked up that algorhythm along the way. If I understand their pseudo-random distribution correctly it should be LESS likely to get critted directly in a row, but MORE likely to get critted during longer fights. Since the math behind it isn't common knowledge (and even then tricky to explain) I'm still all in favour of making random truely random and see what happens. well, the math is not exactly like that. Yea if you got critted then there is less of a chance you get crit'd on the next attack than the opponent's crit chance. But if you didn't get crit'd then the opponent will have a bigger crit chance on his next attack to crit, till he gets a crit. In the long run the expected value of a pseudo random distribution and the expected value of a true random distribution should be around the same. I believe people just don't get it how much difference the mastery change from 2 to 4 % makes. Before the mastery changes, a crit in early game was considered a heavenly miracle. The gods smiled on you. You were the chosen one! But this change doubled the chance to crit. At the bottom lane I usually get more than 2 crits on opponents in the laning phase.
Wouldn't you have an equal chance to crit on each attack? I haven't looked into the league engine but I feel like each attack is typical built independently of the last so you always would have a 4% crit.
|
On January 15 2012 01:45 whatwhatanut wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2012 00:54 freelander wrote:On January 15 2012 00:43 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:24 JackDino wrote:On January 14 2012 19:09 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:02 JackDino wrote:
I didn't say cho needs to build MORE tanky than Irelia or Udyr, I said that a cho that doesn't itemize tank isn't tanky at all, after you said that a cho is tanky without itemizing for it, which pretty much means you only get hp from your ult and no resists(buying items with both damage and resists means you are actually itemizing to be tanky).
If a recurve is your only offensive item, you're better off getting stark's on cho/skarner over an ionic spark imo, it helps your team, gives you lifesteal and hp5 which should make you tankier than 250hp, you're alive longer, you do more damage. Same with wit's.
Ionic spark can't bounce to the same target more than once, wit's is better for single target output. Yeah, agree; it's pretty much Starks vs IS vs Wits. Uh, stupid question but how does the gold value of 250 health vs 30-50 mres look like? Unless I'm being stupid right now IS should always outdamage Wits whenever it hits more than one person. That is assuming you get all four attacks off which is kinda tricky again. -.-v The "you're alive longer, you do more damage"-argument always struck me as not that clever. Extreme case: I'm an Amumu with warmogs, Thornmail, FoN and Banshees. Will I live damn long? Most likely. Will me being alive actually accomplish shit by crying all day? Nope. Imo the goal of tanks/bruisers (huehue) should be to balance offense and defense in a way that if you try to ignore them they rape you but if you don't ignore them they give the real damage enough time to rain down on the enemy team. Too much emphasize on damage and you get killed too quickly, too much emphasize on tankyness and you can be ignored for too long. PS: Excuse me for always ruining the "lol riot is so stupid"-party, but I keep hoping that changes here and there actually make sense and are well thought-out. Sorry. =D Except you're not itemizing on doing damage for amumu, but your choice was to itemize for damage on cho, big difference. If you replace that banshees with a deathcap you'll live damn long and do tons of damage. Thing is, you don't need to really itemize for more damage on cho, itemizing for tank is almost always better since he's so damn big everyone can just hide behind you, do damage, and it's hard for them to get big. Try dpsing a fucking trist hiding inside a giant cho. Skarner already does insane amounts of damage without really building damage(just a triforce). Building more damage on him isn't really as good as building tankier on him and just sticking on your target(wether you want to kill it or peel it for your carries). Actually IS might be really nice on skarner if you're really tanky and are able to get 2+ champs on your Q. Ahh, here we got where we differ. =D The times where I feel as if I can build Triforce from a jungling Skarner only occur when I'm pretty damn fat. Considering people play stupid vs Skarner it's highly likely, but still... =P If you have a game with low kills something like Philo -> HoG -> IMGONNASQUEEZE2kGOLDINNOW -> Tank is way more likely imo. On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
A part of me wouldn't wonder if they fucked up that algorhythm along the way. If I understand their pseudo-random distribution correctly it should be LESS likely to get critted directly in a row, but MORE likely to get critted during longer fights. Since the math behind it isn't common knowledge (and even then tricky to explain) I'm still all in favour of making random truely random and see what happens. well, the math is not exactly like that. Yea if you got critted then there is less of a chance you get crit'd on the next attack than the opponent's crit chance. But if you didn't get crit'd then the opponent will have a bigger crit chance on his next attack to crit, till he gets a crit. In the long run the expected value of a pseudo random distribution and the expected value of a true random distribution should be around the same. I believe people just don't get it how much difference the mastery change from 2 to 4 % makes. Before the mastery changes, a crit in early game was considered a heavenly miracle. The gods smiled on you. You were the chosen one! But this change doubled the chance to crit. At the bottom lane I usually get more than 2 crits on opponents in the laning phase. Wouldn't you have an equal chance to crit on each attack? I haven't looked into the league engine but I feel like each attack is typical built independently of the last so you always would have a 4% crit.
I believe Riot did some tweaking and it is now pseudo random to prevent things like the GP spotlight from happening too often.
|
On January 15 2012 01:45 whatwhatanut wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2012 00:54 freelander wrote:On January 15 2012 00:43 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:24 JackDino wrote:On January 14 2012 19:09 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:02 JackDino wrote:
I didn't say cho needs to build MORE tanky than Irelia or Udyr, I said that a cho that doesn't itemize tank isn't tanky at all, after you said that a cho is tanky without itemizing for it, which pretty much means you only get hp from your ult and no resists(buying items with both damage and resists means you are actually itemizing to be tanky).
If a recurve is your only offensive item, you're better off getting stark's on cho/skarner over an ionic spark imo, it helps your team, gives you lifesteal and hp5 which should make you tankier than 250hp, you're alive longer, you do more damage. Same with wit's.
Ionic spark can't bounce to the same target more than once, wit's is better for single target output. Yeah, agree; it's pretty much Starks vs IS vs Wits. Uh, stupid question but how does the gold value of 250 health vs 30-50 mres look like? Unless I'm being stupid right now IS should always outdamage Wits whenever it hits more than one person. That is assuming you get all four attacks off which is kinda tricky again. -.-v The "you're alive longer, you do more damage"-argument always struck me as not that clever. Extreme case: I'm an Amumu with warmogs, Thornmail, FoN and Banshees. Will I live damn long? Most likely. Will me being alive actually accomplish shit by crying all day? Nope. Imo the goal of tanks/bruisers (huehue) should be to balance offense and defense in a way that if you try to ignore them they rape you but if you don't ignore them they give the real damage enough time to rain down on the enemy team. Too much emphasize on damage and you get killed too quickly, too much emphasize on tankyness and you can be ignored for too long. PS: Excuse me for always ruining the "lol riot is so stupid"-party, but I keep hoping that changes here and there actually make sense and are well thought-out. Sorry. =D Except you're not itemizing on doing damage for amumu, but your choice was to itemize for damage on cho, big difference. If you replace that banshees with a deathcap you'll live damn long and do tons of damage. Thing is, you don't need to really itemize for more damage on cho, itemizing for tank is almost always better since he's so damn big everyone can just hide behind you, do damage, and it's hard for them to get big. Try dpsing a fucking trist hiding inside a giant cho. Skarner already does insane amounts of damage without really building damage(just a triforce). Building more damage on him isn't really as good as building tankier on him and just sticking on your target(wether you want to kill it or peel it for your carries). Actually IS might be really nice on skarner if you're really tanky and are able to get 2+ champs on your Q. Ahh, here we got where we differ. =D The times where I feel as if I can build Triforce from a jungling Skarner only occur when I'm pretty damn fat. Considering people play stupid vs Skarner it's highly likely, but still... =P If you have a game with low kills something like Philo -> HoG -> IMGONNASQUEEZE2kGOLDINNOW -> Tank is way more likely imo. On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
A part of me wouldn't wonder if they fucked up that algorhythm along the way. If I understand their pseudo-random distribution correctly it should be LESS likely to get critted directly in a row, but MORE likely to get critted during longer fights. Since the math behind it isn't common knowledge (and even then tricky to explain) I'm still all in favour of making random truely random and see what happens. well, the math is not exactly like that. Yea if you got critted then there is less of a chance you get crit'd on the next attack than the opponent's crit chance. But if you didn't get crit'd then the opponent will have a bigger crit chance on his next attack to crit, till he gets a crit. In the long run the expected value of a pseudo random distribution and the expected value of a true random distribution should be around the same. I believe people just don't get it how much difference the mastery change from 2 to 4 % makes. Before the mastery changes, a crit in early game was considered a heavenly miracle. The gods smiled on you. You were the chosen one! But this change doubled the chance to crit. At the bottom lane I usually get more than 2 crits on opponents in the laning phase. Wouldn't you have an equal chance to crit on each attack? I haven't looked into the league engine but I feel like each attack is typical built independently of the last so you always would have a 4% crit.
No, you don't have an equal chance on each attack.
Assuming 4% crit you have like a 2% crit chance for the first attack on a single target.
If you don't crit, your crit chance for the next hit increases.
If you either crit or hit a different target it resets to the original 4%.
|
No, the initial chance to crit with 4% is still 4%, what is changed is the chance for the NEXT hit to be a crit. Riots pseudorandom RNG doesn´t disort the actual chances, over 100 attacks you still get 4 crits on average - it´s just unlikely to get them in a row.
|
On January 14 2012 23:26 mr_tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 23:23 jcarlsoniv wrote:On January 14 2012 17:14 Two_DoWn wrote:
And screw it- but one more COMPLETELY unrelated topic:
Nothing makes you feel dirtier than running the following rune set up on GP:
Crit chance reds, armor yellows, mr/lvl blues, armpen quints. 12.4% crit at level 1 with the masteries. Its essentially the equivalent of the Korean 4 warpgate in base shenanigans from very early beta. It literally cannot fail.
Its guaranteed first blood. I had 4 crits and first blood on the riven I was against by the time I had hit level 3. Shit is just unfair. It doesnt even matter if they open cloth 5. You just rip through them with the crits. And I still maintain that you're a massive douchebag for doing this. It just shows how badly crit needs to be removed early game. Not crit. Unitemized crits. Masteries/Runes crits removed and it's ok. If a GP comes in lane with a brawler's glove just use it to your advantage.
Yes, 100% agreed. Sacrificing a cloth armor for brawlers' gloves is perfectly fine, as it's a big and noticeable sacrifice. Sacrificing 9 AD for 8.5% innate crit (reds), on top of 4% innate crit (masteries, no sacrifice at all here) is just silly.
|
On January 15 2012 02:13 Unentschieden wrote:
No, the initial chance to crit with 4% is still 4%, what is changed is the chance for the NEXT hit to be a crit. Riots pseudorandom RNG doesn´t disort the actual chances, over 100 attacks you still get 4 crits on average - it´s just unlikely to get them in a row.
This should be very obvious that it's wrong...
Say you have a normal engine 4% crit chance every attack
4% chance to crit on every attack = 4% average crit
Now if you have a pseudo random distribution and the first attack is 4% chance and attack after that is higher (and it resets back to 4%) then your average is going to be more than 4% crit chance. In a pseudo random distribution the first attack has a smaller chance to crit than your actual crit chance.
|
On January 15 2012 01:50 warscythes wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2012 01:45 whatwhatanut wrote:On January 15 2012 00:54 freelander wrote:On January 15 2012 00:43 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:24 JackDino wrote:On January 14 2012 19:09 r.Evo wrote:On January 14 2012 19:02 JackDino wrote:
I didn't say cho needs to build MORE tanky than Irelia or Udyr, I said that a cho that doesn't itemize tank isn't tanky at all, after you said that a cho is tanky without itemizing for it, which pretty much means you only get hp from your ult and no resists(buying items with both damage and resists means you are actually itemizing to be tanky).
If a recurve is your only offensive item, you're better off getting stark's on cho/skarner over an ionic spark imo, it helps your team, gives you lifesteal and hp5 which should make you tankier than 250hp, you're alive longer, you do more damage. Same with wit's.
Ionic spark can't bounce to the same target more than once, wit's is better for single target output. Yeah, agree; it's pretty much Starks vs IS vs Wits. Uh, stupid question but how does the gold value of 250 health vs 30-50 mres look like? Unless I'm being stupid right now IS should always outdamage Wits whenever it hits more than one person. That is assuming you get all four attacks off which is kinda tricky again. -.-v The "you're alive longer, you do more damage"-argument always struck me as not that clever. Extreme case: I'm an Amumu with warmogs, Thornmail, FoN and Banshees. Will I live damn long? Most likely. Will me being alive actually accomplish shit by crying all day? Nope. Imo the goal of tanks/bruisers (huehue) should be to balance offense and defense in a way that if you try to ignore them they rape you but if you don't ignore them they give the real damage enough time to rain down on the enemy team. Too much emphasize on damage and you get killed too quickly, too much emphasize on tankyness and you can be ignored for too long. PS: Excuse me for always ruining the "lol riot is so stupid"-party, but I keep hoping that changes here and there actually make sense and are well thought-out. Sorry. =D Except you're not itemizing on doing damage for amumu, but your choice was to itemize for damage on cho, big difference. If you replace that banshees with a deathcap you'll live damn long and do tons of damage. Thing is, you don't need to really itemize for more damage on cho, itemizing for tank is almost always better since he's so damn big everyone can just hide behind you, do damage, and it's hard for them to get big. Try dpsing a fucking trist hiding inside a giant cho. Skarner already does insane amounts of damage without really building damage(just a triforce). Building more damage on him isn't really as good as building tankier on him and just sticking on your target(wether you want to kill it or peel it for your carries). Actually IS might be really nice on skarner if you're really tanky and are able to get 2+ champs on your Q. Ahh, here we got where we differ. =D The times where I feel as if I can build Triforce from a jungling Skarner only occur when I'm pretty damn fat. Considering people play stupid vs Skarner it's highly likely, but still... =P If you have a game with low kills something like Philo -> HoG -> IMGONNASQUEEZE2kGOLDINNOW -> Tank is way more likely imo. On January 14 2012 23:57 LaNague wrote:
i personally think this "anti random" crit calculation is just broken, people get way more crits than they should with 4%.
A part of me wouldn't wonder if they fucked up that algorhythm along the way. If I understand their pseudo-random distribution correctly it should be LESS likely to get critted directly in a row, but MORE likely to get critted during longer fights. Since the math behind it isn't common knowledge (and even then tricky to explain) I'm still all in favour of making random truely random and see what happens. well, the math is not exactly like that. Yea if you got critted then there is less of a chance you get crit'd on the next attack than the opponent's crit chance. But if you didn't get crit'd then the opponent will have a bigger crit chance on his next attack to crit, till he gets a crit. In the long run the expected value of a pseudo random distribution and the expected value of a true random distribution should be around the same. I believe people just don't get it how much difference the mastery change from 2 to 4 % makes. Before the mastery changes, a crit in early game was considered a heavenly miracle. The gods smiled on you. You were the chosen one! But this change doubled the chance to crit. At the bottom lane I usually get more than 2 crits on opponents in the laning phase. Wouldn't you have an equal chance to crit on each attack? I haven't looked into the league engine but I feel like each attack is typical built independently of the last so you always would have a 4% crit. I believe Riot did some tweaking and it is now pseudo random to prevent things like the GP spotlight from happening too often.
It was pseudo random LONG before the GP spotlight. They just need to remove the crit mastery.
|
How much do the champion + 2 skin bundles cost on release? im thinking of getting the next champ with the rp i bought
|
ok, does this reset when u switch targets?
Also, with 4% crit that should mean the first 12 attacks are below 4% crit, right? (4 out of 100, 1 out of 25, half of it)
So if it resets, you would have a much lower chance to crit overall UNLESS they adressed this lazily by making the starting crit chance 4%, resulting in higher chances to crit as i suspect being the case.
If it doesnt reset you can maximise the amount of crits on champions by attacking after you didnt crit for X amounts of times on the creeps.
I dont see any scenario where this isnt in some way flawed.
|
On January 15 2012 02:34 LaNague wrote:
ok, does this reset when u switch targets?
Yes.
Also, with 4% crit that should mean the first 12 attacks are below 4% crit, right? (4 out of 100, 1 out of 25, half of it)
So if it resets, you would have a much lower chance to crit overall UNLESS they adressed this lazily by making the starting crit chance 4%, resulting in higher chances to crit as i suspect being the case.
If it doesnt reset you can maximise the amount of crits on champions by attacking after you didnt crit for X amounts of times on the creeps.
I dont see any scenario where this isnt in some way flawed.
They haven't said how it works. However, each subsequent attack would likely have a slightly higher chance to crit until you crit and then a slightly lower chance to crit after you crit. It supposedly helps to stop streaking, but there is no way to gauge how much of an effect it really has.
|
On January 15 2012 02:34 LaNague wrote:
ok, does this reset when u switch targets?
It keeps track of stats for different targets seperately (minions/monsters probably grouped up somehow).
On January 15 2012 02:34 LaNague wrote:
Also, with 4% crit that should mean the first 12 attacks are below 4% crit, right? (4 out of 100, 1 out of 25, half of it)
That sounds highly unlikely. Such an approach would be WAY too naive, and I'm pretty sure that Riot knows better than that. There's math behind it, and it is highly unintuitive. Our brain just fails at intuitively judging randomness.
|
Has Riot ever released more information about their system than saying it's different from the wc3 engine?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
