The Accuracy Stat sucks

[Vermachtnis]

This stat is literally the worst. It's the game deciding your fate and it doesn't matter if it's 99% or 5%, it's going to screw you over no matter what. I'm sitting here playing Valkyria Chronicles and I'm just thrust in a fight against a giant tank, which is bullshit on it's own. I give this order to up my sniper's accuracy. Her passive procs and her accuracy goes up again. And she fucking misses. Not to mention our tank just misses sometimes too. It's not just Valkria Chronicles. How many death happen in Fire Emblem because you miss a 95% chance. Or gathering in FFXIV, fuck gathering in FFXIV.

So yea, vent about all the times accuracy screwed you over.

[Wolf Kanno]

That's one of the reasons why I had to stop playing Valkyria Chronicles cause situations like that kept happening, it made me decide the Character Quirk mechanic was largely bullshit and didn't matter. Made worse when enemy units always tear your units apart with perfect accuracy and when you finally get their weapons, they all have terrible accuracy stats. WTF.

The original Tactics Ogre is like this too. If you actually wanted to land a blow, your only hope was to flank them and do a back attack. Hell, I think Tactical RPGs in general screw you over the most with this nonsense cause I'm now flashbacking to some Front Mission and Disgaea shenanigans...

[Rez09]

There is nothing I hate more in an RPG than missing -- I'd rather do 0 damage than miss, even though they are functionally the same thing. There is just something about it that drives me nuts.

For a particular instance that comes to mind, Ring of Red: because you look down the scope and line up your shots in that game, it is easy to mistake the accuracy number as a measure of how wide your shot may go rather than an actual chance to hit, buuuuut this is sadly not the case, and you can fire with your scope pointed at the ground and still hit things in the arm a good mile away as long as the roll favors you. It actually took me the longest time to figure that out too, as the randomness of the accuracy stat kept me thinking there was some trick to firing with the swing of the barrel to score faster hits when there is, indeed, was absolutely not. The game was a whole lot harder the first time though. . _.

Looking at Fire Emblem, while accuracy does screw me from time to it, it's actually random crits that get me in that series. Generally speaking accuracy is in the player's favor with your higher stat totals and how formulas work, but for whatever reason I ALWAYS get crits when I don't want them, and 8% crit on enemy units actually seems to be more like, you know . . . 100%. And I hate it.

Also, another one that came to mind, FF1, where the start of the game is always annoying because your hammer doesn't hit a goddamn thing. Ever. I mean, you could always, like, _not_ buy a hammer, but . . . it's a hammer, who doesn't buy one? Or two? That said, the accuracy stat is pretty bananas later in the game though, since it is sky high and tied to attacks per turn.

[Vermachtnis]

This image sums up my feelings exactly.

https://i.imgur.com/cVAc8oo.png

[Chibi Youkai]

Accuracy is lame. Unless you're in a game where canonically, accuracy is a thing, like shooting games, it needs to be a thing of the past. Also, accuracy is gathering is the largest scam ever. If it's less than 80%, it may as well be 0%, lol.

[WarZidane]

I only like accuracy in SRPGs where I can save scum (for instance, Super Robot Taisen, where I once did an optional objective by reloading if the enemy hit with its 60-70% chance or when I missed with my 40% chance :p )

[Rez09]

But do you really like accuracy in those situations, or do you like that you can bypass it? ;)

[Vyk]

Ive always wondered if it might be better to do like a ratio of accuracy. Like if you had 66% accuracy you'd be guaranteed two hits out of three and guaranteed for one of three hits to miss

[Lord Golbez]

How would you practically work that? What of you don't attack with the same accuracy three times. It seems like it would be very convoluted to implement.

And yeah, accuracy kind of sucks. I somewhat appreciate it in tactical games because it adds a strategic element to positioning, but they still tend to go too far with it.

[Vyk]

I'm less worried about practicality, and more worried about raging over missing 3 times in a row in XCOM with a 95% chance to hit. There has to be a better way. Some things either need gauranteed, or you need more than just a stat. Things like Valkyria Chronicles doesn't help either, with the dopey evasions, where a character suddenly gets psychic and ducks immediately before a sniper shot zooms overhead

Probably the best solution is that 95 is a guaranteed hit, and that 5% is like a veering stat, so that you can miss a headshot and hit the body instead or something

Some games, like Fallout 3+ visualize this by making your gun's aim unsteady until you get better with it. But I remember people hating that shots were still a statistic in 3, where you can line up a shot and pull the trigger and there's still a dice roll on whether or not you hit. Since people were playing it like an FPS (understandably) rather than an RPG

[sharkythesharkdogg]

This image sums up my feelings exactly.

https://i.imgur.com/cVAc8oo.png

Came here to rage at XCOM, but nevermind. Good work, solider. :salute:

Also, the latest XCOM is stupid hard with how many people it throws at you and how troutty your accuracy is.

[Vyk]

Yeah... I could not beat xcom 2. The gauntlet of enemies they throw at you on the last leg was too much for me. Groups spawning in every round. I just couldn't cause enough damage to kill five or more enemies every turn..

[sharkythesharkdogg]

Agreed, although I honestly also struggled with the time limit too. They touted the new ability of moving in cover and not breaking concealment as easy, then followed it up with mission after mission where you basically need to sprint across the map to meet the objective in time.

How can I take advantage of the new movement/concealment properties when I don't have time to move slowly and carefully? Oh well.

[Loony BoB]

I beat XCOM2, but I probably restarted quite a few missions, and I definitely had to figure out some tactics that suited me better, particularly on the "timer" missions. The non-timed missions were a piece of cake, just had to be careful and stay within a decent proximity of your teammates.

[Spuuky]

You can always use pseudo-random miss chance, where any missed attack raises your subsequent hit chance, and any hit lowers your subsequent hit chance, by an appropriate amount depending on what results you're hoping to achieve.

[Lord Golbez]

That sounds like a practical way to implement something like Vyk's suggestion. That way, regardless of whether you're doing an action with the same hit rate multiple times, you could have all hit rates go up by some set offset or proportion for each miss.