Block vs dodge

[Velorien]

I'm aware that block and dodge are mechanically the same, but how do they interact? Does high dodge mean you don't have to bother with block, and vice versa? Or do they add together? Or do you take the average?

[Tenebrais]

As far as I know they add together.

[potterman28wxcv]

I would guess that they are independent. You have x% chance to dodge. And if you did not dodge, then you have x% chance to block.

So if you want to compute the probability of "evading" an attack whether it be through dodge or block, it's something like 1 - (1 - P(block))(1-P(dodge)).

Indeed the probability to get hit is (1 - P(block)) * (1 - P(dodge)). (you get hit iff you did not block and you did not dodge). The probability not to get hit (i.e. through a dodge or a block) is then 1 - that probablity, hence the formula above

That's close to computing the average of both, but it's not exactly the same

[Velorien]

Oh, actually, found it on the wiki:

"The target's Block, Dodge, and Cover are added together to give Defense Strength."

(...)

"If the attack fails, the system will randomly determine whether the target Dodged, Blocked, or Took Cover. Cover is the first line of defense—if the hit strength is less than the cover value, the shot hits and does damage to the cover. Otherwise, Dodge or Block is selected, weighted by the target's defense ratings."

[kory]

To my knowledge, they are identical (I think I got that impression from the wiki), it is a bit confusing that both exist, since they are interchangable. I suppose the game left itself room to have some effect trigger on dodge and not block, but it never happened.

[Trekopep]

Yeah, block and dodge used to be separate (weapons and attacks had a "wield" stat, where a fast weapon was good against dodge, and a slow weapon was good against block), but it ended up being confusing and not well conveyed, so we scrapped it. We've talked about combining the two stats at some point, but it's a bit complicated to do, and we know some modders make dodge and block have different effects.

[76561199007339512]

It would be a lot more intuitive if it were two checks even if they currently operated identically. You're picking tabletop gamers and tabletop gamers tend to know probability and expect the math to work out like potterman28wxcv described.

[Velorien]

I'm happy with it as it is, but I do have a QoL suggestion: when you're equipping new augments, have the display show both the block and the dodge values. Otherwise, you look around and somebody has a block of 45, so clearly they need this blocking augment, and you don't realise they also have a dodge of 80.

[kory]

Originally posted by nbrown0:

It would be a lot more intuitive if it were two checks even if they currently operated identically. You're picking tabletop gamers and tabletop gamers tend to know probability and expect the math to work out like potterman28wxcv described.

If it was two checks you would then be better to stack one over the other, and so everytime you got an upgrade you would have to go in and check the character sheet. Making it one check actually makes them identical, so its a bit simpler.

[76561199007339512]

Originally posted by kory:

If it was two checks you would then be better to stack one over the other, and so everytime you got an upgrade you would have to go in and check the character sheet. Making it one check actually makes them identical, so its a bit simpler.

You have to do that anyways to check whether a hero is stacking block/dodge or warding/armor.

Giving them different names gives the impression that it's better to stack one or the other. The problem is that the impression is false. Anyone who knows basic probability would assume that they should be concentrating them on different characters and that a penalty to one from age or a theme can be mitigated by stacking the other and only know that this isn't how it works if they looked them up on the wiki. And likely still assume it's an error by an editor that doesn't know how probabilities stack.

[kory]

Well, its not uncommon in popular games to do a one roll system (world of warcraft does it for many rolls), so I think it somebody is minmaxing enough that they want to optimize like that, they would know they have to look it up anyway, and it is spelled out nicely on the wiki. "Basic probability" doesn't really give an answer here.

[Thril]

Originally posted by Velorien:

I'm happy with it as it is, but I do have a QoL suggestion: when you're equipping new augments, have the display show both the block and the dodge values. Otherwise, you look around and somebody has a block of 45, so clearly they need this blocking augment, and you don't realise they also have a dodge of 80.

I agree, this is a good idea!

[76561199007339512]

Originally posted by kory:

Well, its not uncommon in popular games to do a one roll system (world of warcraft does it for many rolls), so I think it somebody is minmaxing enough that they want to optimize like that, they would know they have to look it up anyway, and it is spelled out nicely on the wiki. "Basic probability" doesn't really give an answer here.

Blizzard did it first is not a good excuse for opaque and misleading game mechanics and assuming players read a wiki to uncover misleading mechanics is not an acceptable standard of communication. This is especially true since I've seen a dev mention of an upcoming console version. You can't guarantee a console user has a web browser available.

[Syrris]

Umm. You're going back to the earliest tabletop RPGs with that one, long before Blizzard was around. Turning defense into a bunch of separate rolls is a much more recent invention.

[76561199007339512]

Originally posted by Syrris:

Umm. You're going back to the earliest tabletop RPGs with that one, long before Blizzard was around. Turning defense into a bunch of separate rolls is a much more recent invention.

Tabletop games can't have misleading mechanics because the players have to have the formulas to roll the dice. The players can't play the game at all without the formulas because they, not a computer, are doing the math.