Brainstorm: less randomization

I think you are missing the point a bit Deep Blue. The 50% spells are not just resistance, they act as a deterrent from being targeted in the first place. So the toss of a coin analogy is not accurate. It is risk vs reward. Is the chance for a good outcome good enough? Can I deal with the failed outcome? these are the questions you need to answer as the timer ticks. You can have a situation where a 20% chance, because the reward would be so great and you can handle the failure is worth the risk. You could also have a situation where and 80% chance is not good enough because the reward is not great and you cannot handle the failed outcome.

I promise i won't continue further with this dicussion as i would be happier if you would comment about my ideas or give yours (unless you love so badly the current system of course).

While i obviously agree on your scenario as it was pointed out already by DW some situations leave you no choices. At that point it comes down to tossing coins. There is no risk vs reward here, no real interactions is left to the players as it is suddenly based on luck. No daring strategy either.

Those skills, especially the low % ones generate no interaction nor strategical decisions between the two players. Sometimes they happen and are awesome, sometimes they give mixed results or terrible ones. Do any player plan around assassin or survival instinct? do these skills reward some kind of "daring" gameplay? Personally i dislike this. If you really like very random things to happen without the possibility to decrease/increase the odds then i dont think we will ever agree

and for the records...how often you saw somebody picking up assassin or survial instinct? lonewolves shield are bit more common but mostly because they are a necessary step (and are much much better in general as you have better odds)

I think survival instinct as I stated is too low % for the AP, I would never take it, it is not reliable enough. +10% crit chance seems very good when it is +10% not 10% in total. The LoW should make multiple attacks in a match meaning it will happen often (ie: most matches where the LoW was not wasted) For me assaults are all about bang for your buck, increasing their AP by too much IMO reduces their main role as cheap effective killers.
I like your idea for survival instinct but it smells of OPness when a LoW has very good parry to begin with. Being able to guarantee a crit would change the game enormously so also a pretty impractical solution for assassin. I never take more then mobility on a LoW, but it always seemed to me that the assassin skill as it sits currently would make an assault much more reliable at killing units. Killing units is kind of what they do, so +10% crit = greater chance of kill, even greater with offensive stance.
I think all of those 50% spells are fine as they are for reasons already stated. They are part resistance, part deterrent making it a lot less like a coin toss than you are making out.
Discipline is an important part of Lion, but I cannot rely on it. How would you feel about making it that Lion ALWAYS get the first activation? Pretty crazy suggestion isn't it? That is how yours sound to me.

I think you are missing the point a bit Deep Blue. The 50% spells are not just resistance, they act as a deterrent from being targeted in the first place. So the toss of a coin analogy is not accurate. It is risk vs reward.

This is true, but there are other ways to achieve the same result without coin tossing (or just smaller ones).
I feel these 50% chances will have to go before the game is complete.

Discipline is an important part of Lion, but I cannot rely on it. How would you feel about making it that Lion ALWAYS get the first activation? Pretty crazy suggestion isn't it? That is how yours sound to me.

You made me read again some of his posts and that does not sound to me like what he was tring to say.

He wanted to say that there is difference between this:
http://www.btwaters.com/probab/dice/dicemain3D.html
And random events happening during a tactical game.
If you cant see it I really dont know how to explain it.

PS ok maybe I found a way to explain it:
Suppose you are in a wood in real life and in this wood you know there is a guy who wants to fight you to death, now you both have swords but during the fight at one point a tree fall on your opponent and kill him, that was lucky, but you also were good to remain alive and actually could have happened that he killed you if before the lucky event he got you off guard with his sword.
Another thing is that, with (or against) the same guy you started to play russian roulette if you have the first try and the bullet is in the second shot you will survive and he will die even if you repeat the game infinite times, another matter is the first situation that could evolve in different ways (not every time the tree will fall on your opponent but it depends on the fight you set up against him before the event!) and the roll factor have a much less importance and is not the centre of the fight.

You have to understand that rolls must be logically dependant (as mathematicians would say) on your tactic and what happened before the roll and never be independant.

Insensitive -> make it work like hardboiled but only for spells (not my idea but i really liked it). Maybe absorbing 4-5 damage can be enough. This would make bad omen/e-touch quite hard counters vs it but golem has such a high accuracy that usually bad omen impacts slightly and e-touch can be played around/dispelled if the pala dies.
Ring of mist -> same as insentive but with a duration. Dispelled if the caster dies.
Ring of ice -> Same as insensitive with reduced damage from arrows or a -ACC penalty for ranged attacks (notice that having a -ACC from ranged attacks , while still random it can be played around by the player/opponent! a point blank shot will probably hit regardless! this is the interaction i want!). Dispelled if the caster dies.
Assassin -> critical hit chance to 100% if the enemy unit is surrounded by 2 or more units. Alternatively, if hit rate is higher than 100% it will automatically crit.
Survival instinct -> The unit doesn't suffer the penalties by being surrounded.

Imo especially Assassin and Survival needs to work less random but more tactical way.
and i like both ideas.

thanks for the support DW survival instinct might be quite powerful like i would imagine it BUT if you think about it, it costs two times more than War fury...and more than bloodlust (!!) on the PoB...it better bring some value to the table or else it won't be considered by anybody. Same goes for assassin quite expensive for a 10% chance... personally i would really consider assassin if it would deal 100% crit when you have more than 100% hit chance. It makes also sense lore-wise imo as a well trained knight will never let a puny "assassin" sneak behind him, while if surrounded by 4 units he might not notice that sneaky assault unit coming from behind

i really like this assasin idea.

this would make it work fine against unprotected mages without defensive stance, wounded units, skeletons (assasins - "killing undeads more eficient since battle of kaiber") and encircled enemies.

some time ago i mentioned even thatn all % above 100% should be converted into critical chance - becouse this would be nice way do deal with no current bonus for encircling or skills giving bonuss to Acc Vs enemies with low PAR. Simply when you have 100% you cant hit better - while in case of STR Vs TOU - you always can hit harder.

Discipline is an important part of Lion, but I cannot rely on it. How would you feel about making it that Lion ALWAYS get the first activation? Pretty crazy suggestion isn't it? That is how yours sound to me.

I understand what Deep Blue is saying. Discipline is another thing that is a 'core' ability but does not always yield the desired result. If we are to remove low % or make more abilities sure things, then Discipline rolls would also fall into that category. This is a dice game. I accept chance, I try to minimise it. What I am saying is if you are looking to remove random elements it will have to go deeper than the handful of skills shown here.

Survival Instinct is a good example of a skill that is too low % to be viable, but people still take it. I like the idea for that but it will not work in a game sense. Defensive LoW could be used as a suicide troop who is actually not risking anything. Could not be encircled, no penalties to hit the targeted unit if it tries to disengage. Unable to be hit by the defenders, even if they have done the right things. Negating a core mechanic like encirclement is too big a deal.

Assassin is +10% chance of crit, not 10% chance of crit. That is already a pretty good skill especially when making more than 1 attack. Being able to guarantee a crit is also too big a deal IMO. The mechanic of works when people are already engaged is good, but auto crit is too much. +1 or +2 damage, or more damage against wounded targets would be more reasonable. I also think that works when people are engaged makes the 'assault' more defensive than offensive.

Insensitive may be more of an issue, I have not played many Golems (nor should I in a 400 AP game). That could be changed independently of the spells that do similar. The spells have a duration and a caster so I don't think they need to be changed.

What I am saying is if you are looking to remove random elements it will have to go deeper than the handful of skills shown here.

But that's not what he is trying to do.
The random aspect of the game is something you cant take away from a game like this, but there is random and Random like I tryed to explain you... the first random is logically dependant by past events, the second Random is indepentant by everything and it s just a coin toss you have to face at some point.

I agree with the OP, mostly. Many of these abilities would be less frustrating if they were less "Luck" and more steady.

Instead of 50% chance to cancel spells, -75% damage from spells (instead of 50 Because some spells don't deal damage) etc...

What I am saying is if you are looking to remove random elements it will have to go deeper than the handful of skills shown here.

But that's not what he is trying to do.
The random aspect of the game is something you cant take away from a game like this, but there is random and Random like I tryed to explain you... the first random is logically dependant by past events, the second Random is indepentant by everything and it s just a coin toss you have to face at some point.

Your explanation was pretty silly actually. Explain how I can influence the discipline roll? If I cannot it falls into the category that you and deep blue are talking about. Not able to be influenced. This game had a lot more right than wrong when I started playing. You are looking to change things that are really not that big a deal, and for me they are fine. Trying to look smart with your absolutely irrelevant analogy does nothing to change my opinion of that.