Yup. This actually happened.

http://i.imgur.com/zEBp90i.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/EIantfZ.jpg

Just ain't right. I'm not even angry. This isn't a rant post. I'm just sad :( I had a bad feeling all day too. First Serpent Lieutenant is going to have to wait another day.

It's quite annoying how we have 90% or even 98% of the correct stats and they'll still reduce the success rate to whatever abysmal rate it is :(

Well all your people leveled up from that, I'm sure you got at least one more point in strength there. You can send them right back out.

This is normal.

You can succeed with a report of "equal to the task" but I've only personally had 50% success with that pre-deployment evaluation.
That's 2 of 4 attempts. Not a great sample size. I've had "equal to the task" pop when I'm 40 points below (and succeeded)
and I've had "equal to the task" at 2 points below the reqs (and failed).
So I think "equal to the task" is a general success % probably somewhere between 50 and 75.

Conversely if you meet the requirements (or exceed them) then I've had 100% success.

The little quotes need to go. Just give us a visible flat % chance already. There's no reason to hide that information from us.

Do you think leading a squad of military units comes with flat numbers on success?
You take risks with people's lives. You don't get guarantees.
Be lucky and thankful that when he says you'll succeed, you succeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shai

This is normal.

You can succeed with a report of "equal to the task" but I've only personally had 50% success with that pre-deployment evaluation.
That's 2 of 4 attempts. Not a great sample size. I've had "equal to the task" pop when I'm 40 points below (and succeeded)
and I've had "equal to the task" at 2 points below the reqs (and failed).
So I think "equal to the task" is a general success % probably somewhere between 50 and 75.

Conversely if you meet the requirements (or exceed them) then I've had 100% success.

---

Yup. I know it is normal. I am more than acquainted with the RNG. However, it should not be normal to miss the required attributes by 1pt, and still have your success rate be reduced to what ever ridiculous value it is set at. But if I was the one responding to this post, I would tell myself, "Hey, you say you know about the RNG and the success rate, so you know full well that you either send them out and take the risk, bench them for the night, or send them on a guaranteed mission if there is one available. Missing the attribute by 1pt is no different than missing by 100."

So I think my hindsight is intact, just a little bummed about it is all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khalithar

The little quotes need to go. Just give us a visible flat % chance already. There's no reason to hide that information from us.

---

you aren't supposed to math it out, as shai said, this is about people so you take risks based on what the adviser says (think strategy games like Civ). The advisers in strategy games don't tend to give numbers, only opinions on what you should do, which is the way it should be. You have the stat numbers (own and required), and you can make your own judgement, with the adviser there for when you aren't sure.

I know how you feel.

This happened to me 3 times so far, where there was a difference in just 1 stat, by 5 or fewer points.
It was extremely frustrating.

Yesterday I was just 2 strength points away from getting 1st lieutenant, but still he says "Your squadron isn't ready for this mission yet". Which was kind of annoying.
I wish he'd at least let us try, even with a 50% success rate, I'd still have tried.
But it seems like the promotion quests are 100% or 0%, whereas the other ones are vague.

But, I'm glad we still get at least some experience points even if we fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewtskie

Well all your people leveled up from that, I'm sure you got at least one more point in strength there. You can send them right back out.

---

From a role playing perspective:

Serpent Squadron Sergeant: Commander, I regret to inform you that mission was a failure.

Commander Lunarian: This is unfortunate news. We have just received word from our operatives in Coerthas that the Ixali beast tribe is again attempting to summon Garuda.

Serpent Squadron Sergeant: *gasp* No!

Commander Lunarian: I'm afraid the reports are confirmed. We must use haste to prevent her summoning. Our team could not uphold the nation of Gridania's reputation of excellence with the Maelstrom in a routine mission. Tell me Sergeant, am I sending our team to be slaughtered?

Serpent Squadron Sergeant: Commander. I should remind you that the Maelstroms are still bitter that you left them for the Adders, and the fact you've risen the nation of Gridania to one of excellence as a result of your efforts towards peace and prosperity only rubs it in. Our squad is ready.

Commander Lunarian: That may very well be the case Sergeant. However, I will not make the same mistake twice. Their failure is my own. Continue their training and deploy them. We'll keep an eye on the Ixali in Coerthas and intervene ourselves if it comes to that. Get them ready. Now.

Serpent Squadron Sergeant: Right away commander!

I think you made the right choice sending them out.

As I said I've sent out 4 missions that I (now) expect to fail.
You typically get about 50% of the XP for failure which is [typically!] enough to level up and get closer to the required stats.

The only better option would be to send them out on another mission they would succeed that gives more than 50% of the one you are about to fail. Sometimes the stat requirements do not allow for this - or the members of the team that need levels don't fit the mission I can succeed so I send them out anyway and hope for the best. They come back ready to face the mission with higher stats and a few more training sessions.

What I do not think is that there's a gradient scale. I think if he says you're equal to the task, you have some hidden flat %. Right now I'm literally 2 points too low for the Lv40 mission and on any other mission in the game that would be "equal to the task" but for that mission he flat up tells me "They aren't ready for this." I assume that's a 0% success rate. I'm making an assumption, but I think I'd rather just get 2 more points of Physical and do it at 100%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shai

I think you made the right choice sending them out.

As I said I've sent out 4 missions that I (now) expect to fail.
You typically get about 50% of the XP for failure which is [typically!] enough to level up and get closer to the required stats.

The only better option would be to send them out on another mission they would succeed that gives more than 50% of the one you are about to fail. Sometimes the stat requirements do not allow for this - or the members of the team that need levels don't fit the mission I can succeed so I send them out anyway and hope for the best. They come back ready to face the mission with higher stats and a few more training sessions.

What I do not think is that there's a gradient scale. I think if he says you're equal to the task, you have some hidden flat %. Right now I'm literally 2 points too low for the Lv40 mission and on any other mission in the game that would be "equal to the task" but for that mission he flat up tells me "They aren't ready for this." I assume that's a 0% success rate. I'm making an assumption, but I think I'd rather just get 2 more points of Physical and do it at 100%.

---

I craft as much as battle. Hence, my knowledge of how RNG can be both really good and really bad to you. And I see this squadron thing kind of like a crafting session. You make strategic decisions trying to get your HQ success rate to 100% while keeping enough durability to finish the synth. Here you essentially do the same thing with your training and selection of squad members, and I've have had more fails at 90% crafting than I care to admit to, but I've also had success at very low percentages as well.

This is just a matter of unfortunate timing because the rank promotion has been so overdue, and I have grown impatient. I never sent my squad out without all the stats met prior to this mission, and I just had a really bad feeling about this one, but I sent them out anyway. I'm not sure if it was the right decision if it failed. I do get 50% of the exp, but the exp was not the goal.

The silver lining with this is that since the squad leveled up, they now have the highest probability of success with this mission without training. This means I get to do contemporary training all three sessions, which gives the highest exp per training session meaning my whole squad will benefit. More than likely, I wouldn't have been able to meet to requirements for the level 40 mission regardless if the last mission succeeded or not. I must exercise patience. Completing the lv 40 routine mission after tonight will likely be much easier.

It's not about how close you are to fulfilling a stat (304/305). It's based on how many of the stats you HAVE fulfilled. Example!

305/305 Physical, 450/450 Mental, 1/350 Tactical
305/305 Physical, 450/450 Mental, 349/350 Tactical

Both of these seems to have exactly the same chance of succeeding.


If you complete all three requirements it becomes a 100% chance of success. If you complete 2/3 of the requirements he says "Your squad seems to be equal to the task." This seems to be something like 50-75%. So keep in mind, that even though your three stats may be at 304/305, 449/450, 349/350, you still haven't met any of the requirements and he'll say your chance of succeeding are practically zero.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shai

Snip...

---

On an added note, I wanted post a few of my own theories:

Meeting stat requirements boosts success rate, but each stat has a different boost:
Highest stat: 50% increase
Penultimate stat: 30% increase
Lowest stat: 20% increase

Meeting stat requirements for a promotional mission is made more difficult by:
All stats met: 100% success rate
One or more stats not met: 1-5% (I don't believe SE is evil enough to make RNG values 0%)

I was willing to take the risk of not having all stats met for a non-promotional mission. But for the level 40 mission, I won't send them out until all the stats are met. It took a couple days to get my squad there with the level 20 one.

This game really dislikes me I've done an 18 hour every time since patch.. I've had 7 successful. I think my Squad might be glue eaters...

Im really tired of RNG. So very tired.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galactimus

It's not about how close you are to fulfilling a stat. It's based on how many of the stats you HAVE fulfilled.

...

If you complete 2/3 of the requirements he says "Your squad seems to be equal to the task." This seems to be something like 50-75%.

---

Yup. This is exactly what I believe also.
This has been one of my leading theories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chiapet

This game really dislikes me I've done an 18 hour every time since patch.. I've had 7 successful. I think my Squad might be glue eaters...

Im really tired of RNG. So very tired.

---

Tweak your stats to meet the requirements by selective training and selecting teammates.
If you meet the requirements or exceed them you will succeed every time.

I have only failed 2 18-hour missions and I was 2 points under the requirements.
I rolled the dice on 2 other missions and got away with it, but I expected them to be failures.
Only these 4 missions were "RNG" as you say. The rest were about strategically setting up the team to win - which is the real "fun" of Squads.
I say the real fun because it's literally the only thing you can do. LOL It's the only thing you have any control over.

Every other time, I've found a way to meet requirements. It's a constant juggle of Squad Stats & Membership/Classes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galactimus

It's not about how close you are to fulfilling a stat (304/305). It's based on how many of the stats you HAVE fulfilled. Example!

305/305 Physical, 450/450 Mental, 1/350 Tactical
305/305 Physical, 450/450 Mental, 349/350 Tactical

Both of these seems to have exactly the same chance of succeeding.


If you complete all three requirements it becomes a 100% chance of success. If you complete 2/3 of the requirements he says "Your squad seems to be equal to the task." This seems to be something like 50-75%. So keep in mind, that even though your three stats may be at 304/305, 449/450, 349/350, you still haven't met any of the requirements and he'll say your chance of succeeding are practically zero.

---

I understand this completely. You will have to see a previous post of mine where I say missing the required stat by 1 point isn't any different than missing it by 100 pts. However, this doesn't change that I think it's wrong. Flat percentages based on RNG is very lazy. I have a degree in programming so trust me when I say I know how lazy this is. I understand that this is new, and it will likely receive changes in upcoming patches. I also understand that even if things work in a way that is based on how high you can raise a certain stat, that you can still fail at 99.9%.

The thing is, I KNOW this has flat percentages tied to it. It is how we know that missing a stat by 1 or 100 points makes absolutely no difference. The round function is one line of code, and would take care of this whole thing. Don't sell someone short a guaranteed success rate (if that is what it is) if they are 2 points or less of meeting the requirements. It's an evil and cosmic joke.

SE puts too much emphasis on stats. It's kind of annoying to keep failing the same Lv. 40 mission three times in a row just because I'm missing like 10ish stats in Tactical. I have a surplus in Physical and Mental. This is mostly due to my party composition. I have one CNJ, one MRD and two ARC which makes it hard to balance the three stats. And yes, I could replace one of the ARC but I just want to be done with it and get my rank up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

The thing is, I KNOW this has flat percentages tied to it. It is how we know that missing a stat by 1 or 100 points makes absolutely no difference. The round function is one line of code, and would take care of this whole thing. Don't sell someone short a guaranteed success rate (if that is what it is) if they are 2 points or less of meeting the requirements. It's an evil and cosmic joke.

---

It'd lower the impact of the actual lvl of the classes and chemistry boni.
Needing those for the last 2-3 points in 1-2 stats happens quite often, if that only turns out to lower the success rate by 5% who would care? It's easy to have +15 on one and -2/-3 on another one even without having the needed lvl and tgat should be 90ish success rate?

On the other side the current system actually nerfes the impact of not having a wide array of different classes, which is the real RNG. No Archer or Rogue? Even with +280 on tactical you might not get close to 450.

Ouch, that sucks. I once had a mission in WoW fail at over 100% and got no loot due to a bug the first week of Legion.

Even if i don't meet all the requirements i send them out regardless, if i get the success then awesome but if i get the fail well i can then spend some little extra time on training and get the 100% success next time as there is no negative impact to failing a mission.

Must've wiped at 1%.

The points just seem so... random.
For my lvl 30 mission (to move onto next set of missions) I had my team, if I remember correctly, 1 pt below on DMG, a good 20 pts over Magic & 30/40 pts over on the last one (tactical?) but he said "i'll be blunt" and that it wouldn't succeed...
Now, i'm looking at lvl 35 missions where i'm below by about 10 pts on everything and he's saying "it'll be a challenge but I think your squad are equal to the task!" !?!?
He even says the same to lvl 5 missions!? Surely they should be guaranteed with everyone over 35!? Ugh i'm not enjoying this tbh :/ not strategically minded enough maybe :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

you aren't supposed to math it out, as shai said, this is about people so you take risks based on what the adviser says (think strategy games like Civ). The advisers in strategy games don't tend to give numbers, only opinions on what you should do, which is the way it should be. You have the stat numbers (own and required), and you can make your own judgement, with the adviser there for when you aren't sure.

---

Except it would be nice to at least actually -know- the numbers.

This isn't a strategy game. This is just another means to an end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shai

Do you think leading a squad of military units comes with flat numbers on success?

---

No. But I also don't think a squad commander could turn up whenever he pleases, receive the mission report and send it to the bin right away, send off the squad again and then go back to baking cakes and going fishing...

What would have made this system better was if we could actually gear the squad up like retainers, but a tad bit differently. Rather throwing highest ilv gear on and calling it a day, use a system that actually impacts how the stats are generated, and by feeding them items, similar to that of Chocobo grade feed items. Make the gear requirements be open for all classes, that way you can mix and match to find an optimal alternative, for instance you have a CNJ, GLD, ARC, and ACN, you're short 10 in your physical, but swapping out your team for other units creates a discrepancy in mental. So you open up squad and select the CNJ or ARC and equip them with "soldiers survival chest" or whatever we call it for this idea, and it gives said unit a stat increase in physical allowing you to do the mission.

I can't fathom the logic behind the "you take chances with people's lives" argument. A good leader, in dealings with military ideologies, has their unit properly conditioned, fed, and equipped, in order to handle whatever objective is bring asked of their unit. The mere fact we can only condition our unit, very limited at that, and only change their respective class upon having the next rank or item unlocked, is a very restrictive system, that also can prove to be counterproductive.

This system wasn't thought out by SE very well, and frankly I'm going to say they rushed it, it was a feature that could have actually made a promising mini game, instead it's a mess that as it stands, is almost not worth the effort to unlock the next ranking.

A lot of time it does not make much sense to me..I could have send my squadron on a lvl 35 mission where he said that it will probably be a success if nothing bad happens (none of my members had enough lvl to even go there)..and yet at the same time I got the same message or even a worse one with the lvl 20 mission or less..how does this make sense? That is nothing strategic for me, just complete and utter randomness..Or I have such incompetent members in my squadron that they somehow could even fail a lvl 15 mission with lvl30...not sure if I want such people with me in a dungeon later on..

And they should have made it so that its different depending on the numbers that are still missing. Now you likely get a "I'll be blunt" if you only have 1 point less in two parts and yet get a "will probably succeed" if only one part has 100 points missing..it seems that the systems does not care if its 1 point or 100..so in the end as long as you dont have at least two of the three fulfilled you will get a failure, even if both parts are only one number less. Nothing with the squadrons screams fun for me..they could have done so much more with them..and instead they choose a complete RNG system.

finally a use for all those gregarious worms i mined months ago!

It definitely needs tweaking to take Character levels into account. There is no reason a lvl 39+ party should fail a lvl 20 mission because they don't have enough of one of the three statistics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shai

Do you think leading a squad of military units comes with flat numbers on success?
You take risks with people's lives. You don't get guarantees.
Be lucky and thankful that when he says you'll succeed, you succeed.

---

I don't get care what a "real military" deals with. This is a game. We *should* be able to see the % chance of success next to whatever he quotes and in addition to that, if we're only a few points off of a stat it shouldn't be that huge of a penalty. Random example, let's say the stat requirements on a mission are 100/100/100 and our stats are 95/105/105, that should at least be a 95%+ chance of success rather than 50-75% it appears to be.

This is what we need:

https://postimg.org/image/943s6kcbx/

https://s10.postimg.org/9l442uatl/wo...514_104558.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khalithar

The little quotes need to go. Just give us a visible flat % chance already. There's no reason to hide that information from us.

---

Especially when I swear, the guy is drunk half the time. He kept saying how it was hopeless for my squad to complete the level 20 mission because they were seven points off yet after I did complete it, he's now saying they're up to a task despite being over 200 points below one of the requirements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khalithar

I don't get care what a "real military" deals with. This is a game. We *should* be able to see the % chance of success next to whatever he quotes and in addition to that, if we're only a few points off of a stat it shouldn't be that huge of a penalty. Random example, let's say the stat requirements on a mission are 100/100/100 and our stats are 95/105/105, that should at least be a 95%+ chance of success rather than 50-75% it appears to be.

This is what we need:

https://postimg.org/image/943s6kcbx/

https://s10.postimg.org/9l442uatl/wo...514_104558.jpg

---

Just as you "don't care what real military deals with" nobody in particular cares about how you think the system should work either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khalithar

let's say the stat requirements on a mission are 100/100/100 and our stats are 95/105/105, that should at least be a 95%+ chance of success

---

why?
you've only reached the required level for two of three stats, so why not 66% chance of success? where has 95% come from?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randysquirrel

why?
you've only reached the required level for two of three stats, so why not 66% chance of success? where has 95% come from?

---

The 95% likely comes from the fact you have 95% of the required stats in the one stat you are lacking. The + likely comes from the fact that you have more stats than necessary in the others, so that would compensate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zojha

The 95% likely comes from the fact you have 95% of the required stats in the one stat you are lacking. The + likely comes from the fact that you have more stats than necessary in the others, so that would compensate.

---

Essentially yes.

Edit for clarification:

Using the level 35 mission Allied Maneuvers as an example, it requires 455/315/190 for a grand total of 960. Let's say my total is 160/160/160 for a total of 480 points, that's 50% of the required amount which should be a 50% chance of success in my opinion.

that's not how everything in life works.

if you have to scale a 9 foot wall it doesn't matter if you can reach 8'11" or 5'10" you won't be able to get over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shai

Tweak your stats to meet the requirements by selective training and selecting teammates.
If you meet the requirements or exceed them you will succeed every time.

---

I appreciate your advice but I can tell you for a fact that I've met the stats and the lil window lickers still fail.

You really under estimate how much this game dislikes me ^^;;;;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SendohJin

that's not how everything in life works.

---

In life, if you die, you're gone for good. Hardcore mode incoming?

It's a video game. I feel I have to stress this. If you are to scale a 9 foot wall in real life, you can freeclimb, you can build a ladder, you can try to walk around it, you can use climbing tools, you can build a fricken tower or a tunnel through the wall if you've got the time. In a video game, it's just a stat check.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zojha

In a video game, it's just a stat check.

---

A stat check that wasn't met. So whats the issue?