this post was submitted on 23 May 2026
68 points (91.5% liked)

Showerthoughts

42178 readers
1111 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] socsa@piefed.social 8 points 1 hour ago

It's been proven that the hit rates shown in XCOM are basically bullshit. There's a bunch of hidden modifiers which determine the true hit probability.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 20 points 1 hour ago

The hit percentages in XCOM are a complete lie. I remember one time my sniper up on a rooftop missed a ~95% chance shot on a mook, who then turned around and crit the same sniper with a pistol aimed through two box trucks and cover. I think that's when I quit.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 6 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

xcom percentages are also not how probability works. When you need 95%+ just to have an effective 50/50 outcome, something is royally fucked.

[–] stardreamer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 20 minutes ago* (last edited 15 minutes ago)

IIRC it's a variation of the "double random number" system that Fire Emblem uses:

https://serenesforest.net/general/true-hit/

https://fireemblemwiki.org/wiki/True_hit

tl;dr humans are bad at percentages, so the displayed percentage is actually not the true accuracy, but a skewed number that "feels" more accurate

[–] CMDR_Horn@lemmy.world 30 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I feel the pain you clearly just felt

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 23 points 2 hours ago (3 children)

3 times...... How.. Advent is standing right there, one tile away and you have a shotgun....

[–] Z3k3@lemmy.world 20 points 2 hours ago

Bonus pain if the model was shoving the gun barel up its nose

[–] The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 14 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Shotguns and swords missing is so painful. They're usually so reliable that it feels like a guarantee!

Morrowind and dying to mubcrabs right outside the starting town says hi.

[–] Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 9 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

it's a 1 in 1000 event, that really hurts (or doesn't in this case)

[–] morto@piefed.social 12 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

We lose the notion of how many shots we fire in the game, so very unlikely events like that are very likely to happen at least once in a playthrough, but they still feel absurd. Our minds simply aren't made for statistics

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 12 points 2 hours ago

I can't remember where I heard it but I remember someone saying for every 90% shot you miss, how many 10% did you hit and not call unfair.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 57 minutes ago)

Two things:

  1. It wasn't missing on a 90% that was an issue; you could miss shots that showed 100% because it was actually a 99.5% chance and the display number got rounded up.

  2. It still doesn't use real probability. They literally programmed it so anything over 50% was actually a much higher percentage behind the scenes to make you feel like you were doing better (and because computers can't do truely random numbers). This is actually a super common thing in all video games that use percentages or dice rolls. And becsuse it's a computer, if you opened up the code to see the starting seed and all the math applied to it, you could accurately predict everything in the sequence.

[–] ArgentRaven@lemmy.world 16 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The newer XCOM games actively remember and give you the same result if you reload. To discourage save scumming. I would get stuck in one where I'd miss a 90%, reload, and still miss. Because the next shot was always going to miss. So I'd take a different shot with someone else that wouldn't matter, come back, and suddenly I'd make that 90%.

The original 90's games, you could just save scum. But you'd still miss that 90 sometimes.

[–] PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 hour ago

This can be easily solved by just going to a different tile and bumm, new possibilities. (I save scum)

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago

The "modern" XCOM games cheaped out on their game mechanic budget.

The game Phoenix Point made by a much smaller studio with fewer resources came up with a vastly superior way to tackle hit probability. In that game you can free aim using a reticle made of two concentric circles. The outer circle represents where your shot(s) have a 100% chance falling inside of. The inner circle represents where 50% of your shots have a chance of being inside. The more accurate weapons have smaller circles. Then when you shoot the game simulates the path of your shots and any character or environmental object that gets in the way will be taken into account. If you fire a burst or shoot a shotgun, you're not bound to only 100% hitting or 100% missing. You can have a partial number of rounds or pellets hit the target, while others might miss, be blocked, or even hit another enemy or ally if they were sharing that cone of probability.

This makes the whole thing feel far more real than the shitty dice roll system XCOM relies on that just feels cheap and simplistic in comparison especially for a game of that price. Too bad that overall Phoenix Point had difficulty curve issues and the story was not every interesting to me at least.

If they ever make a new XCOM game I really hope they make that mechanic more like Phoenix Point's. And also lose the arbitrary turn limits that they've introduced in XCOM2 because they force a reckless game style that I absolutely hate in those types of games.

[–] TheFriendlyDickhead@feddit.org 15 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I understand that it's just bad luck, but I was still so fucking pissed off every time someone missed while litterally standing infront of someone and dying because of that.

[–] morto@piefed.social 6 points 1 hour ago

That's probably why in phoenix point they made it trajectory based, to feel more realistic

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 8 points 2 hours ago (1 children)
[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago

It's an alien invasion defence game where RNG hates you.

https://steamdb.info/franchise/XCOM/

[–] auzy1@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I'd assume that the reason I lost all my finding in xcom fairly quickly too was because of bad AI coding, not because I suck

The fairest Gollop accuracy is in the GBA game though.