Pet Battle Accuracy Changes in Patch 5.3

Community Manager
We've recently posted a new blog going over the details of how accuracy in Pet Battles will be changing in Patch 5.3. Give it a read, and then come back here to share your feedback. We'd really appreciate it!

Edit: We received an update today that the damage percentage increase has been adjusted from 5-15% to 10-30%, which has also been updated in the blog.
Edited by Crithto on 4/11/2013 5:47 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Undead Warrior
20035
This is a great change, a single dodge changes the outcome of an entire match, very frustrating. Whilst you're at it blizz can u make it so that the resilient effect kicks in immediately instead of after a stun(or other cc) effect wears off? as its possible to be chain cc'd if the first cc doesnt actually break yet(frog lick hex cc chain for example).

Thanks Crithto.
Reply Quote
MVP - World of Warcraft
90 Troll Priest
13355
Thanks for the info, Crithto! :)

I personally am fond of the change. The reduced chance to miss is nice and will alleviate some of the frustration grinding out pet levels in the Vale. It's good to know now too that in a PvP fight you know that you can get that last hit in for the kill if each pet has a 100% hit ability, rather than praying it doesn't miss three times in a row.

I do think that a little RNG is good - the entire game is based on it, and if each ability were 100% chance to hit it would remove all real strategy, and the fastest and hardest hitting pet would always win.

What is the lowest current change to miss right now? 50%? I imagine it would be for the current high miss abilities there are now, like Moth Balls and such. More of a curiosity question than anything.

Thanks for the info, again! Looking forward to dig into it when I am done moving and settled into my new job. It's tiring!
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Druid
17580
One of the best changes in 5.3, it'll take away the frustration of pet battling.
Reply Quote
71 Gnome Warlock
875
I personally don't think that removing the 5% base dodge was necessary (I'm sure even the dimmest of pets can think to move out of the way of something hurtling their way every now and again without being told to), but over all the changes to hit chance look awesome.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
16690
Personally I cant wait for these to go live.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
14660
I don't quite understand, the point of these changes is reduce randomness right? So then why are the basic attacks taking an accuracy cut? Sorry if I'm missing something, that just seems a bit strange to me.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Priest
BnB
14295
I don't quite understand, the point of these changes is reduce randomness right? So then why are the basic attacks taking an accuracy cut? Sorry if I'm missing something, that just seems a bit strange to me.


Without a little randomness, the outcome of a match could be predicted to a high degree of certainty before the first swing, and that’s no fun.
Reply Quote
90 Human Death Knight
11405
Great change. The worst thing about Dodge was how opaque it operated, making it very frustrating and feeling much too random. Glad to see it go.

If there's only one other thing to try and take a look at, imho, I would vote how Speed (or who goes first) affects the fight. I do a lot of PvP and knowing with certainty if I'm going first makes the match much too easy to predict and control. My best team is a combo of Winter's Helper, Kun Lai Runt and a Tundra Penguin. Their speeds are generally faster than most of the pet population, giving me an advantage that I actually feel is overpowered when I PvP.

A few ideas to consider, although I haven't thought these through fully.

1) Give a few attacks an RNG roll to go first to give an opponent a chance to mitigate an incoming hard hitting attack. For example, if I'm going up against someone using a Kun Lai Runt, and they just Frost Shocked me, I'd love to have an ability that has a chance to go first to try to get one last hit in before I get stunned and have to swap. (Not a guaranteed move first like an aquatic attack, but a more general dice roll that has a decent chance to go first.) Of course, people have to choose this pet ability from their pool of three slots.

2) Make swap attack moves, like Death Grip, always go second, ignoring speed.

3) Have one of the weather effects randomize who goes first. I think Sandstorm would be more fun if it randomized who went first, versus being a chance to miss.

4) Remove damage from speed increase attacks, but allow them to always go first. This allows a person to get in the speed change before a burrow or dodge or some other attack that forces a miss.

Just thinking out loud.

Looking forward to the change. Love how Pet Battles turned out in WoW. Can't wait for an iPad or iPhone Pet Battles game I can play on my train commute! (HINT HINT HINT.)
Edited by Neue on 4/4/2013 8:19 PM PDT
Reply Quote
81 Troll Priest
0
Sooooo basically they listed nearly every single basic attack that is used in between cooldowns and gave them a chance to miss?

I mean its cool that the cooldown abilities won't miss anymore but this looks like they are taking a step forward in the right direction then taking half a step backwards to me.

Removing Rng does not remove strategy. Its actually the reverse. Anyone who actually pvps alot would know that in PVP the consequences of RNG become higher the longer a match goes on. If you are in the middle of a match and things are looking relatively even and suddenly you miss three times on main attack hits, 2 times on major CD abilities, or a combination of the two from RNG you might as well forfeit and requeue. The only exception is if you've got enough type advantage to still pull out a win.

It doesn't even need to be back to back misses. Unless you've got type advantage, in general missing more than 3 times on main hits in a pvp match sets you back far enough that unless your opponent misses a few times as well you are pretty much guaranteed to be fighting a losing battle. But relying on RNG to make the game even again because you rolled badly on the RNG has nothing to do with strategy... it just rolling the dice and praying that the RNG will turn in your favor enough so that you might still pull out a win. And two or three turns do matter seeing as how most pets go down within four to five turns. Missing 3 times on a main attack essentially means you are playing that game with two pets and a gimp.

Normally you'd make up for missing once or twice by hoping that your cooldown abilities land on the current patch.. so like I said this change is a step forward and half a step back seeing as how CD abilities dont miss anymore.

But they increased the damage of these abilities that they added RNG to? Srsly? that makes the RNG problem even worse. If you miss you would be even further behind than you are on live when you miss a basic attack. Especially since many of the major big hit moves have already been nerfed in terms of damage, bringing basic attack damage closer to cooldown abilities means that missing on main attacks will be even more problematic. If anything they should be decreasing the damage of main attacks if they want to attach RNG to them in order to mitigate the problems caused by RNG. If the devs insist on keeping RNG on staple game determining abilities then they should nerf the abilities to make them create less of an impact should they fail to hit.

I mean sure they didn't add a miss chance to some main attack abilities, but most of the attacks they didn't add to that list are what? multi hit moves that are already RNG in nature? lol. RNG or not no one in their right minds are going to pick up the crappy moves that didn't make it to the list like laser over burn especially since the damage gap is about to grow even wider (dark phoenix hatchling as example), and if they lose because of some ridiculous game determining miss people will continue to rage or rationalize their loss as a win because of RNG.

Clearly it would be much better and preferable if they just did away with RNG completely. The game will never be free of idiotic losses because you missed the move that determines the outcome of the game otherwise.

This game is only so predictable because they limited us to 3v3. If they added 5v5 or 6v6 then there wouldn't be this problem.
Edited by Savras on 4/5/2013 1:33 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
18455
04/04/2013 10:45 PMPosted by Savras
Sooooo basically they listed nearly every single basic attack that is used in between cooldowns and gave them a chance to miss?


This is a false statement and the core problem with your argument.

Re-read the list in the OP and look at how many of those abilities are only found on one pet.
Reply Quote
81 Troll Priest
0
Sooooo basically they listed nearly every single basic attack that is used in between cooldowns and gave them a chance to miss?


This is a false statement and the core problem with your argument.

Re-read the list in the OP and look at how many of those abilities are only found on one pet.

I mean sure they didn't add a miss chance to some main attack abilities, but most of the attacks they didn't add to that list are what? multi hit moves that are already RNG in nature? lol. RNG or not no one in their right minds are going to pick up the crappy moves that didn't make it to the list like laser over burn especially since the damage gap is about to grow even wider (dark phoenix hatchling as example), and if they lose because of some ridiculous game determining miss people will continue to rage or rationalize their loss as a win because of RNG.


Those abilities found only on one pet also happen to be either best in slot or mandatory on said pet. And said pets also happen to be pets that are or were used quite often in pvp pet battles.

beam vs light on wisps a pet that shows up with some relative consistency in pvp? most people go beam because otherwise they will end up being on CD doing nothing between flash and soulward which is the optimal attack selection for said pet.

Sulfurus smash > magma wave for lil ragnaros

broom> batter because enchanted broom already does mechanical damage elsewhere. also batter is RNG.

onyx bite > pounce for feline familiar

jab I think is usually used on the harbringer of flame a pet that I see pop up form time to time in pvp. their other option is burn. both are on the list. Most people take jab because again it already can do elemental damage from elsewhere. Not like it matters since both jab and burn can still miss.

metal fist and rail gun? They both suffer from RNG in 5.3 and rail gun is better. clock work gnome another relatively popular pet in certain comps has both and the only mechanical pet that I've even seen people use nowadays outside of mini thor and yeti

Yeti also has metal fist.. and thrash another RNG multi hit move. This might be one of the few cases where I'd argue that I don't care about the main attack because thrash is better for yeti

missile (i know its not only found on one pet)> batter (another RNG multi hit move). most mechanical pets that have missile also have batter. mini thor and the poormans clockwork bots.

infected claw or slicing winds another RNG move on the blight hawk?

Snap or surge a move that does crappy damage? Especially after they buff the damage on snap when you use the magical crawdad, or the emperor crab? The only time anyone even takes surge anyway is if they were running into copious amounts of elemental in the queue otherwise its not even worth it.

Snap and other common moves like claw, shadow slash, crush, are all found on and used on the most popular pets. And almost all of these pets have a multi hit, dot, or some kinda attack with huge RNG miss chance ( the pets with demolish and main attack ; anubisath idol and anodized bear cub and yes I know most people don't use the bear cub anymore)
crabs use snap, anubisath idol uses crush, etc etc etc

I can keep going but you get the idea. They didn't remove RNG from the main attack tier. They just attached RNG to nearly every main attack that matters forcing you to choose between two different kinds of RNG.

In nearly all the cases minus unused abilities such as but not limited to the breaths because tail sweep is better, and water jet because the only pets that have it that matter (frogs) are better off speccing into their critter damage tongue lash with aquatic frog kiss, jab because monks use take down instead, yes they did list nearly all the main attacks that are generally used in between cooldowns in pvp.

The ones they did not list are the ones no one ever uses like peck because for flying types that have peck quills is generally better.

The only one that I can think of off the top of my head that didn't make it to the list and is actually useful and on a number of decent pets is bite.

So yea actually after writing this I AM pretty sure they listed nearly all of the main attacks that are used in between cooldowns on most pvp viable pets. Obviously certain pets like oozes and whatever are unaffected by this, but RNG is RNG and I am still seeing mandatory RNG on like most of the pets I use and most of the pets that I will likely encounter doing pvp in 5.3.
Its not that I am ungrateful or anything with the removal of RNG from the other skills but theres absolutely no good reason, and "RNG is fun" is NOT a good reason for them to try and take a middleground

-Notice
I am talking about this from a purely PVP perspective. PVM arguments about pet skill selection and arguments about how I am wrong because RNG is necessary for PVM to make it more challenging need not apply.
Edited by Savras on 4/5/2013 3:42 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
17315
04/04/2013 08:06 PMPosted by Hearus
I don't quite understand, the point of these changes is reduce randomness right? So then why are the basic attacks taking an accuracy cut? Sorry if I'm missing something, that just seems a bit strange to me.


Without a little randomness, the outcome of a match could be predicted to a high degree of certainty before the first swing, and that’s no fun.


Not an answer. Millions of people playing chess, go, draughts and other games when you can use your brain and experience to predict opponent's move. And they are not thinking that it's no fun.
And when you lose your game because of "a little randomness" it's sure VERY fun. It's a great logic.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
18455
On the specifics of their changes:
Most of the abilities are balanced purely mathematically - IE an ability that has 100% hit uses a 1.00x attack coefficient while an ability with a 90% attack uses a ~1.11x attack coefficient.

If you pick the more RNG higher damage attack (despite it being balanced around the same damage over time), that's your own fault.

Now this is obviously not the case for certain abilities which are better in a way that is higher than mathematically average but circumstantial - like Tail Sweep or Pounce - and that is a good argument to make. It is probably the type of feedback they want to hear.

Also, I don't have the time to debate ability specifics with you, but when I was glancing over your post I noticed you mentioned that it doesn't matter that they didn't nerf Jab when everyone uses Takedown... but they didn't nerf Takedown either.

Maybe they changed too many basic attacks, but I'm pretty sure that's why they are asking for our feedback.

On RNG in general:
Their rationale for changing -some- of the basic attacks to be more RNG is actually quite good from a fundamental game design perspective. Lots of people argue for PvP to be entirely about skill and not gear and for PvP Pet Battles to be entirely about pet lineup and ability choice rather than RNG, but they don't consider the psychological importance of randomness. This is the reason that game designers continue to make choices that hardcore PvPers will always see as "bad"; the designers recognize that some low amounts of RNG add variety to situations. Pet Battles without any RNG at all feel stale and static.

You will inevitably disagree with this argument and talk about how it would not impact you in that manner, but you will be wrong. No game designer ever argues this with fans or critics because it is not something that they ever want to hear, but the way the human mind works dislikes pure repetition. It will be impossible for me to come up with an argument to convince you of this though (I've tried with others).

I'm actually a bit surprised Blizzard even touched on it with their blog:
In a turn-based game, randomness can be a lot of fun if handled correctly. Without a little randomness, the outcome of a match could be predicted to a high degree of certainty before the first swing, and that’s no fun. Randomness often works best when it is opt-in, often in exchange for greater attack power, longer duration, etc. In fact, many higher-damage battle pet abilities already had a reduced chance to hit, which will now be visible.


Edit:





Not an answer. Millions of people playing chess, go, draughts and other games when you can use your brain and experience to predict opponent's move. And they are not thinking that it's no fun.
And when you lose your game because of "a little randomness" it's sure VERY fun. It's a great logic.

Hearus is right when it comes to this topic, regardless of whether people want to hear it or not. It's very uncommon for "a little randomness" to change the outcome of the match. The times it does change the outcome causes frustration, sure (that's not always bad, btw), but that is the price you pay.

Also, if you held IRL polls on whether or not Chess and Go are "fun", you may be rather surprised at the results. People are pretty psychologically predictable as a whole. The majority of forumgoers are exceptions and will disagree because for some reason they don't have the perspective to understand that they are exceptional.

It's pretty ironic actually - I think people could do a study on how fast complaints appeared about all three of the RNG reductions taking place in 5.3 (PvP resil standardization, LFR loot 'fail-safes', and pet battle base miss/dodge removal) that Blizzard "wasn't doing enough". People will always find something to complain about with RNG until the game is completely static.

I'm not saying all of these complaints are invalid and this is obviously the place for this kind of feedback, but people need to gain some perspective on this issue.

TL;DR: Arguing for complete removal of RNG is flat-out impossible and will never happen, so you should be realistic and ask for more reasonable changes with specific abilities. You'd be surprised to find how much more willing to listen they will be if you argue for smaller changes first.
Edited by Simca on 4/5/2013 3:55 AM PDT
Reply Quote
81 Troll Priest
0
I never actually implied anything was nerfed. I'm saying they kept RNG on jab but that was one of the examples on the list that didn't really matter because the pets that mattered who use jab (aside from the harbringer of flame) would use takedown instead.

I can keep going but you get the idea. They didn't remove RNG from the main attack tier. They just attached RNG to nearly every main attack that matters forcing you to choose between two different kinds of RNG.


^this best sums up my wall of text. most of that post were examples that i made to refute your statement where you said the abilities on the list were mostly on unique pets

Their rationale for changing -some- of the basic attacks to be more RNG is actually quite good from a fundamental game design perspective. Lots of people argue for PvP to be entirely about skill and not gear and for PvP Pet Battles to be entirely about pet lineup and ability choice rather than RNG, but they don't consider the psychological importance of randomness. This is the reason that game designers continue to make choices that hardcore PvPers will always see as "bad"; the designers recognize that some low amounts of RNG add variety to situations. Pet Battles without any RNG at all feel stale and static.

You will inevitably disagree with this argument and talk about how it would not impact you in that manner, but you will be wrong.


Its bad because if my opponent and I were both playing with things going evenly between the two of us and we were down to our last pets, both with a sliver of HP. Losing or Winning at that point because of RNG is completely illegitimate. If I lost because he had anticipated the end result and kept a faster pet for the final round then it would have been good game. That woulda been their win because they had a better strat, outplayed etc, or whatever. Losing because of RNG even though you outplayed your opponent is stupid. Similarly winning because you of RNG is equally no good. I mean ok I admit I feel pretty good everytime I win when RNG favors me, but in the end the frustration of losing when you've played everything right but losing anyway because of RNG.. is just not worth it.
Edited by Savras on 4/5/2013 3:58 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
18455
As a good specific example Blizzard, I think that Shadow Shock and Shadow Slash should not both be changed. It leaves multiple pets without an alternative basic attack. One of those two abilities should remain at 100%.
Reply Quote
81 Troll Priest
0

Hearus is right when it comes to this topic, regardless of whether people want to hear it or not. It's very uncommon for "a little randomness" to change the outcome of the match. The times it does change the outcome causes frustration, sure (that's not always bad, btw), but that is the price you pay.

Also, if you held IRL polls on whether or not Chess and Go are "fun", you may be rather surprised at the results. People are pretty psychologically predictable as a whole. The majority of forumgoers are exceptions and will disagree because for some reason they don't have the perspective to understand that they are exceptional.

It's pretty ironic actually - I think people could do a study on how fast complaints appeared about all three of the RNG reductions taking place in 5.3 (PvP resil standardization, LFR loot 'fail-safes', and pet battle base miss/dodge removal) that Blizzard "wasn't doing enough". People will always find something to complain about with RNG until the game is completely static.

I'm not saying all of these complaints are invalid and this is obviously the place for this kind of feedback, but people need to gain some perspective on this issue.

TL;DR: Arguing for complete removal of RNG is flat-out impossible and will never happen, so you should be realistic and ask for more reasonable changes with specific abilities. You'd be surprised to find how much more willing to listen they will be if you argue for smaller changes first.


Lol funny you should mention Hearus.. because like you Hearus has like zero pvp pet battle experience. And as such is not qualified to say whether or not "a little randomness" can change the outcome of a match. Go ahead queue up a couple matches and intentionally pass 2 turns at any point during the battle to simulate some RNG missing. I can pretty much guarantee if you are not playing against someone who has no idea what they are doing you're gonna have a very very hard time winning. in fact if you pass a turn while you are winning you might suddenly find yourself losing.

Like I said PVM arguments have no place in a pvp discussion. Yea missing a few time won't kill you in PVM because the AI is predictable. Players are not and missing a few times will put you behind and it will make you lose.

And also every single thing that I actually paid attention to that hearus said wouldn't happen either happened (reflect nerf) or is happening (miss/dodge). So i don't put much stock in when people say stuff like, fix or nerf on X is impossible when its clearly game breaking.

As a good specific example Blizzard, I think that Shadow Shock and Shadow Slash should not both be changed. It leaves multiple pets without an alternative basic attack. One of those two abilities should remain at 100%.

I cannot think of any pets that are PVP viable that actually use shadow shock so shadowshock is another one of those non issue abilities that ended up on the RNG list. netherrays use it mebe.. but i haven't seen any for weeks and have never had problems with them.

Still not the point though, issue is that RNG miss/dodge should not exist outside of certain select abilities.
Edited by Savras on 4/5/2013 4:17 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
18455
Lol funny you should mention Hearus.. because like you Hearus has like zero pvp pet battle experience. And as such is not qualified to say whether or not "a little randomness" can change the outcome of a match. Go ahead queue up a couple matches and intentionally pass 2 turns at any point during the battle to simulate some RNG missing. I can pretty much guarantee if you are not playing against someone who has no idea what they are doing you're gonna have a very very hard time winning. in fact if you pass a turn while you are winning you might suddenly find yourself losing.

And also every single thing that I actually paid attention to that hearus said wouldn't happen either happened (reflect nerf) or is happening (miss/dodge). So i don't put much stock in when people say stuff like fix or nerf on X is impossible when its clearly game breaking.


I don't agree with everything Hearus says, which is why I qualified my statement.

Experience is irrelevant - I understand the effect that misses have, which is obviously why they're making this change... the difference is that missing -basic attacks- has a much much smaller effect.

None of the changes Blizzard has made here public in this blog are anywhere near "game-breaking", by the way. (There are some bad changes that they haven't talked about here, but nobody has noticed yet. I'm going to make a list and post that here in a minute or twenty.)

04/05/2013 04:06 AMPosted by Savras
As a good specific example Blizzard, I think that Shadow Shock and Shadow Slash should not both be changed. It leaves multiple pets without an alternative basic attack. One of those two abilities should remain at 100%.

I cannot think of any pets that are PVP viable that actually use shadow shock so shadowshock is another one of those non issue abilities that ended up on the RNG list.


And since you can't think of any pet that has both of these abilities and meets your specific PvP approval, they shouldn't look at it? I'm really not sure what the point of this section of your post was - my post that you quoted there is entirely unrelated to my PvP conversation and above posts.

FYI, it's on the Unborn Val'kyr, a new pet in 5.3 whose viability is yet to be determined.

Even if it was an absolutely awful pet, all Pet Battle abilities and Pet ability choices should be balanced.

Still not the point though, issue is that RNG miss/dodge should not exist outside of certain select abilities.


Which is why you should point out which of the abilities in the list should not be changed.
Edited by Simca on 4/5/2013 4:26 AM PDT
Reply Quote
81 Troll Priest
0
And since you can't think of any pet that has both of these abilities and meets your specific PvP approval, they shouldn't look at it? I'm really not sure what the point of this section of your post was - my post that you quoted there is entirely unrelated to my PvP conversation and above posts.


-edit

Ok I understand now, What I was thinking when i typed that was if anything they should keep shadow shock RNG if they keep anything RNG at all. Because unlike shadow shock , shadow slash is actually on useful pets.

As for the unborn val'kyr im looking at its move set now it kind of reminds me of a cross between a crawling claw and a skull.. cept without the moves that matter either ghostly bite or death grip. Its moveset is not diverse and it has no utility. I personally don't think it will good and its certainly not going to be high tier. mebe only good for curse of doom bombs assuming its not on the same tier as unholy ascension. But again I'd prefer to just run crawling claw if i wanted to curse of doom.

Unborn valkyr
shadow slash
siphon life
haunt
shadow shock
curse of doom
unholy ascension


Which is why you should point out which of the abilities in the list should not be changed.


My opinion of course is that either None of these abilities miss.

Or as in my first posting

that they reduce the damage of all these RNG main attack abilities across the board instead of increasing them so that if they insist on keeping RNG in the game, the RNG won't be as devastating in PVP when it does happen.

Experience is irrelevant - I understand the effect that misses have, which is obviously why they're making this change... the difference is that missing -basic attacks- has a much much smaller effect.


Missing basic attacks become a major concern once you miss approximately 3 in a single game, and its always a concern when its down to 1 pet vs 1 pet which happens all too often. My point is that since they are actually raising the damage of basic attacks its now even more of a concern if you miss one.
Edited by Savras on 4/5/2013 4:49 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
18455
The following abilities have also had their accuracy reduced and are NOT mentioned in this blog:
Alpha Strike
Burn
Conflagrate
Consume
Darkflame
Death Coil
Fury of 1,000 Fists
Gift of Winter's Veil
Gnaw
Gravity
Haywire
Holy Charge
Howling Blast
Huge Fang
Nether Gate
Paralyzing Shock
Pounce
Quicksand
Rampage
Reckless Strike
Sand Bolt
Shot Through The Heart
Siphon Anima
Slither
Stone Rush
Swallow You Whole
Sweep
Tail Sweep
Trihorn Charge


Some of these changes are really bad, particularly changes to the underlined ones as they have cooldowns. I guess the Haywire/Rampage changes are okay because those are abilities that you use for 3 turns in a row, but some of the others are seriously questionable (additionally, a large number of them are Magic - why?).

Sand Bolt, Reckless Strike, Swallow You Whole, and Trihorn Charge are understandable because they had secondary effects. I'm even okay with Death Coil.
Edited by Simca on 4/5/2013 4:51 AM PDT
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]