Fixing Max Resistance imbalance.

"

tmaciak wrote:

With reses cap and with GGG balancing damage with assumption, that you overcap reses, there is no other way around it.

This is the reason why overcapping is made more and more restricted.
Capping resists is an aspect of your gearing, which you can 'fixed' aim for, yes. Thanks, god! (dominus?) ^^ Hopefully you have (enough) good rolls of them on your equip, or you have to waste of your precious passives to compensate, at least temporary (while then again wasting precious respec points)

The other view is: the monsterlevel in merciless raises slowly (sideareas aside) from twilight to solaris, how much impact should/could your rating have/get? How much that the raising stats (damage/life) of the monsters NOT provokes? Now, if we assume you're not perfect equipped as you enter from the sceptre, but have to raise your resists (again) from ~50% to the cap: that includes a 'rating change' from 100% that stands against increasing damage from the foes. It's NOT that you can assume every char to begin merciless with 75% all, and even then the damage taken from elemental 'hits' (spells included) raises while your further journey...

Again: we dont 'need' diminishing returns on every (of the more and more; with armour AND evasion AND dodge, block, spellblock, EHP...) defensive aspect.

"

Mr_Cee wrote:

The idea is bad because there are enough things to consider for your defense that already are rating based; you CANT add more and more layers of defense and base all of them by ('endless') rating. There must be some aspects that you can 'solve' and be done. Otherwise you'd have to gain some improvements on your gear with every levelup to compensate the loss...
There already IS too less choice on offense, too much investment into defense needed to survive.

It's not because you change the system that it will need more investment.
The point that investment should stay the same to have the same survivability against monsters ( which can already be quite much ), but then if you invest even more, you could have some tiny increase for some of it.

More choices is never bad.
And it's not another layer of defense, it's the same.

It could give elemental resists potion a real meaning past some point also.

But it would be too much of a balance change for GGG to get into such a thing anyway.

"

Fruz wrote:

It's not because you change the system that it will need more investment.
The point that investment should stay the same to have the same survivability against monsters ( which can already be quite much ), but then if you invest even more, you could have some tiny increase for some of it.

It did not work this way. If it would not result in a change on average, it would be pointless. And your 'tiny increase' would either
-need too much overinvestment to be worth it
or
-be too easy to not justify shifting the balance to make it mandatory.
(its the same issue so often criticised on magic find: its either pointless or 'never enough')
There's no balance in between.

"

Mr_Cee wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

It's not because you change the system that it will need more investment.
The point that investment should stay the same to have the same survivability against monsters ( which can already be quite much ), but then if you invest even more, you could have some tiny increase for some of it.

It did not work this way. If it would not result in a change on average, it would be pointless. And your 'tiny increase' would either
-need too much overinvestment to be worth it
or
-be too easy to not justify shifting the balance to make it mandatory.
(its the same issue so often criticised on magic find: its either pointless or 'never enough')
There's no balance in between.

What you are saying would be true if the balancing team is talent-less.

Is all about balancing, if the balancing is perfect the new system would work perfectly.

bump

I agree with post starter, ele resists would be better when closer to evasion/armour mechanics.

bump

bump

I really wish they would do this, however it is a MASSIVE balance change.
I think the best way to test it would be to have a 2, maybe 3 day league where resists work this way, play test it, and get back to us. There is nothing wrong with testing a method to see if it works or not :/.

I disagree on the points that were made with regard to diminishing returns for larger hits.
Maybe it'd work, maybe not, but I don't think that's really needed or wanted.
I do think that we need diminishing returns (with regards to %) per point of resistance.
My equation would be as follows:

Damage taken = (Damage Dealt*100)/(Resistance + 100)

I'd also throw in another flat multiplier to make it work nicely.
This means your health pool vs fire damage would be this:

EHP = HP*(100+Fire Resistance)/100



For the comments about linearity of the current system:
When you compare the size of a hit to the amount of damage taken, yes, the amount of damage you resist per point of resistance is linear.
However, the size of a hit we can take per resistance is most definitely not linear, i.e.

Max Hit Size = Max Hp/(1-resistance)

That isn't linear, and lets be honest, that's what we really care about. What is the biggest hit we can take with X amount of fire resist.
and stacking fire resistance in this case is most definitely not linear.

There are a number of reasons why I believe this is a good idea:

1: I am of the opinion that every stat on a piece of gear should have a value relative to it's roll. How much benefit that exact stat gives you with the goals you're trying to reach should be relative, but currently any excess resistance is completely wasted (except in very specific circumstances). Note that the only other circumstances where this happens is if you take a keystone passive (i.e. life regen and chaos inoculation).

2: It reduces the ABSOLUTE need for certain unique items, and not in a bad way. I personally would keep the max resistance value as adding a flat % of resistance, which stacks additively with the % resistance the EHP equation gives you. It makes it possible (though extraordinarily difficult) to run righteous fire without RotP, or to run a crit discharge build without vaal pact. Whether or not this is worth doing is debatable, and promotes options and diversity which is good for the health of the game.

3: Resistance at the moment are deceptive in their strength. Gaining an additional 25% fire resist can allow you to take anywhere from a hit 2* as large to a hit just over 1.25 * as large, or even exactly the same size if it's capped
This discrepancy means that resistance on gear GAINS in value as you go towards your cap, then loses ALL value beyond that (again, except in VERY specific circumstances). It doesn't get any messier than that, and max resistances serve to only exacerbate the issue.

3: The effective HP system means that the first bit of cold resist you get before Merviel is just as valuable as the second, which means the average new player who grabs a single cold resist ring of 30% is much less likely to get one shot, and conversely, the player who has 75% won't face tank and get bored.

So far, we have build diversity, a more natural progression, a benefit for lower characters without buffing higher, and the resistance system becomes more intuitive.

Hell of a reason to at the very least try it.

"

assamite1 wrote:

I agree with post starter, ele resists would be better when closer to evasion/armour mechanics.

Rather not.
Armor makes you take nearly 5% damage from regular mobs. But big skeletons (pre patch) or bosses with damage mods still instantly kill you on crit no matter ur armor rating. So you are either god or paper. Because armor get's less effective the more damage you take. If resists would work like that... Then Magnus would instantly kill anyone in his circle even if you had 100% fire res. Not to mention certain beyonds.
That's why the lighting coil is so strong. It's the only reliable way to reduce physical damage.