Resistance needs to be converted to resistance rating
" Here is one, from several pages back : " |
|
|
I agree. I'd prefer a percentage-based system to have, rather than reduced penalties at each act, simply lower benefits overall. Sapphire rings providing 10-15% instead of 20-30% or however much they actually provide, and similarly reduced enhancement bonuses, as an example.
|
|
"Most rating based systems use a formula similar to the armor formula for this game. Guess what that means... *I'll cover the other guy this afternoon. Just woke up. IGN - PlutoChthon, Talvathir
|
|
"It means you ignored the question because you couldn't answer it. The devs haven't come back and said "Gee, it's sure easier to balance armor compared to lighting!" Why don't they say that? Because it's not true. PoE is Diablo 3
Diablo 3 is Torchlight 2 Torchlight 2 is Fate 5 |
|
" In this game GGG can easily calculate average armor at each level. I mean they know what kind of armors values you can have at certain levels. It is not hard to have monsters always do more depending on how you want them to work (fast or strong). And it would be easy to put in mods like Armor Piercing that ignore certain amount of armor. Same for resistances. Fixed damage reduction would work similar to armor/resistance ratings (creatures with more damage make armor/resistances more and more useless) except it is so much easier to understand for users (especially when compared to their HP/ES and HP/ES mods; things like want to have +50 hp or take 10 damage less per attack would be easy to compare) |
|
"How often do devs post outside of skill tree and skill feedback forums? I can answer the qustion: In games which use a rating system (not explicit stacking percentages) use a forumla similar to this game's armor forumla. Doing so allows them to pick a damage value and tune it in such a way that it doesn't get overshadowed by extremely high resistances. That is EXACTLY how physical damage on bosses works in this game. It also lets the devs tune the *other* way because the more resists a player has the less effect it has on the damage they take from the boss. You eventualy hit a diminishing returns point where more resists are basically useless. However resists *lower* than a threshold resist (but above a lower threshold) conversely aren't majorly impacted compared to the threshold. This gives "slosh room" for resistance values and allows a wider degree of resistances to be effective without needing to balance the game at a 75% explicit resistance cap (because resists are cheap in an additive % system compared to a rating system as per armor). Consider that if the devs balance the game at 50% resists. A character who has only 25% resists is taking 50% more damage (and that's 50% of a relatively massive damage value in order to be meaningful at 50% resists). Whereas a player who has hit 75% resists is taking HALF what the 50% resist value (probably relatively trivial damage unless the 50% value is still relatively large damage). In a rating system (I'll use a rating to % conversion because I'm lazy) if you have the formula Damage=(R/(100+R))*(Initialdamage) you have very flexible thresholds for resistance values, and WIDE thresholds at that (much wider than % thresholds) where you have multiple resistance values giving the same basic DR, with diminishing relative returns the higher your resists get. Alternatively a formula like Damage=(Resist*InitialDamage)/(Resist+InitialDamage*4) works like this game's armor, providing defenses based on exactly how much damage you take. This allows trivializing low damage enemies, but also allows a "graded" threshold for damage taken as enemy damage increases. It also NATURALLY (without artificial addition of flat -resist which is more of a hurdle than an actual challenge) forces a player to constantly upgrade resistances. IGN - PlutoChthon, Talvathir
|
|
|
Autochan has hit the issue clearly. You don't want to force a game to balance it's difficulties or ability damage on the assumption that the players will have 50-60% resistances early game which is what it currently is. The Game Devs know that you will have elemental resists so the caster mobs spam 2 spells a second before you are in range with something like Spark or groups spam 2 spells a second like the Brine elementals so the damage you are taking makes your resistances trivial.
When a game developer has to increase elemental damage or elemental damaging spell attack/cast speed to be a threat because people have been driven to have max resists, that means there is something wrong with the resist system as it is now. A penalty to the resists at a higher difficulty doesn't fix the issue because once you overcome that penalty you are in the exact same situation. The difference is now that the players who don't have 95% Ice resist to offset the 20% penalty will have to grind in lower areas to handle Chatter, or Merveil, or the Brine Elementals and that is a terrible terrible way for increased longevity in a game because it is artificial. Or they get absolutely destroyed, get frustrated, leave the game and don't come back and tell their friends not to play the game because of the bad balance issues. That's something people need to take into account, especially with an indie game. It relies on word of mouth to get interest in the game. And if people are going the other way, not to play the game it hurts. If the only way to progress in the game is forced grinding for resist rings at the beginning of the game or the only way to play the game is for you to roll an x class ranged character, which is what the vast majority of the game is because of the terrible balance when it comes to resistances and damage dealt people will tell their friends not to play the game because of terrible balance issues when it comes to PvE. |
|
"What does that have to do with anything? "Nothing you've posted here has proven anything about ratings working better than percentage. All you rambled on about was "if you have too much, it's easy, and if you don't have enough, it's hard". Rating systems suffer from the EXACT same problem. They pick an arbitrary number, and if you have more, you win, and if you have less you lose. EXACTLY like percent based resists. This has nothing to do with one being better than the other. PoE is Diablo 3
Diablo 3 is Torchlight 2 Torchlight 2 is Fate 5 |
|
"You asked why if ratings were so much better no dev has chimed in. I retorted with "how often do they show up in this forum" "You don't even understand what slosh room for the system means do you? Useless to explain to you because you refuse to actually attempt to understand. In & system slosh room is ~+/- 5% In a rating system slosh room can be as much as +-70 rating. Depending on exact system used. And generally rating systems value large rating bumps more than smaller ones, which means that +/-70 rating in rating systems is usually more "expensive" from an itemizing point of view than +/- % resists. IGN - PlutoChthon, Talvathir
|
|
|
@Autocthon: he doesn't worth Autocthon, even a wall had it understood by the time, he is just bullshitting and trying his best for "not to understand" on purpose or he is a real idiot.
You and gh0un did your bests so far and very clear on this problematic situation, but he resists in a pointless manner obviously. If i were you, i wouldn't waste my time replying him further. "This is too good for you, very powerful ! You want - You take" Last edited by BrecMadak#3812 on May 22, 2012, 4:39:25 AM
|
|
