Resistance needs to be converted to resistance rating

"

notevenhere wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

You continue to completely fail to understand the difference here.

Why is armor a rating system? If explicit % systems are SO much easier to balance and use why isn't armor just explicit % values that stack additively. You OBVIOUSLY do not understand the math of % resistance systems.

You continue to completely fail to understand the difference here.

Why are resists a percentage system? If rating systems are SO much easier to balance and use why are their FOUR ELEMENTS that use percent values instead of a rating system? You OBVIOUSLY do not understand the math of rating systems.


See what I did there? Your argument has no solid foundation at all. Because if I use your logic, I can say that % based systems are four or five times better than armor's rating system, because it's used five times as much!


You don't understand what a decimal point is apparently, since you can't seem to understand anything other than "20% resist is bad!"

There's nothing that makes balancing armor easier than balancing the restists. All you see is that "hey, now I can increase my numbers by 10000 instead of 100! Somehow you think that actually matters.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

Look at you ignoring the math.

"

BenZen wrote:

Let's try to reverse the system so that everyone gets it: what if armour was a fixed % system.

Right now in the game, there are 17 tiers of armour. Lets round it to 15 because it makes much more beautiful numbers.

Lets assume we have 4 different slots to fill: chest, head, hands and feets. The chest slot is worth roughly twice the others. We want the end-game gear to have about 75% reduction, with the remaining 25% as a buffer in case someone has a lot of improved armor or something. Lets also assume item quality is out of the question (because resists do not have such a thing and it breaks the system badly)

so, we have 75% divided by 5 (armor = 2, gloves 1, boots 1, headgear 1) = 15%.

That makes division by tiers quite easy. 15 tiers, 15% per item, 1% per item per tier. That gives us something like that:

Tier 01(lvl 01): full dmg reduction = 5%
Tier 05(lvl 28): full dmg reduction = 25%
Tier 10(lvl 45): full dmg reduction = 50%
Tier 15(lvl 68): full dmg reduction = 75%

The problem with this is quite simple: everybody would probably run naked for the first 30 lvls, because even then, they would only take 25% more damage than the norm, which is still very bearable. People would mostly wear armour only for its magical mods until very late in the game and would mostly never bother upgrading their gear once they found interesting mods.

The same thing is true of %-based elemental resists: either we make it relevant in the early-game by giving good mods to low-lvl items (the way it is now) and completely trivialise the system for later in the game, or we put low values on low-lvl items and make resists completely useless until lvl 30-ish (like in my armor system).

I appreciate the attempt, even if it already overlooks something: No one cares about armor already.

I know I don't. I never care about armor values on my gear. It's just a completely worthless stat for most classes.

Also, this doesn't prove that it's harder to balance. Way back in the thread, the actual problem was pointed out.

Here's a boss:


FrostMan

FrostMan does pure frost damage. He does X damage. If you have no frost resist, you will take X damage. If you have the maximum amount of possible for your tier, you will take X-Y damage.

It doesn't actually matter WHAT you call it, percent or rating, you're still always going to take a minimum possible X-Y damage when you face him.


Here's another boss:


PhysicalGal

PhysicalGal does pure physical damage. She does X damage. If you have no armor, you will take X damage. If you have the maximum amount possible for your tier, you will take X-Y damage.

It doesn't actually matter WHAT you call it, percent or rating, you're still always going to take a minimum possible X-Y damage when you face him.



It doesn't matter WHAT you call this, both of these bosses are balanced EXACTLY the same way. At tierX you will have a maximum possible reduction value of Y. Therefore, the boss will do X damage, with X-Y being the minimum amount you'll take.

Regardless of what you call it, both of these will do the exact same thing.


You're still somehow thinking it actually matters if your gear shows you 122 rating or 1.25% physical resist. It doesn't.

I haven't thoroughly read this entire thread, here I am responding directly to the first post. I suggest you guys stop with the ad hominems and just agree top disagree, 12 pages is enough of "failing to understand" each other.


About differences between early and late game:
Basically the OP points out that you need to upgrade your armour throughout the game for it to remain effective, and that the same is not true for resistances. If you're looking at the individual statistics themselves in isolation, this is true. However, resistances mainly come as mods on gear (including armour) which needs to be upgraded throughout the game. So it is unlikely that you'll be using the same resistance gear all game without upgrading, especially since more and better non-resistance mods become available as you progress.
Also resists potentially become more important and choices more difficult as you progress. At level 8 it probably won't hurt you much to have to swap your belt for one with some resistances, but at level 62 you might have some other highly important mods that are almost or absolutely necessary for your build. You will always have 4 or 5 slots for armour, equipping boots does not cost you anything. But resistances carry an opportunity cost, each resistance mod means less room for other mods in your overall setup.


About difficulty of balancing monster damage:
I don't see much difference between elemental and physical damage in this regard. Some value of expected player armour would be arrived at, based on the available gear and mods at that level, and monster damage is set to give an appropriate challenge. Or visa versa. Same goes for accuracy/evasion, monster HP vs expected player damage, etc.
There would be some sort of ramp as to the expected player resistance values and HP, beginning at 0% for level 1, increasing to probably max for MoC.
I don't see the difference in balancing difficulty. You have an expected level of defence, and you set monster damage to how much damage you want them to deal.

edit: If anything, the current resistances are easier to balance monster damage for, because they are less variable. There is a hard cap, and it is reasonable to assume that most players will achieve that cap. Armour on the other hand is highly variable. A player might have no armour at all, or an immense amount, depending on class, passive skill choices, and pure luck of drops.

Armor is a junk stat. No one ever picks gear because it had X more armor compared to having an actual good mod. I would imagine that most people feel cheated when they see "+X armor" wasting what could have otherwise been ANYTHING else.

It's also given a completely meaningless value. X armor means nothing to me. When I look at a piece of gear, even when I'm trying to build a "tank", armor is likely to be the last thing considered.

No one cares about armor. All that a rating system is going to do to elements is make me not care about them either.

So I guess if the goal of this thread is to get me to not care about resists, then yes, it would make it easier to balance, because no one would care if they had them or not.

"

notevenhere wrote:

Armor is a junk stat. No one ever picks gear because it had X more armor compared to having an actual good mod. I would imagine that most people feel cheated when they see "+X armor" wasting what could have otherwise been ANYTHING else.

It's also given a completely meaningless value. X armor means nothing to me. When I look at a piece of gear, even when I'm trying to build a "tank", armor is likely to be the last thing considered.

No one cares about armor. All that a rating system is going to do to elements is make me not care about them either.

So I guess if the goal of this thread is to get me to not care about resists, then yes, it would make it easier to balance, because no one would care if they had them or not.

Not only do you fail to understand precisely why armor tends to be considered a junk stat (most enemies taht actually do something don't do physical damage, and the armor formula uses too high a a curve for DR) you ocmpletely fail to understand the whole poiont of resistsance rating instead of explicit values.

In ratings systems the rating is an expensive stat. To get "good" resists you have to itemize for it. However passable resists can be gained relatively easily. However in explicit resist systems the resists are CHEAP. They are not something you actually have to itemize for (especially without arbitrary artifical penalties to make up for this fact). Because in general resistances are cheap they have to be balanced assuming people have 75% resists. This means that players with lower resists are exponentially less durable than higher resistance players.

If you do not understand the difference between linear (and generally organic) progression and exponential (and generally inorganic) progression and the ramifications these have on balancing and design decisions YOU DO NOT BELONG IN A FEEDBACK FORUM.

The fact that PoE fails to properly balance their ratings systems has NO BEARING on how difficult it actually is to balance. It just means they didn't balance the stat well enough.

I'll give you a hint though: You'll be happier fighting Brutus wearing GOOD armor than bad. Much happier. Just because it offers less relative DR to Brutus' attacks than random mob attacks doesn't mean it doesn't offer protection.

Wow, this thread sucks. Although I would agree that difficulty progression is easier to balance through a rating system I don't feel it is necessary for poe to use it for their resist mechanic.

"

thepmrc wrote:

Wow, this thread sucks. Although I would agree that difficulty progression is easier to balance through a rating system I don't feel it is necessary for poe to use it for their resist mechanic.

If it's easier to balance then why shouldn't they?

The goal should be to let any player enjoy the game shouldn't it? More balance in general means more enjoyable.

"

Autocthon wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

Wow, this thread sucks. Although I would agree that difficulty progression is easier to balance through a rating system I don't feel it is necessary for poe to use it for their resist mechanic.

If it's easier to balance then why shouldn't they?

The goal should be to let any player enjoy the game shouldn't it? More balance in general means more enjoyable.

I don't necessarily feel that more balance means more enjoyable either as 'breaking' mechanics has always been my favorite thing to try to do in games such as this, but that is not relevant in this particular debate really. I simply feel that there is enough restrictions on gear in poe already that forcing people to itemize resists more and more is detrimental as there are so many factors that already go into determining whether an item is an upgrade or even usable.

I would not be upset by any means if they decided to go this route, but do not feel it is necessary as it is possible to still balance the game well enough without using resistance rating. Notice I didn't say they shouldn't, I said that it was not necessary.

"

thepmrc wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

Wow, this thread sucks. Although I would agree that difficulty progression is easier to balance through a rating system I don't feel it is necessary for poe to use it for their resist mechanic.

If it's easier to balance then why shouldn't they?

The goal should be to let any player enjoy the game shouldn't it? More balance in general means more enjoyable.

I don't necessarily feel that more balance means more enjoyable either as 'breaking' mechanics has always been my favorite thing to try to do in games such as this, but that is not relevant in this particular debate really. I simply feel that there is enough restrictions on gear in poe already that forcing people to itemize resists more and more is detrimental as there are so many factors that already go into determining whether an item is an upgrade or even usable.

I would not be upset by any means if they decided to go this route, but do not feel it is necessary as it is possible to still balance the game well enough without using resistance rating. Notice I didn't say they shouldn't, I said that it was not necessary.

Well at least you have an intelligent informed opinion.

I don't think it's required either but I'd like them to try when they get a chance. If only because easier to balance means ore development time elsewhere after it hits.

"

thepmrc wrote:

I don't necessarily feel that more balance means more enjoyable either as 'breaking' mechanics has always been my favorite thing to try to do in games such as this, but that is not relevant in this particular debate really. I simply feel that there is enough restrictions on gear in poe already that forcing people to itemize resists more and more is detrimental as there are so many factors that already go into determining whether an item is an upgrade or even usable.

I don't agree with this statement. You can pretty easily find what you are looking for, at least you can gather what you are looking for via trading at worst, if you had run out of some specific orbs f.e. But the issue shouldn't be compared with being shortage or abundance. What in here should be questioned primarly is to manage balancing at best, and within progression. Thus, the situation solely is deserved to implement and test it, which i think is pretty reasonable.