Resistance needs to be converted to resistance rating

"

BrecMadak wrote:

"

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.

But in order for an item to replace your current piece it will need to have enough sockets, links, and the correct color combination. Considering how much one has to itemize to HP currently on top of the socket requirements of items making resistance increasingly necessary would make it that much more difficult to upgrade. I am not against this as I am always down for item hunt, but they would need to introduce a lot more resistance mods, all resist mods potentially, and potentially make them more common. In summation i feel balancing this change would be a lot more work than people think.

They don't have to make resists more common, they simply have to assume you will have less resists. It's the whole point of the system, so that new players with little resists don't get destroyed by early elemental mobs and to make it a gradual progression towards needing more of it later in the game so that elemental encounters aren't trivialised by "maxed out" resists from lvl 14 on.

"

Autocthon wrote:

Explicit additive % resists have a nearly exponential eHP increase. This means that in order to balance at a given %DR the developers have to use damage values EXPONENTIALLY HIGHER than what a character at lower %DR is going to survive. Likewise increasing the %DR you have makes the game EXPONENTIALLY easier (as you are taking exponentially less damage).

It's not "nearly" exponential, it's "more than" exponential. More than factorial, even. Exponential functions do not reach infinity within a finite domain, and wouldn't cause as much of a problem as the current resistance function does.

The current resistance function makes your EHP go up to infinity very fast, even with an elemental weakness debuff. Indeed, the artificial cap is the only thing preventing it from being completely broken - and you can put a cap on the domain of any ridiculous function, even a busy beaver.

"

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.

Junk stats can easily be made into not junk stats by huge, and I mean huge buffs. GGG has recently done this with elemental damage on weapons - it has gone from being irrelevant, to being more important than physical damage with certain builds.

The point is that junk stats aren't caused by the system used, but by the specific balance in the game. And the system that armor uses is much easier to balance. Just make armor give twice as much EHP as it does now, problem solved.

"

thepmrc wrote:

"

BrecMadak wrote:

"

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.

But in order for an item to replace your current piece it will need to have enough sockets, links, and the correct color combination. Considering how much one has to itemize to HP currently on top of the socket requirements of items making resistance increasingly necessary would make it that much more difficult to upgrade. I am not against this as I am always down for item hunt, but they would need to introduce a lot more resistance mods, all resist mods potentially, and potentially make them more common. In summation i feel balancing this change would be a lot more work than people think.

Balancing resists with hp and other mods is much easier than being forced to take gear to max out every resist, as you are now in late game hardcore.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

It's a junk stat because no one cares about it. Armor is not "expensive", it's garbage. No one itemizes for armor, because it's always there, and it's a complete afterthought.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

No it isn't expensive. Armor (your rating system that YOU have cited multiple times as being awesome here) is a complete garbage stat that NO ONE itemizes for. NO ONE goes out of their way to get armor. (Oh, I know, YOU do, because you're trying to win this argument - but actual real people don't care about armor.) I've been playing these types of games for at least 20 years, and no one EVER cares about armor. It's just something that's on gear. It's always there, and no one cares about it.

Resistances (not your rating system, they're actually percentages, you know, the thing I've been talking about this whole time?) are expensive stats. They are weighed against other stats of similar DESIRE value.

Do I want resists, or do I want more damage? Do I want resists, or do I want more gold or experience from things I kill?

No one cares about armor. Armor is not an expensive stat.

"

Autocthon wrote:

However in explicit resist systems the resists are CHEAP. They are not something you actually have to itemize for

You couldn't be more wrong. You go out of your way to make sure you've stacked resists. You keep trading them away only when you're sure you replace it with gear that has enough. That makes it an expensive choice. You are giving up something of value to make sure you have enough.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

It looks like you've discovered the word "exponential" without actually knowing what it means. Since you cried about me ignoring math, I suppose I should cry about you ignoring my example of physical damage and frost damage and how they're identically balanced.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

I never said armor didn't have any affect. I said no one gears for it because it's a garbage stat that no one cares about. No one goes out of their way to get a few extra points of armor. Why? Because your stupid rating system doesn't let them easily know how actually useful it is.

"

Silty wrote:

Junk stats can easily be made into not junk stats by huge, and I mean huge buffs. GGG has recently done this with elemental damage on weapons - it has gone from being irrelevant, to being more important than physical damage with certain builds.

I could easily make it not a junk stat. Turn it into a nice clear number called "physical resistance", so that when I see X on gear, I know exactly what it does.

Percents are easy to understand.
Rating systems are not.

"Yeah but higher is better!"

So what, higher is better with % too, and I actually know what it's doing for me.

"

notevenhere wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

It's a junk stat because no one cares about it. Armor is not "expensive", it's garbage. No one itemizes for armor, because it's always there, and it's a complete afterthought.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

No it isn't expensive. Armor (your rating system that YOU have cited multiple times as being awesome here) is a complete garbage stat that NO ONE itemizes for. NO ONE goes out of their way to get armor. (Oh, I know, YOU do, because you're trying to win this argument - but actual real people don't care about armor.) I've been playing these types of games for at least 20 years, and no one EVER cares about armor. It's just something that's on gear. It's always there, and no one cares about it.

Resistances (not your rating system, they're actually percentages, you know, the thing I've been talking about this whole time?) are expensive stats. They are weighed against other stats of similar DESIRE value.

Do I want resists, or do I want more damage? Do I want resists, or do I want more gold or experience from things I kill?

No one cares about armor. Armor is not an expensive stat.

"

Autocthon wrote:

However in explicit resist systems the resists are CHEAP. They are not something you actually have to itemize for

You couldn't be more wrong. You go out of your way to make sure you've stacked resists. You keep trading them away only when you're sure you replace it with gear that has enough. That makes it an expensive choice. You are giving up something of value to make sure you have enough.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

It looks like you've discovered the word "exponential" without actually knowing what it means. Since you cried about me ignoring math, I suppose I should cry about you ignoring my example of physical damage and frost damage and how they're identically balanced.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

I never said armor didn't have any affect. I said no one gears for it because it's a garbage stat that no one cares about. No one goes out of their way to get a few extra points of armor. Why? Because your stupid rating system doesn't let them easily know how actually useful it is.

Diablo 3 completely proves you wrong.

If you have a brain in D3 you care about armor. You care a LOT about armor. Just because PoE's devs don;t know how to balance their armor system does not mean that rating systems suck. Until you can couch your arguments in MATH and not subjective bullshit you cannot win an argument.

Enough of the bickering. Both of you take a break for a couple of days, and keep it civil in the future.

I think its already a long enough break had given. So to speak, since we still do not have a handicapped resistances that goes down per difficulty, rating system seems obligatory at least for to be tested and analysed imo.

I just need a dev's reply to this idea, which is pretty important aspect of the game considered the current way doesn't go well enough since resistance mods are pretty much abundant and once obtained it generally carry on for a long time.

I just want to hear from devs what is thought about resistance spikes and the rating mechanic itself, wish one would give a reasonable one.

Rating is a way to chop percentage into relatively large bits.
Mainly, it's a way to deterioate gear without actually destroying it while providing appropriate defense.
Rating make levels more relevant to gear quality, nerfing lowlevel drop.
Additionally, it obscure item value, since rating is relevant to level, making it harder to notice wether it is a high value or not.

*The reason to use rating is to obsolete gear as soon as possible while still being able to have that easily obsoletable gear useful at it's apropriate level.

My stash is full of gear at 12 pages, think I'm gonna quit because it's too much. Do something interesting, maybe play gw2.
Hate these garbage piles of gear. Gets in the way of fun.
With rating, I'd easily need a quadruple stash to have relevant gear at most levels. 44x3=132dollars to play the game. Or just sell everything and collect only orbs. Nah I dunno. Perhaps. Game's pretty good, I'll see what the deal is later.

I very much like to find good items at all levels, I think that's very omnious of ggg.
There were just a few items like that in d2. One of the most rare items were surprisingly a blue amulet with both magic find pre and suffix.
Pretty annoying. But fun too.
That amulet wasn't findable until endgame however.. There were a few interesting items to find at low levels, but mostly junk until, I dunno, 70?



My solution would be to introduce physical reduction instead of armor rating.
Classic best d2 stat, at least in my opinion. With elemental resists a close second.

Reason is to have a unison reduction system.
Thus easily understood and overviewed.


To keep it interesting I'd show it like this:

Cap--------Buffer
75%--------150%

And then introduce a new stat, Power. Which would be a reductional stat.
It could be split into the 5 damage types, if chaos will be a reductional stat.

Mobs could have these at 4 ranges.

None-----------0%
Strong---------25%
Powerful-------50%
Overwhelming--75%

With attacks reducing resistances according to level.
This would be a secondary damage modifier without the need to raise base damage.

It would make the player aware of a mob with 'Overwhelming physical' as something you'd need to either cap at 150% physical reduction to have your quarter damage or if you'd be at 0% a mob you'd wanna stay out of melee from since you'd be at -75% you will suffer almost double damage if hit.
On Merveil it'd say Powerful Cold and Strong physical. Indicating to the player what she deals with.


This kind of stat would be another way for a player to specialize into damage without picking actual damage.
It's a way of capitalizing on an already existant function, which is stacking resitances above the 75% cap.
The system present makes such stacking advantageous only when encountered with a certain curse.
With a general use, excess stacking becomes more valuable, especially against weaknesses.

It would portion resistance penalty randomly with higher probability as difficulty rise and make 75% resists viable when facing most mobs, still useful at extreme levels and enable 0% if utmost caution is used when encountering a vulnerable element.


Power is already present in armor vs damage. But it simply overpowers stacking damage, so top-end stacking is more valuable.
I think that route is flawed.
It's because it's a circular reasoning, more damage makes armor less effective, making you take more damage from the already high damage.
Better to have damage coupled with a reductional mod, that's gonna tell the player what it faces and put more variance into the encounters.
Also it will allow a player to keep higher stacks of resists than the cap allows, since it's a specialty of said player. Such as a melee fighter wants the 150% since that will keep reduction completly stable.



Be nice on the internet. Being polite has only benefits and is a sign of personal strength.

Flaring angrily is a sure sign of lost control. Your opposition won't change and you won't gain any allies with insults.
And yes, I'm just as bad as anyone when it comes to the insult game. Just saying whats rational and obvious.


++If you gonna keep evasion, think it through.! (No I don't have a good idea, probably gonna have to read whole evasion thread+evasion thread+evasion thread before I think of something that fits. Real mess that evasion is its own armor concept. Falcord had a reductional idea with evasion working against magic also, arguing fairness due to strength hitpoints and intelligence energy shield, but I dunno, it needs more cowbell probably.)

I'll revive this because OP is too decent to do so. This thread contains many good thoughts about the problem that is on the front burner.