[X] My Assistant

It's only a 5% chance of an eth, Scorpio. Why are you surprised?

It's only a 5% chance of an eth, Scorpio. Why are you surprised?

I'm not surprised. I'm sad. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

WARNING: EFFORT POST

The differences between heavy armor and light armor in general are pretty counterintuitive.

For these equations, I'll assume a value of 20% mitigation from Endurance, and 10% from the secondary mitigation stat (wisdom or strength).

Light armor has lots of protective resistances, such as +evade, lots of +resist (not that that matters now but it really helps vs. original creatures like FSM) and low burden. Assuming a 16% contribution to mitigation from this armor type.

(1-0.20)(1-0.10)(1-0.16) = 0.6048x = 60.48% damage taken/39.52% damage reduction.
Assuming effective 20% evade for average HV light armor player's equipment and agility (I make no delusion that my equipment is average), light armor players take an overall 48.38% of damage incoming before parry or resist.

Heavy armor has 1.5-1.6x the amount of mitigation while losing at least half of the evade, plus resist is completely gone. Assuming a 25% contribution to mitigation from this armor type, and a ~2% advantage to Endurance added.
(1-0.22)(1-0.10)(1-0.25) = 0.5265x = 52.65% damage taken/47.35% damage reduction.
Assuming effective 2% evade for the average HV heavy armor player's equipment and agility + burden penalty, heavy armor players take an overall 51.6% damage taken, before parry (not resist, since that's mostly absent.)

This makes heavy armor clearly less protective than light armor, and due to the heavy reliance on top-quality gear, heavy armor users pretty much have to look for high percentile mitigation rolls on their gear to edge out light armor users in protection.

Ideally you'd have heavy armor be at least 2.5x-3x protective on the mitigation aspect due to diminishing returns but that's not what happens in reality.

IN WHERE I PROMOTE A 1/(1+X+Y+....) SYSTEM OVER (1-X)(1-Y)(1-Zn).... SYSTEM, AGAIN

If the mitigation system worked under 1/(1+x+y+z1+z2+z3+z4+z5+zS) (where z is equipment and zS is a possible shield) like I've posted before it would be a lot easier to balance the defensive capabilities of light and heavy armor.

...so instead of 16% of mitigation coming from light armor and 25% mitigation coming from heavy armor on top of a 20% endurance mitigation, you'd have 16* mitigation from light armor, and 48* mitigation from heavy armor on top of 20* endurance mitigation. assuming secondary mitigation can come from either strength and wisdom, I'll put that in as 10*.

* being the value from the proposed system.

Proposed light armor damage taken:
1 / (1 + 0.20 + 0.10 + 0.16) = 0.684931507 ~= 68.5% damage taken/31.5% damage reduction.
Assuming effective 20% evade for average HV light armor player's equipment and agility, the light armor player will face 54.8% of total damage incoming.

Proposed heavy armor damage taken, with a small endurance advantage assumed in the form of +2 "value" of the proposed mitigation system:
1 / (1 + 0.22 + 0.10 + 0.48) = 0.555555556 ~= 55.6% damage taken/44.4% damage reduction.
Assuming effective 2% evade for the average HV heavy armor player's equipment and agility + burden penalty, this is 54.48% total damage incoming. Survivability under this system and scaling become similar, though light armor now has a measurable higher vulnerability to attacks that actually hit compared to heavy armor, closer to expected and possibly intended.

This post has been edited by Bunker Buster: May 4 2012, 12:35

As a light armor user I'm naturally against light armor nerf. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) And also you've forgot about shards, which gives heavy armor an advantage already.

This post has been edited by Evil Scorpio: May 4 2012, 12:47

As a light armor user I'm naturally against light armor nerf. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

Which is why I said in the other thread that the scaling factor on equipment could be tweaked. If the scaling values for mitigation were .502 instead of .21, we'd see these equations:

Light Armor
20 From_End + 10 From_Sec + 38.24 From_Eq
1 / (1 + 0.20 + 0.10 + 0.3824) = 0.594388968 ~= 59.44% damage taken.
Assuming 20% evade, this is 59.44 * .8 = 47.552% overall damage taken. Hardly a nerf.

Heavy Armor
20 From_End + 10 From_Sec + 114.74 From_Eq
1 / (1 + 0.22 + 0.10 + 1.1474) = 0.405284915 ~= 40.53% damage taken.
Assuming 2% evade, this is 40.53 * .98 = 39.7194% overall damage taken. This system will thus make heavy armor scale better.

And also you've forgot about shards, which gives heavy armor an advantage already.

Do you think this game should always be balanced against the "best case scenario"? This kind of thinking is why we have the awful-idea awful-scaling HP boost.

Light armor will still have the advantage of not having to spend credits on featherweight shards, nor depend on the supply for them for evade.

This post has been edited by Bunker Buster: May 4 2012, 12:55

Which is why I said in the other thread that the scaling factor on equipment could be tweaked. If the scaling values for mitigation were .502 instead of .21, we'd see these equations:

Light Armor
20 From_End + 10 From_Sec + 38.24 From_Eq
1 / (1 + 0.20 + 0.10 + 0.3824) = 0.594388968 ~= 59.44% damage taken.
Assuming 20% evade, this is 59.44 * .8 = 47.552% overall damage taken. Hardly a nerf.

Heavy Armor
20 From_End + 10 From_Sec + 114.74 From_Eq
1 / (1 + 0.22 + 0.10 + 1.1474) = 0.405284915 ~= 40.53% damage taken.
Assuming 2% evade, this is 40.53 * .98 = 39.7194% overall damage taken. This system will thus make heavy armor scale better.

Well... As long as it didn't make light armor worse - I'm ok with this. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Do you think this game should always be balanced against the "best case scenario"? This kind of thinking is why we have the HP boost.

"Best case scenario" is counting based on theoretical player with full legendary set, maxed ability tree and all hath perks. So we're far from it. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by Evil Scorpio: May 4 2012, 12:57

Keep in mind that we're not the average players. Average players are people that roll around in leather armor and plate because it's the best they can get. Average players aren't the people who look at these forums beyond bitching in the version thread. We're hardly one in a million rollers, but we're not exactly merely above average either.

This post has been edited by Bunker Buster: May 4 2012, 12:58

Keep in mind that we're not the average players. Average players are people that roll around in leather armor and plate because it's the best they can get. Average players aren't the people who look at these forums beyond bitching in the version thread. We're hardly one in a million rollers, but we're not exactly merely above average either.

I doubt somebody still wear Leather since the last patch, 'cause now you they buy Superior Kevlar for a 5-10k per piece. And thanks to shards Plate can be good too.

We have lots of players who can't get past round 20 of Grindfest even with "good" plate armor. A lot of mechanics aren't explained well or thoroughly to the player without reading up on the wiki, and are intimidated by buying things from WTS. I want a system that'll at least telegraph better to the average player.

God, this quality shit is a bitch. especially since I still don't know how it goes from roll to quality. Weighted average? Is it a % of max roll? Or brought down to a range of 1-10, from 11-20?

Well...

- The "quality" of an equipment piece is now weighted more heavily towards the more important stats. That is, stats like absorption, burden and interference now count less towards the quality than damage, physical/magical mitigation and avoidance.

So I expect there will be some painful weighted average.

Range should go this way though

The quality prefix is basically the average value of all the stats given to a piece of gear. For a stat that ranges from 5-10, getting 5 is +1 quality while getting 10 is +6 quality. The sum of the quality scores is then divided by the maximum possible quality score to get a quality rating between 0 and 1. For example, a piece of gear would have to score above 0.5 to qualify as "fine", so if the maximum quality score was 100, it would need at least 51.

So I guess the overall method hasn't been changed; now you calculate the quality score, multiply that with some weighting index, then add those score together and compare with a maximum possible quality score, which now also involves some weighting index.

We have lots of players who can't get past round 20 of Grindfest even with "good" plate armor. A lot of mechanics aren't explained well or thoroughly to the player without reading up on the wiki, and are intimidated by buying things from WTS. I want a system that'll at least telegraph better to the average player.

(IMG:[i2.lulzimg.com] http://i2.lulzimg.com/b4c7b21846.png)

(IMG:[i2.lulzimg.com] http://i2.lulzimg.com/b4c7b21846.png)

I want a better game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaAS4xHPiR0

We have lots of players who can't get past round 20 of Grindfest even with "good" plate armor. A lot of mechanics aren't explained well or thoroughly to the player without reading up on the wiki, and are intimidated by buying things from WTS. I want a system that'll at least telegraph better to the average player.

There's room for improvement on most of the HV interface, but the ignorant players should also be blamed.

Yes, there's no clear indication of what STR does, but then if you're interested you should go and find that out. You can't blame others when there's an operation menu, full of updated information, beside the rocket's control panel.
It's stupid to have something in-game like 'This is the attack button, which you can then choose which monster to attack. You can also attack with mouse-click or press 1-0 on your keyboard!'

This post has been edited by varst: May 4 2012, 13:23

There's room for improvement on most of the HV interface, but the ignorant players should also be blamed.

If a mechanic couldn't be figured out within the realm of examining the game system, then it's not the player's fault. Like the fact that Defend and Focus are effectively a penalty turn, or the fact that Light Armor is chiefly better than Heavy Armor for a long while before equipment rolls start mattering.

Yes, there's no clear indication of what STR does, but then if you're interested you should go and find that out. You can't blame others when there's an operation menu, full of updated information, beside the rocket's control panel. It's stupid to have something in-game like 'This is the attack button, which you can then choose which monster to attack. You can also attack with mouse-click or press 1-0 on your keyboard!'

This is assuming that such a system would not be optional, and in a well-designed UI, it always is. A on-highlight help system could default to off for all existing players or automatically shut off at level 50. Naturally, for speed purposes, it could also default to off for all existing players if implemented to avoid triggering any on-highlight script.

We also already have on-highlight examination for equipment, by the way.

This post has been edited by Bunker Buster: May 4 2012, 13:27

If a mechanic couldn't be figured out within the realm of examining the game system, then it's not the player's fault. Like the fact that Defend and Focus are effectively a penalty turn, or the fact that Light Armor is chiefly better than Heavy Armor for a long while before equipment rolls start mattering.

Defend and focus are still working as stated. It's just that we don't know the exact percentage of effect.

And light vs heavy is something called strategy. You don't expect an online game to teach you in-game strategy, especially when it's prone to changes.

This is assuming that such a system would not be optional, and in a well-designed UI, it always is. A on-highlight help system could default to off for all existing players or automatically shut off at level 50. Naturally, for speed purposes, it could also default to off for all existing players if implemented to avoid triggering any on-highlight script.

It is painful to even write something about game mechanics, let alone including them into UI.
Even an informal introduction is difficult.

Defend and focus are still working as stated. It's just that we don't know the exact percentage of effect.

Works in the sense that "the benefit is not significant compared to the tactical uses of other actions available."

And light vs heavy is something called strategy. You don't expect an online game to teach you in-game strategy, especially when it's prone to changes.

How is "A is unquestionably weaker than B" strategy? It's just an arbitrary handicap on the unaware, instead of a tactical decision. If I'm a new player who wore heavy armor I'd expect to have the benefit of knowing i'd take roughly as much less damage vs. how much more I'm being hit. I expect a tradeoff, not a neutering.

It is painful to even write something about game mechanics, let alone including them into UI.
Even an informal introduction is difficult.

Have someone willing to write them. SKILLCHIP (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/duck.gif)

I'd also be willing to write semi-verbose descriptions for most things involving primary stats.

This post has been edited by Bunker Buster: May 4 2012, 13:49

Works in the sense that "the benefit is not significant compared to the tactical uses of other actions available."

How is "A is unquestionably weaker than B" strategy? It's just an arbitrary handicap on the unaware, instead of a tactical decision. If I'm a new player who wore heavy armor I'd expect to have the benefit of knowing i'd take roughly as much less damage vs. how much more I'm being hit. I expect a tradeoff, not a neutering.

A player can test those things you've said. What do you expect the highlight say? Something like 'These things sucks. Don't use them.' ?
No really, I'm interested to know how you want the in-game description to look like.

Have someone willing to write them.

Have been working on it for quite a long time. How not to write too much is the interesting part. Most people must be bitching like 'Too slow!'

This post has been edited by varst: May 4 2012, 13:57

A player can test those things you've said. What do you expect the highlight say? Something like 'These things sucks. Don't use them.' ?

I don't think we're communicating on the same level here. I'm talking about a thing that doesn't warrant a highlight (when in reality it needs a change or be converted into a stance, HINT HINT) and you think I want one for that.

I don't think we're communicating on the same level here. I'm talking about a thing that doesn't warrant a highlight (when in reality it needs a change or be converted into a stance, HINT HINT) and you think I want one for that.

Maybe I've misunderstood that, sor (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
I also think 'adding in a multiplicative way' should be mentioned somewhere in-game, but it don't foresee that coming soon (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/heh.gif)

Except it's not. It's more of an inverse multiplicative.