[Defense Discussion] They're testing the 'fenses for weaknesses...

[Odd Hermit]

The X-Factor for this problem is DR. If there was no DR, Josh could have used D&D style lower numbers for things. Because DR exists, everything requires much higher numbers and it makes it very hard to balance. Another thing that throws it off is the Endurance and Health system and how Constitution works. 

 

The attack resolution system was designed so that unit actions had a positive outcome most of the time. The original design didn't even include a chance to miss. They have not really accounted for the fact that things pretty much always deal damage with their numbers properly IMO, or, if they are - they're looking at it from the wrong angle or something.

 

It's a fair experiment for a system, but it's got a long way to go before they get it right IMO.

 

DT you mean, I assume? Damage Threshold.

 

It makes some sense as a form of mitigation but if it's high across the board it just makes taking things that counter it the most reliable sources of damage. A high damage/hit weapon and/or high DT penetration weapon will still kill lightly armored targets fine, but the same can't be said of low damage/hit and no DT pen weapons vs. high.

 

Mid-High DT just trivializes too many things that it shouldn't, both for and against the player.

 

I think they could still work with DT, but they need to get creative with it. There aren't many DT lowering abilities available outside of modal talents.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Sensuki]

It's called DR now They removed DR and renamed DT to DR.

 

DR alone forces you to use inflated damage numbers, instead of the 5-8 damage from a Longsword example that Josh Sawyer used a long time ago (which wasn't an explicit example).

[Odd Hermit]

Just had a perfect example of how fights are often completely decided by positioning testing a 3 person custom party vs. medreth's group.

 

 

This is not an ideal party of course but -

 

PC: Priest, Interdiction w/talent that adds weakness to it and

Fighter: Savage Attack/ 2h style

Wizard: Scion of Flame and Blast

 

 

First fight, I go up to it as any noob might, just click on Medreth, go through dialogue, dropped into combat. Enemies split onto us somewhat evenly, my casters are too busy getting engage spammed while running away, there's a lot of desperate slicken casting and healing while my fighter has no support as the casters struggle for life. I almost made it, and probably could've had I played some cards a bit better and/or got a few less spells interrupted or engagement attacks hit.

 

Second fight, carefully position my fighter in the center. Have casters a distance back. Fight starts, they mob my fighter, my priest and wizard debuff and AoE them to death easily. Fight over in very short order, piece of cake. All it took was moving a couple characters a few meters away and letting them all glue to my fighter at first.

[Sensuki]

And it's not engagement that makes them do that.

[Clean&Clear]

 

The problem is that many of the talents and abilities are almost useless when applied to lower defense characters. +20 deflection doesn't mean jack if you're still low enough deflection to get hit/crit frequently anyway. Same goes for Fort/Will/Reflect and such. There aren't many options for mitigating burst damage other than getting as much DT as possible and then positioning.

 

This is definitely true, and it is IMO tied with the very high per hit damage. If there was lower per hit damage and the fights would generaly last longer, there would be more attacks thus more attack rolls and this could make deflection increase worth even for low deflection characters, because the improvement would have time to show.

[Luckmann]

As a veteran of 40kRP and it's DT-only system (which is even slightly more advanced), I have no idea how they're going to resolve the system in the long term, if they stick to it, because it gets wonky as all hell the "higher" you go numbers-wise. At some point, you become completely immune to lower-leve damage, and insanely squishy against anything that punches through your armour (meaning armour either makes you immortal or might as well be made out of paper).

Now, I don't mind the system *overly* much in a PnP, but there's really no reason for a system to be so simple when everything is handled "under the hood". You don't have to do calculations yourself to resolve attacks. I never tried the BB while DR/DT were separate things, but DT only is only going to result in inflated numbers the higher you go, with resulting wonkyness.

As the game or the series progresses, I really hope they revisit this because it's going to need some work. I'm not sure how much it'll matter on these particular "power levels", but.. yeah.

Personally, I'd like to see Damage Reduction (%), Damage Absorption (DT countered by nothing), Armour (DT countered by Penetration), Dodge (essentially Hit-to-Graze & Graze-to-Miss rate) and Deflection (Shield & (Half-)Plate that adds considerable Armour on a strike, possibly negated in part or full by Penetration). It gives a lot of variables to play with for balancing. It's harder and would take (much) longer but would be more interesting than add armour, receive DT, up numbers.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Luckmann

[Endrosz]

There is a guaranteed 20% damage that DT cannot reduce. The system is fine, it can deliver the different outcomes that people expect from combat, it just needs tweaking. I agree that general per-hit damage is high and combat is over too fast and that makes defense not so great except on tanky characters. It is known.

[Simaska]

My 2 cents in this matter:
Positioning is key in a lot of great games.
I can make two examples too:
1) When fighting on hard against the dude that brainwashed the pregnant girl (Im really bad with names and english is certainly not my native language so sorry in advance).
The party cannot be positioned before the fight. So the fight is really challenging and fun (and yes, i am making an assumption that we all played the PoE beta).
2) In a game like Dota2 which is played for millions of dollars, positioning your heroe is key! So why in this game it should be different?

I played 6 different partys and got all the stuff done in BB in various difficulties  (i know for some of you thats a drop in the ocean)  and i loved the combat. Yes it has to be polished. Yes there are a lot of bugs (Sensuki taverN refference). Yes balancing is needed. But positinioning still holds up (again - only my opinion).

 

Just had a perfect example of how fights are often completely decided by positioning testing a 3 person custom party vs. medreth's group.

 

 

This is not an ideal party of course but -

 

PC: Priest, Interdiction w/talent that adds weakness to it and

Fighter: Savage Attack/ 2h style

Wizard: Scion of Flame and Blast

 

 

First fight, I go up to it as any noob might, just click on Medreth, go through dialogue, dropped into combat. Enemies split onto us somewhat evenly, my casters are too busy getting engage spammed while running away, there's a lot of desperate slicken casting and healing while my fighter has no support as the casters struggle for life. I almost made it, and probably could've had I played some cards a bit better and/or got a few less spells interrupted or engagement attacks hit.

 

Second fight, carefully position my fighter in the center. Have casters a distance back. Fight starts, they mob my fighter, my priest and wizard debuff and AoE them to death easily. Fight over in very short order, piece of cake. All it took was moving a couple characters a few meters away and letting them all glue to my fighter at first.

 

 

P.S. one more thing. In my opinion a lvl 12 mages with all the buffs he can cast on himself should still be less effective then the same lvl fighter with all his class buffs on. Why??? BECAUSE MAGES HAVE VERSATILITY! Fighters are made to fight in close combat, mage can if he wants too.
Sorry if ranting. Still love the game and this forum. Have a great day!

[Infinitron]

I'm reminded of how people were laughing earlier at how the game encourages you to use "naked mages" or whatever. Maybe the high damage is a hint that you should consider wearing armor?

 

In general it seems like people ITT are disregarding the DT/DR portion of the equation and would like to rely entirely or mostly on their Deflection, but perhaps those two stats are meant to work in tandem - a dual replacement for AD&D's almighty Armor Class.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Infinitron

[Endrosz]

I'm reminded of how people were laughing earlier at how the game encourages you to use "naked mages" or whatever. Maybe the high damage is a hint that you should consider wearing armor?

 

In general it seems like people ITT are disregarding the DT/DR portion of the equation and would like to rely entirely or mostly on their Deflection, but perhaps those two stats are meant to work in tandem - a dual replacement for AD&D's almighty Armor Class.

 

The damage is so high on the stronger mobs it makes DT a pointless investment.  If the average damage I receive is 10, then it's worth to don an armor which gives a DT of 4. If the average damage I receive is 30, then wearing that DT 4 armor is rather pointless, you should just go for full offense by not reducing your action speed via armor, and try to CC the enemy instead of relying on armor. Per-hit damage is too high, that goes both for character damage incl. spells and monster damage.

[Luckmann]

And let's not forget about DT Reduction; I would be very surprised if higher-level enemies won't have increasingly better weapons or abilities, to boot. Or at least they should. Which just drives the point home all the harder.

DT (or DR as it is called now) as the only relevant modifier isn't a very good system by itself, and will always result in numbers inflation.

[Veevoir]

So basically it is reduced to the very same issue Wasteland 2 had. Weapons/skill progression for enemies you actually consider dangerous nullifies armor bonuses all the time,so later in the game wearing armor is a waste of money (and time in PoE).

Actually, in Wasteland 2 it was amplified by the fact armor could make you take *more* damage.

It is funny PoE handles damage increases on weapons with % but protection increase is in hard numbers. Just making armors defend against % of given damage which scales very well.. forever. Of course with some fine tuning. But it seems that hard DR numbers are infinitely more complicated to do right.

 

Edited March 11, 2015 by Veevoir

[Odd Hermit]

My 2 cents in this matter:

Positioning is key in a lot of great games.

I can make two examples too:

1) When fighting on hard against the dude that brainwashed the pregnant girl (Im really bad with names and english is certainly not my native language so sorry in advance).

The party cannot be positioned before the fight. So the fight is really challenging and fun (and yes, i am making an assumption that we all played the PoE beta).

2) In a game like Dota2 which is played for millions of dollars, positioning your heroe is key! So why in this game it should be different?

 

I played 6 different partys and got all the stuff done in BB in various difficulties  (i know for some of you thats a drop in the ocean)  and i loved the combat. Yes it has to be polished. Yes there are a lot of bugs (Sensuki taverN refference). Yes balancing is needed. But positinioning still holds up (again - only my opinion).

 

 

 

False, you can position as long as you don't snap the girl's neck like some psychopath. I've done both ways just to see what happens, but if you don't snap the girl's neck you can open on them rather than being dropped into combat.

 

However, I actually wrecked that group faster when being dropped into combat last time I tested it. If you look at all of them and see there's a cipher with an arquebus, you just gib that guy first and you're kinda sorta good to go from there 'cause your casters aren't going to be randomly gibbed.

 

Anyway, positioning over the course of a fight is one thing, positioning at the start of fights being the deciding factor too easily is a problem. The player, in the majority of encounters, is allowed to open the fight with positioning favorable to them. It gets too formulaic and predictable. I cleared most of the Skaen out without resting last play-through just by chain will-o'-wisp pulling them.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Infinitron]

 

I'm reminded of how people were laughing earlier at how the game encourages you to use "naked mages" or whatever. Maybe the high damage is a hint that you should consider wearing armor?

 

In general it seems like people ITT are disregarding the DT/DR portion of the equation and would like to rely entirely or mostly on their Deflection, but perhaps those two stats are meant to work in tandem - a dual replacement for AD&D's almighty Armor Class.

 

The damage is so high on the stronger mobs it makes DT a pointless investment.  If the average damage I receive is 10, then it's worth to don an armor which gives a DT of 4. If the average damage I receive is 30, then wearing that DT 4 armor is rather pointless, you should just go for full offense by not reducing your action speed via armor, and try to CC the enemy instead of relying on armor. Per-hit damage is too high, that goes both for character damage incl. spells and monster damage.

 

 

Well, I said in tandem. That is, you always need to invest in both DT and Deflection. Just one of them won't save you, so examined in isolation they don't seem like "worthwhile investments".

Edited March 11, 2015 by Infinitron

[Infinitron]

Anyway, it's funny that people are saying "DT inevitably leads to high damage values", but now what you're telling me is that wait, the damage values are actually way higher than the DT values of the armor!

 

If that is indeed the case, then it's an easily correctible balance issue. So maybe DT is fine after all?

Edited March 11, 2015 by Infinitron

[Sensuki]

I'm reminded of how people were laughing earlier at how the game encourages you to use "naked mages" or whatever. Maybe the high damage is a hint that you should consider wearing armor?

 

In general it seems like people ITT are disregarding the DT/DR portion of the equation and would like to rely entirely or mostly on their Deflection, but perhaps those two stats are meant to work in tandem - a dual replacement for AD&D's almighty Armor Class.

 

I have played 300 hours of the game and Odd Hertmit and co have valid concerns that they have demised through playing the game.

 

You don't wear armor on anyone that isn't going to get attacked, because it's suboptimal and reduces their DPS and you don't invest in defensive attributes or passively defensive abilities/talents unless you're going to make a pure defensive build that you specifically use to take hits, while everyone else pours on the DPS.

 

Armor Class in Baldur's Gate and the Icewind Dale games actually meant something because it was one defense that protected you from all physical attacks. In general, hit chance, or change to actually deal damage on a melee attack was lower, so having more AC made that low number even lower and it didn't cost you any offense. In this game offense is better than defense and defense makes you WORSE at fighting in most cases and it's offense that wins you encounters.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Sensuki

[Infinitron]

Sensuki: See my subsequent posts.

 

I'd like to see an examination of non-Fighter characters that combine both high deflection (as high as they can get, that is) and decent armor, and see how they hold up going into a melee.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Infinitron

[Odd Hermit]

 

I'm reminded of how people were laughing earlier at how the game encourages you to use "naked mages" or whatever. Maybe the high damage is a hint that you should consider wearing armor?

 

In general it seems like people ITT are disregarding the DT/DR portion of the equation and would like to rely entirely or mostly on their Deflection, but perhaps those two stats are meant to work in tandem - a dual replacement for AD&D's almighty Armor Class.

 

I have played 300 hours of the game and Odd Hertmit and co have valid concerns that they have demised through playing the game.

 

You don't wear armor on anyone that isn't going to get attacked, because it's suboptimal and reduces their DPS and you don't invest in defensive attributes or passively defensive abilities/talents unless you're going to make a pure defensive build that you specifically use to take hits, while everyone else pours on the DPS.

 

Armor Class in Baldur's Gate and the Icewind Dale games actually meant something because it was one defense that protected you from all physical attacks. In general, hit chance, or change to actually deal damage on a melee attack was lower, so having more AC made that low number even lower and it didn't cost you any offense. In this game offense is better than defense and defense makes you WORSE at fighting in most cases and it's offense that wins you encounters.

 

 

I'm @ 128 hours FWIW.

 

It's not a matter of ignoring one and hoping the other will protect you. You can try to get decent values for both and still be very squishy. The only classes capable of taking serious hits are those that have class-specific high deflection/health/DR along with talents that sacrifice most of their offensive power.

 

The difference between taking, say, 100 damage from a high damage spell/power/ability or gun and taking 85 because you have plate on your wizard is pretty negligible. And even with some deflection talents a class like a wizard or priest really cannot afford enough deflection to turn enough hits into grazes very often.

 

This is why players advocate high offense on all but "tank" characters. It matters more that your offensive characters damage/control things more quickly, because even if they try they can't save themselves from burst damage because +deflection only matters on already high deflection characters, and DT is only substantial protection on high deflection characters.

 

 

My plan is actually to take a Paladin as a tank now, because they have a class-specific modal that can't be active with the strongest offensive modals anyway. And they only get one use of their strongest attack which is fine 'cause I can pull with a high damage ranged weapon then swap to weapon+shield. That's become the deciding factor in who I sit up front to take the hits.

 

We have something that's essentially like the Icewind Dale II Heart of Winter mode situation where the ideal parties involve extremely specialized characters: 1-2 exceptional defense tank/decoy characters to have enemies cluster around while the offensively built characters bombard them with damage.

[Sensuki]

Sensuki: See my subsequent posts.

 

I'd like to see an examination of non-Fighter characters that combine both high deflection (as high as they can get, that is) and decent armor, and see how they hold up going into a melee.

IMO it is a waste to do that with a Fighter. Paladins and Chanters are two classes that suit that role the best because their main class feature are passive auras. Max Deflection and Plate armored Paladins and Chanters are tanky with good defenses, and against trash mobs and low level scum - you will notice a difference in their survivability.

 

It may even be optimal to have one of these types of characters in every party.

 

However, when you stack Deflection and armor - you do no damage. You are terrible at doing anything except standing there and taking hits. Against foes with high Accuracy and high damage - defense will not save you, in those cases it is actually WORSE to have one of these characters because they cannot contribute with accurate crowd control or king hits to win the encounter.

 

The problem is not that you can't find a use for maximum defense. The problem is that it has limited applicability, and the middle ground absolutely stinks.

[Infinitron]

Fighter, Paladin, Chanter, whatever. What I meant was any "non-traditionally melee" class.

 

It's okay that some classes are better suited to the role than others (that's what different classes are for), but the question is if those other classes can be made at least competent in a defensive role - ideally while still being able to make at least some use of their unique class abilities as well.

 

BTW, is it true what Endrosz said, that damage values are much higher than the DR values of even the best armor?

Edited March 11, 2015 by Infinitron

[Odd Hermit]

Fighter, Paladin, Chanter, whatever. What I meant was any "non-traditionally melee" class.

 

It's okay that some classes are better suited to the role than others (that's what different classes are for), but the question is if those other classes can be made at least competent in a defensive role - ideally while still being able to make at least some use of their unique class abilities as well.

 

BTW, is it true what Endrosz said, that damage values are much higher than the DR values of even the best armor?

 

Yes that is true.

 

Most of my characters can hit harder than their endurance value. Hits of 100+, and of course crits can get really up there. And then there's Leadsplitter, which I'm not even sure because it doesn't display in my combat log but it's one-shot some bosses for me.

 

The best armor I've got(Fine Plate) has 20 DR vs. Pierce/Slash and a bit lower vs. Crush I think. It could be buffed a little more but you're never going to get armor good enough to protect a squishy class like priest, cipher, or wizard well enough to have them taking hits from multiple targets or even one high-damage enemy.

 

And @ level 7-8 my characters hover in the 100-125 endurance range, with my one tank having about 200.

 

So even with the best armor, I'm taking a 50% recovery penalty for only a chance at surviving one or two heavy hits before dropping, and/or further stack deflection and nerf every other aspect of those classes to reduce my chances of taking those heavy hits by only a small %. It's just not worth it. 

Edited March 11, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Sensuki]

Yeah equipping plate on a Priest or a Wizard, or even a Cipher is not going to do much at all for their survivability. It's just not worth it.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Sensuki

[Infinitron]

Well then, like I said, seems like a fairly trivial balance issue. Unless the beta area is actually designed for the player to have way better armor than what's available in the beta, or something.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Infinitron

[GreyFox]

If they don't fix the armor or damage before release would the combat be laughable?  I'd rather the game get pushed back even more if it meant it'd release with better combat and volume options and such.

[Infinitron]

If they don't fix the armor or damage before release would the combat be laughable?  I'd rather the game get pushed back even more if it meant it'd release with better combat and volume options and such.

 

What Odd Hermit and Sensuki are complaining about here is basically that traditionally non-melee classes such as mages don't perform well in melee combat if you build them as such. At least, not as well as they'd like them to.

 

Infinity Engine purists shouldn't have a problem with this, since in those games it wasn't really possible to build a pure mage that performs well in melee anyway. Not until you got cheesy spells at the high levels, anyway.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Infinitron