Resolve! Huh, What is it good for?

[Answermancer]

Hmm, I didn't realize Perception was in such a bad place.

 

The concentration/interrupt changes are looking worse and worse to me.

 

One thing though, you said that +2 Acc on Perception was a ~4% increase, isn't Strength going to go up from 3% as part of the split anyway? Maybe then +2 Acc would be okay, although I imagine Dex would have to go up slightly too? I dunno, seems like this change is gonna really require some rebalancing if they stick with it.

[tinysalamander]

 

 

The easiest fix for Perception is to give it the deflection that Resolve used to have. There is no reason as to why Resolve should have both spell damage, healing and deflection, so move the deflection over to Perception.

 

Governing both accuracy and deflection looks kind of weird.

 

 

Easily explained in that your better perception lets you hit enemies while it also lets you see the attacks coming a little faster allowing you to gain deflection.

 

Makes a lot more sense than the new Resolve being stronger spell casting and deflection because deflection used to be part of Resolve when it was all about concentration and stopping interrupts.

 

I'd go the extra mile and then swap Intellect and the new Resolve. Intellect would cover spell damage and Resolve would cover duration and AoE.

 

 

Nah, I mean mechanically. It might sound logical (for some values of “logical”), but gameplay-wise making a stat both offensive and defensive. So, you deal more damage and take less damage. Either it’s going to be too good or so weak it wouldn’t matter, IMO.

[KDubya]

+1 accuracy is weak (about +2% damage) compared to +3% damage or 3% action speed. Giving it a +1 deflection as well makes it a little better but doesn't make it overpowered.

[Raenvan]

 

Actually miss-to-crit gives only 1.25% additional damage, plus extra penetration and duration. Nevertheless, we have three or four (with new Resolve) attributes that increase DPS various ways. This is a bit redundant, and Perception is most probably the weakest one. 

 

Right, but that additional 1.25% is roughly 2% of your total damage -- i.e., if accuracy and deflection are equal, the "expected value" of a weapon swing works out to be around 62.5%, and the additional 1.25% from +1 point of accuracy ends up being about 2% of that 62.5% total, so 2% additional damage. 

 

That's like the best case scenario for the expected value of an additional point of Per, too. Accuracy gets above 25, relative value drops fast. 

 

Might and Dex both have similar diminishing relative returns for each additional point, but the curves start much higher and for most in-game ranges you're going to get between 3% and 2% dps increase per additional stat point, whereas for Per it's like between 2% and  . . . probably somewhere under 1%, I haven't crunched the top end numbers.

 

Thanks for the correction. At least, Perception is less negligible this way than I thought.  If it granted +1.5 Accuracy instead of +1, its effect on DPS (3% per point) would be similar to Might and Dex for a typical scenario (Accuracy = Deflection).

 

As you said, Perception becomes weaker against weaklings, since you gain either 1.25% or 0.75% (miss-to-crit or graze-to-crit) in the current beta and your expected damage increases. It can get weaker or stronger against bosses who have high Deflection, because crits would be almost impossible and miss-to-hit gives only 1% extra damage, but your expected damage also drops considerably below 62.5%.

 

 

Good catch! At least Perception is required for spotting traps... but you only need one char with high Per in your party for that. To be fair though, either perception or dex was often a dump stat for defensive chars in PoE1, right?

 

So if Resolve is going to get spell/healing power, what the hell does Perception gain? Or are we going to go round robin on each attribute as the dump stat? 

 

To be honest, I wouldn't mind if the general power of Int, Dex and Might (Str/Res) is toned down that the effects of different attributes were not *that* noticeable, and mainly used for scripted interactions, RP and saving rolls. I know they already were not that NB in PoE1 as compared to other Infinity games, but still...

 

Good idea. If somebody doesn't like +1.5 Accuracy/Deflection per attribute point, all other attributes should be toned down proportionally. Might and Dex gives only +2% damage/speed, for example.

[digdigdigidy]

Id like to see a return of con and interrupt perhaps with some new changes. however if Obs really likes the new system my suggestion is make might damage oriented, while resolve does deflection, healing, and healing received (does not apply to self healing). The healing bonus means support classes will like it and those that can't self heal still receive a sustain bonus. 

[dunehunter]

So if Dex is +2% action speed, and Might is a 2% multiplier for damage, which match the gain of Perception, I think it is a good balance. And the only thing to fix is Resolve.

[Raenvan]

So if Dex is +2% action speed, and Might is a 2% multiplier for damage, which match the gain of Perception, I think it is a good balance. And the only thing to fix is Resolve.

Resolve would be automatically balanced In that case, since Deflection has opposite role to Accuracy. It's been discussed in the other thread https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/95062-simple-rebalance-for-resperdexmight/. Before splitting damage to Str/Res, of course.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Raenvan

[Insidous]

+1 accuracy is weak (about +2% damage) compared to +3% damage or 3% action speed. Giving it a +1 deflection as well makes it a little better but doesn't make it overpowered.

 

What people have seem to forgotten is that +1 accuracy is not linear in its effect, and much more useful when your accuracy is lower than enemy defenses (so against bosses or on potd - what people are min-max for in the first place). Also it applies to debuffs and cc aswell.

Let's look at a practical example:

 

You want to hit somebody with a blinding strike: 50 AC (51 AC) versus a defense of 80. Ranges:

Miss: 1-54 (0-53)

Graze: 55-79 (54-78)

Hit: 80-100 (79 -100)

 

Let's say a hit does 20 damage and the duration of blind is 10 seconds:

Expacted damage: (25*10+20*20)/100 = 6.5

Expacted duration: (25*5+20*10)/100 = 3.25

 

With +1 Accuracy:

Expacted damage: (25*10+21*20)/100 = 6.7   --  (6.7/6.5)*100% - 100% = 3.08% increase in damage

Expacted duration: (25*5+21*10)/100 = 3.35   --  (3.35/3.25)*100% - 100% = 3.08% increase in blind duration

 

Conclusion: Against strong defenses +1 accuracy, and therefor perception as it is, can be very competitive with the +3% damage of a point of might. Of course stacking damage bonuses are nice, at the same time accuracy also affects cc.

Accuracy was the "god stat" of PoE1 and that is unlikely to change. Perception doesn't need to be buffed

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Yeah, Perception helps a lot against very high defense targets, but why are you facing very high defense targets? 

 

Fighters (and I think everyone else? but I checked with a fighter) only get +3 Accuracy per level. Base accuracy for everyone is 20 now; max accuracy for fighters is then 80 at level 20. 

 

The  accuracy of 50 in your example is equivalent to the standard accuracy for a level ten character; for that same character to reach an 80 accuracy, equivalent to the defense in your example, he or she would have to be level twenty, max level. 

 

So yeah, Perception does help a lot if you're trying to face stuff waaaaay over your level, but if you try that everything else about trying that will make sure you get crushed, so there's little point in it. 

 

I mean yeah you've got a point that most of this argument is based on numbers theorycrafting perception vs. equivalent defenses, but there is a reason I've been making that assumption  --- this game has level scaling. Most of the time, you're going to be facing enemies at rough level parity, not way higher or lower level. 

 

(It's also true that enemy defenses vary a lot -- but if an enemy has one defense thirty points higher than "level norm," they'll have some other more vulnerable defense that's lower that you're "supposed" to be attacking instead. Trying to hit defense 80 with an accuracy of 50 is a gameplay error).

 

As to PotD, you're right that Per is marginally more useful on PotD, but PotD is only a fifteen point increase in enemy defenses, so additional points of Per don't make as much difference as you'd think -- I posted the math in another thread, but basically at -15 to hit, an additional point of accuracy IS relatively more valuable for generating grazes and hits, but you lose Critical Hits at the top end, so the overall benefit stays around 2% per point. 

 

 

Even on Path of the Damned   .. presuming it keeps the same +15 to all defenses penalty. . .  that just means that, presuming otherwise equivalent attack/defense apart from the PotD penalty, you're going to miss on a 0-40, graze on a 41-65, hit on a 66-115, and crit above that. So:

 

expected value of a normal attack on PotD: 35 + (25/2) = 47.5

With one additional point of Perception:  36 + (25/2) =  48.5

 

(from this thread : https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94949-should-might-stay-multiplicative-or-return-to-additive/page-4?do=findComment&comment=1960507 )

 

So that's . . . 2.1% damage increase for the additional point of Per on PotD, still below the benefit from Might or Dex.

 

 

You're right that Accuracy was very effective in PoE 1 but it's a lot harder (by design, apparently) to get accuracy bonuses in Deadfire, so I'm not sure it's going to be possible to (for example) push your accuracy high enough to ensure you're guaranteed to hit / crit with CC attacks, etc., like you could in the first game.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Insidous]

 

 

Yeah, Perception helps a lot against very high defense targets, but why are you facing very high defense targets? 

 

Fighters (and I think everyone else? but I checked with a fighter) only get +3 Accuracy per level. Base accuracy for everyone is 20 now; max accuracy for fighters is then 80 at level 20. 

 

The  accuracy of 50 in your example is equivalent to the standard accuracy for a level ten character; for that same character to reach an 80 accuracy, equivalent to the defense in your example, he or she would have to be level twenty, max level. 

 

So yeah, Perception does help a lot if you're trying to face stuff waaaaay over your level, but if you try that everything else about trying that will make sure you get crushed, so there's little point in it. 

 

I mean yeah you've got a point that most of this argument is based on numbers theorycrafting perception vs. equivalent defenses, but there is a reason I've been making that assumption  --- this game has level scaling. Most of the time, you're going to be facing enemies at rough level parity, not way higher or lower level. 

 

(It's also true that enemy defenses vary a lot -- but if an enemy has one defense thirty points higher than "level norm," they'll have some other more vulnerable defense that's lower that you're "supposed" to be attacking instead. Trying to hit defense 80 with an accuracy of 50 is a gameplay error).

 

As to PotD, you're right that Per is marginally more useful on PotD, but PotD is only a fifteen point increase in enemy defenses, so additional points of Per don't make as much difference as you'd think -- I posted the math in another thread, but basically at -15 to hit, an additional point of accuracy IS relatively more valuable for generating grazes and hits, but you lose Critical Hits at the top end, so the overall benefit stays around 2% per point. 

 

 

Even on Path of the Damned   .. presuming it keeps the same +15 to all defenses penalty. . .  that just means that, presuming otherwise equivalent attack/defense apart from the PotD penalty, you're going to miss on a 0-40, graze on a 41-65, hit on a 66-115, and crit above that. So:

 

expected value of a normal attack on PotD: 35 + (25/2) = 47.5

With one additional point of Perception:  36 + (25/2) =  48.5

 

(from this thread : https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94949-should-might-stay-multiplicative-or-return-to-additive/page-4?do=findComment&comment=1960507 )

 

So that's . . . 2.1% damage increase for the additional point of Per on PotD, still below the benefit from Might or Dex.

 

 

 

 

Try the beta on potd, face the Lagufaeth chieftains, broodmother and redfins on level 7 and see if you can manage without attacking a defense 30 higher than your accuracy with all your characters. Or the named Engwithan Saint. Sure a high might char might kill those skeletons in the Engwithan Saint fight faster, but you need a char with decent perception against the saint. You need to apply cc and actually hit him.

The toughest enemies, single bosses, dragons, whatever we will see in the full game do have very high defenses and not necessarily an easy weakness that your character can exploit. A rouge cannot simply attack toughness all the time, a fighter has difficulties to do anything against high deflection etc.

 

Even with level scaling single bosses will (hopefully) have considerably higher defenses than your accuracy and that is when perception still shines. Again it is these fights you want to be most effective! 

 

 

 

You're right that Accuracy was very effective in PoE 1 but it's a lot harder (by design, apparently) to get accuracy bonuses in Deadfire, so I'm not sure it's going to be possible to (for example) push your accuracy high enough to ensure you're guaranteed to hit / crit with CC attacks, etc., like you could in the first game.

 

That is precisely why perception is still so important! The lower the accuracy is the bigger is the impact of extra points and since you can't buff yourself as much anymore your accuracy will be lower and you can't overcome a critically low accuracy as easily.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Insidous

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

 

Try the beta on potd, face the Lagufaeth chieftains, broodmother and redfins on level 7 and see if you can manage without attacking a defense 30 higher than your accuracy with all your characters. Or the named Engwithan Saint. Sure a high might char might kill those skeletons in the Engwithan Saint fight faster, but you need a char with decent perception against the saint. You need to apply cc and actually hit him.

The toughest enemies, single bosses, dragons, whatever we will see in the full game do have very high defenses and not necessarily an easy weakness that your character can exploit. A rouge cannot simply attack toughness all the time, a fighter has difficulties to do anything against high deflection etc.

 

Even with level scaling single bosses will (hopefully) have considerably higher defenses than your accuracy and that is when perception still shines. Again it is these fights you want to be most effective! 

 

 

 

 

 

Sure, but even in those instances, I'd argue that those are the fights where you're supposed to be using debuffs to lower enemy defenses, or buffs to heighten your own. That's why I said "gameplay error" above -- going head-on against a thirty-point defense advantage is the equivalent of trying to rush Raedric's Keep instead of sneaking in through the sewers. The game allows you to do it, but it's . . . not intended to be the optimal approach.

 

And again, once you start using buffs and debuffs, the relative value of perception drops a lot, faster than the relative value of additional points of Might or Dex.

 

 

 

 

That is precisely why perception is still so important! The lower the accuracy is the bigger is the impact of extra points and since you can't buff yourself as much anymore your accuracy will be lower and you can't overcome a critically low accuracy as easily.

 

 

Sure, but. . .hrm.

 

There were a few advantages to stacking Per / Accuracy in the first game.

 

The first was the one we've mostly been discussing -- the statistical boost to hits, etc. That has diminishing returns etc. as we're discussing, and you're right that the relative value of each point of accuracy is mathematically greater now that there are fewer sources for it.

 

Second was that stacking Interrupt could be really useful.

 

Third was that once you stacked a LOT of accuracy, you could rely on your CC effects; get your accuracy high enough and they would always land and frequently crit, which makes them a lot more useful utility wise.

 

In this game, we still have the first advantage; the second has been removed. The third one is what I'm talking about re: the inability to stack accuracy -- it appears you can't get your accuracy high enough to guarantee or near-guarantee your spells will always land. Like, even with max starting Per, there's still a 15% chance you're gonna whiff against an equivalent-defense enemy, and you only have a 10% chance to crit. 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Insidous]

Sure, but. . .hrm.

 

There were a few advantages to stacking Per / Accuracy in the first game.

 

The first was the one we've mostly been discussing -- the statistical boost to hits, etc. That has diminishing returns etc. as we're discussing, and you're right that the relative value of each point of accuracy is mathematically greater now that there are fewer sources for it.

 

Second was that stacking Interrupt could be really useful.

 

Third was that once you stacked a LOT of accuracy, you could rely on your CC effects; get your accuracy high enough and they would always land and frequently crit, which makes them a lot more useful utility wise.

 

In this game, we still have the first advantage; the second has been removed. The third one is what I'm talking about re: the inability to stack accuracy -- it appears you can't get your accuracy high enough to guarantee or near-guarantee your spells will always land. Like, even with max starting Per, there's still a 15% chance you're gonna whiff against an equivalent-defense enemy, and you only have a 10% chance to crit. 

 

 

I agree on points one and two, even though I always found interrupt rather underwhelming in PoE1

 

I don't really see how the third one is an argument against perception. So cc reliant characters shouldn't try to buff their accuracy at all? I am very happy for any bonus that I can still get.

-10% chance to miss for +10% chance to crit equals an expected increase of 24% in cc duration

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

 

I agree on points one and two, even though I always found interrupt rather underwhelming in PoE1

 

I don't really see how the third one is an argument against perception. So cc reliant characters shouldn't try to buff their accuracy at all? I am very happy for any bonus that I can still get.

-10% chance to miss for +10% chance to crit equals an expected increase of 24% in cc duration

 

 

 

Fair enough. It's basically a utility argument, not a math argument: i.e., "each point of strength helps you jump 1% higher" vs "with a strength value of X, you can jump over this wall."  If you can make it over the "always hit" threshold by stacking accuracy that makes CC more useful generally, if you can't, Per/Acc still helps, just . . . not in the same way.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Answermancer]

I mean yeah you've got a point that most of this argument is based on numbers theorycrafting perception vs. equivalent defenses, but there is a reason I've been making that assumption  --- this game has level scaling. Most of the time, you're going to be facing enemies at rough level parity, not way higher or lower level.

Sorry to sidetrack things, but does the level scaling option lower enemy levels too? I turned it off in my beta runs because I generally don't like it, but I thought it just raised enemy levels to make it more challenging, not less?

[Wormerine]

 

I mean yeah you've got a point that most of this argument is based on numbers theorycrafting perception vs. equivalent defenses, but there is a reason I've been making that assumption  --- this game has level scaling. Most of the time, you're going to be facing enemies at rough level parity, not way higher or lower level.

Sorry to sidetrack things, but does the level scaling option lower enemy levels too? I turned it off in my beta runs because I generally don't like it, but I thought it just raised enemy levels to make it more challenging, not less?

I didn’t try level scaling at all, but from what I understand it works both ways - it tries to match enemy levels to your level whenever it is higher or lower. However, there is a toggle in the beta to scale enemies up only - so if you only want more challange you can opt for it.

[AndreaColombo]

Where would that toggle be?

 

My understanding is that level scaling in its current implementation scales enemies either up or down, within bracketed values, to match your level. There’s an option to apply this to the critical path only.

 

I also reckon there is a plan to include an option for scaling enemies up and never down, but that’s not currently available to us that I know of.

[Wormerine]

Where would that toggle be?

 

My understanding is that level scaling in its current implementation scales enemies either up or down, within bracketed values, to match your level. There’s an option to apply this to the critical path only.

 

I also reckon there is a plan to include an option for scaling enemies up and never down, but that’s not currently available to us that I know of.

Sorry, you are right. Josh did an Inception on moi.

 

From one of the streams:

 

"is it possible to make enemies only scale up?

JS: Yes, that is an option we're adding. It's not in the Backer Beta, but it is an option we're adding. You can say I only want things to scale up, I don't want things to scale down."