What do you think about Deflection?

[SaruNi]

How much deflection do you get from a large shield?

 

+12 (or +14 if Exceptional).

 

 

(The modal gives -50% ranged damage and -50% damage for attacks that target reflection in exchange for not being able to move.)

Edited January 4, 2018 by SaruNi

[SaruNi]

Deflection bonuses from spells and abilities don't stack, and escape gives +50 deflection for 3 seconds (with 0 recovery and brief casting time)... which is just enough time to get in a weapon attack if you have dex a bit > 10 and no armor. You can also "escape" to the same location you were at before. So a Rogue using that strategy doesn't gain deflection from multiclassing Wizard or using Trickster's mirrored image (however, since you can't be engaged under the effects of escape, you can't force disengagement attacks to mass riposte, and streetfighters can't be flanked by enemies... and you'll eventually run out of guile to keep escaping). Arcane Veil also gives  +50 deflection (except against "veil piercing" attacks").... Deflection bonuses do stack with +all defenses from Paladin et cetera, with paladin having the largest +all defenses by far (and +all defenses seem to always stack with each other?).  

 

On large shield: you can use Escape or Evasive Roll to move even when the modal is active.

[hilfazer]

 

If my armor can reduce damage of enemy's crit to 25% i'm probably overleveling him.

What's the level of broodmother suggested by Joe? It's around 9? 

 

 

 

Ok, i've expressed myself poorly. Let's try again.

 

If i were making a game where crits increase Penetration by 50% and where extra penetration is a main benefit of crits a defender would be able to reduce crit damage by 3/4 only when overleveling the attacker. Or maybe also in extreme situations like when defender is a tank and attacker uses low PEN weapon like a sabre or dragon's breath.

[MaxQuest]

We can simply change the coefficient 0.05 to the original formula, the old one is DR = (0.05 * armor)/(1 + 0.05 * armor), if we change the 0.05 to maybe 0.5 or 1 for example, even 1 armor advantage will be obvious. And this coefficient is easier to adjust.

I have tried to visualize your suggestion:

 

 

Still thinking what conclusion to make, but can already see that the increase in damage from extra PEN is really high. And if we take a lower coefficient, our frontliners will struggle with damage mitigation. 

 

Ok, i've expressed myself poorly. Let's try again.

 

If i were making a game where crits increase Penetration by 50% and where extra penetration is a main benefit of crits a defender would be able to reduce crit damage by 3/4 only when overleveling the attacker. Or maybe also in extreme situations like when defender is a tank and attacker uses low PEN weapon like a sabre or dragon's breath.

Understood your point, and agreed: fine-tuning enemy AR coupled with addition of few enemies with very-high PEN / low acc (as suggested by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy) will make avoidance-tanks (def-based) as useful as mitigation-tanks (armor-based).

[DozingDragon]

Isn’t it fair to say that a high deflection has the added bonus of protecting against secondary effects of attacks or abilities that target deflection whereas penetration does not? An increased vulnerability to CC or secondary effects should be enough of an incentive to try to keep deflection and the other defenses at a reasonable level.

[MaxQuest]

^ Partially yes. On the other hand AR helps vs 7 out 8 damage types, while deflection is only 1 out of 4 defenses.

But yes, if there were more nasty enemies dealing raw damage - definitely.

[FreeKaner]

I do not understand why DR system couldn't be used in conjunction with penetration. Weapons with % penetration would still negate portion of the DR thus would have their niche against highly armoured targets while not being universally strong against any DR higher than 3 or 5 as was the case in PoE1. 

 

A flat reduction system definitely works more fluid and intuitively with attack and defence rolls due it's asymmetric reaction to higher ratio of attacks, which could also help solve the current problem where one-handed weapons are universally better.

Edited January 5, 2018 by FreeKaner

[MaxQuest]

I do not understand why DR system couldn't be used in conjunction with penetration.

A flat reduction system definitely works more fluid and intuitively with attack and defence rolls[...]

The DR system used in PoE1 was considered "mushy". Strange, I can't find the exact article on that, but here are two partially related tumblr posts:

- post 1 - about mushy feel of DR; plus it explains that graduated approach will not be used for PEN-AR

- post 2 - mentions that PEN should be separated from flat damage numbers, and be percentage based

 

 

P.S. I'm pretty neutral on the DR vs AR thing, but I'd recommend also checking this post from 2014. It's a bit humorous, that flat DR is now marked as mushy; while percentage DR was considered confusing =)

Edited January 5, 2018 by MaxQuest

[hilfazer]

I do not understand why DR system couldn't be used in conjunction with penetration. Weapons with % penetration would still negate portion of the DR thus would have their niche against highly armoured targets while not being universally strong against any DR higher than 3 or 5 as was the case in PoE1. 

 

A flat reduction system definitely works more fluid and intuitively with attack and defence rolls due it's asymmetric reaction to higher ratio of attacks, which could also help solve the current problem where one-handed weapons are universally better.

 

DR is good but in POE1 was done just badly.

Quality on weapons gave them % damage bonus increase while armors got a flat value. Just like Obsidian wanted armor to be weak at higher levels. 

 

Each tick of a DOT was reduced by 25% DR. WHY? Why not divide DR by number of ticks and use this value? 

 

Lashes did not have a minimum damage that goes through DR. Why?

 

Every lash goes against 25% DR. No matter if it 10% Lightning Punches or 50% Flames of Devotion. Former talent was actually buffed to 25% because it sucked. I don't think i need to tell anyone why it sucked. It just make sense for lashes to go against same % of DR as their damage multiplier is.

 

Armor penetration was a flat malus. You are correct, % penetration is the way to go. If you have two weapons, one with 13 damage and 3 DR reduction, other one with 16 damage, 2nd is better. But if one weapon has 13 damage and 40% DR reduction while other has 16 damage, which one is better? Yeah, you can't tell because it depends on enemy armor (or at least it depends more than in case of flat malus).

I know my example is a little biased but the thing is % armor penetration is better at preventing penetrating weapons from being obsoleted by high DPS ones.

Flat DR malus is too similar to damage bonus.

 

How many damage multipliers were applied after damage was reduced by armor? Das Schwarze Auge has them. I don't think there were any in PoE1 but i'm not Boeroer/MaxQuest/AndreaColombo.

 

"B-but... DR deals poorly vs high damage attacks!". Ok Obsidian, but you solved this in your arguably best game - Fallout: New Vegas. Damage reduction was mostly flat but there were drugs that temporarily provided % reduction. Those Deathclaws had surprised look on their faces.

 

Sure, absolute reduction tends to work poorly with HP/damage bloat, but bloat is not good to begin with. Without bloat you can for example use low level enemies as a support to high level ones in high level encounters and they'll be doing something. With bloat they will just die to some low damage AoE player used to debuff stronger foes.

Moreover if you have bloat low level enemies will be non issue to high level heroes no matter what armor system you use.

When i want bloat i play JRPGs or Diablo 3. Ok, i never played D3 but you get the point.

[dunehunter]

 

We can simply change the coefficient 0.05 to the original formula, the old one is DR = (0.05 * armor)/(1 + 0.05 * armor), if we change the 0.05 to maybe 0.5 or 1 for example, even 1 armor advantage will be obvious. And this coefficient is easier to adjust.

I have tried to visualize your suggestion:

 

 

Still thinking what conclusion to make, but can already see that the increase in damage from extra PEN is really high. And if we take a lower coefficient, our frontliners will struggle with damage mitigation.

Maybe the easiest way to fix frontline damage mitigation is, using different Coefficient for damage reduction and damage multiplier.

Edited January 5, 2018 by dunehunter

[MaxQuest]

Maybe the easiest way to fix frontline damage mitigation is, using different Coefficient for damage reduction and damage multiplier.

Yeap, that would be the easiest way. But:

- it will complicate the system description a bit.

- when choosing these coefficients we should also keep base damage of different weapons in mind, and check how they will compete vs each other:

 

 

 

 

It's important that both [high damage, low pen] and [low damage, high pen] are somewhat equally viable. And I have found the coefficients that would balance weapons around -4..0 (that's ~0.15) and around 0..4 (~0.27), But... nothing so far that holds consistent along the all length of the scale\

 

A niche could be:

- high pen weapons are only useful if your PEN with them gets around -2..2

- high damage weapons are superior on the rest of the scale

But am not really happy with this, as in 90% of cases players will just use Great Swords anyway and will be debuffing enemy AR, and even if they don't succeed, well, they lost only ~25% dps vs a select few enemies.

 

Look at the scale for 0.25: if you jumped from -4 diff to 0 that's a big gain, from 50% of damage going through to 100%. And even if Estocs deal only 61.3% of Great Swords they will be ahead because 1*0.63 > 0.5*1. But we have a minor proble at the lower part of the scale, as going from -10 to -6, is only jumping from x0.29 to x0.36; and even if Estocs are likely purposed to be useful vs high-armored targets... players would still use great swords.

 

 

We might need to have different bottom damage thresholds for different weapons, like:

- Great Swords are capped at 20% minimal damage

- Estocs are capped at 40% minimal damage

 

But it has to be elegant and simple worded. So... still thinking.

 

 

And there is one more concern: atm cipher with Estoc is really bad. You can take Great Sword and build focus by hitting squshies, why would you hinder yourself by taking Estoc in the first place?

Now if the game allowed for two different and both viable types of ciphers... e.g. one mighty with Great Sword (reliable) and another accurate with Estoc (spike, based on crits) that would be really great both, thematically and mechanically. And I think I know how this can be achieved...)

Edited January 6, 2018 by MaxQuest

[hilfazer]

Sword - 15 damage. Mace - 10 damage, 50% armor bypass.

Leather armor - 20% damage reduction. Platemail - 80% damage reduction.

 

Sword vs leather: 15 * (1 - 0.2) = 15 * 0.8 = 12

Mace vs leather: 10 * (1 - 0.1) = 10 * 0.9 = 9

Sword is better.

 

Sword vs plate: 15 * (1 - 0.8 ) = 15 * 0.2 = 3

Mace vs plate:  10 * (1 - 0.4) = 10 * 0.6 = 6

Mace is better.

 

Above certain armor value higher pen weapons is always better than low pen one. And the higher damage reduction the better high pen weapon compares to low pen one.

 

As a bonus light armors are always doing something, unless attack happens to have 100% armor penetration. No more "I can as well go naked".

[MaxQuest]

^ That can be a good fallback solution.

 

What I am thinking though is:

- imagine a rogue: one with high MIG focused on steady dps with high_dmg/low_pen weapons; and another with high PER, focused on spike dps (with stingy crits) with low_dmg/high_pen weapons

- or imagine a cipher: one with high MIG and Great Sword; and another with high PER and Estoc

 

And damage be somewhat like:

 

MIG-based cipher with GreatSword vs naked: 16

PEN-based cipher with Estoc vs naked: 14

MIG-based cipher with Estoc vs naked: 12

PEN-based cipher with GreatSword vs naked: 12

 

MIG-based cipher with GreatSword vs leather: 12

PEN-based cipher with Estoc vs leather: 12

MIG-based cipher with Estoc vs leather: 9

PEN-based cipher with GreatSword vs leather: 9

 

MIG-based cipher with GreatSword vs plate: 4

PEN-based cipher with Estoc vs plate: 6

MIG-based cipher with Estoc vs plate: 3

PEN-based cipher with GreatSword vs plate: 3

 

At the same time something like fighter would obviously prefer a Great Sword for the most cases and switch to Estoc only vs very high-AR targets.

Edited January 6, 2018 by MaxQuest

[dunehunter]

Balancing weapon damage will be much easier when you already have an AR vs Pen formula, but I do agree that the reason Obs use some absolute value than formula is because it is easier to document and understand.

[nordicbstrd]

My problem right now with the system is if you go through with a solo class that doesn't have a bunch of PEN buffs i.e. something like a rogue in the beta your character always seems to be like 2 - 3 PEN < AR.  If you use the default mercenary rogue given to you this happens.  You can equip a PEN weapon and that works for like 50% of the guys, but still on a lot you are 1-2 low.  This makes a single spell like the chanter's Hel-Hyraf that reduces AR by 5 make like your entire party do 50-75% more damage.  That is a HUGE debuff.

 

Obviously this is not the issue if you start multi classing characters like devoted/beserker or something where your PEN can go through the roof anyway and you never come across this, but I don't think a lot of the casual players are going to be working the penetration system and they are going to feel like they do no damage...because they don't.

[KDubya]

My problem right now with the system is if you go through with a solo class that doesn't have a bunch of PEN buffs i.e. something like a rogue in the beta your character always seems to be like 2 - 3 PEN < AR.  If you use the default mercenary rogue given to you this happens.  You can equip a PEN weapon and that works for like 50% of the guys, but still on a lot you are 1-2 low.  This makes a single spell like the chanter's Hel-Hyraf that reduces AR by 5 make like your entire party do 50-75% more damage.  That is a HUGE debuff.

 

Obviously this is not the issue if you start multi classing characters like devoted/beserker or something where your PEN can go through the roof anyway and you never come across this, but I don't think a lot of the casual players are going to be working the penetration system and they are going to feel like they do no damage...because they don't.

 

But casual players will be playing the easier difficulties such as normal where enemies are weak enough that it won't really matter. Even then how hard will it be for them to just switch to a stiletto, grab an estoc or activate a mace modal?

 

For armor to be meaningful it has to stop damage at least occasionally. In PoE early game armor was huge as damage was low, wearing plate or brigandine at level 2 was a massive advantage, while late game enemies hit hard enough that enchanted robes or padded were way more offensive while being close enough defensively to the heavy plate.

 

I preferred the first version of beta where under penetrating was a big -70% not the mushy -25% per point that they are going to now. Before penetration mattered, now its back to damage is always king and use a great sword and sabre for everything.

[SaruNi]

My problem right now with the system is if you go through with a solo class that doesn't have a bunch of PEN buffs i.e. something like a rogue in the beta your character always seems to be like 2 - 3 PEN < AR.  If you use the default mercenary rogue given to you this happens.  You can equip a PEN weapon and that works for like 50% of the guys, but still on a lot you are 1-2 low.  This makes a single spell like the chanter's Hel-Hyraf that reduces AR by 5 make like your entire party do 50-75% more damage.  That is a HUGE debuff.

 

Obviously this is not the issue if you start multi classing characters like devoted/beserker or something where your PEN can go through the roof anyway and you never come across this, but I don't think a lot of the casual players are going to be working the penetration system and they are going to feel like they do no damage...because they don't.

 

Vanilla Rogues have raw DoT to deal with penetration (same goes for Rangers, Druids, Conjurors...). Non-devoted fighters have upgraded Into the Fray (-10 AR)... and if you're 1 low there's the Mace modal. And Empower.

[dunehunter]

 

My problem right now with the system is if you go through with a solo class that doesn't have a bunch of PEN buffs i.e. something like a rogue in the beta your character always seems to be like 2 - 3 PEN < AR.  If you use the default mercenary rogue given to you this happens.  You can equip a PEN weapon and that works for like 50% of the guys, but still on a lot you are 1-2 low.  This makes a single spell like the chanter's Hel-Hyraf that reduces AR by 5 make like your entire party do 50-75% more damage.  That is a HUGE debuff.

 

Obviously this is not the issue if you start multi classing characters like devoted/beserker or something where your PEN can go through the roof anyway and you never come across this, but I don't think a lot of the casual players are going to be working the penetration system and they are going to feel like they do no damage...because they don't.

 

Vanilla Rogues have raw DoT to deal with penetration (same goes for Rangers, Druids, Conjurors...). Non-devoted fighters have upgraded Into the Fray (-10 AR)... and if you're 1 low there's the Mace modal. And Empower.

 

 

Aren't Wounding shot's DoT damage based on the damage you inflict? So if you cannot penetrate enemy armor, your raw DoT will be negligible. Same as Deep wound of rogue.

[SaruNi]

 

 

My problem right now with the system is if you go through with a solo class that doesn't have a bunch of PEN buffs i.e. something like a rogue in the beta your character always seems to be like 2 - 3 PEN < AR.  If you use the default mercenary rogue given to you this happens.  You can equip a PEN weapon and that works for like 50% of the guys, but still on a lot you are 1-2 low.  This makes a single spell like the chanter's Hel-Hyraf that reduces AR by 5 make like your entire party do 50-75% more damage.  That is a HUGE debuff.

 

Obviously this is not the issue if you start multi classing characters like devoted/beserker or something where your PEN can go through the roof anyway and you never come across this, but I don't think a lot of the casual players are going to be working the penetration system and they are going to feel like they do no damage...because they don't.

 

Vanilla Rogues have raw DoT to deal with penetration (same goes for Rangers, Druids, Conjurors...). Non-devoted fighters have upgraded Into the Fray (-10 AR)... and if you're 1 low there's the Mace modal. And Empower.

 

 

Aren't Wounding shot's DoT damage based on the damage you inflict? So if you cannot penetrate enemy armor, your raw DoT will be negligible. Same as Deep wound of rogue.

 

 

Not sure... the UI makes it difficult to tell. Though Rogue Gouging Strike, Arterial Strike, and (one-handed melee) Strike the Bell do raw DoT independent of damage inflicted. Also ranged Strike the Bell gives ranged weapons extra penetration....

[SaruNi]

Rangers also have a passive that grants their pets +2 penetration and an upgrade to Takedown that "grants a large penetration bonus to the attack" (not to mention Sharpshooters and war bow's bonus penetration modal)....