Dear GGG: You brought over a MASSIVE mistake from PoE1 to PoE2 and it hurts everyone! Resistance?!

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

1) Percents are clear, you are just misconstruing the meaning by comparing two different things. 75% literally means that out of the total damage dealt via an attack, 75% is resisted. Crystal clear. The nuance is not though, which I even stated in my post. This nuance confusion is ONLY TRUE if you are comparing one increase to another increase, and almost exclusively beyond the maximum. This kind of confusion is damn near meaningless to 99% of players.

I'm not misconstruing anything. You're incorrectly assuming I'm talking about the mathematical clarity. I'm not, but you seem to agree that what a given percentage means for your survivability in context is not perfectly clear. I'm not sure how relevant it is that that kind of confusion is meaningless to [insert arbitrary % of players].

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

Compare all that to a numerical, ever increasing system: you have 10,000 fire resistance. What the heck does that mean upon taking a fire hit of x damage? Is it a flat reduction, is it a "hidden" equation (likely)? Far more nebulous.

You're right. Everyone is super confused about evasion. What does having 4531 evasion rating mean? No one knows since it's impossible to display that number converted to an appropriate percentage in the same window.

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

Additionally, you attempt to ignore the fact that there is a HUGE difference between 0% and 75% resistance, by trying to say 75% is the baseline.

I did no such thing. I claimed that it was the expectation. I'm sorry you're confusing or conflating those things.

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

2) Everyone points to armour because of how unclear and unreliable the in-game "%pdr provided" is. Whereas evasion and "%evade", while also diminishing returns, is WAY more accurate in most situations. Sure...the entropy system is a bitch, but the numbers you see are almost 100% accurate when it comes to evasion.

Those complaining about diminishing returns in general as a system are simply wrong. Diminishing returns NEED to be in place. The comparison to armour is because of the accuracy of the data being provided to the player.

Right. And the implication (with no justification) is that resistances would have to work like armour and be confusing. Why? Why assume the percentage value presented to the player would be inaccurate?

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

Additionally, you attempt to ignore the fact that there is a HUGE difference between 0% and 75% resistance, by trying to say 75% is the baseline. It isn't. Mathematically and factually, it isn't. 0% is. No matter what the GAME balance is, this is always unequivocably true. Even with a new system, NO RESISTANCE is going to be the baseline, and you go up or down from there. You don't just get to arbitrarily assign a different baseline here to suit your argument: math is math. Whatever you START the game with upon waking up on the beach is net zero everything.

We're talking about how the game is balanced. 75% is the expected value so it's kinda baseline in the endgame. If you have 0%, you take 300% more damage than expected. If you have 90%, you take 60% less. This is the problem with current implementation.
If damage values were actually based around players having 0%, we would be playing a completely different game.

"

drkekyll#1294 wrote:

Lots of picking and choosing and misunderstanding

No I specifically did NOT agree to your assertion that the "survivability" of a number is unclear. It IS rock solid clear with percentages. What's unclear is a linear, non-percentage system.

I'm not incorrectly assuming you are talking about mathematical clarity. I am literally telling you that you are NOT talking about mathematical clarity which plays a huge role in this discussion. Percents are just straight up 100% mathematically clear, and that is what the PLAYERS NEED. As I said in one of my previous posts, players do not like mystery.

And again, you didn't even read what I wrote. NO ONE is confused about evasion because the percentages in-game actually DO function, unlike those of armour and pdr. I spelled this out explicitly and then you stated the opposite? That is precisely why evasion is not relevant to this discussion, albeit having a very similar dminishing return nature. It's another illustration of why CLARITY is of upmost importance to the players.

I can't say this enough with regard to this discussion: it does not matter what the expected minimum defenses are in your opinion. The sheer fact of NUMBERS is what matters, not expectations. 0% resistance means 0% mitigation. 75% means 75%. 90% means 90%. Going FROM 75 to 90% and how much MORE mitigation you receive is ultimately irrelevant to all but a very few attempting to min/max their points for the best "bang for your buck" so to speak. For the vast majority, 75% vs 90% is enough information, even if it isn't telling the whole story. In fact, we would still have the same problem in the new system: 500 extra fire resistance from 2000 to 2500 wouldn't be the same value as 2500 to 3000.



Regarding the confusion: i literally listed like 4 different ways a flat number would be more confusing than percentages are. And you...cut them out of your quoted portion, or just ignored them.




Set up a scenario. 1 with our current system and 1 with a new numbers-based system.

1) A player has 80% fire resist. The map has a -12% max resist penalty. They take 10000 fire damage hit. How much damage do they take?

2) A player has 2500 fire resist. Tooltip says this equates to 80%. The map has a -12% max resist penalty. We take 10000 fire damage hit. How much damage do they take?

#2 is WAY more unclear in determining your incoming damage. Because when it comes to a diminishing return curve, that 12% max resist penalty doesn't equate to 12%. If we were to change that to a flat value, lets say 250. Gut reaction? We are losing 10% max resist right there. BUT WE AREN'T even in that scenario, because of the nebulousness of the curve. None of that needs to be factored in at all in scenario #1.

Now take both those scenarios and ADD resistances to them. Lets say 5% in 1, and 500 in 2. Which is IMMEDIATELY more clear to the player in terms of functional mitigation? It is absolutely the percentage, regardless of ACTUAL increased reduction going from one value to the other.

The balance of the game, functional "minimum required"....plays no role in the math and systems. That is a balance issue, entirely separate from this discussion and argument.

"

Set up a scenario. 1 with our current system and 1 with a new numbers-based system.

1) A player has 80% fire resist. The map has a -12% max resist penalty. They take 10000 fire damage hit. How much damage do they take?

2) A player has 2500 fire resist. Tooltip says this equates to 80%. The map has a -12% max resist penalty. We take 10000 fire damage hit. How much damage do they take?

#2 is WAY more unclear in determining your incoming damage. Because when it comes to a diminishing return curve, that 12% max resist penalty doesn't equate to 12%. If we were to change that to a flat value, lets say 250. Gut reaction? We are losing 10% max resist right there. BUT WE AREN'T even in that scenario, because of the nebulousness of the curve. None of that needs to be factored in at all in scenario #1.

Dude, why the hell would maps still have a -max res modifier if res got reworked to a formula? The map would just have like a 30% less ele res modifier or something.

Also, if resistance used a formula that told you your percent mitigation in the character sheet you could literally just press C and see your de-buffed mitigation in that area.

Did so many people really miss that part of the OP?

^read the post and then respond.

You are adding unnecessary confusion into a system that was already clear to begin with. The entire point of reworking the system was to make it MORE clear, not less.

You can already "press c" to see the adjusted values. That isn't the point. The point is that you don't even NEED to do that in our current system.

So I crafted a new ring and I cannot wear it, despite it being a massive overall upgrade, reason is it gives lightning res instead of a cold res...

SO to wear that ONE RING UPGRADE, I need to change 2 of my items, gloves and helmet, or helmet and boots.

Mind you my helmet gloves and boots costs around 200 DIVINES EACH.

Finding those on trade is nearly impossible.

Because they could not be bothered to add a damn resistance bench swap tool, that existed in PoE1, I am hardstuck between an anvil and a hammer, equip new ring and brick resistances? Recraft 500+ divines worth of a gear and risk failing?

I realized in the end I can simply not be bothered to do this much work because of one resistance falling out and quit the game, so enjoy it if you can...

"

You are adding unnecessary confusion into a system that was already clear to begin with. The entire point of reworking the system was to make it MORE clear, not less.

What confusion? More res = less damage taken is all most people want to know. Do you really think that knowing the EXACT damage differences being gated behind pressing C is more confusing and detrimental than all of the other problems that the current system has combined?

Also, the entire point of reworking the res system in my post was NOT just about clarity. If you read the whole post and that was your only take away then IDK how I'm supposed to communicate with you.

"

You can already "press c" to see the adjusted values. That isn't the point. The point is that you don't even NEED to do that in our current system.

Ok? So improving multiple aspects of the game's progression is worse than people having to occasionally press C if they want to know exact values before they get a rough understanding of a new system?

"

GODOFWARSANCHEZ#4574 wrote:

So I crafted a new ring and I cannot wear it, despite it being a massive overall upgrade, reason is it gives lightning res instead of a cold res...

SO to wear that ONE RING UPGRADE, I need to change 2 of my items, gloves and helmet, or helmet and boots.

Mind you my helmet gloves and boots costs around 200 DIVINES EACH.

Finding those on trade is nearly impossible.

Because they could not be bothered to add a damn resistance bench swap tool, that existed in PoE1, I am hardstuck between an anvil and a hammer, equip new ring and brick resistances? Recraft 500+ divines worth of a gear and risk failing?

I realized in the end I can simply not be bothered to do this much work because of one resistance falling out and quit the game, so enjoy it if you can...

Well...that's just the basic nature of min/maxing: every upgrade requires a re-balance of everything, which is costly. It's literally the point at the stage of your character development where its supposed to be difficult to find "the perfect item" for that slot and that slot only.

As your character gear gets better and better, and the upgrades become fewer and fewer, the balancing act becomes more and more difficult. This should absolutely not be taken away from the progression system...its natural.

There WILL be some sort of crafting bench eventually: I can all but guarantee it. That will solve your woes a bit, provided you have an open mod slot to craft on. But it will still be difficult and costly to min/max, it will just shift the burden ever so slightly higher in the chain.

"

GODOFWARSANCHEZ#4574 wrote:

So I crafted a new ring and I cannot wear it, despite it being a massive overall upgrade, reason is it gives lightning res instead of a cold res...

SO to wear that ONE RING UPGRADE, I need to change 2 of my items, gloves and helmet, or helmet and boots.

Mind you my helmet gloves and boots costs around 200 DIVINES EACH.

Finding those on trade is nearly impossible.

Because they could not be bothered to add a damn resistance bench swap tool, that existed in PoE1, I am hardstuck between an anvil and a hammer, equip new ring and brick resistances? Recraft 500+ divines worth of a gear and risk failing?

I realized in the end I can simply not be bothered to do this much work because of one resistance falling out and quit the game, so enjoy it if you can...

I feel your pain.

Imagine if the game had a crafting system that allows players to change one resistance element for another.

Well, PoE 1 does, called harvest bench. Sad that someone in GGG said "Let's not do craft in PoE 2".

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

"

GODOFWARSANCHEZ#4574 wrote:

So I crafted a new ring and I cannot wear it, despite it being a massive overall upgrade, reason is it gives lightning res instead of a cold res...

SO to wear that ONE RING UPGRADE, I need to change 2 of my items, gloves and helmet, or helmet and boots.

Mind you my helmet gloves and boots costs around 200 DIVINES EACH.

Finding those on trade is nearly impossible.

Because they could not be bothered to add a damn resistance bench swap tool, that existed in PoE1, I am hardstuck between an anvil and a hammer, equip new ring and brick resistances? Recraft 500+ divines worth of a gear and risk failing?

I realized in the end I can simply not be bothered to do this much work because of one resistance falling out and quit the game, so enjoy it if you can...

Well...that's just the basic nature of min/maxing: every upgrade requires a re-balance of everything, which is costly. It's literally the point at the stage of your character development where its supposed to be difficult to find "the perfect item" for that slot and that slot only.

As your character gear gets better and better, and the upgrades become fewer and fewer, the balancing act becomes more and more difficult. This should absolutely not be taken away from the progression system...its natural.

There WILL be some sort of crafting bench eventually: I can all but guarantee it. That will solve your woes a bit, provided you have an open mod slot to craft on. But it will still be difficult and costly to min/max, it will just shift the burden ever so slightly higher in the chain.

Why does every upgrade require a re-balance of your entire loadout? That isn't natural at all. I can think of multiple games I have hundreds or thousands of hours in that don't require me to change everything I have equipped and force trading just to improve a stat slightly. It's not natural and it causes players like the guy you quoted to quit.

The harvest craft to swap resistance types in PoE1 was a band-aid mechanic that allowed people to by-pass such an unnatural system and I myself would have played 3-4 less leagues of PoE1 due to tedious burnout if such a thing didn't exist. Unfortunately we have no basis to know if such a band-aid fix will actually return to PoE2 as the devs have been very adamant about not including so much innate crafting. The best we may get is just rune swapping which we have right now. Regardless of whether resistance swap crafting returns or not it still wouldn't remove all of the symptoms of the current resistance system. It only alleviates a portion.