Alphane

At this point it doesn't seem likley to become an in game option

Hippy Bathday

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A high 'conning' enemy does more dmg to you if that is a truth then has Defence not gained an advantage on Res or was the same scalic balance applied.

[/ QUOTE ]You do realise that the enemy is also going to deal more damage to a def-based character, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

In the same way a res based charecter would be effected by increased to hit, I'm pretty sure that was my assumtion yes.

Ok Praf I apologise for any perceived insult perhaps my information gathering techniques fail to meet the standards of etiquette usual to a forum (this being the first one I've ever really used, So |\|008 and proud).
So to return to where I was going with this, it would appear that Defence has some scalic factor applied to it to balance the scalr effect of 'Conning', Now this point I'm not sure on but is the same scalic effect applied to dmg in some way ie A high 'conning' enemy does more dmg to you if that is a truth then has Defence not gained an advantage on Res or was the same scalic balance applied.
Still just checking it all out but I joined the 'Faithful this weekend so' \/\/007.

Complete package just 404 ing me

How many alts did you create before you
a/Dinging 50 (GRATZ)
b/'Pimped' a build
Also how long did this take you as a secondary question
As one of the 'Faithful' my answers would be
a/About 14 I think and still no 50 all heroes except one incident I'd rather not talk about, It was peer pressure I swear (6 months and counting)
b/err. well see 1
signed an interested party

I only play AT combos I've already got a viable background for, some have been later been dropped as they were found to be inpractical at the Costume creater stage.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Have you actually played this game? Min-maxers can quite easily get near the def cap, where a tiny bonus makes a sizable difference to suvivability, and it is the smart players who understand maths ans statistics that the game has to be balanced around.

If you care to ignore numbers and statistics, and think 5% def is trivial, then it is not suprising that your characters underperform.

[/ QUOTE ]

^^^ That

You wanted an example?

45% def = 95% mitigation -> 5% damage: lets say a battle leaves you @ half health

40% def = 90% mitigation -> 10% damage: same battle, double damage, dead

*still* think 5% is trivial?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well to apply your example in a somewhat 'realistic' Ingame scernario you must be constantly being buffed by 2 compentent sheilders (or other such buffs) for this 5% to have the effect you claim (Especially as Psi defence currently starts at -5%)
So once again CAN 5% give you 50% damage mitagation yes but only in the correct circumstances and it's surely not wise to encourage those who may be less able at maths to beleive otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Think im not speaking from a normal in game experience?, my Inv tank currently has 22.3% psi def (27.3% excluding the 5% debuff) from slotting. So couple that with an accidental Dispersion Bubble from 1 defender thats afk and on follow you get 38.3% def (43.3% excluding the 5%debuff), not exactly 2 competent sheilders as you claim you *must* have

To slotted Inv tanks, this 5% def boost will make a notable difference

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming such a high Psi defence is arrived at by a lot of Expensive set IO slotting which wouldn't to me really represent an 'average' Inv tank and probably would fall under the catogary of 'other such buffs' in my previous statement.

And cheers Praf another interesting article, I'll examine it in more detail when I find the time.

I'm not the sort of kid who goes sizing up and shaking my pressies when they appear under the Christmas tree, well not these days at least

I would say the web development staff are peobably working hard on new toys for us to enjoy and updating previous 'versions' has become less of a priority

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to look at it in another way, 5% def is roughly equivelent to 10% resistance in terms of damage mitigation

[/ QUOTE ]

An easy explanation for that can be found here, courtesy of Cognito for anyone who needs further information.

If the Inv adjustment works as explained in this thread, should be a good thing, let's expect they get it right first time without further tweaking, just for the "annoyance factor" sake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting article though it seems to stop short of the maths involved in Def retaining itself validity against higher conning enemies and AV's which was kinda the bit I would have been interested in. Cheers though

[/ QUOTE ]

Yo might understand the game better if you learned to read:

[ QUOTE ]

7. Defence IS good against AVs and higher conning enemies.

Prior to issue 7, the mathematics of defence made it perform very poorly against AVs or higher conning enemies. You may still hear this, but it is now just mythology. Whatever the level of the enemy, or if it is a boss, lt, or AV, the average damage mitigation remains 1% defence = 2% resistance.

Of course, you still have to factor in the “unlucky streak” I mentioned above. When facing an AV with an almighty whallop, a defence based toon could face a huge chunk of damage, whilst a resistance based toon at least know’s he has some protection.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

And this explains the mathmatics behind how this system works how exactly?

And to be quite frank praf your implications during your last couple of posts are probably breaking the forum rules conserning personal insults (implied or direct)

Myself I would also prefer that Dev time to be spent on New fearures/ Powers / Mission coding etc

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to look at it in another way, 5% def is roughly equivelent to 10% resistance in terms of damage mitigation

[/ QUOTE ]

An easy explanation for that can be found here, courtesy of Cognito for anyone who needs further information.

If the Inv adjustment works as explained in this thread, should be a good thing, let's expect they get it right first time without further tweaking, just for the "annoyance factor" sake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting article though it seems to stop short of the maths involved in Def retaining itself validity against higher conning enemies and AV's which was kinda the bit I would have been interested in. Cheers though

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Have you actually played this game? Min-maxers can quite easily get near the def cap, where a tiny bonus makes a sizable difference to suvivability, and it is the smart players who understand maths ans statistics that the game has to be balanced around.

If you care to ignore numbers and statistics, and think 5% def is trivial, then it is not suprising that your characters underperform.

[/ QUOTE ]

^^^ That

You wanted an example?

45% def = 95% mitigation -> 5% damage: lets say a battle leaves you @ half health

40% def = 90% mitigation -> 10% damage: same battle, double damage, dead

*still* think 5% is trivial?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well to apply your example in a somewhat 'realistic' Ingame scernario you must be constantly being buffed by 2 compentent sheilders (or other such buffs) for this 5% to have the effect you claim (Especially as Psi defence currently starts at -5%)
So once again CAN 5% give you 50% damage mitagation yes but only in the correct circumstances and it's surely not wise to encourage those who may be less able at maths to beleive otherwise.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Aim for it all you like in an 'Average' game it rarely happens

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you actually played this game? No can't say I ever have ! Honest Guv Min-maxers can quite easily get near the def cap, where a tiny bonus makes a sizable difference to suvivability, and it is the smart players who understand maths ans statistics that the game has to be balanced around.

If you care to ignore numbers and statistics, Can't say I ingnore them I just try and represent them in the most appropriate way given the scenario and think 5% def is trivial, then it is not suprising that your characters underperform. Interesting assessment, given I don't know if you have ever seen one of my charecters perform

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
oh yes 'Mary Whitehouse' bot that says a.s.s.e.s.s obviously a word unknown to these forums

[/ QUOTE ] I think you made a typo, since it doesn't censor assess

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps I just can't spell that word as it's the second time the profanity filter has pulled me on it

All these things in theory must be possible else how who they excist at all, surely the problem is the amount of re-animation and coding involved. If someone gets hit by Power_Fireball and bursts into flames why not Power_Fireball (x) and burst into flames (x) (where x = a colour code), yes a whole new set of animations would need to be burned and code applied to correctly choose and apply them but it is hardley beyond the realms of possability.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do higher conning mobs still have a better to hit chance or did they change that cos wouldn't that change the def*2=res calculation?

[/ QUOTE ]

It used to (which made balancing def and res sets impossible), so they changed the way they did the to-hit calculation.

Best case scenario is what they have to use when balancing power sets, because you can be sure that is what players will aim for.

for example, Combat Jumping gives my bane spider only about +3% def, but is is abolutly essential to my suvivability.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man best case scenario, so they [censored] nukes as when they hit there cap, all tanks have allways got there optimum amount off oppenents about them .....

Aim for it all you like in an 'Average' game it rarely happens

oh yes 'Mary Whitehouse' bot that says a.s.s.e.s.s obviously a word unknown to these forums

Do higher conning mobs still have a better to hit chance or did they change that cos wouldn't that change the def*2=res calculation?

And no sorry 'Best case scenario' does not equal a full statistical analysis

[ QUOTE ]
Don't understand much about game mechanics do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

oh I feel all 'belittled' now

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What I was really saying is that it is worth changing why only provide a 5% boost which in game probably ain't gonna effect you still diving for green pills all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sooo, taking your def from 40% to 45%, halfing your incoming damage is nothing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well just choose the ideal situation and try to make a point using it if you like to me statistics just don't work that way, perhaps you should get a job in the goverment though I'm sure they'd love you.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Castle must think programmers grow on trees, hours of extra work for a 5% buff to PSI defense

[/ QUOTE ]There's no need for programmers, he only has to change a few numbers. And he'll be the one doing the changes too, not someone else.
Plus hours of testing time to put up viable stastical analyse then a relisation 5% was to much 2.5 would have been better further hours of testing 2nd realistation 3.75 would be about right more hours of testing............. if it was just a matter of changing two numbers all nurfs/buffs ever needed would be done by the end of the week
[ QUOTE ]
it will only have any effect at all against those who do pure PSI dmg don't know how prevlant they are but they can't be that common

[/ QUOTE ]Could you name one power that does psi damage and some other damage type at the same time? I can't think of any. Obviously you failed to read Jravens post, then again he might be wrong being as my knowledge of game mechanics has been found to be so wanting who am I to know

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
My impression is that very few psionic attacks are typed as anything else than "psionic damage, [positional damage]" and that some of the ones that are actually lack a positional component and are pure psionic attacks.
An exception would be Telekinetic Blast in the Blaster psychic blast set, which has a smashing component. There are also exceptions where only psionic defense is applicable. World of Confusion from the Mental Domination set is typed as purely psionic, to take an example.
The Mind Control set for Controllers is notorious for this as all of the powers are typed as purely psionic without a positional component (which means SR scrappers and brutes may as well be naked).
Now, in the PvE game I'm not certain how prevalent pure psionic attacks are. I suspect they usually have a positional component. My personal experience is that they very seldom has another damage type component however, given that my Defense rarely seems to help against psionic enemies.


Note: I've taken the information from Red Tomax' City of Data site; while usually correct there could be errors.

[/ QUOTE ]

You probably right on reflection if the Devs have judged all PSI powers to be 'non manifesting' then maybe they don't contain other dmg types to balance thre defence against. Don't really know enough about the subject to say for sure.

What I was really saying is that it is worth changing why only provide a 5% boost which in game probably ain't gonna effect you still diving for green pills all the time.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fire-Man with molotov cocktails

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, right, I can see exactly how a molotov cocktail could turn into an imp.

[ QUOTE ]
Plant-Gaia loves you so much she sends her 'children' to protect you

[/ QUOTE ]

Which would make your origin magic.

[ QUOTE ]
Aliens are natural origin,

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I specified human. I have a natural dominator, but he aint human.

[ QUOTE ]
Except... that just means a 'natural' controller needs a Tech origin.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tech origin can explain current controler powers. I could invent a gravity device.

The Tac Rifle uses technology similar to non-lethal crowd control technology that exists in the real world. As it doesn't require any exotic tech it would be perfect for a natural human controler, perhaps of the Super-cop ilk.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've always seen origon as being a very relative concept perhaps you aren't happy with 'natural' controllers others might be, thats all I'm saying rather than ANY natural origins out there got it all wrong if they chose to play a controller.

The finger has well and truley wagged Gilmore