Synapse
-
Posts
99 -
Joined
-
Quote:Alphas that modify recharge are taken into consideration. However remember that the primary portion of the alpha is subject to enhancement diversification and the bonus portion is not.Originally Posted by DarkSideLeague
So just to be clear, will this new formula take Spiritual or Agility alphas into consideration? (I'm betting yes but just want to be clear) -
Quote:ACK! You're right. Sorry about that. Foot Stomp's area factor is 3.25 not 2.5. These are the actual values for Foot Stomp with Force Feedback slotted.Originally Posted by Another_Fan
This looks really good. It means that I won't be nagged to death to redo builds so double thumbs up from me, but I have one question.
Can we get the area factor formula ?
There is one floating around the boards that states
Area Factor = 1+(0.15*Radius)-(0.011*Radius*(360-Arc)/30)
From your examples
Dark regen radius 20 full arc
Example Area Factor = 4
From Formula Area Factor = 4
But
Footstomp Radius 15 full arc
From Example Area Factor = 2.5
From Formula Area Factor = 3.25
Is the formula we have incorrect ? If so can you share the correct one ?
CURRENT PPMs
Foot Stomp
Base Recharge: 20 seconds
Cast Time: 2.1 seconds
Area Factor: 3.25
Force Feedback Proc
IO Chance: 10%
PPM: 1.5
Proc Chance: 15.8%
PROPOSED PPMs
Foot Stomp
Base Recharge: 20 seconds
Cast Time: 2.1 seconds
Area Factor: 2.5
Force Feedback Proc
PPM: 1.875
0% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 24%
33% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 18.6%
66% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 15.4
100% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 13.2%
PPM: The above values are assuming we apply a 25% bonus to existing PPMs. -
Quote:Certainly!Originally Posted by Bionic_Flea
Can we have a similar example with say, tanker footstomp and Force Feedback chance for +recharge?
CURRENT PPMs
Foot Stomp
Base Recharge: 20 seconds
Cast Time: 2.1 seconds
Area Factor: 2.5
Force Feedback Proc
IO Chance: 10%
PPM: 1.5
Proc Chance: 22.1%
PROPOSED PPMs
Foot Stomp
Base Recharge: 20 seconds
Cast Time: 2.1 seconds
Area Factor: 2.5
Force Feedback Proc
PPM: 1.875
0% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 32.5%
33% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 25.2%
66% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 20.8%
100% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 17.8%
PPM: The above values are assuming we apply a 25% bonus to existing PPMs. -
Okay, here's what I've come up with. The differences are FAR less dramatic than my first proposal:
1) Increase the PPM value by 20-25% (So a 4 PPM proc would become 5ish PPM) NOTE: The exact amount is still being figured out.
2) Replace the Base Recharge used by the PPM formula to only take into recharge enhancements affecting that power. This means recharge boosts from powers like Speed Boost, Hasten, Chrono Shift and Global Recharge from Enhancement effects like Luck of the Gambler's: +Def/+Global Rech 7.5% are not factored in.
3) Procs will have a maximum chance to trigger. I'm leaning toward 90-95%. There will be a minimum chance to proc equal to 5 plus 1.5 per PPM. Only the most extreme instances of very low recharge, cast time and area factor will cause this to occur.
4) All non-PPM enhancements with a chance to trigger less than 100% will use PPMs. (Note: Enhancements like Numina's Convalesence: Regen/Recovery will not be affected by this change as they have 100% chance to trigger).
5) The formula will treat Area Factor differently. Instead of simply using the flat Area Factor of the power, it will use 1 plus 75% of the difference between 1 and its actual AF. I think I heard a couple of you say "Huh?" Let me give you an example and then explain why.
Let's take a look at Dark Regeneration shall we? It has an Area Factor of 4, base recharge of 30 seconds and cast time of 1.17s. Using current PPMs with Essence Theft (3PPMs) it has a 39% chance to proc per target.
With the new formula we'll treat area factor as being slightly smaller than it is now. So the new formula would treat this Area Factor as 3.25. (1+(.75*(Actual Area Factor-1)). The simple version is: Area Factor will have a smaller impact on proc chance reduction.
Okay, now onto the example. Let's use Assassin's Strike slotted with Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide (Standard):
CURRENT PPMs
Assassin Strike
Base Recharge: 15 seconds
Cast Time: 1 second
Area Factor: 1
Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide
PPM: 4
Proc Chance: 106.7%
PROPOSED PPMs
Assassin Strike
Base Recharge: 15
Cast Time: 1 second
Area Factor
Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide
PPM: 5
0% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
33% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
66% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 83.6%
100% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 70.8%
Superior Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide
0% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
33% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
66% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
100% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 88.5%
PPM: The above values are assuming we apply a 25% bonus to existing PPMs.
Now the why...
As many of you have mentioned it seems odd to penalize players' proc chances for strengthening their builds with global recharge. So, only recharge modification from enhancements and enhancement-like effects (like Alpha Slot effects) will modify proc chance. We also realized, after looking at a great number of affected powers, that we were over penalizing AoE powers with PPMs. So, we've lightened the impact Area Factor has on the formula.
Thanks for all the great feedback and really making me look for creative, but appropriate ways to solve this problem.
Thoughts?
Synapse -
Procs were originally designed as something that had a chance of happening. If they were ever intended to be a 100% chance to go trigger they would have been designed to do just that. Take Numina's Convalescence unique for example. That said perhaps having a 95% chance to trigger as a cap might be a better way to go. We'll see. No promises.
Anyhow, I've got a rather promising model so far and I look forward to sharing it with you. I think it works out a lot better. -
Quote:I really don't want to do this. I however plan on making the values closer to what you'd expect from live play.Originally Posted by DreadShinobi
Is it possible to just use the old flat % proc rates for aoe powers and PPM values for ST powers?
-
Quote:There's a reason I like to have an open discussion with players as opposed to just putting blinders on and saying "I'M DOING IT MY WAY!". You guys always bring up excellent points that I may not have considered, or may not have considered as much as I should have. So cheers to you all. Anyhow... back to the drawing board...err drawing spreadsheet...Originally Posted by Darth_Khasei
More excellent stuff from you. What the hell are you trying to do become my favorite dev or something?
I like the direct way you are handling this entire deal and support your extensive efforts to make it right. Cheers.
Synapse -
Some very good points have been brought up regarding outside buffs to your recharge affecting your proc chances. While we have considered this, after really taking a look at how this affects a great deal a power, the original proposed changes might be too punitive considering this. I'm going to take a look at some options and I'll get back to you all (hopefully later today.)
TL;DR: I'd like to make the formula less punitive for players with global recharge bonuses and for powers with large area factors.
Synapse -
Quote:Interesting that you mention this. Arbiter Hawk and I just spoke about this possibility. However, without using some really complex math that would ultimately make this feature even more difficult to explain and just replacing AF with targets hit you're going to get a decrease in proc chance without completely overhauling how PPMs work.Originally Posted by Natsuki
Synapse, is there any way to make it so that rather than the chance to proc is based on the number of enemies hit with an AoE as opposed to the AoE Factor of the power itself?
There are some powers out there that are AoE based, but often times get utilized for single target DPS. Such as Ripper for Spines Stalkers. And I'm curious if it would provide better balance or not over the AoE factor. Of course, if it's not possible to have the chance change depending on number of targets hit than that scratches this idea out completely. (Though, for the record, what is the AoE factor on Ripper?)
EDIT:
Sniped by Uberguy... he makes a very important point, and I wonder the same thing now.
This leads me to my next point...
I think the way the formula handles Area Factor isn't ideal and it over penalizes AoE proc chance in a way that is more harsh than was originally intended. So, I would like to address that somehow. Back to the drawing board on that part.
Synapse -
Quote:No, I don't consider this proc to be very abused. Here's how it works now:Originally Posted by Gorgar
Dark Regeneration. Is that one of the powers that is considered to be abusing the fixed proc chance?
This power has a recharge of 30 a 1.17second cast time and an Area Factor of 4.
IO version has a 20% chance to proc.
SBE version has 3 PPMs and thus has a 39% chance to proc.
PROPOSED CHANGES
Theft of Essence: Chance for Endurance
PPM: 4.5
0% Global Recharge/Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 58.4% per target
0% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 31.0% per target
100% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 21.3% per target
200% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 16.4% per target
300% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 13.6% per target -
Quote:I need to know what power it is slotted in to tell you exactly how it will be affected.Originally Posted by Gorgar
How will the change to PPM affect the Theft of Essence proc?
-
Quote:That's the current problem with both fixed chance procs and the current implementation of PPMs. You can slot a very fast recharging power with a bunch of fixed chance procs to cause way more damage than is intended. Conversely you can slot a PPM proc into a longer recharging power and have a 100% chance to trigger.Originally Posted by firespray
I don't really agree with that. It would still be beneficial to powers with long recharge times without being harmful to those with short recharge times.
That's the reason why we're not using the base % chances nor are PPM procs going to have a 100% chance to trigger.
Synapse -
I've read some good points in this thread and I wanted to let you know I am continuing to read all of your comments. I do want to stress that in most cases this change will increase proc chances. I'll give you guys some concrete numbers once I have them, but my internal examples I am using look pretty good.
Before we continue let me explain the math. There seems to be some confusion regarding how Procs Per Minute work. Here's the formula that is currently in game:
If power is a click: (PPM * (Base Recharge Time + Time To Activate)) / (60 * Area Factor)
This basically adds your Recharge Time and the power's Cast Time and Divides them by the 60 times the size of the power's area of effect (if any) and then multiplies it by the power's procs per minute. In short: powers with long recharge times and cast times proc more than powers with low recharge times and cast times. Additionally, powers with large area factors have a reduced chance to proc as well.
If power is not a click: (PPM * Activate Period) / (60 * Area Factor)
This applies to powers like damage toggles and the like.
The proposed change would do the following:
1) Increase the PPM value by 50-75% (So a 4 PPM proc would become 6 or 7 PPM) NOTE: The exact amount is still being figured out.
2) Change the Base Recharge in the formula to your actual power's recharge. This is the part where I think a lot of you are scared. I'll show you an example of how this will actually play out in game later in this post so you can decide how much this will actually impact you.
3) Procs will have a maximum chance to trigger. I'm leaning toward 90%. Someone mentioned a minimum chance to proc. I really like this idea and I am thinking about this value being 10%, but I'll have to test this internally to find out if this breaks anything.
4) All non-PPM enhancements with a chance to trigger less than 100% will use PPMs. (Note: Enhancements like Numina's Convalesence: Regen/Recovery will not be affected by this change as they have 100% chance to trigger).
Okay, now onto the example. Let's use Assassin's Strike slotted with Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide (Standard):
CURRENT PPMs
Assassin Strike
Base Recharge: 15 seconds
Cast Time: 1 second
Area Factor: 1
Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide
PPM: 4
Proc Chance: 106.7%
PROPOSED PPMs
Assassin Strike
Base Recharge: 15
Cast Time: 1 second
Area Factor
Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide
PPM: 6
0% Global Recharge/Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
0% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 86.9%
100% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 60.8%
200% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 48%
300% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 40.3%
Superior Stalker's Guile: +Rech/Chance to Hide
0% Global Recharge/Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
0% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 90%
100% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 76.1%
200% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 60%
300% Global Recharge/95% Power Recharge
Proc Chance: 50.4%
PPM: The above values are assuming we apply a 50% bonus to existing PPMs.
You can use the formula I listed above to figure out how this will impact you. If you're confused how all of this works I am happy to answer questions. My goal here is to enlighten you all on the complex world of procs. Also, I am currently considering having a minimum chance to proc that scales with the enhancements Procs Per Minute if that is possible with the code. We'll have to see.
Regards,
Synapse -
Quote:There wouldn't be much reason for the PPM system if we did that. There are a few powers that can really abuse the fixed proc chance. Part of the reason we implemented PPMs in the first place was to address this issue.Originally Posted by firespray
Any particular reason you're considering this rather than just setting the floor at whatever the fixed proc chance is now?
And will the minimum proc chance for purples be higher, considering that the proc chance on them now is considerably higher than the proc chance on any non-purple procs? -
Quote:This is an interesting idea. Something like 10 + ~2 per PPM for example maybe?Originally Posted by Liquid
I'd like to suggest making the minimum be based on the PPM value, so that higher PPM procs have a higher minimum, to prevent situations where a Purple proc has no better chance to activate than an Orange proc.
Synapse -
Quote:I'm currently considering having a minimum chance to proc of 10-15%, so this particular example might not be as dramatically affected as you mention here.Originally Posted by Another_Fan
Neutrino bolt has a base recharge time of 1.5 seconds
An apocalypse proc currently in neutrino bolt has a 33% chance to go off
A 6 PPM proc current system will have a 15 % chance
A 6 PPM proc new system on a 200% recharge build will have a 5% chance
Damage for neutrino bolt goes from 77 points to 47. -
Quote:Just to dispel any confusion I wanted to clarify something regarding enhancements like Numina's Convalesence: +Regen/Recovery, Regenerative Tissue: +Regen and Miracle: +Recovery. These enhancements aren't procs. They always fire off when the power they're slotted into activated. These enhancements won't be affected by this change as they have a 100% chance to trigger and are in fact NOT a proc.Originally Posted by MisterD
Oh..good point! How does this work on numi/miacles in Health? Do they suddenly change? Or because they last 120 secs, will we see next to know difference, since they will be checking every 10 secs anyway?
Regards,
Synapse -
Hi All,
I wanted to reach out to you all to let you know that we're aware of your concerns regarding procs per minute versus IO static proc chances. In some situations the procs per minutes on store bought enhancements (SBEs) are superior to those in IOs. I've read through your feedback and understand your concerns. We have a course of action we'd like to take for Issue 24. The changes we're going with are:
1) All IO procs will have their flat percentage chance to trigger updated to use Procs Per Minute.
2) Proc chance will cap at 90%. This means that there is always a small chance for the proc to not trigger even if slotted into a power that would previously guarantee a proc.
3) Procs Per Minute will use modified recharge instead of base recharge. The reason for this is that the whole idea of Procs Per Minute goes right out the window when we keep the base recharge even though that value can be dramatically altered.
4) To compensate for this, the Procs Per Minute on all enhancements will be increased.
The goals of this change would be to create a strong level of parity between IOs and Store Bought Enhancements (in fact they'll be identical proc wise) and reduce the impact that the initial implementation of the PPM mechanic had on gameplay. Your feedback is very important to us so I wanted to see how the community feels about these potential changes.
I think it's important to stress that the overall impact to gameplay this will have on existing PPM enhancements will be small. That said players will notice a small performance hit at very high levels of recharge. The balancing point for the increased procs per minute rates will be based upon a reasonable level of recharge. That amount will likely change through beta testing. You'll all have a chance to play test this on the beta servers in the not so distant future.
Best Regards,
Phil "Synapse" Zeleski -
Quote:Hey all. This is an unintended benefit. I'll take a look at this today.Originally Posted by DarkSideLeague
I literally did a double take when I saw 3PPM on the enhancement (I was checking out SATO enhancement values so I can spitball my brutes build without needing mids, so I figured why not?) and thought "Nah, it can't possibly mean it procs 2.5 times the regular version in stamina... right?" and then I opened a second build with stamina and started timing.
The first result I was unimpressed since it went a full 70 seconds before procing, then it proc'ed every 10 seconds for a minute and my heart (or maybe wallet) sank. The "worst" result was a 37% rate - almost DOUBLE the existing value. I did two more and got more than 50% rates and called it and came here to extoll the virtues. I'll PM Synapse I guess at this point.
Regards,
Synapse -
Quote:Yes. Those should be in the next patch as well.Originally Posted by ShadowNate
While we have you here, what's going with the changes to Fade and that other power in Dark Affinity I can't remember the name of. Will that be in the next patch?
Synapse -
Quote:Currently the Umbra Beast's AI is effectively set to defensive. This is a bug and will be addressed in an up coming patch. Hang in there, Umbra Beast will be an aggressive face eating monster in no time.Originally Posted by Agent_D
Another thing is Umbra Beast.
I know allot of people in the Beta, including my self addressed this issue with it NOT attacking unless the caster was attacked. The devs failed to let us know if this is intentional or not. Is the Umbra Beast suppose to be on Defensive mode?
For me Umbra Beast should be one of the most aggressive pets in the game with it being an Entity of the Abyss and all. I'd like some dev input on whether this is a bug or intentional.
Regards,
Synapse -
Quote:The taunt auras in question were originally designed to be a weaker than others. That said, I think it might be a good time to reconsider this stance. Once again, great feedback guys. Feel free to PM me as this evolves. Tankers will be the next archetype I take a look at.Originally Posted by Liquid
I agree. This is really the one thing I think needs to be done more than anything else. WP was given a weaker taunt aura as a drawback to make up for all the other benefits it has, which is like giving a particular Blaster set weaker damage as a drawback. I'm not sure why SR was given the same drawback, when it's not anywhere near as comprehensive, defensively, as WP. That does explain, though, why my SR Tanker has been having trouble holding aggro. I hadn't looked up the Taunt duration on Evasion and assumed it would be closer to the other sets.
Honestly, overall, I think Tankers are in a good spot balance-wise relative to other ATs after years of fighting to get them there. I think some tweaks to have some internal balance between Tanker powersets and some aggro control tweaks are warranted, but I'm going to disagree with calls for overall defensive or damage raises. I agree that Scrappers and Brutes mostly make Tankers irrelevant on skilled teams, and that's been the case for years, but I don't see how you could fix that without making them overpowered or step on other ATs' toes without a radical change to the AT that lots of Tanker players may not like.
Speaking of radical changes, one thing I always wanted, to make Tankers more fun, was to remove their reliance on taunt and have a position and/or proximity-based method of protection, where attacks intended for other teammates are instead redirected at the Tanker. Something like reverse Bodyguard, but with the ToHit roll being redirected as well. I know that may not be feasible for this game, but I just thought I'd add it.
Regardless of my opinions, good work compiling the list, Aett Thorn.
Synapse -
Interesting thread. These are EXACTLY the kind of consolidated chunks of feedback we like to see. Great job! Definitely some things to chew on in here.
Synapse -
Quote:For me, ideally I feel that Stalkers should be the single target burst damage kings. Some sets do this better than others and some sets offer some AoE. Your mileage may vary depending on which sets you pair together. However, I'd really like to see Stalkers being able to outperform Scrappers and Brutes in bursts, especially with single target damage. Their trade off as always is survivability.Originally Posted by Liquid
This sounds good!
-
Quote:That wasn't a misunderstanding. I made a horrible typo. So, I believe your confusion was shared by many.Originally Posted by BurningChick
Ahhh, I think I misunderstood the part where AS out of hid is /not/ interruptible.
But ... I still don't think I'm a stalker person. The AT seems to have been designed around the idea that the game has a single target, tactical component that never caught on with the players.
See also: recent epic threads about KB.