I think the intuitive/counterintuitive thing comes from thinking about multi-typed damage attacks as being either parallel attacks or serial attacks. What I mean is this:
Some people think of an attack that does energy/smash as two attacks that each do one type of damage, bundled into a package. Under those circumstances, if you have a defense against energy, and another one against smash, you would expect the defenses to work independently or in parallel. I.e. if you had 15% defense to energy, and 30% defense to smash, you would expect that you would have a 15% chance to deflect the energy portion of the attack, and a 30% chance to deflect the smash portion of the attack. Under that mode of thought, the current game mechanics are better than what you expect - under current CoH game mechanics you are actually getting 30% defense to both - contrary to but better than what your "intuition" says ought to happen.
On the other hand, if you are thinking that energy/smash attacks are a single attack that has an energy mechanism and a smashing mechanism (i.e. a baseball bat that discharges energy when it hits) then you would think that defenses would work in sequence or serially. In other words, first the attack has to bypass your smashing defenses, or it wont hit you at all, and then the attack has to bypass your energy defenses or it still wont hit at all.
It is clear, from geck's post, that the devs consider the attacks to be parallel, not serial attacks. As such, multiple defenses against the same attack type should stack, but - and this is the critical issue - defense from one type should not stack on top of a completely different type of damage just because that damage happen to "ride along with" another damage type.
Given that perspective, it makes total sense. Arguing that it is counterintuitive fails to recognize the conceptualization of the attack types that the devs have in mind.
And BTW, if you are a proponent of the serial theory of damage and defense, then you still ought not to get an additive stacking of defense, you should be getting a multiplicative stacking. In other words, if you have 15% defense to energy, and 30% defense to smash, and your base to-hit is 50%, then really, you have to believe that what happens is that first the attack has to hit you at all (50%), then the attack has to bypass your energy defenses (15%) and then has to bypass your smash defenses (30%). Your effective to-hit is now 12.75% ( (1-0.5) * (1-.15) * (1-.3) ), not 5%, meaning your effective defense is now 87.25%, not 95% (50%+15%+30%).
Suppose SR defenses couldnt stack, and then the devs fixed the stacking problem. But suppose when they did, they made an mistake - when a villain fired a gun (a ranged weapon) in melee range, focused fighting and focused senses stacked. That would be a bug - it wouldn't be in keeping with the devs concept of "ranged" and "melee" defense. It might not be your concept of how they work, but its the dev's concept that counts.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Let me say two things:
1) I said I wouldn't use CoH terms or math...I didn't say I don't know the former and don't understand the latter
2) Even though I have a SR scrapper, and who knows what else in my alts, I don't really care what the result is. But I would like all the people arguing (and theoretically any devs listening) to understand other people's POVs. That was all.
To the guy with all the math: what you really mean there is Gun/Knife Attack 1, Gun Attack 2, and Gun Attack 3. In reference to my example, I was refering to player defensive powers 1, 2, and 3. Not the same thing.
Last I heard/understood (which could be entirely wrong) this is one part of the effects of the patch:
Power 1 Defense v. lethal and others = 15%
Power 2 Defense v. lethal and others = 25%
Power 3 Defense v. lethal and others = 50%
Total Combined Defense versus lethal = 50% (not 90%)
because "only the largest single defense bonus will be used."
15 + 25 + 50 = 50 is counter-intuitive. I can comprehend that the devs have another system in mind. No problem. But, no amount of reasoned arguments will change a person's intuition.
[ QUOTE ]
Total Combined Defense versus lethal = 50% (not 90%)
because "only the largest single defense bonus will be used."
[/ QUOTE ]
As I understand it, you are wrong, the combined defense vs lethal will be 90%.
Defense granted by different powers still stack. It's only the defenses granted by the same power that don't anymore.
Lets say you have two defense powers that give Def vs S/L and Fire.
Power A = 15% S/L 10% fire
Power B = 20% S/L 25% fire
With the bug, if you were attacked by something that did both Slashing/Lethal and Fire damage your defense would be...
15 s/l + 10 fire + 20 s/l + 25 fire = 70% def against a that attack. Because the bug caused both the s/l and fire defense to stack from the same power.
With the fix, the defense from the same powers don't stack, so against a s/l fire attack you would get the following.
15 s/l from power A + 25 fire from power B = 40% because the best defense against that attack gets applied.
[ QUOTE ]
As I understand it, you are wrong, the combined defense vs lethal will be 90%.
Defense granted by different powers still stack. It's only the defenses granted by the same power that don't anymore.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're right, of course. I knew I had that wrong. It just didn't make any sense.
The only issue I still have is one that I will probably just have to let go. The way it's setup now, most typed defense other than Smash/Lethal has been further trivialized. Due to the fact that Smash/Lethal defense is almost unilaterally higher than it's counterparts, for the majority of attacks in the game you need nothing else. It makes situational powers even more situational. Not that it's a bad thing, in the end it means you can pretty much get away with slotting only armor instead of 3 or 4.
As I said, not really a big deal but something I find odd. Usually the devs do not make changes which further trivialize powers.
[ QUOTE ]
To the guy with all the math: what you really mean there is Gun/Knife Attack 1, Gun Attack 2, and Gun Attack 3. In reference to my example, I was refering to player defensive powers 1, 2, and 3. Not the same thing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, the powers 1, 2, and 3 that I mentioned were attacks. But, I also mentioned defense powers; I just didn't label them. When looking at this fix, you can't consider just the attacks or just the defense powers. You have to consider both of them.
To clarify, in my example, I mentioned the following attack powers:
Attack Power 1 - Uses 5 bullets and 5 knives
Attack Power 2 - uses 10 bullets
Attack Power 3 - uses 10 knives
And, the hero had the following defense powers:
Defense Power 1 - 25% Bullets/Knives
Defense Power 2 - 25% Bullets
Defense Power 3 - 15% Knives
With all three defense powers up, the hero would get the following defense against each power:
Before Bug Fix
Attack Power 1 - 90% (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 2) + (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 3)
Attack Power 2 - 50% (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 2)
Attack Power 3 - 40% (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 3)
After Bug Fix
Attack Power 1 - 50% (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 2) OR (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 3), whichever is largest
Attack Power 2 - 50% (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 2)
Attack Power 3 - 40% (Defense Power 1 + Defense Power 3)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, but this basically screws Ice Tankers, no have almost NO resistance, and all defense. Now they have MUCH less defense because their stacked armors will not help them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, that's not entirely true. You're still getting the benefit of the "higher of the two" DEFs. You're lucky they aren't averaged, or worse, taking the "lower of the two".
Sounds like a pretty good deal to me, still.
Its been hosing certain toons forever and benefitting others. Now that its hurting some others, the fix "sucks". Not from where I'm sitting, I assure you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What the hell kind of lame answer is that? Fix one, screw the other? Are you always that myopic? It's pretty obvious you've never played an ice tanker, so I don't know why you bothered to reply. How does the higher of the two equate to "stacking armors" which is what the Devs JUST rolled out? Since SO many attacks do smashing/leathal, in addition to other damage types, why not just leave up FA, which has a higher defense that the other armor sets? If the lower defense rating are simply ignored, they serve NO purpose at all, except to drain end faster.
Try to look beyond the end of your own nose the next time you post.
[/ QUOTE ]
Myopic?
Defense still stacks. If you have defense to fire and lethal, you dont get double defense to a fire sword and regular defense to a regular swords and fire blasts (that is not fair to the guy with the fire sword, nor is that system fair to Dark scrappers, or energy blasters). It does mean you get the chance to apply the higher of the 2 values.
The lower defense values are not ignored. If you have 30% defense to lethal, and 20% defense to fire, you get 30% defense to a fire sword (the higher of the 2). But you still get 20% defense to a fire only attack like a fire blast. Of course the lower one serves a purpose. And if you get an Insulation Shield put on you, your Fire defense may go to about 40%, so now you get 40% defense to a fire sword (the new higher of the 2), and 30% defense to a broadsword.
[/ QUOTE ]
a while ago on the Training room forum some tankers were testing and discussing whether the defense from Invincibility and Tough Hide was bugged (not stacking).
this system Geko is talking about would explain why it seemed to be a bugged situation.
if i recall correctly, the original To Hit system in CoH was a check against each defense type the target had. so if a i was the target of a MELEE attack that did SMASHING damage then the attacker would have to make 2 successful To Hit rolls (1 vs my MELEE defense if i had any and another versus my SMASHING defense if i had any). this old sytem insured that each +DEF power i had was taken into account.
but with the system Geko is describing in this thread many +DEF powers become useless vis redundancy.
someone has already metioned Ice Armors and Force Fields. another victim of the "only highest defense counts" system is Invulnerability.
the new Invicibility provides +DEF(melee,ranged)
Tough Hide provides +DEF(lethal,smash,fire,cold,energy,neg energy)
i just picked up Tough Hide to boost my survivability against attacks with annoying side effects (end drains, etc). i have noticed no significant improvement since picking up Tough Hide and now i know why.
since Invincibilty and Tough Hide provide 2 completely different types of defense my Tough Hide power is doing absolutely nothing. it was a wasted pick and im just glad i havent put too many slots in it before seeing this thread.
[ QUOTE ]
the new Invicibility provides +DEF(melee,ranged)
Tough Hide provides +DEF(lethal,smash,fire,cold,energy,neg energy)
[/ QUOTE ]
That is what Invincibility has always done.
[ QUOTE ]
i just picked up Tough Hide to boost my survivability against attacks with annoying side effects (end drains, etc). i have noticed no significant improvement since picking up Tough Hide and now i know why.
[/ QUOTE ]
Mostly I would suspect it is because with 3 or more mobs the +Def from Invinc is much higher than the +Def from Tough Hide so it isn't easy to see.
[ QUOTE ]
since Invincibilty and Tough Hide provide 2 completely different types of defense my Tough Hide power is doing absolutely nothing.
[/ QUOTE ]
My reading of Geko's post doesn't support that. His post only mentions +Def vs damage types so there is no indication that +Def vs melee would not be added to +Def vs Fire for a fire melee attack.
[ QUOTE ]
it was a wasted pick and im just glad i havent put too many slots in it before seeing this thread.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am not going to say it is not bugged, there is enough evidence to suggest that something odd is going on and also plenty of people just don't like Tough Hide becuase of it's small +Def, but I think it is a bit over the top to blame a possible coding error for you not liking a power.
The only other easy combo I can think of to test this stacking or lack of stacking would be a Stone Tanker with Weave. +Def vs a type of damage from one of their Stone Armours and +Def vs vs Ranged and Melee from Weave.
regards, Screwloose.
"I am not young enough to know everything."
How to Look Stuff Up Yourself - It's Fun and Easy
Looking for Powers Numbers try City of Data.
For Fraks sake read the Guides and FAQs
Global Chat Channels - Australia
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
since Invincibilty and Tough Hide provide 2 completely different types of defense my Tough Hide power is doing absolutely nothing.
[/ QUOTE ]
My reading of Geko's post doesn't support that. His post only mentions +Def vs damage types so there is no indication that +Def vs melee would not be added to +Def vs Fire for a fire melee attack.
regards, Screwloose.
"I am not young enough to know everything."
[/ QUOTE ]
true, but Geko's post also does not deny it.
it we take Geko's explanation literally then his explanation only applies to dual damage type attacks (the MELEE, RANGED, or AoE component is not considered).
but if we look at the intent of Geko's explanation . . . "Only the highest +DEF value counts". well then, my eyebrows raise.
so the question is what exactly does "Only the highest +DEF value counts" refer to? just the damage-type aspects of the attack, or the melee/ranged/aoe-type aspecs as well?
[ QUOTE ]
true, but Geko's post also does not deny it.
[/ QUOTE ]
It certainly could be clearer.
[ QUOTE ]
it we take Geko's explanation literally then his explanation only applies to dual damage type attacks (the MELEE, RANGED, or AoE component is not considered).
[/ QUOTE ]
That is because the only thing that was bugged was +Def vs multiple damage types.
[ QUOTE ]
but if we look at the intent of Geko's explanation . . . "Only the highest +DEF value counts". well then, my eyebrows raise.
[/ QUOTE ]
His quote also makes it clear that +Def from multiple powers adds up to a total +Def that is then applied to any attack.
So it is not the highest +Def power that is used and all other +Def powers ignored, but all the +Def from all your powers is added up for each category and then the highest is used.
[ QUOTE ]
so the question is what exactly does "Only the highest +DEF value counts" refer to? just the damage-type aspects of the attack, or the melee/ranged/aoe-type aspecs as well?
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. And it is possible that even if there wasn't a problem before that the changes that were put in have somehow made +Def vs Damage Type and +Def vs Attack mode non stacking.
Certainly some people have been gathered evidence that this may be the case and if it is then it would seem to be a bug to me. Some comment from the Devs to put minds at rest would be good.
regards, Screwloose.
"I am not young enough to know everything."
How to Look Stuff Up Yourself - It's Fun and Easy
Looking for Powers Numbers try City of Data.
For Fraks sake read the Guides and FAQs
Global Chat Channels - Australia
[ QUOTE ]
I will explain this whole problem using zero mathematics and zero CoH terms:
Step 1:
FORGET EVERYTHING YOU KNOW.
No really. Did you do it?
Okay.
Step 2:
Imagine that you have a bunch of superpowers that protect you from harm, such as bullets and knives. A whole bunch of them.
Step 3:
Imagine that one of them is pretty good and really helps you not get hurt by bullets or knives.
Step 4:
If you activate 3 or 4 more powers like that, would you expect to be:
A) Really extra super-duper protected from bullets and knives?
Or
B) Protected exactly the same against bullets and knives?
This is the problem in the proverbial nutshell. No amount of math or "but what if the bullets are flaming" or "wait, no, what if they are ice knives" is going to change that.
It's simply counterintuitive.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's not entirely accurate. A better analogy would be this:
There are three powers:
Power 1 - Uses 5 bullets and 5 knives
Power 2 - uses 10 bullets
Power 3 - uses 10 knives
(For simplicity's sake, assume 1 bullet is equivilant to 1 knife)
Let's say you have a 25% defense against bullets/knives
With the bug, you would get the following defense against each power:
Power 1 - 50% (25% bullets + 25% knives)
Power 2 - 25%
Power 3 - 25%
Now, does it make sense that the powers that do single-typed damage should have twice as much chance of hitting someone as the one that does both types? The power protects against bullets OR knives together, not separately.
With the fix, since defense doesn't stack against single attacks, you get the following defense:
Power 1 - 25%
Power 2 - 25%
Power 3 - 25%
However, defense of the same type still stacks, so suppose you activated another power that gives 25% defense against bullets. In that case, with the bug you would have gotten the following defense against each power:
Power 1 - 75% (50% bullets + 25% knives)
Power 2 - 50%
Power 3 - 25%
With the fix, you would now get the following:
Power 1 - 50% (Since you have a 50% defense against bullets and only a 25% defense knives, you get the higher of the two bonuses)
Power 2 - 50%
Power 3 - 25%
Now, if you activated yet another power that gives a 15% defense against knives, you would get the following:
Before fix:
Power 1 - 90% (50% bullets + 40% knives)
Power 2 - 50%
Power 3 - 40%
After fix:
Power 1 - 50% (since you have a 50% defense against bullets and only a 40% against knives, you get the higher of the two bonuses)
Power 2 - 50%
Power 3 - 40%
While activating the extra 15% bonus against knives wouldn't be useful against Power 1, it would be useful against Power 3. So, stacking is still useful. All the bug fix does is make multi-typed powers just as effective as single-typed powers.