The Scaling Renaissance

[Teridax68]

13 hours ago, (XB1)alchemPyro said:

It's hard to get exact values on the older game model as so much has changed.

This is true, but many of the core mechanics, namely damage types, enemy health, and enemy scaling, have remained largely the same since Damage 2.0. It is therefore possible to look back upon how the advent of new damage mods, and the increases they've brought, have forced raises in enemy levels just to keep up. Even without a record, we already have full knowledge of exactly how each enemy scales, and the base health, armor and shield values for them, as well as the multiplier we get from our own mods, so it's perfectly possible to construct a mathematical model and test hypotheses.

[Tyreaus]

21 hours ago, (XB1)alchemPyro said:

At least with armor being static, you'd have to focus on what deals the most damage rather than what removes the most defenses.

What I proposed was to make armour a depletable health class, like overshields for health, that has self-damage reduction up to a % cap. That two-part EHP pool should create a similar kind of breadth and focus on damage as exists in the Corpus, albeit not necessarily to the same degree.

The main point was more that the static armour solution doesn't address other things surrounding armour, like how players' EHP skews toward armour and health for the same reason scaling armour and health are such pains.

[(XBOX)Avant Solace]

2 hours ago, Tyreaus said:

What I proposed was to make armour a depletable health class, like overshields for health, that has self-damage reduction up to a % cap. That two-part EHP pool should create a similar kind of breadth and focus on damage as exists in the Corpus, albeit not necessarily to the same degree.

The main point was more that the static armour solution doesn't address other things surrounding armour, like how players' EHP skews toward armour and health for the same reason scaling armour and health are such pains.

Ah, kinda like Doom's armor system? That sounds cool on paper, but would create a lot of difficulties in application. Keep in mind that Warframes also have Ferrite armor, so how exactly would they fair with such a change? The thing about armor is that it does infact give better protection than shields. However because the wearer still receives health damage regardless, it becomes something of a trade off.

Personally I'd still like to see Grineer be more defensive than Corpus. (At least to me) Grineer should feel durable, but not particularly strong offensively (due to their crude weaponry). Meanwhile Corpus should be squishy, but their high-tech weapons would deal more damage. Ideally Grineer would have a "stone wall" playstyle while Corpus were "glass cannons".

[Tyreaus]

1 hour ago, (XB1)alchemPyro said:

Ah, kinda like Doom's armor system?

Kind of. The idea I had was that armour would be in addition to health, as shields are, but whereas shields have the ability to recharge, armour has damage reduction based on its current amount. E.g., if a target has 600 armour, it would have ~66% DR against the first shot. If the first shot does 300 damage post-reduction, then the armour drops to 300 and the DR on the second shot drops to 50%. The DR on armour would be capped at, say, 80%, so anything above 1200 armour would only increase the health pool instead of further increasing the damage resistance. Or whatever maximum DR is ideal - numbers are just for example.

Then the "toughness" stat would do largely what armour does now, except:

1. It would be non-scaling, i.e. static, for enemies that have it at all
2. It would apply to all forms of HP, not just baseline health
3. It would decrease from Puncture procs into negative values, up to -150% (i.e. at max, it removes innate damage reduction and adds a 1.5x damage multiplier)

[(PSN)Spider_Enigma]

28 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

Kind of. The idea I had was that armour would be in addition to health, as shields are, but whereas shields have the ability to recharge, armour has damage reduction based on its current amount. E.g., if a target has 600 armour, it would have ~66% DR against the first shot. If the first shot does 300 damage post-reduction, then the armour drops to 300 and the DR on the second shot drops to 50%. The DR on armour would be capped at, say, 80%, so anything above 1200 armour would only increase the health pool instead of further increasing the damage resistance. Or whatever maximum DR is ideal - numbers are just for example.

Then the "toughness" stat would do largely what armour does now, except:

1. It would be non-scaling, i.e. static, for enemies that have it at all
2. It would apply to all forms of HP, not just baseline health
3. It would decrease from Puncture procs into negative values, up to -150% (i.e. at max, it removes innate damage reduction and adds a 1.5x damage multiplier)

that would make all warframes die stupidly fast that dont have shields like inaros 

[Tyreaus]

21 hours ago, (PS4)Spider_Enigma said:

that would make all warframes die stupidly fast that dont have shields like inaros 

The toughness DR would apply to everything: armour + health + shields. Armour DR would apply only to armour points. Not sure where you're getting the idea that shields would become some kind of god-tier HP pool just because they're nudged closer to par (not even on par) with armour...

[(XBOX)Avant Solace]

Side topic: I believe I have found a happy rework for "multishot".

The main complaint of multishot is that it basically adds free damage, but it also does something else: increase the number of status procs. Normally a weapon can only have 1 proc per bullet, making low fire rate and/or anything over 100% status chance useless. However if a weapon fires multiple rounds per bullet (like shotguns) then it essentially gets more than 1 chance to proc. The current model of multishot calculates this as a depreciating bonus to status chance (can never reach 100% this way). But this only skews the overall status chance.

So what if: Multishot gets it own statistical value "Proc Potential". Essentially it is how many procs can potentially hit per round fired. A default value of one shot fire per round has a value of 1. Adding +90% multishot increases the value to 1.9. Multishot would divide the damage between the shots fired per round, so damage doesn't increase, but directly boosts how many status procs can hit at once. This essentially divorces multishot from both damage and status values, while still retaining an essential role.

Thoughts?

[Tyreaus]

8 hours ago, (XB1)alchemPyro said:

Side topic: I believe I have found a happy rework for "multishot".

The main complaint of multishot is that it basically adds free damage, but it also does something else: increase the number of status procs. Normally a weapon can only have 1 proc per bullet, making low fire rate and/or anything over 100% status chance useless. However if a weapon fires multiple rounds per bullet (like shotguns) then it essentially gets more than 1 chance to proc. The current model of multishot calculates this as a depreciating bonus to status chance (can never reach 100% this way). But this only skews the overall status chance.

So what if: Multishot gets it own statistical value "Proc Potential". Essentially it is how many procs can potentially hit per round fired. A default value of one shot fire per round has a value of 1. Adding +90% multishot increases the value to 1.9. Multishot would divide the damage between the shots fired per round, so damage doesn't increase, but directly boosts how many status procs can hit at once. This essentially divorces multishot from both damage and status values, while still retaining an essential role.

Thoughts?

Probably better for another topic but:

What I'm not following is how the status chance graph looks with and without multishot on a per-pellet (i.e. a pellet, e.g. from a shotgun or multishot) and per-bullet (i.e. a round from the clip) basis. For example, if a weapon has 30% status chance (per bullet), does that mean throwing multishot on it doesn't change that 30% per-bullet chance? That would mean the per-pellet chance goes down to compensate, since that 30% is now spread across multiple pellets (particularly important with shotguns or weapons with high spread that give a decent chance for the extra pellet to miss at certain ranges, lowering the effective status chance). Or does it just increase the status chance cap over 100% so it can guarantee one proc and have a chance for another? Or is this some way of saying "make the damage split across each pellet but keep the effects to status chance the same"? IIRC multiple pellets already can proc multiple status effects if they land, after all.

[(XBOX)Avant Solace]

On 2019-02-18 at 8:29 PM, Tyreaus said:

Probably better for another topic but:

What I'm not following is how the status chance graph looks with and without multishot on a per-pellet (i.e. a pellet, e.g. from a shotgun or multishot) and per-bullet (i.e. a round from the clip) basis. For example, if a weapon has 30% status chance (per bullet), does that mean throwing multishot on it doesn't change that 30% per-bullet chance? That would mean the per-pellet chance goes down to compensate, since that 30% is now spread across multiple pellets (particularly important with shotguns or weapons with high spread that give a decent chance for the extra pellet to miss at certain ranges, lowering the effective status chance). Or does it just increase the status chance cap over 100% so it can guarantee one proc and have a chance for another? Or is this some way of saying "make the damage split across each pellet but keep the effects to status chance the same"? IIRC multiple pellets already can proc multiple status effects if they land, after all.

For the sake of cleanliness, I made a separate thread. Just snip this here and I'll answer it for you.

Here ya go!

[Teridax68]

On 2019-02-18 at 5:14 PM, (XB1)alchemPyro said:

So what if: Multishot gets it own statistical value "Proc Potential". Essentially it is how many procs can potentially hit per round fired. A default value of one shot fire per round has a value of 1. Adding +90% multishot increases the value to 1.9. Multishot would divide the damage between the shots fired per round, so damage doesn't increase, but directly boosts how many status procs can hit at once. This essentially divorces multishot from both damage and status values, while still retaining an essential role.

Thoughts?

Why not then simply change status chance to work like crit chance, so that any status chance over 100% counts as a separate chance to apply another proc? You'd have the same gameplay at a much lesser complexity cost.

[DerGreif2]

So first of I have read everything on this thread and I really like the ideas. Especially important for me:

- implement linear scaling for enemies

- removing +damage mods

- changing multishot

- cap armor on enemys

 

I would make the game a lot better in the moment its is like at the beginning really cool because we can kill the enemy but they are dangerous, then we get stronger and enemies are weak until a long mission comes along where we wait 30 min to have a good fight for the next 10 minutes and then we get enemy's that are to strong because of scaling. That is a problem. A huge problem. The only good thing in anthem is the fight system. You get a equip power level and the enemy scales to that level and stays that way. There are stronger enemies (elite and legendary units) that are a lot stronger and are pretty hard to kill. I would love to see that also here in warframe. In defense and survival there could just spawn "elite" units and then instead of legendary units we got eximus ones. That with nox and bursas could create a good around experience. I know that people hate the power level system because it locks them out of things but we dont have to give everything a "min power level of X" sign. In our case mods could represent power levels (indicating from bonus damage and so on) while all warframe have a level of 0 and also weapons. Just with the mods its gets harder. Thoughts about this? Otherwise I really enjoy this thread. Please keep up the work on it. I hope DE sees it.