De, How Are We Going To Fight Grineers Now?

[PsycloneM]

I think is a wrong direction. Take U11 + U11.3 Damage 2.0 and avoid putting any negative modifier to armor is far more elegant and balanced solution. Armor by itself is already the most punishing thing, there is no need for negative modifier.

 

This will allow reasonable damage to be done to Grineer Heavies and Trooper, no matter what level it scale into.

 

When I first learned of cold damage's problem I had suggested that either negative modifiers be removed from the armor column, or modifiers should affect the enemy's armor before damage reduction is calculated. So it's not as if I'm against the former idea. However, as long as the symmetry on the resistance table is to be maintained with three positives and two negatives per column, there are going to be two damage types that will deal a minimum of 1 damage to high-armor enemies with U11's original formula. No weapon, elemental mod, or warframe should ever lose its effectiveness that quickly. 

 

With that, I disagree with these particular steps being the wrong direction. Is there more that needs to be done? Yes, and one of those steps could involve adjusting the armor scaling equation.

[Eyeless]

For the sake of bumping this thread, and putting in a little side comment/rant.

 

DE, armor doesn't need to scale so enemies turn into walking bullet sponges, none of us want that and it isn't fun, nor is it good design. It isn't challenging to have legions of Shield bearing troops and Heavy Units combo us into cheap sustainable knockdowns from all directions 'till we're crippled and dead either, only now we can't even scratch the Heavies!

 

This is bad design, plain and simple, and you need to fix it for the sake of your game.

 

Please read this thread, front to back, every reply. Yeah things need fixing, yeah they need tweaked, but armor as it is right now is where ya shot yourself in the foot last time, and now right when we're on the precipice of you finally doing something better about it you throw it off this cliff.

 

Take head what these testers say, take into account what we're all asking for in general, because these people know what needs to be done.

 

Please. Do it.

[Definitegj]

When I first learned of cold damage's problem I had suggested that either negative modifiers be removed from the armor column, or modifiers should affect the enemy's armor before damage reduction is calculated. So it's not as if I'm against the former idea. However, as long as the symmetry on the resistance table is to be maintained with three positives and two negatives per column, there are going to be two damage types that will deal a minimum of 1 damage to high-armor enemies with U11's original formula. No weapon, elemental mod, or warframe should ever lose its effectiveness that quickly. 

 

With that, I disagree with these particular steps being the wrong direction. Is there more that needs to be done? Yes, and one of those steps could involve adjusting the armor scaling equation.

 

Not sure why there is a need to limit the resistance table with 3 positives and 2 negatives per column. Unnecessary shackles on oneself, make design not flexible. People just want simplified resistance table, one that don't scare people on first look. Nobody really want symmetry.

 

I can't foresee how adjusting armor scaling will workout nicely, it just delay the problems to further higher enemies and at that time the alert might not be 50+ Grineers, DE might change it to 70+ Grineers and the same problems all over again.

Edited December 17, 2013 by Definitegj

[SlyBoots]

However, as long as the symmetry on the resistance table is to be maintained [...]

With that, I disagree with these particular steps being the wrong direction.

 

dude, how about we look at balance and stop obsessing over something so arbitrary as table symmetry? i mean seriously, it's entirely possible to use positive modifiers the old way and negative the new way. that surely can be coded/calculated. or how about a different outlook? since armor _is_ damage reduction it de facto already _is_ a negative modifier (for flesh in case of grineer obviously...) in this fancy little table, it works completely different to shields, flesh and infested flesh.

Edited December 17, 2013 by SlyBoots

[Kyte]

The U11 system just covered up for the fact armor scaling was still whacked. It's armor that has to be fixed, not elemental bonuses.

 

The table as it is now is fine (and don't underestimate the power of table symmetry in user friendliness and intuitiveness).

It's the armor that needs to scale slower.

One exponent. That's all it needs to change.

Edited December 17, 2013 by Kyte

[SlyBoots]

right... all is fine... hm, wait, i got one more:

 

yo dawg, i heard you like damage reduction so we put resistance on armor so you can reduce damage while you reduce damage...

Edited December 17, 2013 by SlyBoots

[Otaiken]

I'm getting kinda tired of this. The weekend is over and there have been multiple topics about this on general and gameplay, there's even one in the bug section. Someone from DE at least acknowledging this is a bug/flaw/working as intended would be nice.

Edited December 17, 2013 by LocoWithGun

[PsycloneM]

Not sure why there is a need to limit the resistance table with 3 positives and 2 negatives per column. Unnecessary shackles on oneself, make design not flexible.

 

dude, how about we look at balance and stop obsessing over something so arbitrary as table symmetry?

 

Table symmetry was not my doing, and is certainly not a decision that I'm obsessing over; if that's what the developers want to use, I'm going to try to provide suggestions to work around its limitations. Regardless, table symmetry isn't arbitrary and has been quite helpful in simplifying resistances and their effects.

 

If we're going to talk about armor scaling delaying issues, the same is true if U11's damage model was used with no negative modifiers. Sure, you'll be able to inflict damage that diminishes to non-zero values against very high-armored enemies. However, there's going to be a point where the enemy's health is far too high for your damage to make a significant effect. Considering that armor and health scale at roughly similar rates, bullet-sponge enemies are inevitable in either case (not to mention the issue of armor scaling at an absurd rate will still be present).

 

As I've suggested in several threads when U11 was released that negative modifiers should be removed from the armor column, DE's stance on that suggestion has become clear. It is also certainly possible to use a different solution, like a piecewise function, to redefine the damage model. I'm not against any of these possibilities as you two seem to suggest. For instance, instead of the current system, let's look at what was mentioned earlier in this thread:

 

For positive resistances:

 

damage x ( 1 + modifier ) x ( 1 - damage reduction ) = final damage for armor ≤ 300

 

damage x [ 1 - damage reduction x ( 1 - modifier ) ] = final damage for armor ≥ 300

 

 

For negative resistances:

 

damage x [ 1 - damage reduction x ( 1 - modifier ) ] = final damage for armor ≤ 300

 

damage x ( 1 + modifier ) x ( 1 - damage reduction ) = final damage for armor ≥ 300

 

 

Something like this would be interesting to see in action. It's worth a try; however, the issue of armor scaling will still remain. It also doesn't seem likely that this would be implemented considering the simplicity of the current model. This is why I would like to see the armor scaling equation experimented with, as it solely requires the adjustment of an exponent. If the damage we deal is still undesirable at high level, we can continue to provide feedback and more complex solutions. For now I still believe we are on the right track, and threads like these are important for the developers to follow.

Edited December 17, 2013 by PsycloneM

[Redmage107]

Glad to see this thread is getting some love.

 

Corrosive projection needs to be fixed before it's a viable pug fix and as I mentioned before it's not a fix for those who can't obtain it due to original mission being an alert anyway where enemies have their level doubled now anyway

 

Last update it was being revised and they mentioned they're doing one last update tommorow so we'll see how things go

[SlyBoots]

dunno, psyclonem, read that point about symmetry earlier in this thread so i shouldn't have really aimed at you but people in general. at the moment i'm trying to wrap my mind around why exactly this resistance table exists in the form that it does and why armor is depicted in the same way as health and shields are in the  codex as well.

 

an approach that would make sense to me would've been to have infested health, (armored) grineer health and corpus health and corpus shields, that way people would actually see that armored grineer start with an absolute minimum of 25% resistance towards damage of any type, 50% for heavies - this puts the current "vulnerability" to puncture and corrosive into perspective.

 

on a sensible scaling calculation all i can say is that there are equations that let you approach a certain maximum tangentially/that describe an asymptote - and i sure as hell can't find a reason why they didn't use one of these. i don't have one at hand right now but good arpg's should have examples aplenty.

 

even corrosive projection could be rather easily fit into all of this if it had a higher base armor reduction and diminishing returns per additional aura.

 

edited to avoid confusions...

Edited December 17, 2013 by SlyBoots

[Phoenix86]

i would like to see Corrosive dmg/proc working like Viral, cutting in half dmg reduction given by armor each time it procs with a CD of 2-5 seconds and a duration of 10 sec (every proc that doesnt cut armor again will simply refresh the timer)

Edited December 17, 2013 by Phoenix86

[Redmage107]

an approach that would make sense to me would've been to have corpus health, (armored) grineer health and infested health and shields, that way people would actually see that armored grineer start with an absolute minimum of 25% resistance towards damage of any type, 50% for heavies - this puts the current "vulnerability" to puncture and corrosive into perspective.

 

on a sensible scaling calculation all i can say is that there are equations that let you approach a certain maximum tangentially - and i sure as hell can't find a reason why they didn't use one of these. i don't have one at hand right now but good arpg's should have examples aplenty.

 

even corrosive projection could be rather easily fit into all of this if it had a higher base armor reduction and diminishing returns per additional aura.

I'm not sure I follow this. Why do infested need shields and health? How would this improve the understanding of grineer damage ratios?

[SlyBoots]

what? redmage, you are confused... :P

 

that's corpus health, grineer health, infested health and just shields in general, maybe i should've used a different order...

 

edited that...

Edited December 17, 2013 by SlyBoots

[Armored-raven]

by shooting stabbing slashing bashing blowing up and generally kicking the crude outa em

[General_Krull]

by shooting stabbing slashing bashing blowing up and generally kicking the crude outa em

Read the thread, friend. We are discussing, well smarter people than I, are discussing how armor scaling is broken meaning at higher levels they are impossible to kill.

Edited December 17, 2013 by General_Krull

[Armored-raven]

Read the thread, friend. We are discussing, well smarter people than I, are discussing how armor scaling is broken meaning at higher levels they are impossible to kill.

yea I know what they are discussing ny inner troll got the better of me tho ... happens from time to time

[Krymanol]

DE could just patch things up by placing some armor reduction caps on enemies...there should be no way an enemy should reach 90%+ damage reduction...it should cap out around 70% or 75% tops...This way, no matter what level an enemy is or what faction or type of enemy it is, if it has armor, it won't ever reduce your damage down to 1's or 10's like what's currently happening against higher level heavy enemies.

 

Then they can also tweak the health stats and increase those base on level...so armor won't increase continually, but health would...since health is considerably easier to damage than armor or shields, this should help augment the armor cap and keep the high level enemies from dying in 1 or very few shots from high powered (or OP) weapons.

 

 

But that's my short solution, a better one would be a complete overhaul of not only the armor system but the weapon system as well.

[Redmage107]

Read the thread, friend. We are discussing, well smarter people than I, are discussing how armor scaling is broken meaning at higher levels they are impossible to kill.

Or at the very least more difficult to kill than the average/starting player can manage.

 

Increasing health will work up to the point where it starts out-scaling damage at about 6k or 10k hp depending on the weapon. Grineer currently hit around 4k HP on average so this wouldn't necessarily fix the issue though I agree with armor reduction being fixed in percentage or bottom value. Either one would fix the issue without requiring a radical armor rewrite

[Eyeless]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DGei4TV95s&t=22m40s

 

Orokin Void Defense Tower 3. Today a few hours ago.

Mother of God...

[Redmage107]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DGei4TV95s&t=22m40s

 

Orokin Void Defense Tower 3. Today a few hours ago.

Thanks very much! I'm glad someone produced T3 D footage, since most of my keys are exterminate and survival from the old days. Can you please post your build so we can use it to crunch numbers?

Edited December 17, 2013 by Redmage107

[DJ_Redwire]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DGei4TV95s&t=22m40s

 

Orokin Void Defense Tower 3. Today a few hours ago.

 

LOL it's so broken XD

[LazerusKI]

shooting enemies at the end of V3 Defense is senseless...

we used to pull them in front of the laser with vortex, drop them, laser-them.

but now...vortex is broken again, crashes clients, cant use it -.-

[Phoenix86]

Hope that with today's update or with 11.5 Corrosive proc will get boosted to cut in half armor's reduction everytime it procs...

that's the solution imho

[Redmage107]

Hope that with today's update or with 11.5 Corrosive proc will get boosted to cut in half armor's reduction everytime it procs...

that's the solution imho

Status proc chance needs to be stronger for that to work

[tehous]

I know many of you are frustrated about all of these changes, but I think these are steps in the right direction. While armor resistances should have significance at higher levels, they should not cause your damage output to be nullified (as was the case with U11 and U11.3). Perhaps the next step should involve reviewing the armor scaling equation. I agree with Kyte that a simple adjustment to the exponent (as 2.5 is fairly high) would make a significant difference.

 

 

 

The issue is that past 1000 or so damage reduction is stupid large and the curve tapers off, so 1000 armor is barely any different from 10000. armor This of course means even a 75% reduction to that 10k will leave you with 2500 armor that is almost just as tanky.

On the other hand, if you kill all the armor (ie reach 100% armor reduction or more), then there's no armor at all. You are completely immune to armor scaling. Your weapons will do full damage. So yeah. Stack dem Corrosive auras. In fact, stack ALL the armor debuffs. So long as you can hit 100%, you're good to go.

(Unless DE has a bug in their math)

 

 

The issue is that the U11 system is fundamentally a bandaid over too-high armor scaling. Nobody noticed because Corrosive covered all your armor-piercing needs. Then they scaled back the elemental effect and the ugly became visible.

 

---

 

I'm gonna quote myself from another forum, since I wrote a bunch of words and graphs and stuff. (Someone had asked what's up with the current damage model.)

 

I don't remember if I showed the last graph before, but eh. Completes the idea.

 

...

Come to think of it, a Lv. 1 Heavy Grineer taking only 37.5% damage is still pretty crazy.

Two issues.

* Why do we need scaling of mitigation in the first place?

* Looking at mitigation scaling in isolation gives a incomplete and likely misleading view of the state of things.

 

 

Why do we need scaling of mitigation in the first place?

Mob armor serves as a health amplifier in warframe. Due to the scarcity of health restoration for mobs it's functionally equivalent to a increase in health. It does provide a visual cue in reduced damage numbers and that helps create the "heavily armored mob" illusion.

So what's the point with scaling armor then?

* To make armor significant at high levels? A non-scaling % mitigation is still significant, at all levels.

* Because killing mobs need to be more time consuming at higher levels?  Scaling health is sufficient for this.

* To differentiate between mobs? Differing base armor is sufficient for this.

* To make the system unnecessarily complicated so that it's inaccessible to the average player?

 

The current scaling of armor provides some quite nasty drawbacks.

* How difficult it is to kill one mob compared to another will be dependent on their current levels. This makes it difficult to learn and adapt and also likely impossible to balance.

* The codex is inaccurate. That +++ corrosive for grineer is level dependent, scaling differently to current level for different mobs due to differing spawn levels, for high levels it's --- or worse. 

 

With the move to damage 2.0 it would actually be more elegant and allow for higher variation to simply have differing resistances for different mobs/warframes and do away with armor entirely. Having the elemental frames actually being resistant to their elements would be nice. This information would then be relatively readily accessible in the codex rather than the current situation which makes the codex inaccurate.

 

 

 

Looking at mitigation scaling in isolation gives a incomplete and likely misleading view of the state of things.

Damage mitigation in itself isn't really of interest. What's important is the impact it has on the amount of damage required to kill a mob, i.e. the effective health of the mob.

 

Effective health=health/(1-damage mitigation)

eg. if a mob mitigates 90% of damage, it takes 10x damage to kill it. With 100 health 1000 damage is necessary to do 1000*90%=100 damage.

 

damage mitigation=armor/(armor+300)

 

effective health=health+health*(armor/300)

health/(1-armor/(armor+300))=

health*(armor+300)/(armor+300-armor)=

 

If we grab "the old" health scaling of:

scaling_health=base_health * ( 1 + 0.01 * (current_Level - base_Level)^1.75)

and combine it with the armor scaling:

scaling_armor=base_Armor * ( 1 + 0.0025 * (current_Level - base_Level) ^ 2.5)

if we abbreviate (current_Level - base_Level) to dL we then get 

scaling_effective_health=scaling_health + (base_health*base_armor/300)  * ( 1 + 0.01*dL^1.75 + 0.0025 * dL^2.5 + 0.000025 * dL^4.25)

 

Might not be obvious to everyone but it is very easy to just move the scaling of armor over to scaling health and still get the same scaling effective health.

 

tl;dr Current armor scaling is wholly unnecessary and just plain bad.