Author Topic: Armor -- Next Wipe  (Read 5206 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kanu

  • Fodder
  • *
  • Posts: 61
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2014, 02:55:03 AM »
Is it too complicated to pro-rate armor based on different weights assigned to each location, rather than penalize someone completely for one spot where they are not wearing armor? I'm imagining the situation where someone has just had a slot decay, and consequently is actually naked in that one spot. According to armor as it is currently framed, that person would have their AC calculated by their remaining pieces, but then if they add armor to that spot, they'd have their overall armor value drop... which is very counterintuitive.

On the other hand, making armor more important seems really interesting to me. I can imagine that people will want to carry around a spare set of equivalent armor. Maybe we will need horses, and external carrying bags or something? :)

Aristox

  • Administrator
  • Zone Leader
  • ******
  • Posts: 363
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2014, 08:45:27 AM »
You touch very lightly on the effect on spells on armor, but I'd curious as to what kind of armor class bonus steelskin, stoneskin (would that be changed from bruising melee to extra armor points?) and globe/minor globe - can you elaborate on this?

Nope. We haven't gotten there yet. You are asking me what color the tile is going to be when I am still working on getting the plumbing in.  Which is to say, I have an idea what those spells will do (if they still exist, which isn't a certainty), but that may change 4 times between now and when they are implemented.

Quote from: Tajs
Also, I think 80% cap is too high tbh, I know it's the very max but it *will* be attained, why was this number picked?.
Max cap at 50-60 would seem fine for me, having seen steelskinned, ghostdancing barbs with cyan armor...

No one will be 80% all the time. It will only be attainable for very very short time periods (rounds, not ticks) when a skill or spell is active.  You won't be buying a rank bonus that gives +20% armor.

Quote from: Tajs
Also it was interesting to see that warrior/dks/pala get much high armor than barbs, who's the traditional main tank these days.

Barbs will still be tanks in the new system, they will just not be the only tank worth having.

Kragg

  • God
  • Newbie
  • ***
  • Posts: 48
  • Favorite Zone: Village of Volger
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2014, 12:58:57 PM »
Here are my rambling thoughts on a few aspects of armor you may wish to consider:  There are 5 aspects to this multiplier that I wish to discuss:

1) How it affects being hit.  The higher the multiplier, the more likely the defender would be unable to dodge or miss incoming attacks.  (hard to avoid hits when you are in a tin can).
2) How it affects the hit being absorbed.  Not just in % of damage but in absorbing it all together (as it occurs now).  Higher multiplier means higher rate of full absorbtion chance.
3) I think the multiplier needs to be additive according to armor part (ie 35% body, 15% head, 15% hands, 10% legs etc) so that one piece doesn't set the multiplier.
4) The damage of the weapons the defender gets hit by could be affected by the defender's multiplier.  In the middle ages, bludgeons were best against the heaviest armors that blades couldn't pierce while bladed weapons work far better against lighter armors.  I don't know if all this is a good idea or just too complicated.  Probably too complicated.
5) 80% max would be too high.  66% would be my thought as an absolute max.

Great changes with lots of devils in the details.  But great changes.

enochvey

  • Fodder
  • *
  • Posts: 57
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2014, 02:20:01 PM »

Barbs will still be tanks in the new system, they will just not be the only tank worth having.

I like the idea of multiple classes being able to tank as spamming ghost dance is great, but can get old... but I'm concerned about how the balancing will play out with one of the intended tank classes not being able to wear the best class of armor.

Do the developers intend to keep dmg reduction potential equal across the board at different levels, quality of gear, ranks etc. or is there going to be a noticable discrepancy between what is a "viable" and what is the "best" tank class(es) regardless of gear/ranks/etc.

I'm asking because I've seen the "multiple tank classes" idea play out miserably in other games before and a lot of it had to do with the poor relationship between class skills/abilities and the available gear for some of the classes (think paladin tanking in WoW during the burning crusade expansion pre-mt hyjal..)

I'm hoping the relationship between class/gear for tanking classes doesn't take the same direction here.



fulloflife

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 27
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #19 on: March 01, 2014, 02:55:18 PM »
this is one of like 10 major changes. It's basically impossible to evaluate the nuances since the whole system needs to be balanced.

I support the goal of making the effects of armor being more transparent\useful. As others say, the devils are in the details and everything else that is changing.

Hoss

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 648
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #20 on: March 01, 2014, 03:08:48 PM »
I can see a common thread in this discussion forming around wearing a lower piece of armor and having it lower your modifier. I want to dive into more detail on why we went in this direction.

It is all about choice. In the game today, armor doesn't really mean a whole lot. It has some bonuses but it isn't a major system in regards to tanking ability. Moving forward, armor will be a major system used for mitigating incoming damage. We want players to have choices, and some of those choices have consequences. Sure wearing that leather chest piece gives you some damage, but it really had a larger impact to your ability to tank. Players that want to focus more on being the best tank in the game would probably skip the leather plate and wear something a lot more durable. It is that simple. You will have the choice of using a piece of gear that is not designed for tanking (which we have none of currently) over a piece that is designed for damage output or something else. The choice is yours.


@enochvey We aren't going to discuss class design with you all yet, but rest assured any tank class will have mechanisms in place to be very effective at tanking, and again tanking will become about choice. Which tank style fits your play style... Damage reduction through armor will not be equal for every tanking class, but the overall "time to die" will be fairly consistent.

I do understand that in other games (I am assuming you are talking WOW) did a poor job at balancing multiple tanking classes. The good part is, we aren't WOW and we are completely willing and able to modify whatever is needed to make sure we have a good balance. I think Arctic Mud has a lot better dynamics for allowing balance to occur than most MMO's today.

@Kragg:
   1. No, armor will not affect being hit at all. Armor is about mitigation after a hit is received.
   2. Also no. This would give a huge advantage to heavy armor types and full absorbs will likely not happen..like ever.
   3. Why? We started down that road in our initial design phase and realized that it just became overly complex for the sake of being complex.
       We want armor and armor rating to be a really simple mechanic to understand.
   4. See above, complex for the sake of being complex <> fun
   5. Max damage reduction is going to be a moving target. It may get adjusted up or down until a sweet spot it obtained.
       Don't get hung up on the numbers too much they are all fluid and designed that way for a reason.
   

enochvey

  • Fodder
  • *
  • Posts: 57
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #21 on: March 01, 2014, 04:59:08 PM »
Damage reduction through armor will not be equal for every tanking class, but the overall "time to die" will be fairly consistent.


Overall time to die sums up my concerns perfectly. Thanks for the response :)

gnua

  • Zone Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #22 on: March 02, 2014, 12:28:53 AM »
According to armor as it is currently framed, that person would have their AC calculated by their remaining pieces, but then if they add armor to that spot, they'd have their overall armor value drop... which is very counterintuitive.

yeah, putting on a cloth belt pack resulting in the same effect as stripping naked sounds counterintuitive to me too. though I could see a lower class of armor providing neither additional armor nor buffs. (i.e. +sneak, +dex leather gear ceasing to have any benefit once you don some scale or plate sounds more intuitive)
« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 08:19:56 AM by gnua »

Jarrad

  • Fodder
  • *
  • Posts: 79
  • Favorite Zone: Isle of Shadows
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #23 on: March 02, 2014, 12:35:13 PM »
It looks like all equipment will be revamped for the next wipe so I wouldn't get hung up on the issue of lower piece dragging down your rating. I am assuming that the staff will be balancing the majority of items in a certain direction so everything except the few lim 1/2 items of heavy armor will be statted towards tanking, while damaging statted gear will be mainly in the medium to light tier etc

Definitely interesting to see some splitting up of physical damage resistance vs magic damage resistance. Looks like an exciting new phase is coming to arctic. Cant wait to see some info on class revamps!!!

Chisul

  • Immortal
  • Zoner
  • *
  • Posts: 171
  • Favorite Zone: Pax
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #24 on: March 02, 2014, 09:55:27 PM »
This feels kinda like FFXII armor mechanic with heavy armor vs light armor vs mystic armor. I really like swapping out armor to tailor for the area or fight knowing I can't have it all. If I want better damage, what am I willing to sacrifice for it?

Pretty cool idea to make me more selective with the armor I choose to use.

Nasredin

  • Immortal
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2014, 06:44:56 AM »
I can see a common thread in this discussion forming around wearing a lower piece of armor and having it lower your modifier. I want to dive into more detail on why we went in this direction.

It is all about choice. In the game today, armor doesn't really mean a whole lot. It has some bonuses but it isn't a major system in regards to tanking ability. Moving forward, armor will be a major system used for mitigating incoming damage. We want players to have choices, and some of those choices have consequences. Sure wearing that leather chest piece gives you some damage, but it really had a larger impact to your ability to tank. Players that want to focus more on being the best tank in the game would probably skip the leather plate and wear something a lot more durable. It is that simple. You will have the choice of using a piece of gear that is not designed for tanking (which we have none of currently) over a piece that is designed for damage output or something else. The choice is yours.

I really like the goal of making armor important; in fact, a good design never includes anything unimportant: anything that just adds pointless complexity without providing any real value should be simply discarded right away.

I also like the goal of letting the players have choices. If various features have different effects (e.g. the armor may provide either AC or +damage or +con but not everything at once), making the right choices becomes important which adds real diversity (not just pointless complexity) to the game.


That said, we may consider different designs that achieve those goals and I really dislike the described by Aristox. Arctic is a game, not quantum mechanics; and the mechanics of the game should be as intuitive as possible.

On a related note, remember the 'mind inversion' skill of the black robes? The way it affected mem time was completely counter-intuitive and I guess there were 5 or 6 bug reports about that (including mine). Finally, you had to make a locked and pinned thread in the forums saying that the skill worked just as designed.

Certainly, it worked as designed! But just as certainly, the design was flawed and crappy.


I hope this discussion may help us shape the suggested armor design so that it still achieves the same perfectly reasonable goals but no longer violates the common sense.


Now, trying to make it constructive criticism, I'd start with pinning down the set of rules (or constraints, or (semi-)invariants) for the solution that we're looking for. Once the rules are set, it is much easier to come up with a suitable design and to test it. So, here goes the first version:

The Goal

Make armor provide a real benefit.  Make that benefit obvious to players.

This should provide choices in equipment.  If you have a +12 con/30 armor item and then you find a +6 con/60 armor item, the difference should be somewhat obvious.


The Constraints

General

The design should be as intuitive as possible. If everybody at the first glance consider some aspect of the design to be a bug, that should be fixed.

KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid). Whenever possible, simplier and more obvious mechanics is better than the complicated one.


Technical

There should be several armor types, class restricted.
The more fragile classes (e.g. mages) may only use the lightest armor type.
The heaviest armor may only be used by the sturdiest classes (e.g. warriors).

Each piece of armor provides some protection from physical damage (0-100).
Heavier armor types usually provide better protection.

Armor is benefitial.
Under no circumstances wearing an additional piece of (non-cursed, i.e. non-negative) armor should lower the total defense of the char.
However, the amount of additional protection may vary and may depend on how well the new piece fits with the others.

Matched armor naturally forms a set providing much better protection:
having the heaviest armor in every slot is significantly better than a mixture of heavy and light armor.
(Design note: calculating the armor class of the char certainly is not the only way to achieve that.
And probably, not the best way.)

The formula for calculating protection should follow Abel's logic (a+b = b+a). In other words, no matter which piece of armor you put on first and which one later, the resulting protection should depend only on what you're wearing, not on the order of equipping the shinies.


??? Empty body slots
(Not sure if we need a special rule here. Currently, it is only important for calculating the armor class of the char.
If we change the design to something different, it may be no longer required.)


----------------

Please add your constraints to the list for discussion (or suggest the constraints to be removed). After the final set of constraints is accepted, it may be used to compare different designes to see which one fits best to our needs.

















Hoss

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 648
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2014, 08:34:03 AM »
@Nasredin While your post is nice and long, it doesn't really state anything. You are basically just rehashing things that have already been discussed and posted. I might be missing here, but it seems like you have just reworded what Aristox and I have already posted. Tossing in "contraints" and "Abel's logic" doesn't support anything you said.

snax

  • Guest
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #27 on: March 04, 2014, 09:08:57 AM »
@Nasredin While your post is nice and long, it doesn't really state anything. You are basically just rehashing things that have already been discussed and posted. I might be missing here, but it seems like you have just reworded what Aristox and I have already posted. Tossing in "contraints" and "Abel's logic" doesn't support anything you said.

I think he's saying that if you have 7 pieces worn, and wear an eighth piece of lighter quality it shouldn't hamper your total AC, as you're adding and not removing from your gear.

On the side topic the order you wear gear shouldn't change any values.  common sense and probably will end up debugged eventually if the quirk arises.

I could be wrong.  But it makes sense, and yet screw sensible decisions.  a heavy admantite codpiece should provide more armor value than a mithril codpiece and leather ball and gag.

<Editted to remove stupid request for a pic no one wants to see>

Hoss

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 648
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #28 on: March 04, 2014, 12:26:10 PM »
Quote
I think he's saying that if you have 7 pieces worn, and wear an eighth piece of lighter quality it shouldn't hamper your total AC, as you're adding and not removing from your gear.
In the realism aspect, I completely agree however it just doesn't translate to a text base game very well without being overly convoluted and messy. We want the paladin to say "no man, ill pass on that shitty leather, I am a tank instead of stealing a piece of gear from the lowly (and whiney) thief. It is a trade off, one that we really think at the end of the day makes the most sense. If you wanted realistic armor methods, I dunno find a Larp group?

gnua

  • Zone Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: Armor -- Next Wipe
« Reply #29 on: March 04, 2014, 12:51:00 PM »
Quote
I think he's saying that if you have 7 pieces worn, and wear an eighth piece of lighter quality it shouldn't hamper your total AC, as you're adding and not removing from your gear.
In the realism aspect, I completely agree however it just doesn't translate to a text base game very well without being overly convoluted and messy. We want the paladin to say "no man, ill pass on that shitty leather, I am a tank instead of stealing a piece of gear from the lowly (and whiney) thief. It is a trade off, one that we really think at the end of the day makes the most sense. If you wanted realistic armor methods, I dunno find a Larp group?

I seem to recall in Dungeons and Dragons, there was a Cavalier class with an honor code that made it disdain lighter armor even if it was 'better'. Perhaps the question should be: is there a more intuitive and obvious way to get the tankier classes to disdain lighter armor and prefer an empty slot to inferior armor. I've been wearing cloth belt packs for years so that kenders couldnt steal all my recalls. If I hadnt read the posts, I might mistakenly think that armor still means nothing because no matter what extra armor I put on, I notice no benefit.