Resistance Penalties (and a league to test them!)

"

Chris wrote:

The monster elemental damage nerfs in 0.9.12k solved problems we identified where characters with less than 75% adjusted resists were getting owned. It's not mandatory to max out your resists in merciless - just a (wise) option.

Hi Chris,

Could you post the calculation for the 75% resist? Let say fire resist. Is it a flat out 75% fire damage reduction?

Somehow i feel 75% resist has too good of a reduction when compare to 50%, especially on ES armour.

"

Xapti wrote:

The more I think about this issue the more blatantly lazy and stupid the idea sounds of doing this barbaric/archaic change of abruptly lowering resistances in higher difficulties.

blatantly lazy and stupid? barbaric/archaic? Are you just trollraging or what's up with u?

Dude, maybe u should relax and wait until u can test it? The same System worked fine in D2... i dont think it will make a big difference in gameplay, but it will remember u to look closer on your items...

And btw - relax ... it's still (closed) beta!

"

Xapti wrote:

"

Malice wrote:

I believe the following set of changes would achieve the same goals as the -75% penalty, but acheive them in a more balanced way:

1. Reduce values of all resistance bonuses by half
2. Lower resistance cap from 75% down to 50%
3. Adjust damage to compensate
.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you or missing something, I think you forgot the simple/obvious fact that it makes resistance far less important to get. If you're halfing the mitigation players will have I only assume you'll be halfing all elemental damage; with weaker damage, there's not as much need to get resistances. It's also making resistances less effective, which indirectly makes resistance less desirable.

I think 50% is still high enough that resistances would be very desirable, although it would make it less punishing to not be at the cap at all times.
But the point is to more tightly focus the range of damage players would be taking, to make balancing easier and thus enable the game to be made more challenging.
To go along with the -75% penalty change, GGG actually nerfed some monsters, to take into account that not everyone will be at the cap all the time - thus making the game easier for anyone at the cap relative to before. This is partly because the difference between max resist and slightly-below-max resist is so huge.
With a cap of 50% that difference would be smaller, allowing the game to be made harder.

When the resist change is applied to default league, would it be possible to make resistance flasks worthwhile by increasing their duration ? I think 4 seconds per drink would make them useful.

This way, when you spot a room full of lightning skeletons, you could charge in, drink from your trusty Topaz Flask, and hurry up to kill them before the timer is up.

It would make for intense and fun gameplay for players who don't want to invest too much in elemental resists, or are just unlucky with drops.

I approve of resistances penalties, mainly because this will force MF gear choices to be an actual compromise, which is exactly what they should be IMO.

"

anubite wrote:

I would like to see "avoid burn, shock, chilled, and/or freeze" as a stat that can spawn explicitly on amulets and/or rings. That way there is more than one way to build against spellcasters - you can avoid their critical effects but potentially take more damage from them.

This ... this is a very good idea.

I'm sure things will balance out in the end; it's just a matter of growing pains. That's what all our post-play feedback is for.

That said, I would like to make a coupla observations:

1. I'm not sure the "tried and true" D2 resists scale is the best approach. It may be a good starting point, but GGG needs to remain flexible and creative in handling this issue.

2. I never side with any Act 2 bandit. It goes against my RP instincts. I hope that my choice doesn't screw me.

='[.]'=

"

Malice wrote:

It will take longer to reach the cap, and the game will be more difficult than before while doing so. But once you get there, the game will be easier than before. Not sure if intended.

Truth out there, maybe a hidden one; albeit, its a great point.Even though i liked the idea of reaching the cap as much as later at first, since GGG started to nerf monsters in a row 3 times to compensate with resist penalty, Malice's point started to stand out, though as a bitter truth.

Although i'm totally against to judge changes before testing, from this point it is pretty clear where the root of the problem that starts to occur.

Now we should think & investigate as if we are at the cap, or very close to it at the least, what is next then ? With the recent streamroller like nerfs being have implemented, i'm curious a lot at how GGG will survive from this ? I think this is the question GGG should be thinking/interested in imo.

Edit: And this was the only reason why i had called it as a "3 nerf in a row!" under 0.9.12l patch notes.

"

BrecMadak wrote:

Although i'm totally against to judge changes before testing

Really? So all of your contrary posts to ideas and changes came...after they were implemented and you'd tested them?

I'm not saying you're wrong; there's a very good reason you're an Alpha tester and it has to do with a unique eye for things that most of us are okay with and your extremely high standards for difficulty. But that statement is rather hard to believe.

__

RayCheetah: I admire that sort of adherence. I imagine my character is told beforehand the pros and cons of assisting each Bandit Lord and decides from there. And very few of my characters are what you'd call categorically 'good'.

__

glutexo: Xapti might have worded it...crudely, but his feedback has been very good for a long time, far longer than I've been here. Next time you want to ask someone if they're trollraging, check their post history. You'll know soon enough what sort of beta tester they are.

__

anubite: you mean you'd like to see those stats unlocked from being 'unique'? Or is 'avoid' different to 'cannot be'? Naturally I think 'cannot be' is too powerful for magic/rare spawning, but I'm not entirely sure how 'avoid' would be implemented, given that a critical hit automatically confers a negative elemental status. Thus I'd figure burning/shock/freezing are intrinsic to crit chance/chance to avoid crits...am I wrong?

__

I sort of wish this 1 week resistance test wasn't hardcore, because it's very unlikely I'll be around long enough to test it at high level. That said, some form of it will be hitting default thereafter, no doubt.

Those who support the resistance penalties, how many of you guys are actually NOT running Marauder/Templar in the 1 week race ?