I would like to be the first on the 'balance analysis' forum to address majormuds issue of AC overpowering. I know that a lot of you think that the issue lies in the fact that every item needs to have its AC value set lower, but that still leaves the ability for overpowering.
Can anyone explain how AC factors into avoiding a hit? I guess what I'm asking for is majormud's formula. Before AC above 100 was achievable, I always assumed that the theoretical max was a 100 and that your AC value was alot closer to your percentage of getting hit. After thinking about it for 10 seconds, it can't be that clear cut because it seems neccessary to take into account Class Combat Level, Intellect, Agility, Accy, bladed vs blunt, level, weapon quality, etc.
I actually have a system worked out in my mind to work around this. It basically just involves making some standards as to what "normal" is in terms of Ac and Monster ACC. Then from there basically picking a number at random, i picked 35. 35% is then the ideal average for a completely average lpayer to get hit. This includes all aspects of the character including dodge, ac, and defensive spells.
So basically my goal is to make it so each class with a normal set of gear and ability will be hit approximately 35% of the time by monsters for their level range.
Now from there how that actually works will depend on how you build your character. If your a mage and you take only offensive spells then you're gonna get hit more. If your a warrior specializing in defensive tactics then you'll be hit less.
I assume this is the basic concept for most games although maybe not put into words for all of them. I can maintain this "balance" by constantly refering back to an up to date chart.
Of course there will be tweaking here and there. But so long as i keep my thoughts and databases organized it shouldn't be an issue.
I know some people are probably thinking well then why be plate if your gonna get hit just as often. The balance for this will be that plate wearers will accutually take less damage VIA dr, and have more HPs. So plate wearers will still stand in front. To balance out a plate wearers advantage in defense, they'll do less damage than other classes.
Something about that just doesn't sound right... What you are saying is there will be a sliding scale for AC starting at 0 (where 0 is 35%). There will either be a penalty or bonus (max upto say +/- 33%).
If i'm at normal armor then I get hit 33% (35% + 0% = 35%) and do normal damage? I'm going to assume that means 5 swings and no damage modifiers.
If you wear max armor then you only get hit 2% (35% - 33% = 2%) but then you do less damage??? Does that mean you swing less? or you hits hurt less? What does that mean if you're swinging a blunt object (e.g., tree trunk)? you going to take 50pts of dmg off my 500 pts?
If you are naked then you get hit 68% (35% + 33% = 68%) but then you do more damage? Does this mean I get more swings per round? Does this mean I get 50 pts of dmg added to swinging blunt object?
Also, if you factor in dodge then I will probably get hit even less than 68% considering I wont have any encumberance penalties. Hence, I will probably be getting hit only are 58% of the time.
***I'm not meaning to flame you just working through the system you posted. I'll post an idea after i think about it some more.***
The system will work exactly the same as majormud's system. I'll just do a better job of planing AC and dodge levels on players.
I was just bored at work and kinda thinking of ways to help balance AC/dodge but i couldnt really get it to work right with monsters only having 1 set accuracy. I was thinking maybe they have a vs dodge and a vs armor. If its 2 heavy swingers going at it armor isnt going to be as effective as dodge. But then if you have a dex based character trying to break thru your armor or find a weak spot to hit it would be harder. ...enter some customers long break between thoughts...? So maybe if dodge amounts were greatly increased to be equal to ac they could use a standard formula for % to hit. if your tunic has 25/5 ac then the dodge version would have +25 dodge. i kinda half assed thought up a formula (keep in mind im not a math person nor a programmer so its not in code and probably has problems)? ? ?% to hit = (acc vs ac - ac) + (monsters level - your level) +1.? if it passes that then you would check it vs dodge... % to hit = (acc vs dodge - dodge) + (monsters lvl - your level) +1.? The first number being the obvious general accuracy and the second number reflecting the two characters sills for fighting. the +1 is just pure dumb luck. ...more customers long break... The problem being that ones agilty doesnt affect dodge in this but there could easily be a bonus for higher agility like 100 agility = +15 dodge. that would be counter balanced by higher AC player who have more strenght to be able to carry heavier/better gear (not that the 2 are mutually exclusive). I kinda ran outta time to my self after that so i didnt really think of any formula for how each cp could affect dodge. but i kinda thought it would be cool because then you could have items that are best for hitting different types of things. like 1handed weapons are going to have a higher acc vs dodge than vs plate to help balance that. and make it worth having a little bit of variety on weapons on you for different situations.
These are my thoughts on it:
The first thing that needs to be done is the amount of AC given by armour needs to be lowered there is no reason to have super high AC for a single piece of armor.
1. Each type of armour such as leather or chainmail.. should have a range of ac given to it. This range should then be varied by the type of material used in its construction. This needs to be well thought out and applied with a great deal of consistency through out the game. There should not be a huge gap in AC between the types of armor this is what DR is for. The average AC of any type of armor at a particular level range should be fairly similar. However the DR of the different types of armor should have a larger gap.
2. AC bonuses for agility must be put in and help balance out high agility races vs low agility races that are normally used for high AC classes. This will help balance out those who get hit a lot and can soak up the damage to those who just avoid the damage. Racial size should also be taken into consideration smaller races should gain a small amount of ac to account for their harder to hit stature in comparison to larger races.
3. A clear system of AC penalties for Encumbrance should be put if you are super heavy then it should be easier to hit you even if that hit just bounces off.
QuoteRacial size should also be taken into consideration smaller races should gain a small amount of ac to account for their harder to hit stature in comparison to larger races.
omfg you are trying to make this dnd version 3 arent you animal?
Quote from: Mukami on July 02, 2006, 07:35:46 PM
QuoteRacial size should also be taken into consideration smaller races should gain a small amount of ac to account for their harder to hit stature in comparison to larger races.
omfg you are trying to make this dnd version 3 arent you animal?
I've never played any version of D&D in my life.
I would actually like to see the entire system for AC and DR get changed but not for the preservation copy I think that needs to just be worked out via content. I think that the problems with AC and DR need drastic changes in order to be really considered fixed though. To work towards really fixing this problem I came up with some formulas to make an encumbrance based AC penalty and bonus system. I think this will help a lot in fixing the problem:
Note - I think I got all the bugs worked out of the formulas but if you find something strange let me know so I can try to work it out. Also The formulas are intended to work from the in game AC, DR values not the value listed directly in the data files which are AC/10, DR/10.
Formula #1: use for each item slot giving ac
(Item_AC - (Item_AC * ((((Item_enc * 100) / Tot_Character_Enc) - 50) /100))) = Item_AC_reward
Formula #2: use once after all slots have been processed using formula #1
Sum of all items slots Item_AC_reward = Worn_AC
((Cur_Character_Enc * 100) / Tot_Character_Enc) = Per_Enc
(Worn_AC - (Worn_AC * (((Per_Enc - (Per_Enc * ((((Agil + Intel)/2) - 50)/100))) - 50)/100))) = Base_AC
(Base_AC + all other AC abilities) = Current_AC
The way this works is each item will have an AC range depending on the percentage of exp it takes up in your inventory. If the item is very heavy on you then it will give less AC but if it is light it will give more AC the swing of the calculation is + or - 50% of the AC value of the item in proportion to the encumbrance used and relative to the AC attributed to it.
All Item slots AC values are then counted and weighed against the characters total percentage of used encumbrance which is diminished or increased based on the average of the characters Intel and agility stats. This creates a proportional system of Penalties and or bonuses that alter a characters AC based on the average of those stats over or under 50 and encumbrance over and under 50%.
On to DR
Dr should be treated similar to MR for the most part and then reward the users with small amounts of total damage negation. Suggested values for testing: (DR * .25) = Damage Reduction, (DR * .1) = Damage Resistance. This would be used like so:
If Damage > (DR * .1)
(Damage - (Damage * ((DR * .25)/100)) = Damage_Delt
Else Damage_Delt = 0, Message: ?yadda yadda armour deflects the blow?
The soak and or deflect amounts probably will need to be adjusted but it?s a start. DR values however would be larger then they were in mmud like a DR of 50 would not be considered to high using the .25 and .1 values
I think this would really help change the way AC and DR plays out in the game for the better as it will help to balance the effects of the different types of armour while offering new strategies for picking armour in proportion to the a characters growth.
Only problem is once you change the armour system, you gotta change every monster to work with it.
That's not really a problem though its true its a bitch to have to do that but if your going to fix something you might as well do it right.
Don't under estimate my laziness. For it is the equal and opposite force to my vast gravitation.
For AC.
I still think that each piece of ac should give you a set amount. It just makes things that much better (for the characters stand point) of being able to plot out a character. i told you that i like to kinda think about that stuff while im at work and dont have easy access to a calculator and cant fully devote all my thinking to it so its nice to be able to think in broad terms of this is about 5 this is about 50 and not that should be 3 ish and that maybe 36...
The second forumla i didnt understand the inclusion of intelegence for it to give a base ac. i think that good arguments could be made that a person can be overall dumb but still able to be great in one area. or where from having worn the ac so much they learned the tricks to using it in ways that far surpas the ac of someone else and in ways that a person of a higher intelegence might not have figured out on their first few uses of the armor. I could see giving a class/item dependent bonus (warrior wearing plate would be a better bonus than the warrior in silk) but that would discourage playing a character a different way.
For DR
After way too much typing and re calculating i realized that i did the exact same thing as you we just went about it a different way.
Quote from: DeathCow on July 27, 2006, 10:24:18 PM
Don't under estimate my laziness. For it is the equal and opposite force to my vast gravitation.
Beep... laziness is not a valid option... please press the star key to hear the menu options again...
Quote from: Mukami on July 27, 2006, 11:37:38 PM
For AC.
I still think that each piece of ac should give you a set amount. It just makes things that much better (for the characters stand point) of being able to plot out a character. i told you that i like to kinda think about that stuff while im at work and dont have easy access to a calculator and cant fully devote all my thinking to it so its nice to be able to think in broad terms of this is about 5 this is about 50 and not that should be 3 ish and that maybe 36...
Eh, it was worth a shot I?ll go over some of the calcs again though and see if the padding it gives to formula 2 is really needed and maybe we can just do away with it. As it?s really the least important part of the calculation.
QuoteThe second forumla i didnt understand the inclusion of intelegence for it to give a base ac. i think that good arguments could be made that a person can be overall dumb but still able to be great in one area. or where from having worn the ac so much they learned the tricks to using it in ways that far surpas the ac of someone else and in ways that a person of a higher intelegence might not have figured out on their first few uses of the armor. I could see giving a class/item dependent bonus (warrior wearing plate would be a better bonus than the warrior in silk) but that would discourage playing a character a different way.
The second formula uses an average of Agility and Intellect to determine how well you can deal with the encumbrance that you have on. There are plenty of logical reasons though to do it like this you mentioned some of them. However it basically looks at it as if you are bad at physically balancing or intelligently distributing the weight then its going to feel like more weight. Also using an average also helps balance the effects of the stats on that portion of the calculation. If warranted we could even weight the stats so agility would do more than intellect overall in the calculation.
QuoteFor DR
After way too much typing and re calculating i realized that i did the exact same thing as you we just went about it a different way.
I thought about DR actually longer then it took me to come up with the calculations for AC. It just seemed to make sense that way and handle higher amounts of DR which will be better in the long run for item design for high level players. Since I?m sure players would like to continue to get better items as they level :)
At any rate I?d like to get at least a few of these calculations down so we can test them all and see what works the best for solving the problem.
More AC encumbrance formulas to test out:
Formula 2.1#
This works much like the formula #2 in the last post but is weighted to place more value on agility then intellect:
(Worn_AC - (Worn_AC * (((Per_Enc - (Per_Enc * (((((Agil * 5) + Intel)/6) - 50)/100))) - 50)/100))) = Base_AC
Formula #2.2
This works like formula 2.1 but the bonuses and penalties are scaled back by 50%
(Worn_AC - ((Worn_AC * (((Per_Enc - (Per_Enc * (((((Agil * 5) + Intel)/6) - 50)/100))) - 50)/100))/2)) = Base_AC
Formula #2.3
This works like formula #2 in the last post but the bonuses and penalties are scaled back by 50%
(Worn_AC - ((Worn_AC * (((Per_Enc - (Per_Enc * ((((Agil + Intel)/2) - 50)/100))) - 50)/100))/2)) = Base_AC
Formula #3
Here is a very bare bones encumbrance penalty system based on a bonus that varies the AC from +0 to +20 AC depending on how low the encumbrance is. Note-? It can be scaled down by adjusting the 2 values set at 20:
Base AC = (Worn_AC + (20 - (20 * (per_enc/100))))
Formula #4
This is basically formula #1 from the last post but used as a totaled encumbrance penalty system rather then per slot. It basically fluxes AC + or ? 50% in proportion to how far above or below 50% the players encumbrance is at.
Base AC = (Worn_AC - (Worn_AC * ((Per_enc - 50)/100)))
Formula #4.1
This works just like formula #4 but the flux is reduced to + or ? 25% this could be further scaled back by adjusting the divisor value 2 from 2 to a number higher.
Base AC = (Worn_AC - ((Worn_AC * ((Per_enc - 50)/100))/2))
Formula #5
The sliding max bonus of this formula is set by the characters level and combat rating and then diminished by the percentage of encumbrance used. The max range of the bonus at level 1 is .05 to 16 and the max at level 70 is 17.75 to 35.5 depending on the players combat rating.
Base AC = (Worn_AC + ((((Level + 1) * (Combat +3))/16) - ((((Level + 1) * (Combat +3))/16) * (per_enc/100))))
QuoteHowever it basically looks at it as if you are bad at physically balancing or intelligently distributing the weight then its going to feel like more weight
i think this must be a mathman/programmer obstical. Im sure that you would love to think that a person can think armor better than someone else but im sure that the armor woudnt be too badly distributed since im sure its mostly fitted in a way that your going to feel as little of the weight of it as possible. (btw that was a major problem with early chain was that it put most its weight on the shoulders it had nothing to do with how it was warn there was just no way for a tunic to spread its weight evenly)
Also I can see the whole race balance being thrown off by the inclusion of int. Neko bards would be great with the +int +agility and a high int/agility combo naturally.
Quote from: Mukami on July 29, 2006, 08:49:19 PMi think this must be a mathman/programmer obstical. Im sure that you would love to think that a person can think armor better than someone else but im sure that the armor woudnt be too badly distributed since im sure its mostly fitted in a way that your going to feel as little of the weight of it as possible. (btw that was a major problem with early chain was that it put most its weight on the shoulders it had nothing to do with how it was warn there was just no way for a tunic to spread its weight evenly)
You?re not really an obstacle at all since at this point it just about extrapolating the possible solutions. It might be true that armour is going to be fitted fairly but these calculations are looking at total encumbrance so it?s your armour and everything else that you are carrying. The inclusion of all the other items and coins and everything else a character might be carrying is one of those logical reasons I mentioned before. One more reason for intellect is can you actually put the armour on correctly :)
QuoteAlso I can see the whole race balance being thrown off by the inclusion of int. Neko bards would be great with the +int +agility and a high int/agility combo naturally.
Until we actually test out some of these it will be hard to say if they toss the balance really. However I tested the calculations with nekos and they aren't as much of a problem as halflings but that is why I came up with other versions of the formulas that scale back the max possible bonuses a little or otherwise cap it...
Quote from: ghaleon on June 16, 2006, 09:33:21 AM
I would like to be the first on the 'balance analysis' forum to address majormuds issue of AC overpowering. I know that a lot of you think that the issue lies in the fact that every item needs to have its AC value set lower, but that still leaves the ability for overpowering.
AC isnt overpowered, its the way its calculated. If a person with HEAVY ass armor is fighting they should be hit more because of the weight and general restriction of movement. But in majormud it seems AC is gearded towards actual misses. Its like picking up a tank and wearing it as armor, sure it will protect, but no way in hell that if i swing my sword/etc that im going to miss a huge weighted down, slow moving tank.
Just make is so the heavier it is the more they can get hit, but the more damage resistant they are. Maybe an extra modifier on armor for this? So that u can have a lim 1 armor piece be light and still resist alot of damage.
Quote from: Hagrid on November 13, 2006, 02:25:13 PM
Just make is so the heavier it is the more they can get hit, but the more damage resistant they are. Maybe an extra modifier on armor for this? So that u can have a lim 1 armor piece be light and still resist alot of damage.
That really wouldn't work think about it all the different item types have varying amounts of weight that would make them considered heavy or not i.e what is heavy for a gauntlet is not heavy for a corset. The better half of this problem needs to be dealt with in the design of the items themselves. The second portion of the problems needs to specifically address the issue of the effects of enc on ac. A heavy burdened character is a heavy burdened character whether or not the load is worn or simply carried. Addressing the problem based on worn eq only creates a very biased solution that could quickly come back to bite us in the ass.
I'm designing armour in conjunction with monster accuracy..
:/
thats not going to help the pvp portion of the problem :p
Quote from: The Crazy Animal on November 13, 2006, 04:15:56 PM
That really wouldn't work think about it all the different item types have varying amounts of weight that would make them considered heavy or not i.e what is heavy for a gauntlet is not heavy for a corset. The better half of this problem needs to be dealt with in the design of the items themselves. The second portion of the problems needs to specifically address the issue of the effects of enc on ac. A heavy burdened character is a heavy burdened character whether or not the load is worn or simply carried. Addressing the problem based on worn eq only creates a very biased solution that could quickly come back to bite us in the ass.
Actually i meant that enc should have an effect on getting hit too. Maybe just have DR on armor. Then for calculating how much you get hit is based on enc/agility. You may get hit often with low agility and enc but you will have a high DR from heavy plate, glancing blows, etc.
yeah this is an old post but people should talk about things.
There is a major problem of chance to hit on armour. It is the effect of things not being closer to dungeons and dragons.
There is a defense roll and a hit roll. I think Level should have an effect. Level having an inadvertant effect due to things like raising accuracy or raising the diminishing return level for accuracy should not be the factors. Level should mean more than a linear increase of stats. Level itself should effect something else. Encumberance then could be part of the equation. This is Dodge. Dodge should NOT be negated if you have plate. Just because something is a metal plate but you are say 40% encumbered, this shouldnt mean you hve -40 dodge. You should dodge or evade at will. Maybe there should be 3 levels of defense rolling. AC, DODGE, EVADE. evade would be like a weaker dodge that is a factor of encumberance and agility. Yes, it looks like dodge but there would be no +evade. It would be a small thing. Dodge should be irontight and very powerful at upper levels. Right now, most users that hve 70% dodge are quite happy, but quite sad if they have 70% dodge and 30 ac. they will get hit like 1outa 5 which is nuts bad for a level 60 neko mystic
Dodge is decressed on high AC/DR armour because the current method factors in dodge after the AC roll rather then before if I remember correctly. This is a common sence thing where high AC + high dodge would make tanks more unhittable then before. Its not exactly the best way to do it but it keeps that problem from happening.
One of the other problems with this method though is that for the most part items don't factor in any type of skill in their use when it comes to penalizing players for things like encumberance. And while this kind pulls this topic off topic but the good way to fix this would be from the class data side. Where as you would attribute each class with two main combat ratings instead of one. I.e A defensive and a offensive rating. Secondly each weapon and armour type could also get smaller base ratings that tally up to make up those main ratings. These ratings would then directly affect how the bonus/penalty systems work for each piece of gear on a player and allow for micro balancing between the classes in particular areas. This type of method would also allow for more of a item oriendted behavior based combat system such as if you are a silk wearer you might get their dodge roll before their AC roll rather then AC then dodge. Which would make a High dodge stat player dodge at a rate truer to their stats. Yet still be-able to skirt that issue of having a high AC/DR player getting high dodge and becoming unhittable.
Since dodge is so close to evade in how it works I wouldn't change it for that. However it could be used in a manner that could really help in the game as some type of better hit severity roll that works similar to the roll that decides if the hit is a normal or crit hit. However in this case it would produce a ranged number varing effects such as grazing blow to crit hits. This would then allow someone with a high evade to get hit lighter (less damage) though just as often as someone with a low evade. Its kind of like the crit defence thing we talked about in some topic in this section but with more functionality. The only problem is that a players DR would need to factored in as to not make any high DR equiped player undamage-able and that alone could be a touchy issue.
regular mud dodge is really hard to acquire still. There are many builds where ac above 40 is really hard to get and still increase dodge.
I think this issue of dodge being hard to caclulate would alleviated by lightening up on the doge cap. I still think though that the existence of only 2 defense factors, dodge and ac is the root of the problem.
If the world would be done my way, however it happens, a level 75 halfling mystic would be the most defensive character in the game yet still be able to be backstabbed occaisionally. however this would be implemented I am not sure but it makes sense. I think that crazy dodge should be more unhittable than a retarded ac tank in backrank. Increase DR if you must or increase Hitpoints, but dont make a plated guy in backrank unhittable and a halfling mystic max level much more hittable.
As far as dodge goes currently these are the only factors that matter:
Encumbrance, Level, AGL, CHA
Its not a monumentally difficult thing to calculate out but and really the cap that you think you see is mostly via the stat caps for AGL, and Charm... And in the case of a halfling the very low encum that they are able to build over the course of the game has a big effect too. That isn't a dodge bonus they have its to help compensate for that low encum... What they really should have is a "level based dodge bonus" however making them dodge crazy I don't think was the origional intention its just what everyone assumed they "designers" were doing when spotting the big dodge value...
-1 hps a level = they should dodge crazy
thats the joy of halfling. ZING! dodge dodge dodge dodge
they get no other joy besides that.
if a halfling mage is 40% with blur, manashield and mira, they should dodge much without encumberance % effecting so drastically. It should just be a factor but the +10 from halfling should rule it bigtime making halfling +10 dodge still sweet.