Change resistance to damage percentage reduction

asdf124

Well-Known Member
Proposal
Change resistance to dmg reduc.
Details
The damage reduction can be 0.2 multiplied with resistance.(Suggestive rating)
If the hit does 1700, it can be reduced to at most by 75% to a mere 425.


Abuse Prevention
Cap it at a certain percentage? 75%? The cap should be dynamic to prevent people from going to pure resistance to gain most. They can potentially ruin ff's by being too resistant. So, the damage reduction cap should also be based on amount of hp.

6% for 1-2k, 12% for 2k-3k, 3k-4k 18% etc 13k is at 75% capped.
Summary
Same as proposal

Visual Details:Not needed.

Administration
Does this idea meet the Ideas Guidelines & Criteria? Yes
Does this idea appear on any of the Previously Suggested Ideas List? No, but think someone mentioned it somewhere.

Edit: Thanks raider for the initial idea. This is just more in depth( https://forum.the-west.net/index.php?threads/balancing-fort-battles.58279/
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser15368

I've never witnessed resistance ruining battles, and honestly it's the only counter to leadership at the moment - even so it's incredibly weak unless you are purely skilled for resist in either attacks or defences - so you're super effective in half the battles. I'm an advocate for stronger resistance for tanks at the moment.

There's many other aspects of the fort fighting formulas that should be dealt with before this. In my opinion, if damage does ever get fixed, we can look at balancing resistance.
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
I already suggested it being Percentage based rather than flat value that doesn't help anything after certain Damage levels.
Especially not with the OP sets with crazy "Sector damage bonus" crap anyway.

%75 seems a bit too high thou.

And if this is to be changed, then damage bonuses also should become percentage based.

These said, there are many things to be fixed in formulas.
Especially "Full Leadership" not having any side-effects and causing easy increases in damage.
 

asdf124

Well-Known Member
I already suggested it being Percentage based rather than flat value that doesn't help anything after certain Damage levels.
Especially not with the OP sets with crazy "Sector damage bonus" crap anyway.

%75 seems a bit too high thou.

And if this is to be changed, then damage bonuses also should become percentage based.

These said, there are many things to be fixed in formulas.
Especially "Full Leadership" not having any side-effects and causing easy increases in damage.

To get 75% at 0.2, you'd need a huge amount of resistance(375) and the 75% can't be achieved by going pure setting trap without hp. Meaning, you cannot get the bonus being 1600 hp.

And yes, I just thought this could be a potential solution to being a tank, nothing more.

How much the dynamic cap would be dependent on solely your hp. Think a cap of 6% for 2k and under, 12% for 2k-3k, 18% for 3k-4k etc. You'll need 13k to get the max cap of 75% and to do that is currently impossible.
 

Lordwasa

The West Team
Forum moderator
Event Manager
This would be a bad idea in my opinion.
Lets say you are a 15k hp adventurer and get 75% damage reduction.
It would mean a hard hit of 1500 will be translated into 375. Crits of 3.600 will become hits of 900, a adventure with some lucky ghost would last over 10 rounds.
With enough adventurers and hp soldiers, no defence would be breakable. Not taking in workers who will already be evading splendidley.

While I would love a menachic which would imrpove the balance between damage and hp, i dont think this would be it.
Totally removing the leadership damage bonus would be an option where damagers would be reliable on their hit chance and crits togehter with maximum sector damagebonus rather than leadership.
Fortfights would still be winable on either side without getting slaughtered in 5 hits.
 

asdf124

Well-Known Member
This would be a bad idea in my opinion.
Lets say you are a 15k hp adventurer and get 75% damage reduction.
It would mean a hard hit of 1500 will be translated into 375. Crits of 3.600 will become hits of 900, a adventure
Do you even know how much resistance that would take?
At least 375 resistance. The current best goes up to 230 which equates to 46% . We can make it based on hits rather than crits. Meaning it would subtract the 1500 to 810 at 46%

This would be a bad idea in my opinion.

Totally removing the leadership damage bonus would be an option where damagers would be reliable on their hit chance and crits togehter with maximum sector damagebonus rather than leadership.
Fortfights would still be winable on either side without getting slaughtered in 5 hits.
That is worse idea, the chance to hit isn't even based on a guaranteed hit. It is totally luck based.
 

Lordwasa

The West Team
Forum moderator
Event Manager
I misread your idea it seems, a damage reduction based on ammount of resistance might work then.
Removing the leadership bonus would still be an alternative. Someone with union would still hit for 800, not taken in resistance.
Either way, i do think damage is too high at the moment, players hitting for 1800 above resistance which is about 15-20% hp of most adventurers and workers is crazy, not even being critical hits.
 

asdf124

Well-Known Member
I misread your idea it seems, a damage reduction based on ammount of resistance might work then.
Removing the leadership bonus would still be an alternative. Someone with union would still hit for 800, not taken in resistance.
Either way, i do think damage is too high at the moment, players hitting for 1800 above resistance which is about 15-20% hp of most adventurers and workers is crazy, not even being critical hits.
I already suggested it being Percentage based rather than flat value that doesn't help anything after certain Damage levels.
Especially not with the OP sets with crazy "Sector damage bonus" crap anyway.

%75 seems a bit too high thou.

And if this is to be changed, then damage bonuses also should become percentage based.

These said, there are many things to be fixed in formulas.
Especially "Full Leadership" not having any side-effects and causing easy increases in damage.
I think that 0.1 is too low, 0.2 is a bit too high. Would you feel that (0.15 x resistance=reduction%) would be best?

You'd need 400 resistance at 10000 to get 60% reduction.
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
Probably, but I highly doubt Inno will take the amount we suggest if they ever change the way Resistance works :D
 
Top