100% resistance sounds like it should resist 100% to a player. Instead, can you just cap resistances at some value so nobody can get more than something like 50-75%?

Duration reduction would be a great move. The only problem with it is that durations are so short that we easily get "resistance plateaus". For example let's say there's a weakening effect very commonly used by enemies that lasts 5 turns by default. If you get 11% resistance that should mean -1 turn, because we can't have fractions of a turn. But at 29% resistance it's still -1 turn.



Still it's much much better.

Yes I won't touch the duration for now, would make the mages too weak I think.

I put a cap of 90%, though I just noticed that the spells damage was calculated as:

damage + damage-resist

so spell damage of 50 to a target 50% resistant would do 75% of the damage, and not 50% as should be. OK, as much as I hate to change this it must be done because is simply wrong. Luckily in the game you can't get high resistance value permanently for all elements otherwise this could screw up everything

It would make mages too weak? 25% chance to resist the effect completely and 25% duration reduction means the same thing on average, but it's more reliable for the caster with the duration reduction



Also grats to 2000th post on this subforum

Well actually the chance to hit was a simple problem: the barbed spike, etc (all single target druid spells) had by mistake same chances as the AOE! so 25%, not 100%. That's why wasn't working as it should, nothing to do with resistances

That sounds inconsistent with my experience. Does the damage multiplier for spells also affect this okayiwontask. But I definitely haven't been experiencing a 25% chance to apply the debuff. It's been quite high and every time it hasn't happened I've been blaming resistances.



P.S. All the simple errors you seem to be finding make me think of http://clichequest.com/index.php?pos=254

OK after some checking, only the Barbed Spike had 25%, the others were good. Damage multiplier affects the damage over time you get, but it's also influenced by the enemy HP (I don't want to put a 10hp damage/turn on a 30 HP enemy, would be too much).

With the changes I made the balancing shouldn't be affected too much, but now if you try to hit with a Fire based spell a target with Fire resistance of 90% it will do 3-4 damage

What did you do lol. I have my Burning ticking for 42 damage. It's an 0.8.7c save loaded in 0.8.7d.



50 magic druid vs. 16 magic polar bear. Is this intended? I would say PLEASE SAY IT IS but I haven't experienced being on the receiving end yet.



Damage goes down a lot as target's magic goes up. 28 target magic = 11 tick, 37 target magic = 8 tick.



Ratman mage (36) vs. my ranger (21) = Burning ticks for 20 ouch



In fact my new druid is capping damage from square one... only against the goblins (and maybe the orcs) have I even seen damage variance. I did put all points in arcane and I did take the +arcane birthday present, but still...



Right, I'm gonna say this. Very good job coding the quest reward system while half drunk. But you shouldn't have started touching the magic system before sobering up :D my druid so stronk.

Oops, did you remember when I said I didn't want to touch the rules because now is PERFECTLY BALANCED and any change could break everything? yes that's what happens...

The DoT damage went overboard indeed, need to fix that. If you have any good save where I can see a very unbalanced effect send it. I tested in my act2 battles but there enemies are stronger

My burning/freezing damage went from like 6 at level 1 to 21 currently (level 2 with 20 arcane). Scaling really fast based on the magic difference.

Yep, asking Anima for another formula. I don't want DoT to do more than 10% of total target HP. Otherwise they screw up everything

I don't know the extent of the changes, but I can tell you, debuff value not included, my druid is better off using Magic Bolt against Mormont's minions than a nuke.



Maybe it's their 50% resistance to like everything...



I feel really impotent as a caster like this. The damage cap is used before resistances come into play. Could resistances not instead be a part of that multiplier mechanic?



Like let's say the max multiplier is 6, but the magic ratio caused it to reach 10. I get the capped multiplier of 6 though, and then 50% resistance is applied to that so I get an effective multiplier of 3 and I cry. If instead the 50% resistance was applied to the actual multiplier I would get a multiplier of 5. I hope Anima understands at least

Can the multiplier just be at the end?

Yeah same result...



I try not to get too mathy about stuff but a damage cap that is applied before resistances just means resistances make casters suck no matter their magic score.

So probably was better if I didn't make this change yesterday

As a general rule if something works fine, why touch it? in this case I did because the resistances seemed to make sense, but if the result is an unbalanced/unplayable game, is worth it? Loren had zero of all those fixes (also because I had less feedback) and nobody ever complained about anything.

Also every day spent on fixes makes the release of the next act delayed...



I am seriously thinking to just revert the changes to how was before...

OK sorry about previous post if I seemed a bit grumpy is just that I'm tired of doing all those gameplay changes.

The real question is: should the damage resistance really work on percentage?

A enemy 90% resistant to Water should really protect him from 90% of damage? because if is like that, even changing the damage reduction and everything in the end the damage from that spell will be low compared to others.

Before was working like this: base damage + base damage/resistance. So you would to at minimum the base spell damage, and at maximum twice. Was still a hack/undocumented but seemed to work well.

Anyway, if you have a save where I can see the crappy attack, I can try to tweak and see. But all tweaks that works here might break the game somewhere else...

I just tried moving the damage cap at end of calculations, but didn't change the damage of a single point, I guess because is the Magic and elemental resistance that make it lower, not the damage reduction.

Err, I'm not sure why you felt a need to touch resistances like that in the first place. My only concern was the binary nature (and a little the double dipping) of ailment resistances. Then you found an error and decided it had to be changed



The magic system was definitely better in the previous build, apart from the poison stuff (and I guess Earth Spike), but I think that fix was a separate change from whatever you did to my nukes I do max damage to almost everything but craptastic to Mormont's minions. I managed to win and earned +5 AI understanding, but still.

I just tried moving the damage cap at end of calculations, but didn't change the damage of a single point, I guess because is the Magic and elemental resistance that make it lower, not the damage reduction.

If damage cap isn't involved why am I getting a fixed damage number instead of a variance? Also sending you pre-Mormont save.

Honestly I have no clue anymore how it works When you work on something 2 weeks straight changing it every day in the end is rather confusing

Got your save, on the skeleton mage you still do 27-30 with Inferno, while with ranged combat you do at best 17-22... it doesn't seem too bad to me ?

Anyway, will revert the spell damage calculation as was before, since was already balanced and working better. I think having base damage + base damage/resistance is a good measure to prevent unbalancing

on the skeleton mage you still do 27-30 with Inferno, while with ranged combat you do at best 17-22... it doesn't seem too bad to me ?

But Inferno is a 300% skill while the archer tops at 150% - I can understand y.'s "ecstasy"