Nano resist change for balance?

[Sniker]

make the different nano debuffs act differently on ppl with high and low NR's.

example player 1 has 2k NR and player 2 has 4k NR


player 1 hit by init debuff ubt (100% effect) player 2 hit by same ubt but the effect is only half ie 50% of what player 1 has, making nanoresist usable for something, and not in need of having 5-6k NR to counter nano's, that can just be recasted over and over till it lands =)

This would also give ppl reason to IP nanoresist at lower level's making it a usefull stat instead of useless. will also ****e up pvp a bit imo.


discuss.

[Xtremtech]

Or... make the effects of hostile nanos vary, depending upon the nanoskills of the caster, making nanoskill values more useful. Debuff values, CC durations could be altered etc. That's a suggestion that has turned up very often over the years. Or perhaps a mix of the two ideas...

Note: You should look at some of the testing done by Ebag which shows that a lot more nanos are countered than people think at really quite comparitively low NR values. The difficulty is often more, that recasting enough times to ensure landing isn't made difficult enough - or that it's too rewarding to just recast the same nano over and over until you win the dice roll. Local cool-downs and "affected by" nanos are being widely introduced as part of the balance effort to counter that, so the NR idea is probably less convincing than the nanoskill of the caster being used.

Such ideas have previously always been shot down because of the immense amount of work involved in rebuilding the base mechanics and needing to adjust every single hostile nano in game. But given that just about all hostile nanos are going to need change and adjustment with the introduction of local cool-downs, duration reductions etc, perhaps FC would be more open to these kinds of idea.

X

[ThatsNotMyName]

Bump, i like this idea

[Sniker]

Note: You should look at some of the testing done by Ebag which shows that a lot more nanos are countered than people think at really quite comparitively low NR values. The difficulty is often more, that recasting enough times to ensure landing isn't made difficult enough - or that it's too rewarding to just recast the same nano over and over until you win the dice roll. Local cool-downs and "affected by" nanos are being widely introduced as part of the balance effort to counter that, so the NR idea is probably less convincing than the nanoskill of the caster being used.
X

that's exactly the thing. instead of making someone recast the same nano over and over and over till it lands it's better to just let it land but with reduced effect in form of a xx% effectivity based on targets NR vs AR (in this case nano skills)

this mechanism is already in game in forms of pvp dmg cap, so i don't see a reason why this shouldn't be introduced to debuffs aswell.

this would also render the NT's NR debuff useful so i don't really see why it wasn't implemented like this from the start =)

[Jekonam]

make the different nano debuffs act differently on ppl with high and low NR's.

example player 1 has 2k NR and player 2 has 4k NR


player 1 hit by init debuff ubt (100% effect) player 2 hit by same ubt but the effect is only half ie 50% of what player 1 has, making nanoresist usable for something, and not in need of having 5-6k NR to counter nano's, that can just be recasted over and over till it lands =)

This would also give ppl reason to IP nanoresist at lower level's making it a usefull stat instead of useless. will also ****e up pvp a bit imo.


discuss.

Great idea mate. Nano resist should be resistance, like a "shield". It should not be on/off switch mechanism.

bump for this

[-Klod-]

It would make certain nanos even more useless, unless various existing NR checks also got reworked (or even removed).

[Sniker]

It would make certain nanos even more useless, unless various existing NR checks also got reworked (or even removed).

good thing you mention this.

for this idea to work u can't have NR check to fully resist or not.

with this idea of mine all nano's land (with the exception of some small % ie fumbles as we used to have in 2007)

so i would say remove how NR works now and replace it entirley on a % effect base

[Xtremtech]

that's exactly the thing. instead of making someone recast the same nano over and over and over till it lands it's better to just let it land but with reduced effect in form of a xx% effectivity based on targets NR vs AR (in this case nano skills)

Note in advance: please don't take this post as attacking your idea - it isn't meant in that way. I'm trying to pin down exactly what it is that you'd want to do and flesh out the idea in the process.

So, you're suggesting that there should be no defence check. Hostile nanos always land but the strength of their effect is attenuated by Nano Resist value - potentially down to 0 if necessary.

Then there should be a calculation something like this:

Nano AR / Nano Def * 50 = %age of debuff effect applied.

So, 3K NR vs 3K Nano AR would give 50% of the debuff effect. 3K NR vs 2K AR would give 33% etc.

That throws up some questions:

* Where hostile nanos have more than one skill on Nano AR (e.g. PM 60% SI 40%) do you still include those split ARs? Split Nano AR values reduce the maximum Nano AR values considerably in most professions. How would you balance this?

* In general, Nano Resist values for top-equipped players exceed Nano AR values by quite some margin. How would you manage balance with relation to skills budgets?

* You'd also see most actual percentages be around the 30 - 60% because players tend to have AR and NR values that are within certain ranges of each other. Would you have a min and max %age value that you'd apply? How would you balance that in the hostile nano effects?

* Def check values at present make it more difficult to land more powerful effects. So, for example, with the same Nano AR vs NR values, Nano Shutdown is more difficult to land than Enhanced Nano Shutdown because one has far shorter duration and shorter recharge. Or it's much more difficult for a Trader to land a Plunder than a Divest, in order to balance both debuff and trader benefits that are available.

How would you rebalance those sorts of differences between nanos?

* How do you deal with hostile nanos that have def checks based on other values for important reasons, such as Level, Psychic, Strength?

* At present, professions like Fixers that have low Nano AR tend to have nanos that have low Def check %ages in order to give them a chance of landing. In the new system, they would nearly always see very low percentages on their effects. How would you balance hostile effects across Nano specialists and weaker nano profs with hostile nanos?

Should this new system apply to all hostile nanos, including nukes and DoTs as well as debuffs/cc?

Should the new system apply to perk effects that check against NR or non-evades too?

How would you cope with different types of effect?:

* Would you reduce durations on debuffs that have black/white on/off effects - like roots and stuns?

* Would you roll damage on nukes/DoTs and then apply a %age reduction? Should this new NR reduction be on top of AC reductions or separate to them?

* Would you apply the same effect to mobs in PvM?

* Would you have AoEs land on everybody and be reduced according to the NR of each affected player? How would you address debuffing Auras?

* Would you want some adjustment to procced effects too?

* How would you deal with 'drain' type effects? Does the reduction just affect the debuff/damage part on the target? Or does it also affect the buff part on the attacker?

Those are just some of the detail questions that come to mind. I'm sure there are more.

this mechanism is already in game in forms of pvp dmg cap, so i don't see a reason why this shouldn't be introduced to debuffs aswell.

It would be a completely different mechanic. It's not the same at all. It would have to be built from ground up.

In essence, though, it would be more like an AC mechanic really - with an added layer of complexity to allow for the reduction to be relative to both the skill of the attacker and the defender.... and added complexity to be able to deal with reducing debuff values, debuff durations, damage values and possibly other effects depending upon the effects of the nanos.

X

[Sniker]

let the wall of answers begin =)

That throws up some questions:

* Where hostile nanos have more than one skill on Nano AR (e.g. PM 60% SI 40%) do you still include those split ARs? Split Nano AR values reduce the maximum Nano AR values considerably in most professions. How would you balance this?

* In general, Nano Resist values for top-equipped players exceed Nano AR values by quite some margin. How would you manage balance with relation to skills budgets?

* You'd also see most actual percentages be around the 30 - 60% because players tend to have AR and NR values that are within certain ranges of each other. Would you have a min and max %age value that you'd apply? How would you balance that in the hostile nano effects?

* Def check values at present make it more difficult to land more powerful effects. So, for example, with the same Nano AR vs NR values, Nano Shutdown is more difficult to land than Enhanced Nano Shutdown because one has far shorter duration and shorter recharge. Or it's much more difficult for a Trader to land a Plunder than a Divest, in order to balance both debuff and trader benefits that are available.

How would you rebalance those sorts of differences between nanos?

* How do you deal with hostile nanos that have def checks based on other values for important reasons, such as Level, Psychic, Strength?

* At present, professions like Fixers that have low Nano AR tend to have nanos that have low Def check %ages in order to give them a chance of landing. In the new system, they would nearly always see very low percentages on their effects. How would you balance hostile effects across Nano specialists and weaker nano profs with hostile nanos?

Quick answer to this would be every nano has different NR values before they start loosing effects on targets

Example as in first post but with a little more numbers to grasp it.

Player 1 = 500 NR
Player 2 = 750 NR
player 3 = 1000 NR
player 4 = 1250 NR
player 5 = 1500 NR

Attacker = 500 AR (or nano skill if you want) to make it fair

Player 1 would get 100% debuff
Player 2 would get 99% debuff
Player 3 would get 95%
Player 4 would get 80%
Player 5 would get 50% tripple the NR compared to AR

But with say another nano that has a def check vs level the different % of debuffing would need even more NR to get to these values

* Would you roll damage on nukes/DoTs and then apply a %age reduction? Should this new NR reduction be on top of AC reductions or separate to them?

Nukes and dots should have a little to none reduction in effectiveness, kept like they are right now, with the rebalancing acts of FC i have no idea how nukes and such will work after the rebalancing.

* Would you reduce durations on debuffs that have black/white on/off effects - like roots and stuns?

I think this actually is alot more realistic than how it's working now. reduced effects makes for example pvp not so predictable, could cause more ppl to team up for example and working more in teams to get a target down.

* Would you apply the same effect to mobs in PvM?

Yup, making most encounters up to date probably harder, not just q/afk

* Would you have AoEs land on everybody and be reduced according to the NR of each affected player? How would you address debuffing Auras?

As for AOE debuffs each targets NR would be applied to each player affected.
Auras would be like they are now.. they hit you nomatter what you try to do. hence why it is an aura in the first place and not a direct nano cast passive/active debuffing

* How would you deal with 'drain' type effects? Does the reduction just affect the debuff/damage part on the target? Or does it also affect the buff part on the attacker?

The defender would be the only one affected by this change the attacker will still get his benefits.

Since u took trader drains in here my idea is the hard one to land would have a lowered effect on the target at first cast. but after say both drains are up the attacker would then have a higher AR to debuff target even more than last time. so first cast would lead to 70% effectiveness but second cast would lead to say 90% effectiveness

Note in advance: please don't take this post as attacking your idea

ideas are to be questioned, turned upside down flipped inside out etc. =)

these are all valid points and should be thought through before applying anything close to this, as this change might aswell change how the whole game is to play.

^_^
maybe others have different views on how this should be implemented if it ever happends

[Xtremtech]

Example as in first post but with a little more numbers to grasp it.

Player 1 = 500 NR
Player 2 = 750 NR
player 3 = 1000 NR

{snip}

I'm not sure that you're actually proposing this, but just to be sure, the last thing you'd want is actual 'bands' of effectiveness. Step changes creating threshold values aren't pretty in a skill based system. It allows people to just reach thresholds and negates the value of all skill values in between the bands.

From a coding and process perspective, I don't think that setting different NR threshold values for each nano would be a good way to go. Essentially, that would be shifting the %age value range for each nano. With systems like this, you want the base applied process (the %age calc) to remain fixed and the data values for each nano to be the variable that you use to control balance. You can gain the same effect by instead moving the range of debuff values for each nano. So what you'd have would be minimum and maximum values for the debuff effect(s) which the %age calculation is applied to.

So, I think what you'd end up with is probably something like this:

All hostile nanos/procs always land (except a 3% fumble rate?). Local Cool-Downs/"Affected By" blockers control spamming.

AoE Effects land on everybody and are adjusted based on each individual's NanoDef stats.

You'd have the option of applying the percentage value to several values on a single nano... so you might apply the percentage to both the debuff value and the duration.

Perhaps even nano stats like Breakability could be included to help balance out the fact that hostile nanos always land. if you're making them always land, then including a chance of it breaking that's att/def checked makes some sense.

For each effect to be adjusted, FC would set a minimum and a maximum value - that could be Debuff effect, debuff duration, nuke/DoT damage, number of ticks of an effect etc.

The minimum value is called 0% effect.

The maximum value is called 100% effect.

When the Nano/Proc is cast, something like the following formula is applied:

Nano AR / Nano Def * 50 = %age of debuff effect applied.

General Skills budget variance between NanoAR and NR can be balanced across the board by adjusting the '50' value. If NR skills budgets have moved away from NanoAR across the board, then you could change the calc to: NanoAR / NanoDef *60.

Specific Skills budget variance on a given nanoline can be balanced by adjusting the min/max values on the effects.

Your general thought is that you can balance the trade-offs presently implemented using variable Def Checks, Attack Skills etc by varying the minimum and maximum values.

So in the NSD Vs E-NSD example, you might build it like this:

Present NSD - Def check 160, Duration 60 seconds, 2K debuff, unbreakable
Present E-NSD - Def check 100, Duration 15 seconds, 3K debuff, unbreakable

Changing it so they have equal max debuffs, padding max to 3.5K to account for the unlikelihood of 100% ever being achieved and assuming a 50% AR Vs NR calculation (equal skill)

Future NSD:

Duration: Min 5s, Max 90s = 47.5s with reduction
Debuff: Min 0000, Max 3500 = 1750 with reduction
Breakable on Weapon Dmg: min 0%, max 30% = 15%
Breakable on Nano/Debuff: min 0% max 10% = 5%

Future E-NSD:

Duration: Min 5s, Max 20s. = 12.5s with reduction
Debuff: min 2000, Max 3500 = 2750 with reduction
Breakable: min 0%, Max 0% = 0%

So, the higher duration on NSD is recreated by varying the min/max duration values. The higher Def Check that followed from that on the old versions, is balanced in the new system by making it harder to reach the higher debuff value. It is breakable - but less so when NanoAR is high, so the effect of certain landing and longer duration is reduced.

With E-NSD it's much easier to get a high debuff value - but its min/max duration scale is much reduced. It is also made unbreakable as a balance to the shorter duration.

Drain Effects e.g. Trader Divest/Plunder

These could be collapsed into one line which over-writes itself on each cast, and each time they cast it, their higher NanoAR will push up the value of the debuff. It's actually quite elegant. But I think it would be better if the buff part also had a minimum and maximum to which the %age was applied. That way, their NanoAR would rise with each casting, giving a better debuff, but the Skill Buff maximum would restrict how far the NanoAR could increase.

Nukes and DoTs:

I'd personally include them in the same way. Min/Max values (as now) with the %age value applied to those min/maxes. The question of whether you then apply AC to the resulting value or not is a difficult one. Since NR is then being used as a sort of AC reduction, you could argue that other types of AC shouldn't apply. On the other hand, professions that rely on Reflect in particular would be adversely affected.

On the whole, I'd personally tend toward not applying AC after applying the NR reduction.

Perks

I'm not sure about whether you should include Perks in this system. It's clear that there will be a difference between the way NR Def check perks are handled - because FC have announced that they are removing the AAD application to the NR checked perk landing calculations.

At the same time, applying such a completely different system to a subset of perks may not be viable or even desirable. There should be some consistency across the way that all perks work imho. This one's a tough call.

Does that capture your ideas/thoughts reasonably well?

X

[Sniker]

Nano AR / Nano Def * 50 = %age of debuff effect applied.

imo there should be alot more complex formula to calculate how much effectiveness each nano has.

Nukes and DoTs:
I'd personally include them in the same way.

If it was like this, then i'd say add more nano dmg for those nukers to not gimp them too much / make them useless

Does that capture your ideas/thoughts reasonably well?

Absolutley!

(Let NT's be able to nuke ppl from other side of playfield again! :P) *joking*

[Gatester]

Give nanos with lower/weaker debuffs a lower nano resist check than the more effective ones.

Allow debuff vs NR checks to work like perks, you meet the skill it lands, you do not meet the skill it fails.

Make sure the debuff vs NR check ranges vary from 25% (should land always) to 150% (hard to land).

Include additional attack checks if needed, such as intelligence, or remove the NR effect on HHaB to ensure that attack and defense numbers can be balanced.

Add additional debuffs to fill gaps.

Nerf rage so enforcers are not completely immune to most debuffs or have a gap where they are vulnerable.

Nukes will be modified to have LOWER checks on more effective nukes, not higher. (similar to obtaining better weapons)


There, fixed, what's next?

[Xtremtech]

I dont think the point was just to 'fix' present issues. I think the point was to create a better system overall. There are many benefits to a system such as the proposed one, that you cant' replicate within the present system.

Nothing wrong with looking at new systems and completely new ideas - even if they'll probably never be implemented.

X

[Sniker]

I dont think the point was just to 'fix' present issues. I think the point was to create a better system overall. There are many benefits to a system such as the proposed one, that you cant' replicate within the present system.

Nothing wrong with looking at new systems and completely new ideas - even if they'll probably never be implemented.

X

some brainstorming from time to time does wonders =)
this is how i'd end up building a spell system or what ever casting there is or nanobots like there is here in anarchy online.

but i'd love to see it in Anarchy Online aswell, but it's probably just a dream =)

[jorricane]

You ever notice that charms have a different duration on different mobs, even ones the same level/type? Something (whether level, NR, or some random roll) modifies the base duration. AO has the capability to change the effects of a debuff to a certain extent, but the way things are right now, if you wanted UBT to have 1/2 the effect on someone with twice as much NR, they'd most likely need to code alot of "if, then" statements under each hostile debuff. However, the duration differences are already ingame and functional. I don't mind UBT landing on my thru 2k NR if it only has a 20 second duration.

[Xtremtech]

You ever notice that charms have a different duration on different mobs, even ones the same level/type?

I hadn't noticed that... I'd thought that the duration of the nano was fixed, but that Charmed Mobs have a random chance of breaking the charm, which would be a different thing.

X

[jorricane]

I hadn't noticed that... I'd thought that the duration of the nano was fixed, but that Charmed Mobs have a random chance of breaking the charm, which would be a different thing.

X

Its never below the duration listed for the charm nano, but sometimes its far, far longer. Same goes for crat calms now that I have actually been paying attention.

[Xtremtech]

I don't want to say that you're wrong, because it's been a very loong time since I played a baby crat and had a different experience. Other people with more up-to-date experience may wish to comment.

If it were the case though, I suppose it could only help...

X

[Soliartist]

No more fumbling by the way.

[mr_road]

another possibility for this...

for example, a snare nano. nano resist stops some of the snare nanobots getting through so the target is only partially snared and gets 50% of the full snare amount. the caster casts again, and a few more snare nanobots get through, and the snare amount gets increased a bit (say 60%). cast again, and the target is snared by 70% of the full snare amount.

the stacked effects percentage would probably need to be limited to a certain amount depending on nano AR to nano resist amount.

docs could multi casts UBT and get an increased init debuff each time.

roots could have their duration increased on each cast... but would require the durations to be significantly reduced first (like the proposed changes). the other option is for roots to be changed to strong snares instead of actual roots.