Topic
Resilience Scaling <Math included>
|
I don't really know what forum to put this in.
Right now, I think that the way resilience works is broken. The problem that arises, is that the more resilience that you stack, the more each individual point of resilience is worth. The current iteration of resilience, is that for every 100 or so rating, you gain slightly more than 1% damage reduction. In full PVP gear most classes will have somewhere between 3k and 4k resilience rating, so about 30% or 40% damage reduction. Lets create a scenario using some arbitrary numbers now. Class A hits Class B with an attack that always hits for 10k damage. Class B has 100k health, and 0 resilience. It will take class A exactly 10 hits to kill class B. If we give class B enough resilience (about 1k rating) to grant a 10% damage reduction, now class A will be hitting for only 9k. This means that it will take class A 11.11 attacks to do the same amount of damage. Therefore, we can say that the first 1k resilience provided class B with an extra 1.11 attacks. Now, if we give class B another 1k resil, for a total of 2k, class A will be hitting for 8k. In order to do the 100k of damage, class A must now hit 12.5 times. This means that second 1000 resilience rating provided protection from 1.39 attacks, a 25% increase. For a 4k resilience character, probably about average for pvp gear, the 4k resilience will provide 6.66 attacks worth of protection. That means if a toon has 4k resilience, then for each 1000 resilience rating, the benefit was 1.65 attacks. (recall that with only 1k resilience rating, the benefit was only 1.11 extra attacks) Now you might argue that this critique doesn't factor in stuff like increased damage, crit, mastery etc, but for all those ratings, the reward is either linear (each point is worth the same amount), or diminishing (the value of each individual rating point decreases the higher the total amount). Resilience is the only rating that works in this manner, which will lead to much much longer drawn out battles, and a lot of classes (especially tank classes) stacking extremely high amounts of resilience. Basically, if you increased the attacker's damage by 10% and gave the defender 10% damage reduction, this would favor the defender, and the gap by which it favors the defender would only increase the higher the ratings went. (Consider the limiting case, where attacker A has +100% damage, but defender B has 100% damage reduction). If anyone's played Warcraft 3, they might be familiar that armor originally worked the same way resilience does right now (each point of armor provided a flat 5% damage reduction), but it was later changed to the more logical approach, where each point of armor provided a 6% increase in the effective hitpoints of a unit. That meant that if a unit had 2 armor, attacks against that unit were treated as if the unit had 112% hitpoints, and attacks were adjusted proportional to that number. The result was that more armor provided the same benefit, but the % damage reduction was decreased per each point according to the formula: (armor)*0.06)/(1+0.06*(armor)). (each point of armor providing a 0.06 improvement in the effective health. In my opinion, this type of mechanic is the only way resilience can avoid this scaling issue, especially in later seasons. |
|
I imagine they're gonna be bringing in that whole scaling down stats things into each pvp tier as well, like how you are going to have to get more hit for hit cap in the next tier of raiding etc.
|
|
So down the road, resilience will get rebalanced.
Shocker. |
|
One might expect blizzard to scrap the idea of stats being downscaled each tier and instead resort to make all stat gain per rating diminish at certain threshold, like armor.
If someone is stacking certain stat to no end while disregarding all the others, then that's it's a problem by itself. |
|
I suspect that armor in WoW works the same way it did in War3, but I've never played a class where armor mattered. However, I'd be very surprised if it actually used a graduated formula, specifically tailored to diminish its value at high ratings.
|
|
Edited by Bloodsoldier on 1/14/11 7:42 PM (PST)
I couldn't say what i wanted to say without sounding like a jerk, but i can't delete my post, so meh.
|
|
It seems like damage is actually scaling insanely fast already.. soo I would assume it will actually outscale the effects of resilience next season, just wait I mean damage is already a problem for alot of classes and they dont' even have Tier 2 weapons yet.
|
|
I've already mentioned that Resilience is exponential and they need to reduce it to a linear stat.
Armor is linearized, the formula in the OP is the armor formula from Warcraft 3; replace the 0.06 with 1/26070 and you get WoW's level 85 armor formula. There is no diminishing of armor, it's linear up to 300% survivability increase (75% damage reduction) and then caps. |
|
Edited by Bredman on 1/14/11 7:46 PM (PST)
It's not possible, linear(cubic) can not out scale exponential. Linear might be stronger in the short run but once exponential wins it just increases it's lead. If you want something that out scales exponential try factorial scaling. |
|
well said |
|
Edited by Bredman on 1/14/11 7:49 PM (PST)
That's the quadratic ( stamina, armor ) vs quartic ( AP/SP, haste, crit, mastery ), 4 linear scalings = quartic, issue. Resilience will trump all though. |
Sure does not seem that way in application, Feels like everyone is gaining so much more damage but not nearly as much survivability. I mean a players survivability right now is almost tied 100% to their specs mechanics rather than resilience TBH. The cap is 60% and some players are already in 40% damage reduction, yet it still feels like their survivability is not much better than Wotlk. I can watch my warrior friends nearly global ppl in 3500 resil, granted they are in half 359 gear and weap but that's still pretty ridiculous. |
|
The primary problem here is that youve taken a stat that scales linearly, and twisted the data to make it APPEAR is if it scaled exponentially when it's still linear the whole time.
The # of resilience rating needed to get 1% damage mitigation in pvp is a flat number. It scales linearly. It has a cap of 60% mitigation, which is not going to be acheivable for a few tiers. What the original poster is doing is using math to tell a lie, and trying to pass it off as truth. If a person has 10% mitigation, and takes 90% of damage in pvp compared to a zero resilience character, then that same person goes to 20% mitigation, now taking 80% damage in pvp scenarios........... You can twist the math all you want but they still had to exactly double their resilience to get exactly double the mitigation. The benefit offered by resilience scales linearly. The relative avoidance levels when compared to each as they raise can be misrepresented as a non linear scaling but that is not the truth, it is a manipulation of data specifically skewed to support an argument which is not true. The present resilience scaling is fine, and if it trumps all other secondary stats in pvp.......... GOOD. That's the best thing that can possibly be done to ensure that pve gear is far less commonly best in slot for rated pvp. Resilience being the best stat for rated pvp is a good thing. If haste or masty or spirit were better at all gear levels for certain specs than resilience in top end rated pvp that would merely encourage raiding for gear to use in pvp all over again, which is a problem that the current implementation actually solves. It's very easy to lie with statistics. It takes a more discerning eye to recognize the misrepresentation, and the courage to say "Excuse me, that's bull****." |
|
Resilience scales that way because I suspect that damage scales the same way.
Ie, resilience has to be stronger in the next season than it is this season because damage gets stronger in the next season at a rate that is greater than the additional health/armor gained. |
|
|
the mitigation from resil scales linearly, true.
that is not the number that really concerns anyone. the number that should concern people is the effective damage that is required to kill a given target. that scales exponentially with resilience- hence the problem. |
No it scales exponentially. Armor is linear. They nerfed avoidance because parry and dodge were exponential.
No, you are the one trying to lie. So that person who blocked 10k damage now needs to take 10k more, what happens to that, they take 9k damage and need another 1k. The person who blocked 20k, needs to take another 20k more to die, what happens with that, they take 16k and are left with 4k. This continues and is why any damage reduction formula that is basic stat -> constant% is exponential. |
|
Edited by Bredman on 1/14/11 8:12 PM (PST)
Damage is not exponential, at least not since ArP was removed. Note that ArP was exponential for the very same reason that resilience is. |
