Enemy Damage

[Ultimo]

So, the subject came up in another thread, and I didn't want to derail it again with this discussion, so I'm starting a new one.

 

To be clear, I do NOT expect anything in the game to change.  It's been this way far too long to change it now.  On the other hand, I would not oppose a change, I even recommend it.  The idea here is to discuss what I see as an issue with enemy damage output.

 

It began in the Manticore TF, when my Defender was instantly wiped out in one attack by the AV Hopkins.  He did over 3000 damage with one punch, which was more than THREE TIMES my character's maximum health.  That was a bit of an aberration, I'm not sure how he got his damage that high... but then I started doing some testing in the AE.

 

My premise is that enemies should never do so much damage that they immediately defeat the character.  It doesn't matter if it's one attack or two attacks, if there's no opportunity to fight back... it amounts to the same thing.  Enemies doing so much damage means there's no GAME, because the players can't DO anything (except run away, if they get the chance).

 

To test damage, I created an AE mission, and created a Minion, Lieutenant, Boss, Elite Boss and Arch Villian, all with only ONE power: KO Blow.  I then entered the mission with my Mastermind (he has 803.2 health at L50), turned on Invulnerability and let each of them hit me to see how much damage they did.  Here's what I found.

 

The Minion hit me for 555.3 damage.

The Lieutenant did 832.95 damage.

The Boss did 1388.26 damage.

The Elite Boss did 1943.57 damage.

The Arch Villain did 2498.88 damage.

 

ALL of these are excessive.  If anything but a minion hit the character with this attack, the fight is over, guaranteed.  He'd be left with 1 health, unless he had already taken even 1 damage from jumping, or some other attack.  A second attack would likely already be on its way, so there is no FIGHT here.  Every one of these is doing several times the character's MAXIMUM health.

 

Years ago, I ran a Champions pen and paper game, and came to the realization that most of the enemies published for the game were unusuable for exactly this reason.  They were capable of taking out the heroes before the heroes could make any kind of a fight out of the encounter.  It was NO FUN.  Even if you're sure to lose, the fun is in the fighting back.  My solution there was to scale back the damage output of the enemies, so they did only as much or slightly more than the heroes were capable of themselves.  I then added a pile of health to them, so the fights would last longer, giving the heroes the chance to fight, but the enemy the durability to threaten them.  It WORKED.

 

This principle seems to exist in this game, even.  There is an AV called Barracuda who seems to follow this scheme.

I did some testing, and found that most AVs (spawned as EBs) had attacks that did as much as 700 damage in one hit, and a minimum of 200.  This meant that two hits was all that was needed to take out almost any character, which means there's NO FIGHT.  The hero either runs away after the first hit (if he can), or he's defeated on the next one.

Barracuda was different.  Her attacks ranged from around 100-150 damage.  This made them HURT, but it wasn't enough to prevent me trying to fight back... and she was likely to win because she had many times my health.  Fighting her was FUN, even if I was at a disadvantage, because I was able to DO things.  Not so with Hopkins, Vandal, or ANY of the others.

 

Again, I don't think anything is going to change... but it seems to me the damage scaling is way out of whack.  I thought this in the past, too.  I'd suggest examining damage output, to see if a better balance could be found, but I'm interested to see if anyone agrees with me.

 

What does the community think of these numbers?  Do they think they're appropriate?  Have they any ideas that might help correct the imbalance?

I'm just curious, really.

[arcane]

Your post implies the game is too difficult when the opposite is closer to the truth. So, no, can’t agree with you here.

[FupDup]

There's a few variables here that are being overlooked, namely the level of defense and resistance that the player can have. A squishy hero like a Defender capped at 75% resistance would only take 750 damage from that Hopkins 3K giga punch, which would still hit most Fenders pretty hard but it would be survivable. And at the defense softcap, only 5% of enemy attacks will hit you. A lot of these NPC damage values seem to be assuming that you have a certain degree of protection built up. 

 

I understand that not all ATs and powerset combos can achieve uber high def/res values easily, but even then the game's current meta largely revolves around maximizing DPS and -res debuffs to delete baddies as rapidly as possible. In such an environment, globally reducing NPC damage would make building for maximum deeps even more of a no-brainer due to reducing the consequence of going all-in on offense. In the current meta I think defensive building needs more incentive/reward rather than less. 

 

Maybe this could be something to smooth out if we ever got to a point where MOAR DAMAGE wasn't the name of the game, but we're pretty far away from that and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

Edited August 23 by FupDup

[PeregrineFalcon]

39 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

ALL of these are excessive.  If anything but a minion hit the character with this attack, the fight is over, guaranteed.

I disagree with you now for the exact same reason that I disagreed with you in the last thread. There is a reason that Tanks frequently call non-tanks "squishies." Your Defender cannot tank as well as a Tank can. Your Defender is a squishy. You got squished because that's what happens when squishies get within melee range of AVs.

 

Without high damage numbers characters will never feel threatened, and players will never feel that they've accomplished something just by surviving.

 

42 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

Do they think they're appropriate?  Have they any ideas that might help correct the imbalance?

Yes, I think these numbers are entirely appropriate.

 

My idea to help correct this "imbalance" is for you to invite a Tank to your team.

[Doomguide2005]

     I think 99.9% of the time they are fine.  And exceptions (if any) are usually and often compounded by tactical error on the part of the player (at least that's what will usually take me out so fast I'm left momentarily going wtf!).  Defenders solo(?) (leveling and not IO'd etc.) vs an AV at ~35th level is a very risky proposition.  3000 damage sounds like you were debuffed (or he was not a +0 version or both).  His hardest hitting attack, Total Focus, does a base of about 1750 damage well short of 3000 per CoD).  And while I've no idea of the power sets involved I'm guessing he didn't do 3000 damage with a ranged attack.  Smells like at least two or three tactical errors already.  No favorable buffs or debuffs, you got debuffed or otherwise effected and didn't realize it (stunned?) and you were subject to a melee attack.  My own Defenders even my IOd out exemplared level 50s (who like and are built to be in melee) would avoid melee range of an AV especially an up level one while solo or teamed without a very good reason.

[Snarky]

I agree.  We should immediately move all enemies damage down 50%.  Just for a test period

 

In unrelated news as soon as we implement this I will be leading a lot of “Master of” and 4 star content.   O.  Yeah.

[Techwright]

21 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I disagree with you now for the exact same reason that I disagreed with you in the last thread. There is a reason that Tanks frequently call non-tanks "squishies." Your Defender cannot tank as well as a Tank can. Your Defender is a squishy. You got squished because that's what happens when squishies get within melee range of AVs.

 

squishies, squishy, squished, squishies...um, are we suppose to have our shot glasses ready before reading this?

[Doomguide2005]

17 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I disagree with you now for the exact same reason that I disagreed with you in the last thread. There is a reason that Tanks frequently call non-tanks "squishies." Your Defender cannot tank as well as a Tank can. Your Defender is a squishy. You got squished because that's what happens when squishies get within melee range of AVs.

 

Without high damage numbers characters will never feel threatened, and players will never feel that they've accomplished something just by surviving.

 

Yes, I think these numbers are entirely appropriate.

 

My idea to help correct this "imbalance" is for you to invite a Tank to your team.

And or use an immobilize and stay at range.  And just to be clear:  No, an AV, even a +0 one, will have better than a 5% chance to hit you do to accuracy mods (both for being an AV and possibly for being uplevel).

[TheMoneyMaker]

You put a high damage attack on all enemy types to see how it would fare.  It was Knockout Blow, of course even at minion level damage it's going to hurt.  But those attacks come less frequently in regular attack chains and yes --although more powerful critters can one-shot player squishies-- it's normal and to be expected that you might get randomly taken down by a powerful hit.  Work on your defense for weaker critters attacks, and make sure the more powerful ones are focused on someone else.  This was normal and expected in the old days, and meant to encourage teaming.  Sorry if your defender isn't soloing AVs.  Even if some people can, that shouldn't be the norm.

[PeregrineFalcon]

17 minutes ago, Techwright said:

squishies, squishy, squished, squishies...um, are we suppose to have our shot glasses ready before reading this?

Your squishy squishies will be squished.

 

Take a shot!

[Frozen Burn]

1 hour ago, Ultimo said:

So, the subject came up in another thread, and I didn't want to derail it again with this discussion, so I'm starting a new one.

 

To be clear, I do NOT expect anything in the game to change.  It's been this way far too long to change it now.  On the other hand, I would not oppose a change, I even recommend it.  The idea here is to discuss what I see as an issue with enemy damage output.

 

It began in the Manticore TF, when my Defender was instantly wiped out in one attack by the AV Hopkins.  He did over 3000 damage with one punch, which was more than THREE TIMES my character's maximum health.  That was a bit of an aberration, I'm not sure how he got his damage that high... but then I started doing some testing in the AE.

 

My premise is that enemies should never do so much damage that they immediately defeat the character.  It doesn't matter if it's one attack or two attacks, if there's no opportunity to fight back... it amounts to the same thing.  Enemies doing so much damage means there's no GAME, because the players can't DO anything (except run away, if they get the chance).

 

To test damage, I created an AE mission, and created a Minion, Lieutenant, Boss, Elite Boss and Arch Villian, all with only ONE power: KO Blow.  I then entered the mission with my Mastermind (he has 803.2 health at L50), turned on Invulnerability and let each of them hit me to see how much damage they did.  Here's what I found.

 

The Minion hit me for 555.3 damage.

The Lieutenant did 832.95 damage.

The Boss did 1388.26 damage.

The Elite Boss did 1943.57 damage.

The Arch Villain did 2498.88 damage.

 

ALL of these are excessive.  If anything but a minion hit the character with this attack, the fight is over, guaranteed.  He'd be left with 1 health, unless he had already taken even 1 damage from jumping, or some other attack.  A second attack would likely already be on its way, so there is no FIGHT here.  Every one of these is doing several times the character's MAXIMUM health.

 

Years ago, I ran a Champions pen and paper game, and came to the realization that most of the enemies published for the game were unusuable for exactly this reason.  They were capable of taking out the heroes before the heroes could make any kind of a fight out of the encounter.  It was NO FUN.  Even if you're sure to lose, the fun is in the fighting back.  My solution there was to scale back the damage output of the enemies, so they did only as much or slightly more than the heroes were capable of themselves.  I then added a pile of health to them, so the fights would last longer, giving the heroes the chance to fight, but the enemy the durability to threaten them.  It WORKED.

 

This principle seems to exist in this game, even.  There is an AV called Barracuda who seems to follow this scheme.

I did some testing, and found that most AVs (spawned as EBs) had attacks that did as much as 700 damage in one hit, and a minimum of 200.  This meant that two hits was all that was needed to take out almost any character, which means there's NO FIGHT.  The hero either runs away after the first hit (if he can), or he's defeated on the next one.

Barracuda was different.  Her attacks ranged from around 100-150 damage.  This made them HURT, but it wasn't enough to prevent me trying to fight back... and she was likely to win because she had many times my health.  Fighting her was FUN, even if I was at a disadvantage, because I was able to DO things.  Not so with Hopkins, Vandal, or ANY of the others.

 

Again, I don't think anything is going to change... but it seems to me the damage scaling is way out of whack.  I thought this in the past, too.  I'd suggest examining damage output, to see if a better balance could be found, but I'm interested to see if anyone agrees with me.

 

What does the community think of these numbers?  Do they think they're appropriate?  Have they any ideas that might help correct the imbalance?

I'm just curious, really.

 

As others stated, You aren't taking into account other variables:  a player's defenses and resistances, and debuffs to the foes.  Additionally, your testing is flawed as I am sure you didn't have your minions out, or were in bodyguard mode where you get more HPs from your minions, and I'm sure you weren't doing anything to buff yourself or debuff the foes.  Raw damage numbers will look inflated to account for all those variables.  If you walk up to enemies as if you were a random citizen, you'd get pummeled as expected.

 

You also only tested using a single high-power melee attack that is rarely seen by most players from foes.  It's a specialized attack that is supposed to be that high.  Testing a more common high-power attack would be more prudent - but then you also have to test the lower end with the weakest attack.... which you didn't. 

 

Also, as others have stated, Squishies will get squished and are supposed to squish when doing something so stupid as to get close enough to damage without support from being squished (drink your shots!).  That is why there are armored ATs and aggro-managing ATs that you are supposed to team with - or you have to embrace the challenge and rush of not dying while being ready to suffer the consequences.

 

As you know, people are already screaming the game is too easy - how does scaling back enemy damage help that?  It doesn't.  It makes the game way TOO easy and we'd lose even more players seeking their challenges elsewhere.

 

[Captain Fabulous]

As others have stated, this is the point of resistances, defense, controls, and debuffs -- to reduce incoming damage to manageable levels. Not all characters are going to have an easy time soloing due to a lack of damage mitigation. It's just how it goes sometimes. It doesn't mean anything is broken or needs to be fixed.

[Psyonico]

I think my issue with damage is not the 1-time hit and do a bunch of damage, it's the DoTs that hit really hard that bother me, because they avoid the anti-one-shot code.

 

These seem to be more rare, so I'm not complaining about them, just saying that is a bigger issue than the Total Focus/Knockout Blow/Energy Transfer powers.

[Ukase]

Without piling on, I have a question of my own. My understanding was the Paragon Dev team had instituted some policy or code or whatever to prevent players from being defeated in 1 shot (although I'm pretty sure the Minotaur didn't play by that rule with his gobsmacking 6k worth of damage, lol). 

Maybe the rule changed? Or perhaps there are exceptions to the rule. 

 

[Ultimo]

Thanks to all for the considered responses.  However, I think a significant point is being overlooked.  An enemy like Barracuda is a threat to both squishies and tanks, because while her damage is lower, she can sustain it longer because of her durability.  Against her, ANY character can at least make an attempt to fight back, whether squishy or not.  Against most other AVs, this is not the case.  If you can't make any effort to fight back, there's no GAME to play.

 

The argument, "get a tank," is unproductive, because most of us are soloing most of the time.

Resistances and such do help, but not much.  Having 75% resistance is meaningless if you're still taking 700 damage and you have 800 health.  The next hit still defeats you, so there's no fighting back.

Just "keeping back" also doesn't help much of the time.  I made a Mastermind and tested him in the AE against his "nemesis."  The nemesis threw a boulder at him (Hurl) and did about 70% of his health in one shot.  So, I kept back, and let his bots fight.  They needed healing, so I moved close enough to do that, and took another Hurl, and was instantly defeated.  There wasn't anything I could do but NOT BE THERE... which again, means there's no game.  Fighting the enemy is the game, for all ATs.  If you can't do it, there's no game.

 

However, I'll do another test, this time with a Tanker, and post the results for evaluation.

 

Again, I appreciate the discussion!

[Ukase]

4 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

The argument, "get a tank," is unproductive, because most of us are soloing most of the time.

As someone who solo's more often than not, I feel I should suggest that you not use this as an argument. I get it - I do! But, there are so many players that are begging for teams, it seems kind of pointless to pursue a soloist argument. I could certainly be wrong, but the HC devs are still allowing us to start TFs solo, and do all manner of things solo - but I don't see them switching the AVs to EBs just for us. And I know you didn't ask for that - just asking for a second look at the damage. 

That by itself is a fair request. But I do think it's working as intended. Although I think you should have been left with at least 1 hitpoint. Maybe there is something screwy going on. 

[Glacier Peak]

No, there's plenty of tools for players to use to mitigate enemy damage. 

[Snarky]

24 minutes ago, Ukase said:

Without piling on, I have a question of my own. My understanding was the Paragon Dev team had instituted some policy or code or whatever to prevent players from being defeated in 1 shot (although I'm pretty sure the Minotaur didn't play by that rule with his gobsmacking 6k worth of damage, lol). 

Maybe the rule changed? Or perhaps there are exceptions to the rule. 

 

but the OP specifically addressed this.  (leading me to believe he was NOT one-shotted.  because you cannot be. and because the way the issue was mentioned) 

 

The OP does not want any player defeated without some type of reasonable ability to respond.  Quote "My premise is that enemies should never do so much damage that they immediately defeat the character.  It doesn't matter if it's one attack or two attacks, if there's no opportunity to fight back... it amounts to the same thing.  Enemies doing so much damage means there's no GAME, because the players can't DO anything (except run away, if they get the chance)."

 

Now I was getting hammered with my Dark Dark Blaster in a 1 star LGTF about a week ago.  So many times 1) enemy teleports me 2) I am confused 3) I take a break free 4) i am dead.  It was an assembly line for a while.  They had it down.  I had to do something, so.... I stopped playing like a fire Blaster lol.  Or i suppose, i could have come here and demanded the Devs change the enemies.

Edited August 23 by Snarky

[Jiro Ito]

I just wanted to point out, AE npcs have the player-version of powers, not the in-game enemy version of the powers, and they typically run stronger.  Comparing AE enemies to standard enemies isn't apples-to-apples.

 

Also, isn't knockout blow one of the highest damage powers in the game?  Enemies with knockout blow should be wrecking players, especially defenders.

[Hedgefund]

If OP thought Hopkins was bad, I look forward to them being able to defeat Hopkins to hear their thoughts on the next fight (I'll stay spoiler free for this tf we've all done 250 times).

[ZemX]

2 hours ago, Ultimo said:

What does the community think of these numbers?

 

Same thing I thought last two times you posted them.  Your numbers are at best exaggerated and at worst fabricated.  Hopkins can't do 3000 damage in one punch.  We've been through this math with you already.  Can he still nearly one shot you if you are a Defender with no energy resistance whatsoever?  Yeah.

 

But really, we don't need to delve into the math.  There's no point, since you just ignored it anyway last time.

 

The best argument against your idea that "there's no game" is that...uh... there IS a game.  We're playing it.  We're playing the heck out of it.  And most anyone playing will tell you more often than not, it's a pretty EASY game too.  So I am not sure what else to tell you.   Your numbers are off, but I could at least get to maybe 75% of your damage numbers if I soloed AVs on a Defender at +4 difficulty.   But I am not sure that's much of a point.   That's not SUPPOSED to work.  The game was not originally balanced around ANYBODY soloing AVs, even though this is now possible even on ATs traditionally not considered good soloists.  But also not without some serious build work and tactics.

 

Ultimately (no pun intended) there are difficulty settings so you can find the level that suits you.   For sure, there are few if any issues with an MM, a Defender, or really anybody soloing at +0/x0, no AVs in normal content.  But even those missions with downgraded AVs to EBs will usually recommend you bring some friends.  The original game balance around SOs, which even Homecoming has not altered, was built around the notion a solo hero should be able to handle at least around 3 minions or 2 minions and a Lt, solo, at once, and this is where you will be in most cases with +0/x0 difficulty.  

 

tl;dr: There's nothing to change because nothing is wrong.

[ZemX]

11 minutes ago, Jiro Ito said:

I just wanted to point out, AE npcs have the player-version of powers, not the in-game enemy version of the powers, and they typically run stronger.  Comparing AE enemies to standard enemies isn't apples-to-apples.

 

I wondered about this.  CoD seems to have listed "MissionMaker" powersets.  Is this not where AE enemies get their powers?  e.g. https://cod.uberguy.net./html/power.html?power=mission_maker_attacks.super_strength.knockout_blow&at=boss_grunt

 

 

So this is a 54 boss.  If he's +4 to you then you can multiply this up by 1.44 to get 1388 which is exactly what OP claims he was being hit for by the boss.  So he's soloing +4 with no smashing resistance at all.  Don't know what he expects.  Soloing at +4 difficulty is something nobody should expect to easily do on SOs, if at all.  Game wasn't balanced for that and, in my opinion, shouldn't be.

 

You want to solo harder difficulty and AVs and all?  Get out Mid's and your wallet and visit the Auction House.

[Luminara]

31 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

The Minion hit me for 555.3 damage.

The Lieutenant did 832.95 damage.

The Boss did 1388.26 damage.

The Elite Boss did 1943.57 damage.

The Arch Villain did 2498.88 damage.

 

ALL of these are excessive.  If anything but a minion hit the character with this attack, the fight is over, guaranteed.

 

How much damage did you take when you used your support secondary?  How much when you were in Bodyguard mode?  How much when the enemy ignored you and attacked one of your henches instead?  How much when you used inspirations, or base buffs, or amplifiers, or temp powers?  How much when you pressed a movement key to put some distance between your character and the scary bad guy with melee attacks?

I remember you doing the same things, performing the same warped "tests", trying to use the same flawed arguments, and even playing the same deliberately badly built Marvel and DC rip-offs... sorry, "homages", with your best attacks skipped and damage mitigation powers skipped and more pool powers than primaries/secondaries, as far back as 2006.

 

3 hours ago, Ultimo said:

I'm just curious, really.

 

No you aren't.  You're pressing an agenda that never gained any traction on the original forums, with the same shady tactics, and won't gain traction here.  You've had 18 years to learn and improve, and all of the improvements Homecoming has made to the game.  Move forward.

[WumpusRat]

Isn't this just a rehash of the previous thread? It's literally the same argument, with the same AV, the same AT being played, etc.

 

So after getting shot down in that one, he just reposted it hoping for a better outcome?

[PeregrineFalcon]

1 hour ago, Ultimo said:

The argument, "get a tank," is unproductive, because most of us are soloing most of the time.

Most of us?

 

How did you determine this? Did you run an in game poll? Did the devs give you metrics? How do you know that "most of us" are soloing most of the time? Let's be honest. You just made that shit up. Didn't you?

 

Look, I'm not trying to argue semantics. This statement of yours goes directly to the heart of this issue that you're having. The fact is that this is an MMO. This MMO has different classes. Classes which are specifically designed to have different levels of durability. Tanks are specifically designed to be more durable than all of the other classes, Defenders are not. You seem to be misunderstanding the entire basis of the game mechanics in this game. The change that you're suggesting would literally fly in the face of the way the entire game is designed to function. The classes, the taunt mechanic, the entire Defender class' goal of keeping the tank alive, all of it.

 

Honestly it sounds to me like you should just go play a different game.