Enemy Damage

[ZemX]

10 hours ago, Ultimo said:

My tests are based on a simple principle.  Since every character is going to encounter the same content, every character needs to be able to have fun DOING that content.  Squishies are going to have to fight AVs and EBs solo

 

Wrong.  Nobody NEEDS to fight anything in this game solo.  The one exception is new story missions at the ends of some arcs, but these are designed to be soloed and CAN be, by anybody.  Soloing is otherwise a choice, not a requirement.   It has never been, and hopefully never will be, a design requirement of this game that literally every character must be able to solo all content equally well, let alone at the +4 difficulty level with zero mitigation you're doing your so-called "testing" at.  The entire point of having different Archetypes is to present players with different strengths and weaknesses.  There are literally support powersets in this game that offer practically no benefit to the player themselves.   They are entirely team-focused.   Soloists don't use them.

 

Your testing isn't revealing any problem.   The game is tested every day by thousands of players.  It works.   And yes, even for soloists.  Though the people who are serious about soloing difficult content don't run up to an AV with a naked Defender or Mastermind... just sayin'

[Andreah]

Task forces are group content. They always have been, and still are. No one has to fight a TF AV/EB solo. NO ONE. We can choose to, as an option, and the game allows this, because enough people were capable of it. Clearly not the OP.  OP... please stop trying -- I don't think you're up to the task.

[Maelwys]

25 minutes ago, Andreah said:

No one has to fight a TF AV/EB solo. NO ONE. We can choose to, as an option

 

(Flashbacks to live before the "EB downgrade" option was available and my Sonic/Elec Defender's answer to coming across a surprise AV was just to summon a Shivan Decimator and slap them with a set of Warburg Nukes...)

[Andreah]

20 minutes ago, Maelwys said:

(Flashbacks to live before the "EB downgrade" option was available and my Sonic/Elec Defender's answer to coming across a surprise AV was just to summon a Shivan Decimator and slap them with a set of Warburg Nukes...)

A player has to deliberately not use any of the many means to rise to such a challenge. 

 

So, okay, you get slapped down, hard, by an AV you tried to face-roll like a melee, even though you are a defender. Instead of, after going to the hospital, or getting any of the many tough tank-like summons, or loading up on high end inspirations, or getting various accolade or START temp powers that would help, or even just changing your tactics to use your strengths against the enemy instead of parading your weakness in his face, or even GASP! turning the difficulty down a bit or getting someone to help, you go to the forums... I mean what?

[Shin Magmus]

Everyone is wrong except me.

[macskull]

To the OP: you are intentionally doing your testing in an environment that is not representative of actual gameplay and trying to use the results to drive a completely unnecessary change.

 

Here’s a counterpoint: I have soloed the ITF on multiple characters. This TF has multiple AVs and hard hitting enemies but I’ve still somehow managed to do it without dying. I was able to do this because I used all the tools at my disposal and I suggest you do the same in your future testing.

[PeregrineFalcon]

12 hours ago, Ultimo said:

If you think these browbeating, bullying tactics are going to make me stop posting my thoughts, think again.  I'll post what I like.

I am so sick of people saying this on this forum.

 

Disagreeing with you is NOT bullying. A lot of people disagreeing with you at the same time is also NOT bullying. Pointing out that you've started other threads is also NOT bullying. Pointing out that you've been making up fake numbers is also NOT bullying. Basically if someone isn't strongarming you out of your lunch money then you ain't being bullied.

 

What you're doing is getting upset that no one is agreeing with you and then crying out "I'm being bullied!" No. No, you're not.

[Bionic_Flea]

Do any critters in the wild (outside of AE) use Knock out Blow?  It's a pretty unique animation and I don't recall any critter doing it . . . other than maybe a clone of a player.

[golstat2003]

2 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I am so sick of people saying this on this forum.

 

Disagreeing with you is NOT bullying. A lot of people disagreeing with you at the same time is also NOT bullying. Pointing out that you've started other threads is also NOT bullying. Pointing out that you've been making up fake numbers is also NOT bullying. Basically if someone isn't strongarming you out of your lunch money then you ain't being bullied.

 

What you're doing is getting upset that no one is agreeing with you and then crying out "I'm being bullied!" No. No, you're not.

 

It's also midly annoying and the sort of gas lighting that happens on the internet in this day and age.

Pointing out facts and logic and having someone saying "you're bullying" is absurd to the max.

 

Few things on the internet get me annoyed, and this tactic of "debate" is one of them.

 

If the OP cares about making a point that will get people to agree then he needs to do actual real testing.

 

And yes, as others have said, no one ever said ALL the content in the game is soloable. You also have the option to turn down you difficutly or call for assistance from other players.

 

[Psyonico]

31 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:

Do any critters in the wild (outside of AE) use Knock out Blow?  It's a pretty unique animation and I don't recall any critter doing it . . . other than maybe a clone of a player.

Yes

 

Off the top of my head, some family bosses do.

[Hedgefund]

A very frequently encountered mob with KOB is the Cyclops.

[Ultimo]

  

14 hours ago, seebs said:

I think what's missing is the point where there's any kind of response to the questions or considerations people raise. Why are you doing these tests with exactly 0% resistance, for instance? Where are your defenses? Why are you in melee range on a mastermind if you're not in bodyguard mode?

As I mentioned, the point I'm making is that I think all characters should have the ability to fight back against all enemies.  Controllers, for example, might not HAVE any resistance.  There are powers they can take (eg. Tough) that would give them some, but depending on the type of damage or whether that particular Controller took the power, they might not have any resistance.  However, this is also why I need to test sturdier characters.

Another reason I'm doing things this way is to control for other variables.  In the wild, there might be damage coming from other enemies, or other attacks, or debuffs affecting damage, or what have you.  I'm trying to get clean data.

 

9 hours ago, Scarlet Shocker said:

 

 

uh... pointing out you either have an agenda or you're fixated on a particular aspect of the game is not really bullying. It's simply pointing out that you have an agenda or a particular fixation.

Um... of course I have an agenda (sort of).  I don't expect to see them change anything, but I'd kind of like it if they did.  Why else would I post?

 

5 hours ago, Luminara said:

 

Oh, so when you repeatedly make claims which are proven to be false, it's not because you're trying to promote a narrative in which the game is unfair and push this campaign to have all enemy damage nerfed so you can solo AVs with your... concept builds, it's because there's just been a slight misunderstanding... every time?

 

 

https://cod.uberguy.net/html/entity.html?entity=legacychain_serafina

 

Serafina's strongest attack only deals 1028.5941 damage, and that's at level 50 and using the AV tables, not the EB tables, but somehow, through some wild misunderstanding, she "hits (you) for 1400 damage"... on a /Elec brute with minimum 26.25 Psi Resistance... at level 36-37... 

 

 

And this report of 11,000 damage, or even the 3000 max that the AV could deal, at his max level (which you weren't fighting), if your defender had a massive pile of -Res stacked on it, that could not have occurred because you were had Steamy Mist active (20% Energy Resistance), even if the TF were set to Enemies Buffed, was a moment of confusion on someone's part, something that the rest of us somehow misread and definitely not an exaggeration?

 

And even in this very thread,

 

AE AV Level 50 KO Blow damage: 1715.5765 points of Smashing damage (all affected targets)

 

but, somehow, even with your character using Temp Invulnerability (30% Resistance Smashing/Lethal), and the enemy not having any other powers, thus not capable of stacking any -Res on you, this attack managed to deal nearly 50% more damage than the attack is actually capable of, isn't a false report on your part, it's just that none of us know how math works... or something...

 

Do you want me to keep going?  Should I pull up the original forum archives and show your posts from the old days, in which you falsify data in exactly the same way and push for exactly the same agenda, and backpedal exactly like you've done here?

 

 

Really?

Really?

I've never made claims that were wrong.  Everything I've said, all the numbers I've provided have either been straight from the combat log, were observed in damage floaties or were determined by logic (eg.  My Brute had 1400 health, so I assumed Serafina's attack did 1400 damage).  I will readily admit, and have done so, that there have been occasions when the numbers seem impossible.  Hopkins' 3000 damage punch, for example.  I've never been able to replicate it, so I can't explain it... but it did happen.  In any case, I'm done arguing about this.  If you have to call me a liar, you go ahead.

 

The numbers I've posted in this thread were taken right from the combat log.  However, what I didn't know was that the AE powers would perform differently than regular NPCs.  This is something else that needs to be addressed actually, as it's made it VERY hard to make playable AE enemies.

 

ZemX is also correct, I wasn't using Temporary Invulnerability, I was using the Invulnerability AE tool, making the character immune to damage.  The other thing I should say is, I didn't notice the enemies were +4!  Since the AE enemies aren't using the powers the regular enemies use, I can't really test with them.  I'll have to try and use an enemy I can try and standardize from.

 

4 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

Wrong.  Nobody NEEDS to fight anything in this game solo.  The one exception is new story missions at the ends of some arcs, but these are designed to be soloed and CAN be, by anybody.  Soloing is otherwise a choice, not a requirement.   It has never been, and hopefully never will be, a design requirement of this game that literally every character must be able to solo all content equally well, let alone at the +4 difficulty level with zero mitigation you're doing your so-called "testing" at.  The entire point of having different Archetypes is to present players with different strengths and weaknesses.  There are literally support powersets in this game that offer practically no benefit to the player themselves.   They are entirely team-focused.   Soloists don't use them.

 

Your testing isn't revealing any problem.   The game is tested every day by thousands of players.  It works.   And yes, even for soloists.  Though the people who are serious about soloing difficult content don't run up to an AV with a naked Defender or Mastermind... just sayin'

This is a matter of opinon, I understand that.  I think everyone needs to have a chance to fight back, because that's what the game is about.  If you disagree on this fundamental philosophy, that's fine.  I simply think otherwise.  Again though, I'm not saying everyone should be able to BEAT any enemy... just that everyone should be able to put up some kind of fight.  Excessive damage prevents even this.  Again, I didn't realize my tests were against +4s.  I'll address that.

I also realize that the game works as it is.  Lots of people play it, and have been playing it.  I don't think they'll change anything.  I'm just bringing this up for discussion to offer an alternative point of view.

 

2 hours ago, macskull said:

To the OP: you are intentionally doing your testing in an environment that is not representative of actual gameplay and trying to use the results to drive a completely unnecessary change.

 

Here’s a counterpoint: I have soloed the ITF on multiple characters. This TF has multiple AVs and hard hitting enemies but I’ve still somehow managed to do it without dying. I was able to do this because I used all the tools at my disposal and I suggest you do the same in your future testing.

Ya, I realize testing in the AE isn't exactly the same is in the wild, but I'm trying to control the conditions, as I mentioned.  It is a valid confound though.

 

48 minutes ago, Bionic_Flea said:

Do any critters in the wild (outside of AE) use Knock out Blow?  It's a pretty unique animation and I don't recall any critter doing it . . . other than maybe a clone of a player.

I'm not sure.  I chose it for testing because it's on the high side for damage, and I need to consider the extremes.  However, AE powers are apparently not appropriate for this purpose.

 

19 minutes ago, golstat2003 said:

 

It's also midly annoying and the sort of gas lighting that happens on the internet in this day and age.

Pointing out facts and logic and having someone saying "you're bullying" is absurd to the max.

 

Few things on the internet get me annoyed, and this tactic of "debate" is one of them.

 

If the OP cares about making a point that will get people to agree then he needs to do actual real testing.

 

And yes, as others have said, no one ever said ALL the content in the game is soloable. You also have the option to turn down you difficutly or call for assistance from other players.

 

I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me.  Saying I've posted before isn't disagreeing with me, it's browbeating.  It's talking about ME and not talking about the subject at hand (the testing I'm doing).

 

I'm trying to do some real testing.  That's the reason for this thread.  I've taken the numbers from the combat log under controlled conditions, and posted them here so people can identify any confounding factors I might have missed (such as the +4 level, which I hadn't noticed).  Discussing the tests, even disagreeing with my results, I have NO problem with.

 

It seems, however, that my tests need to be done again with a regular NPC, since AE numbers aren't reflective of the NPCs in the wild.

 

 

 

[Luminara]

4 hours ago, ZemX said:

His AE numbers in this thread, unlike his wild AV fight numbers of yore, actually make sense.  They match exactly the damage you'd take with zero smashing resistance at level 50 vs a +4 enemy (level 54 damage number x 1.44 for purple patch).

 

Under ordinary circumstances, I'd retract that part of my post, state that I was wrong and apologize... but this doesn't disprove what it I'm saying, it emphasizes it.  Note the lack of the enemy levels in the first post.  He started with a plan to "prove" that enemy damage is excessive, set up a test environment that he could use to demonstrate his "point", deliberately withheld information that might be used to counter his predetermined conclusion, and jumped on the soapbox.

 

That is his modus operandi to a tee.  He's been campaigning to have enemy damage nerfed since he started posting on the old forums in 2006, and it's always gone down this way.  And it's not because he engages in bad faith arguments, he actually believes there's a problem, but because the "problem" is his concept builds which are incapable of performing above -1/x1, slots them in the most abysmal ways, the self-defeating tactics he uses and his denial that the problem is on his end.

 

I've seen him go through exactly the same motions in more threads than I want to remember.  He presents faulty "evidence" which fails to pass the most basic falsifiability tests, and backs it up with "Trust me, bro!".  When asked for screenshots or combat logs, "Trust me, bro!" again, even though he'll try to bolster his position by saying that he checked the combat logs.  When asked for details, he's evasive.  When people point out that damage can been mitigated in a variety of ways, including avoided, he refuses to even address it.  When confronted about discrepancies, or even what's possible in the game, he accuses others of bad behavior.  When he's incapable of defending a statement, he says, "Well, some of you apparently know a little more about the game than I do, so it's possible that things might not have gone that way, but I'm not saying that I was mistaken, just that I may have misremembered."

 

And when he's backed himself into a corner, when he's let it slip that some of the factors in question weren't as he portrayed them to be, and has nothing left, he drops his "You're missing the point!  It's not about who's right or wrong, enemies deal too much damage!" bomb, because that's the agenda.  Adapting the game to his poor build strategies, bad tactics and questionable judgement so he doesn't have to adapt to it.

 

So while I laud your impartiality and willingness to believe, I don't share it.  I've been down this road often enough to know all of the landmarks and the destination.

 

And he posted while I was typing this up.  Exactly the kind of response I outlined three paragraphs above.  Welcome to 2006.

[Frunobulax]

I always feel bad for Hopkins so I hope he reads this thread and starts strutting around for a bit until the next batch of alts show up to humiliate him at work.

 

 

 

 

[Andreah]

5 minutes ago, Frunobulax said:

I always feel bad for Hopkins so I hope he reads this thread and starts strutting around for a bit until the next batch of alts show up to humiliate him at work.

 

 

 

 

We should have more empathy for a dedicated and loyal employee who's fired for what is really no fault of his own.

[PeregrineFalcon]

35 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

  I've never made claims that were wrong.

You're a lying liar who's lying.

 

There, is that clear enough for you? Either post some screenshots of these damage numbers or you're lying. Period.

 

Go ahead and report my post. It's ok, I'm used to it.

[tidge]

20 minutes ago, Luminara said:

That is his modus operandi to a tee.  He's been campaigning to have enemy damage nerfed since he started posting on the old forums in 2006, and it's always gone down this way.  And it's not because he engages in bad faith arguments, he actually believes there's a problem, but because the "problem" is his concept builds which are incapable of performing above -1/x1, slots them in the most abysmal ways, the self-defeating tactics he uses and his denial that the problem is on his end.

 

I feel like the "self-defeating tactics" doesn't get enough air time.

[Scarlet Shocker]

39 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

 

Um... of course I have an agenda (sort of).  I don't expect to see them change anything, but I'd kind of like it if they did.  Why else would I post?

 

 

 

 

Thank you. I understand now.

 

Your quest to be Homecoming's very own Golden Girl seems to have been achieved!

 

Congratulations

[Maelwys]

5 minutes ago, Scarlet Shocker said:

 

 

Thank you. I understand now.

 

Your quest to be Homecoming's very own Golden Girl seems to have been achieved!

 

Congratulations

 

😉

[macskull]

54 minutes ago, Ultimo said:

.Controllers, for example, might not HAVE any resistance.  There are powers they can take (eg. Tough) that would give them some, but depending on the type of damage or whether that particular Controller took the power, they might not have any resistance.

Controllers? One of the two ATs with a powerset that is entirely designed around preventing enemies from attacking to begin with? A CC’d enemy does zero damage.

 

[ZemX]

37 minutes ago, Luminara said:

So while I laud your impartiality and willingness to believe, I don't share it.  I've been down this road often enough to know all of the landmarks and the destination.

 

Yeah, don't worry.   There's no willingness to believe him.  I was just clarifying his point about "invulnerability" in AE.   As I said, he's still barking up the wrong tree on soloability.  Even if he adjusts his "Testing" back to +0 difficulty, he's still going to run at the AV with no armor, no insps, and no plan probably, achieving the same results.

 

Mostly this argument is for the benefit of others reading.  I'd hate for some newcomer to the game to happen upon this and actually believe any of it.

 

And as far as that goes, we've probably all made the points we intended to make.  Until next time!

[SeraphimKensai]

Just wanted to get one more post in before this thread goes further off the rails.

[Skyhawke]

1 hour ago, tidge said:

 

I feel like the "self-defeating tactics" doesn't get enough air time.

 

Sounds like my early 20s. 

 

1 hour ago, Andreah said:

We should have more empathy for a dedicated and loyal employee who's fired for what is really no fault of his own.

 

 

I always assume that when ( I mean, let's be honest, Crey has a butt ton of lawyers) he and the Countess walk out free, she rehires him and makes him sign an NDA to never talk about her also getting her head handed to her. 

[arcane]

this got spicy

[Scarlet Shocker]

1 hour ago, Scarlet Shocker said:

 

 

Thank you. I understand now.

 

Your quest to be Homecoming's very own Golden Girl seems to have been achieved!

 

Congratulations

 

Actually I feel like I should apologize to Golden Girl - I had a lot of respect for her on live because of her sheer dedication to the game and community even if she could sometimes be a bit... single minded.