Talk:Armor

In my opinion, listing the Armor Soak as a range in the table is misleading and makes comparing and calculating the actual effects of those values more difficult. Twitchdrak (talk) 00:11, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

That is how they are listed in game and by the developers. Can you show an alternative formulation that you think is more readable? I think we might be able to have a more algebraic treatment of a bunch of these topics in similar articles to the ones you've already created. It's possible some groups will find one expression more readable than the other and vice versa.

The trouble for me is that I cannot quickly verify the truth of statements when they are expressed in a format that varies significantly from what the developers express on forums and in the game. For what it is worth, I was able to verify that your prior changes matched my previous understanding of how armor worked... until this morning when I learned that both you and I had incorrect information.

In short, I've gotta keep the primary pages in the same formatting as the developers for ease of maintenance. I'm sorry. :( Thebv0 (talk) 01:39, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, I think you were actually referring to the tables at the bottom. Those are now auto-populated by game data, which is a big win for maintainability. I have nothing to do with the formatting of those. If you or I were to make changes to them, our changes would be overwritten on the next auto-import. Thebv0 (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Ohh.. I was referring to the ones at the bottom. Yeah, the problem is that piercing attacks are very different from the stats shown in a non-intuitive way. TBH, given the mechanics presented on this page, the display format I'd like to see is listing the Range (like 1-12) then instead of the concept of thinking of an attack being "piercing", approach it from the ide of "deflection" and add the extra deflection bonus into the listing (like 1-12%, + 12% if deflected). I guess you could write it like "13-24%, -12% if pierced", if you really want to keep the concept of piercing.

But frankly, I think the idea of armor soaking a percentage isn't a very good mechanic. Armor should be a flat damage reduction, so that heavy armor can stop light weapons without feeling a thing (as should happen - a little knife is completely stopped by good armor)... Non-physical should be the proportional reduction option, since non-physical damage comes from abilities, and they should always provide a little damage (with exceptions for immunities; ie 100% resistance)...

Well, I'll be honest, the more I see changing in this game, the less I'm interested in the direction the developers are going (this is, of course, just my opinion and taste perhaps)... I appreciate the development of content, but the game mechanics seem to be getting less and less meaningful and more imbalanced. For instance, giving percentage bonusses to dice pools is completely broken with large dice pools - remember, it only takes 1 success to make a difference, so proportionally increasing the pool disproportionately increases the differences and creates imbalances: For example, if I have 100 defense dice, and my opponent has 110 attack dice, then his +10% Attack Buff and my +10% defense buffs aren't equivalent and don't counter each other despite that being the intuitive interpretation... And at these levels, something like a +25% buff almost means instant win (25 extra dice to get ONE success with, yeah - gonna happen every time...)

I'm all for intricate and nuanced mechanics, but when you do that, you need to make sure that the nuances matter (otherwise they aren't nuances, they're just clutter) and you need to make sure the mechanics and rules are clear and information is readily available (so people can create strategies and theories based on good data). These developers seem to be missing both these points more and more, so it's unlikely I'll be bothering with this game going forward. Anyways, there's my ramblings and two cents, I'm honestly pretty much giving up on this game unless I see some real shifts to balance fundamental mechanics, so I'll leave you to do as you wish with the wiki. As for mechanics you can't update/confirm, please feel free to move them to a separate page when necessary, then link it as a guide/discussion... Twitchdrak (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

--Fallenadmin (talk) 03:28, 6 May 2019 (UTC) Thanks for the feedback! These aren't changes to the game mechanics, just corrections to the wiki. Sorry you dislike the direction and happy gaming out there!