Different damage modifiers but same Health for all Monsters


#1

I want to discuss an idea that I had recently:

Here is why I think this could be a good change:
All the Monsters are easier to compare in telemetry and easier to fine tune by 0.001 damage modifier steps, rather than have to scale it in 500 armor/ health steps like it is tuned right now just to fit into armor and healthbars.
What I imagine is that the overall damage numbers for each hunter could be adapted to match, depending on the evasiveness of the monster they are facing. Like Behemoth is 40% easier to hit than Kraken, therefore all hunters deal 40% less damage or something in that direction.

Here is why I am sceptical myself:
Cabot’s damage amp would last longer against Behemoth but shorter against Wraith. I can’t decide if this would be good or bad. I also don’t know if every monster should have the same armor-health-ratio. For example MG has more armor but the same health compared to OG.

So what do you think:

  • Yes, please!
  • It’s worth a try
  • Let’s rather not
  • Hell, no!

0 voters


#2

Why is there no “Maybe” or “I don’t know” option?

Ya gave us two yes and two no options.

Although in terms of the topic I have no clue.

Math wise I dunno here.


#3

So that you have to decide :stuck_out_tongue: If you cant decide, why vote?


#4

It would just get players more confused about how much damage they are dealing.


#5

No, something like Behemoth who is the largest damage sponge in any game I’ve ever seen will need significantly more health than most Monsters, then if you standardized that for all Monsters then either every other Monster would be OP or Behemoth would be drastically UP.

If Wraith ever goes back to her assassin ways she’d need significantly lower health than all the other Monsters, if you standardized that all other Monsters would be significantly UP or Wraith would be OP.


Not to mention how much extra time coding this would require instead of making new content. It would require a complete rewrite of how Monsters currently work. Nah, just nah.

No offence I hate the idea because of its technicalities and all the problems it will create balance-wise. Especially in the forever Hunter favored meta we should be looking at reworking them and not the ones at a significant disadvantage.


#6

I hope you do realise that a 0.64 damage modifier for all Hunters combined with 16000 Health is just as defensive as a 1.00 modifier and 25000 Health, which is what it is now. In the given example he would have virtually more armor too, as 5000 / 0.64 = 7812.5 > 6000. This does not mean that I think these values should be implemented, but it means that Behemoth can be just as tanky with any amount of Health given the right damage modifier.

It does not matter if Wraith has 16000 health and recieves 2 times damage or if she has 8000 health and recieves 1 times damage. Other than Cabot’s capacity drain or wildlife damage maybe it will be exactly the same.

What exactly do you have in mind? For this to be implemented it would need to change 7 armor values, 7 health values, which as far as I am aware can be done by changing an integer in a XML file.
Regarding the damage modifier, it should be done easily by just copy-pasting it from wildlife which ALREADY has a hunter damage modifier that works just fine.

I have given the example of how it would benefit balance as it would allow the damage dealt to each monster to be easier to compare, while also allow more fine tuning, whereas now its is mostly + or - 500 Health/Armor.
Would you be so kind and provide an example on how it would create a problem, that cant be fixed by changing a simple number?

No offence but this isnt the first time you act like you only read half of what I wrote. It looks to be a habit of yours which I hate.


#7

Actually I think it would bring more clarification. Right now as an Assault you may do like 10000 damage to a Wraith and 12500 damage to a behemoth. Now how much percantage wise did you do? You may need a calculator for that if the numbers get odd.
But if all Monsters have the same values, you may see 12000 on Wraith and 8000 on Behemoth and you know immediatly:
a) You need to get better against Behemoth OR
b) Wraith needs a buff OR
c) Behemoth needs a nerf

Overall you can compare your own damage numbers better and have a better impression on how good you perform against each monster.


#8

If you want to compare your weapons damage from game to game, against different monsters then absolute value will be better.

Percentage value doesn’t offer the same benefit.


#9

How so? Just because you did more damage against Behemoth than against Wraith doesnt mean you aimed/ played better. Behemoth is naturally easier to hit and deal damage to. You may kill a Wraith with 13500 damage done but you may loose if you only do 13500 damage to Behemoth, because thats just slightly more than half of his health. You did the same absolute value but you definetly performed worse against Behemoth.


#10

Well I know nothing when it comes to balance and what not, but I feel like I’m the only that thinks it would be cool.

In class so no other comments :stuck_out_tongue:


#11

If the team composition changes, then the amount of ideal damage will change.


#12

I don’t know what you said but lets do it


#13

I actually like this idea. It’s always frusrtrated me that he end-of-match damage numbers mean basically nothing, and this would help that :smiley_cat:


#14

Hell no for me. I am not a math wiz but agree with @10shredder00 on this.
It all sounds more of a balance nightmare rather than a solution to something :S


#15

Feels like this would add a lot more code to the game.


#16

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.