PDA

View Full Version : Will Health numbers get adjusted before release out of beta?



ApollosBow
7th Feb 2015, 06:11
I mean how the Vamps have 1000 Health and the humans 1050, very low priority i know, but bit weird to look at and think "humans have more health than vamps?"

So basically my question is will humans get 5% reduction in Health and Vamp get 5% reduction in Dmg before coming out of Open Beta? just wondering...

-Konf-
7th Feb 2015, 07:13
Numbers can and will change only if it is needed from a balance perspective. Reducing Human's health pool by X% and compensating for that by reducing Vampire damage by Y% can potentially have far more severe consequence than it looks on paper.

Here is a very simple, but effective example:
Summoner hits for 190 with her melee attacks. It will take her 7 melee hits to kill a Human with 1050 health. Now let's reduce attack value and health pool by 5%. Summoner that now hits for 180 (190 - 9.5) will need 6 melee attacks to kill a Human with 1000 heath. As you can see, despite it looking straightforward on paper it can affect math in many subtle ways, both good and bad (because small fractions of health do matter in this game).

Numbers shouldn't be changed from a "makes sense" point of view. There was a thread by a new player where he was complaining that this game has no logic in its design by comparing health pools of an Alchemist and a Tyrant. He was wondering that how is that a massive strong Vampire that is at least twice as big and durable as a frail woman has only 300 more HP? Makes sense, right? Should we give Tyrants 1800 HP to fit their size and also make them hit for 300 because it "makes sense"? I'm pretty sure everyone will say a definite "no, thanks" to that.

I'm open to the idea of numbers changing, but it will require a lot of careful re-balancing. And I think currently it's easier to work around the model that we have in game instead of re-designing it all and adjusting numbers to make sure balance stays the same for the sake of "making sense". If anything, that should be the very last touch to the game, once it's all mapped out.

Ghosthree3
7th Feb 2015, 08:19
I don't understand the point. There's nothing wrong with unrounded numbers if there's a good reason for it.

Da_Wolv
7th Feb 2015, 09:23
I don't understand the point. There's nothing wrong with unrounded numbers if there's a good reason for it.

I think he might refer to Vampires having a disadvantage because of it?
Forgetting of course to mention how the Tyrant has significantly more HP and all vampires have a passive regen of health when out of combat while humans don't.

TBH I don't really get the point of this threat.
Balance will constantly be in flux as new things come to light and new content stirrs up the meta- and the health of specific classes will be subjected to it; but flat-out saying "fix?" health disparities seems completely besides the point.

Psyonix_Corey
7th Feb 2015, 15:47
I can see why it's "weird" when you compare Health values. We could have made vampires all baseline 2000 HP and scaled human damage to match. But then you lose the ability to easily compare DPS across factions, and you end up with other "weird" scenarios like human melee hitting "harder" than vampires due to relative health pool sizing.

I wouldn't mind normalizing human health back to 1000 (it was increased to 1050 when we nerfed a Max Hp perk back in Alpha) but it hasn't been a priority.

ApollosBow
7th Feb 2015, 19:56
Numbers can and will change only if it is needed from a balance perspective. Reducing Human's health pool by X% and compensating for that by reducing Vampire damage by Y% can potentially have far more severe consequence than it looks on paper.

Here is a very simple, but effective example:
Summoner hits for 190 with her melee attacks. It will take her 7 melee hits to kill a Human with 1050 health. Now let's reduce attack value and health pool by 5%. Summoner that now hits for 180 (190 - 9.5) will need 6 melee attacks to kill a Human with 1000 heath. As you can see, despite it looking straightforward on paper it can affect math in many subtle ways, both good and bad (because small fractions of health do matter in this game).

Numbers shouldn't be changed from a "makes sense" point of view. There was a thread by a new player where he was complaining that this game has no logic in its design by comparing health pools of an Alchemist and a Tyrant. He was wondering that how is that a massive strong Vampire that is at least twice as big and durable as a frail woman has only 300 more HP? Makes sense, right? Should we give Tyrants 1800 HP to fit their size and also make them hit for 300 because it "makes sense"? I'm pretty sure everyone will say a definite "no, thanks" to that.

I'm open to the idea of numbers changing, but it will require a lot of careful re-balancing. And I think currently it's easier to work around the model that we have in game instead of re-designing it all and adjusting numbers to make sure balance stays the same for the sake of "making sense". If anything, that should be the very last touch to the game, once it's all mapped out.

Cheers for the reply, it definitely makes more sense to me now.


I can see why it's "weird" when you compare Health values. We could have made vampires all baseline 2000 HP and scaled human damage to match. But then you lose the ability to easily compare DPS across factions, and you end up with other "weird" scenarios like human melee hitting "harder" than vampires due to relative health pool sizing.

I wouldn't mind normalizing human health back to 1000 (it was increased to 1050 when we nerfed a Max Hp perk back in Alpha) but it hasn't been a priority.

Cheers for the info Corey, favorite game atm, keep up the great work.