Buff Specifics

2456710

Comments

  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here Member Posts: 3,216 Transcendent
    edited March 2015
    I'm not sure why Omen would still be slated to go if it's nerfed from a 66% damage increase (or something really high like that) to a -3 debuff which is like 15%. That's a pretty hefty nerf as it is.

    By the way, shouldn't clumsiness be in the dmg buff section, not the resist section? It should be reducing a players damage dealt, not increasing a players damage received.

    Edit: HC has always been a must-have for ascendants.

    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    edited March 2015
    Keep in mind that the change from level 4 to level 5 with havoc cry is 5%. One of the main goals was to take away the ability for buffs to dictate the flow of combat. 

    What I like about the ease with which people can reach the cap, if they choose to, is that it levels the playing field across the board. One of the tremendously difficult things about balancing, and we can use warriors as an example, is how to you balance "tankiness" and survivability against offense? It's apples and oranges so it's virtually impossible. Should commune warriors be both the tankiest class AND be able to solo kill Steve the mage where as Steve is considerably less survivable? How do you decide who should be able to solo kill the other one quicker/with greater ease? Does the ability to tank trump killing ability? Can you really justify Steve's ability to kill a warrior more quickly than the warrior killing steve because the commune warrior has twice the DMP? These are fair questions, but they are really difficult to answer. 

    Does the new system seem a little watered down? I can see that perspective, and I understand it, but speaking from my own experience, what defences I put up when I logged in played virtually no part in my daily Lusternian life. They were very much "set it and forget it." Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't think any of you take joy out of hitting the automated defence set up button or automating when you refresh your kirigami. It's possible we also have a skill bloat issue due to the old way of DMP that can now be envoyed piece by piece to repurpose some things. 

    P.S. I'm personally really happy to see Astrology have some possible relevance again!

    P.P.S. For me, I would LOVE to see some of the now redundant defences converted into temporary skills that give you that 5th level for a couple of minutes for X power. There are really a lot of options here to change what was just a really bloated system that disenfranchised a lot of people who weren't the very highest tier into a more dynamic offense or reactionary defense. The set it and forget it style of DMP, to me, just didn't contribute a lot of interest to the game. It just disadvantaged a lot of people.

  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here Member Posts: 3,216 Transcendent
    I don't know that any skill using power to bump up 5% will be worth it. 5% boost is 50 extra damage on a 1k hit. 100 damage on a 2k hit. It's the same reason I've never bothered investing the 800 credits to get a lvl 3 magic damage rune, because I can't wrap my head around spending that many credits for an extra 50-100 damage, and I really seriously considered it with this new system going into place.

    I'm ok with caps on buffs/resists. That doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that in this new scheme 3 skills make a multitude of other skills worthless in both the buff and resist category. As I said earlier, darkbeer, kirigami and war karma and I've made just about every other skill useless to me. Amberbeer, kirigami and attune and I've made just about every other resist skill useless, including tailoring proofings, nimbus enchants etc. This is an even greater 'set and forget' system than we have now because I only need to maintain 3 skills and I'm maxed out. 

    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    edited March 2015
    Well, one of the most (if not the most) frequent complaints was the power creep. Instead of just guild skills, we had kirigami and dark beer and curios etc etc etc. So I get it, and I don't disagree, but I think the issue is that we have too much that has been added on over the years that, in the new system, really replace the need for a lot of guild skills. In that scenario, I don't think the system is the problem, I think it's all the add ons.

    So that can be addressed, but that may mean reworking how things like kirigami and darkbeer work so that the emphasis is placed on guild skills rather than external items. 

    Edit: It may be as simple as not making "universal" so available as a defense type. Maybe kirigami is only 1 damage type at a time when you release it. Changes like that. 

    edit2: I propose these: 
    • Remove the damage reduction buff from Kirigami, retain the damage buff (if needed) and critical hit bonus. 
    • Change attune to be permanent but you attune to a damage type that stays with you, rather than universal that only works on the terrain you are attuned to.
    • Rework darkbeer...to do something. I'm not entirely sure with that one. 
  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here Member Posts: 3,216 Transcendent
    But the power creep isn't really being addressed. 

    Curios seem to be a pretty standard 1/4 which means they'll still be must-haves.

    Kirigami/beers etc etc are universal and therefore trump specific guild skills that are not, making them required.

    Particularly for Bards, why would I bother putting up morningstar/fireforte when they don't help my damage buff/resist out at all anymore. I'm going to instead use songs that are more geared toward other things (Stumbling, alcoholfumes (which I would envoy to be actually worthwhile) etc).

    You're right the problem is the add-ons, and that problem isn't being addressed, it's being enchanced.

    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    Sorry, I edited my response before you replied! But I think you may be right regarding the universal damage defences. My idea for a solution is in my previous post. 
  • LeradLerad Member Posts: 2,405 Transcendent
    edited March 2015
    I think the powercreep problem is being somewhat addressed with the hardcap. As long as there is a hardcap somewhere reasonable, outliers will cease to exist, and however much you invest in powercreep items, you're still capped at a place where you can be reasonably competed with.

    I do agree that the proposed numbers can be tweaked a little to make this even more ideal. Xenthos' preliminary idea (which he brought up as a suggestion when these numbers first came up) to double the tiers (but not the bonuses) will give us envoys a lot more space to tweak the numbers to make different abilities (and powercreep features) take different niche roles. For example, certain guild abilities can be given 1/5 or even 1/6 values, so they serve to push the user toward unlocking higher caps, while more common abilities can remain at 1/3 so users need to use less common abilities to hit the lower cap until they get access to the guild ability that unlocks higher cap values. Curios can be something like 1/4 or 1/5, just as an example, where they serve as a bridge between the two, so players that haven't had access to the guild ability can use the curio to tide them over, while at the same time it can still contribute toward reaching the cap when the guild ability is unlocked etc.

    The structure has merit. It's not the way I would have personally implemented it, but it's not a bad idea altogether, as long as it does achieve the aims while still keeping participation in the system fun. It is a game, after all. The numbers might need tweaking, but that's why this thread exists, right? Since it's already half-coded, we might as well roll with what we have, but consider the arguments for number tweaking carefully to tune it toward the goals we were trying to achieve.

  • LeradLerad Member Posts: 2,405 Transcendent
    Also, regarding universal typed defenses, I will personally be fairly happy to see them all (or a large amount of them) converted into thematically appropriate, type-specific versions. Doing so, though, will likely need to be done bit by bit, and with careful consideration, to allow guilds that are affected the opportunity to find replacements or alternative mechanics for the drop in power.

    This specific buff overhaul is probably the most efficient use of coder time to quickly patch-fix the powercreep problem with a hardcap somewhere. If the admin want to push toward less universals over time, though, I for one will definitely be on board.

  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    My questions is if we rework the universal defences (which is a low effort, high reward change) do we need to rework the entire system into a 10 tier system (medium effort, high reward)? I don't know if most (if any) guilds posess enough damage type specific defenses to warrant a 10 tier system.

    I'm not opposed to either direction, one just seems simpler to address the universal skills first which will also address the add on concerns. The other is going to require a lot more consideration to what skills get what levels while making 10 levels actually achievable. 
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    I'm missing Barkskin from Blunt damage. It's currently both cutting and blunt, but in the table it's only listed under cutting.
    image
  • EnyalidaEnyalida Nasty Woman Member Posts: 4,384 Transcendent
    Curios are more powerful in two types than skills that used to give 30dmp to a single skill, waaaay too strong.
  • SteingrimSteingrim Member Posts: 871 Fabled
    Saesh said:

    My questions is if we rework the universal defences (which is a low effort, high reward change) do we need to rework the entire system into a 10 tier system (medium effort, high reward)? I don't know if most (if any) guilds posess enough damage type specific defenses to warrant a 10 tier system.


    I'm not opposed to either direction, one just seems simpler to address the universal skills first which will also address the add on concerns. The other is going to require a lot more consideration to what skills get what levels while making 10 levels actually achievable. 
    I suspect the problem is that some guilds rely on the universal defenses to plug gaps in def coverage. Your suggestion would be the equivalent of giving certain attacks a boost against any guild without a guild specific attack, no?
    You tell Wyrden Ravager Tarken, "Come to Gaudiguch. I'll give you the title of Grand Moth."
    Eyes peering skywards as he thinks, Ironbeard the Magnanimous says to Sksez, "Welll, on my gooD lis *hic* t, we have....Stei *hic* ng *hic* rim.U..Xypherv....Luu *hic* hghaigh *hic* hhe....Breandryn....."
  • EnyalidaEnyalida Nasty Woman Member Posts: 4,384 Transcendent
    Saesh said:

    My questions is if we rework the universal defences (which is a low effort, high reward change) do we need to rework the entire system into a 10 tier system (medium effort, high reward)? I don't know if most (if any) guilds posess enough damage type specific defenses to warrant a 10 tier system.


    I'm not opposed to either direction, one just seems simpler to address the universal skills first which will also address the add on concerns. The other is going to require a lot more consideration to what skills get what levels while making 10 levels actually achievable. 

    Both should happen. Not only are guild skills in the current iteration almost completely irrelevant, there will need to be significant rebalancing with so many previously standout and potentially redeeming skills reduced to the same bonus as everything else, in addition to capping out so quickly.
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    Well, I'm fine with the universal defs being fixed. As a note, I can get to 4/4 in all resistances except Psychic as an SD with Nightkiss being my only universal def by using six tattoos, a magic tome and various potions/enchantments/etc.
    image
  • MaligornMaligorn Windborne Member Posts: 2,765 Transcendent
    edited March 2015
    I really echo the sentiment that it's really strange and boring for everyone to immediately be able to max out the 3/3 of Universals. Guild skills will, hopefully, widen the gaps (and there should be -some- gaps, especially when comparing a defensive class (like say Moondancers) to a very offensive class (like say Pyromancers (or even more appropriately, Geomancers)).

    image
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    One way to get to a middle ground is to keep universal defs, but give them a power cost. That way, if you have some gaps that absolutely need filling, you'd be able to spend power to do so, but you're far better off using power-free defs
    image
  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    edited March 2015
    Steingrim said:

    Saesh said:

    My questions is if we rework the universal defences (which is a low effort, high reward change) do we need to rework the entire system into a 10 tier system (medium effort, high reward)? I don't know if most (if any) guilds posess enough damage type specific defenses to warrant a 10 tier system.


    I'm not opposed to either direction, one just seems simpler to address the universal skills first which will also address the add on concerns. The other is going to require a lot more consideration to what skills get what levels while making 10 levels actually achievable. 
    I suspect the problem is that some guilds rely on the universal defenses to plug gaps in def coverage. Your suggestion would be the equivalent of giving certain attacks a boost against any guild without a guild specific attack, no?
    I don't understand the question. It's worded in an odd way, I think.
    Enyalida said:

    Saesh said:

    My questions is if we rework the universal defences (which is a low effort, high reward change) do we need to rework the entire system into a 10 tier system (medium effort, high reward)? I don't know if most (if any) guilds posess enough damage type specific defenses to warrant a 10 tier system.


    I'm not opposed to either direction, one just seems simpler to address the universal skills first which will also address the add on concerns. The other is going to require a lot more consideration to what skills get what levels while making 10 levels actually achievable. 

    Both should happen. Not only are guild skills in the current iteration almost completely irrelevant, there will need to be significant rebalancing with so many previously standout and potentially redeeming skills reduced to the same bonus as everything else, in addition to capping out so quickly.
    The cap stays the same in either system, so I don't see how changing the volume of tiers is "significant rebalancing." It's just a reorganization of the existing system and splitting it up into smaller steps. Like I mentioned, I don't know if enough guilds have enough damage resistance defenses to warrant a 10 tier system. Ultimately, there is going to have to be a coming to terms with the reality that a lot of skills are going to be less "standout" because this system has an absolute hardcap that is significantly lower was was previously obtainable under the DMP system.  

    Unless I'm missing something, I'm not seeing a compelling argument to turn this into a 10 tier system, while I do see arguments against it (i.e. not enough skills per guild to support 10 tiers of buffs)

    edit: I'm cool with reworking the generic universal damage resistance defenses like kirigami and darkbeer. If there's a list of universals from the list Estarra posts you think should be addressed, go ahead and post them.
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    Personally I'd love to see it reworked as a 10-tier system. Most things in the previous list could probably be simply multiplied by two (so they maintain their effect), while others would be able to be more finely tuned. Turning puissance into a 5/10 instead of a random 2/5 or 3/5 comes to mind.

    It would also let some things have a smaller effect than the current 1/3. Perhaps the curios could be put at a 1/10 if it has two types and a 2/10 if it has one, etc. Frankly, I only see perks with moving it to a 10-tier system instead of the current 5-tier system.
    image
  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    I'm not saying no yet, but I am saying I don't see a lot of value other than extra clutter, but I could be wrong. So, to resolve it, take a guild (any guild, your guild!) and put the defensive skills into a 10 tier system. 
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    As I said, it would be simple enough; just multiply the entire list by two, at least for the most part. The benefit comes from the finer scale; instead of having all curios be 1/3, you'd be able to separate them into 1/6 for those that provides defense against two damage types, or 2/6 if they only have one. Further, puissance would lose its random nature and just be a 10/10 damage buff if one-handed or 5/10 if two-handed.

    It would also allow some defs to perhaps be revisited. Should a simple fire potion be as powerful as a full resistance tattoo? Should it be equal to tailor proofing? Giving it a finer granularity opens up far more possibilities; instead of defs being 1/3 in general, they'd be able to be 1/6, 2/6 or even 3/6 if they're powerful.
    image
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    And, to clarify a bit: Nightkiss would become 2/8, Garb/Torc/Snake/Barkskin would all become 2/6.
    image
  • SteingrimSteingrim Member Posts: 871 Fabled
    edited March 2015

    Curios are artefacts and shouldn’t be computed as
    base buffs. As artefacts, they should instead be grouped with other artifacts giving
    a percentage of max artefact bonus (normally along the lines of 1/3 or 1/6). The
    result would be for magic users that one can buy a lvl 3 Great Rune of Esoteric Authority and not have to
    worry about switching damage types, or one can use a curio artifact and a Great
    Rune of Arcane Force.

     

    The ‘levels’ system I believe has value in identifying problems and conceptualizing
    issues for the developers, but as a player makes me want to just throw shoes
    and seems complex to the point that I wonder if the following might not be
    easier and meet the needs of the game and players better:

     

    Problem: Perceived Outliers.

    Problem: Perceived Creep.

    Problem: Maintaining some value to buffs. Addressing the above while providing
    players good reasons to even bother with buffs.

     

     

    Instead of the number system why not have groups?

     

    General with a cap.

    Skills with a cap.

    Special (Artifacts and attune with a cap).

     

    Pools are certainly far easier for players to understand and really isn’t
    much different than proposed and has the benefit of things like kirigami not
    pushing out guild skills.

     

     [edit: Or as an alternative.]

    Consider using a more additive system:

     

    Imagine a system of points. Consider our system of weighted
    buffs. Skills are assigned a number of points, let use 1-10 for this example.

     

      1-10 (multiplier x 1
    adds a max of 10%) full weight in percent.

    11-20 (multiplier x 0.75, adds a max of 17.5% [10 * 1] + [10
    * 0.75])

    21-30 (multiplier x 0.5, adds a max of 22.5% [10 * 1] + [10
    * 0.75] + [10 * 0.5])

    31-40 (multiplier x 0.25, adds a max of 25% [10 * 1] + [10 *
    0.75] + [10 * 0.5] + [10 * 0.25])

    . . . etcetera.

    41-50 adds 1.25% for max of 26.25%

    51-60 adds 0.625% for max of 26.875%

     

    Depending on what numbers are plugged you can get an
    effective hardcap wherever you want it and should rebalancing ever be needed
    you can just change the formula without combing through every single skill. All
    this while retaining a treadmill of buff seekers for min-maxers. You can either
    include artefacts in the system or tack them on afterwards.

     

     

    You tell Wyrden Ravager Tarken, "Come to Gaudiguch. I'll give you the title of Grand Moth."
    Eyes peering skywards as he thinks, Ironbeard the Magnanimous says to Sksez, "Welll, on my gooD lis *hic* t, we have....Stei *hic* ng *hic* rim.U..Xypherv....Luu *hic* hghaigh *hic* hhe....Breandryn....."
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    The value of artifacts will lie in the fact that they'll be able to buff above and beyond the base skills. For instance, artifacts might be able to get you to X/6 or X/7 (or up to X/14 if we use 10 normal tiers). Frankly, moving it to separate pools would just cause more confusion, I think, and an even greater complexity in which buffs to use.

    The second system looks interesting, and would also mean we'd be able to use all the numbers we already have. Artifacts would then be able to just add a flat 5% or 10% (or whatever number) to the final resistance.

    I don't agree that curios are artifacts though, and they definitely shouldn't be treated as such; they should be treated as a simple buff. Otherwise we're in the exact same situation again; curios, genies, gnewpies etc. will all count above the cap, and will become must-haves for combat.
    image
  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    edited March 2015
    So that's basically DMP with harsher scaling. :P

    I agree with Ssaliss regarding the classification of Curios for the reason he stated. Ultimately any decisions regarding "artifacts," however, is up to Estarra. 
  • SsalissSsaliss Member Posts: 3,575 Transcendent
    Well, it would solve the problem of creep and outliers though, given proper numbers. If it's capped to 15% (which would equal max tier in the proposed system), it'd provide the same benefit, and people would be able to stack defs to their hearts content without it becoming too crazy. Sure, some people would only be able to reach, say, 12% resistance, but it'd be worlds better than the current system, and it wouldn't need a massive recoding to work.

    Really, though, I'm fine with either system. Both have their good and bad sides. The tiers will allow everyone (well, more or less) to reach the cap, but some defs will basically become useless. The harsher DMP will allow all defs to be used again, but it would be more complex.
    image
  • SteingrimSteingrim Member Posts: 871 Fabled
    Saesh said:

    So that's basically DMP with harsher scaling. :P


    I agree with Ssaliss regarding the classification of Curios for the reason he stated. Ultimately any decisions regarding "artifacts," however, is up to Estarra. 
    Only with the numbers currently plugged in. How quickly one tapers off depends on what numbers are plugged in.

    While I get that Estarra will ultimately made the call, saying curios are not artifacts seems to be pushing equivocation to the breaking point. Labeling curios as not artifacts to create a space to make new artifacts to take the same place of curios already brought would be a real asshat move.
    You tell Wyrden Ravager Tarken, "Come to Gaudiguch. I'll give you the title of Grand Moth."
    Eyes peering skywards as he thinks, Ironbeard the Magnanimous says to Sksez, "Welll, on my gooD lis *hic* t, we have....Stei *hic* ng *hic* rim.U..Xypherv....Luu *hic* hghaigh *hic* hhe....Breandryn....."
  • SaeshSaesh Gods Posts: 268 Divine
    edited March 2015
    Edit: Curios mimic skills in that they added DMP, and did not mimic actual artifacts. Yes, by definition they are artifacts but it doesn't make sense to repurpose curios under the new system to be existing artifact equivalents that they have never been nor ever intended to be. 
  • EstarraEstarra Administrator, Moderator Posts: 868 Creator
    edited March 2015
    BTW, Saesh may not know this, but we've adjusted the percent increases per level based on envoys being decimated in the arena by mobs (i.e., the defense stats were too low). They currently are:

    Level 1: 10%
    Level 2: 15%
    Level 3: 20%
    Level 4: 25%
    Level 5: 30%
    Level 6: 35%
    Level 7: 40%

    Note Levels 6 and 7 are reserved for artifacts. I'm not sure I follow the debate about curios. They give a bonus above what you would normally see in skills. Not sure what's wrong with that! I believe we are going to stay with the system as-is and not rework the code from the ground up at every whim. I believe this definitely addresses creep and outliers. I really don't understand arguments that it doesn't address these issues.
    image
    image
  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here Member Posts: 3,216 Transcendent
    It addresses outliers for sure, given that there is a hardcap on how much you can buff/resist

    The current setup means that 

    1) curios are still must-haves, they are the really only consistent buff/resist around that is 1/4.  that's power creep

    2) by using kirigami (100gp a pop to buy, lasts an hour) and darkbeer/amberbeer (cheap and easy to get/maintain too) and some other combination of universal buff, I can hit my lvl 3 buff/resist level, making everything from tattoos, proofings, specific guildskills worthless, and making these items required because they damage buff/resist ALL damage types instead of 1-2 that guildskills tend to do.  Obviously it's better to have 20% resist to every damage type than 20% resist to 1 or 2 types, so they become required. 


    Additonally, it'd be nice to address how artifacts fall into this. For instance, if I have a lvl 2 magic damage rune, and I can hit 5 buff of fire damage(kirigami, darkbeer, war karma, firecurio, hc) , does my magic damage rune pump me to 7 or 6? 



    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • EstarraEstarra Administrator, Moderator Posts: 868 Creator
    Synkarin said:


    1) curios are still must-haves, they are the really only consistent buff/resist around that is 1/4.  that's power creep

    I believe you'll see more 1/4 skills as Xenthos goes through them. In any event, these are all just preliminary numbers and to wave the 'power creep' flag is a bit premature (though please feel free to offer suggestions within the boundaries of the current system--we're not interested in redoing the system).

    BTW, do you call all artifacts 'power creep'? We are planning that artifacts will go over the normal skill limits (but themselves be limited by the system).
    image
    image
Sign In or Register to comment.