|
Post by FunkySwerve on Jan 11, 2013 18:02:41 GMT
Then keeping the balance where it is at now, sticking with the 5 progression for all non-monk weapons is simpler, no? Maintaining the status quo is definitionally simpler - but don't confute that with 'better' or 'more advantageous.' I actually just wrote a fairly lengthy set of posts on game balance on the bioboards explaining how increased complexity of mechanics is used to resolve balance problems. The flip side of that is that we don't want the learning curve to get too steep, but that's not an issue here, since we're not adding new mechanics, just tweaking the numbers of existing mechanics. You can find the post here, if you're curious: Click MeFunky
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Jan 11, 2013 18:06:33 GMT
Is it a bad thing if extra attacks is a WM splash is better for some weapons and Harper boots (or CL 55 Tenser's/Divine Power) is best for others? Nope, as long as all weapons get some kind of useful role, and they don't deviate too much from each other in terms of average damage output in their optimal role. Funky
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Jan 11, 2013 23:51:00 GMT
I do believe Magical Master may be the same who was once here on HG for a tenure?
Interesting.
Thanks for posting that Funky...good stuff.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Jan 12, 2013 0:13:34 GMT
The main problem with handing out more free/extra attacks is that, afaik from reading and testing, the engine puts all free attacks in one separate stack. So it looks like this...more or less--using 100 AB as an example again--....Free attacks: Haste 100, Harper Scout Boots 95, Harper Scout Boots 90, Divine Power 85, Flurry for Monk Weapon 80, etc.. engine is actually capped at 10 ? so even if your entitled to more somehow they won't trigger iirc...adding more free/extra attacks at -25 or more to hit would seem fairly pointless ? iirc the idea behind changing some iterations on weapons was to give some that do "blah" damage a better chance to hit more often and make a few that can deliver devastating hits but are harder to hit with as often...a -7 iteration would give a line that got ugly fast-- Attack Bonus: 100/93/86/79. KE. So, will this iteration affect just the bonus attacks? Or would it affect the main attacks (and their quantity)? (there is an issue to be explained in next quote) Then keeping the balance where it is at now, sticking with the 5 progression for all non-monk weapons is simpler, no? Maintaining the status quo is definitionally simpler - but don't confute that with 'better' or 'more advantageous.' I actually just wrote a fairly lengthy set of posts on game balance on the bioboards explaining how increased complexity of mechanics is used to resolve balance problems. The flip side of that is that we don't want the learning curve to get too steep, but that's not an issue here, since we're not adding new mechanics, just tweaking the numbers of existing mechanics. You can find the post here, if you're curious: Click MeFunky Interesting reading. Damage types work like Rock Paper Scissors while the balance between iteration and critical damage is an attempt to make them homogeneous. Quantity of attacks vs dps with Critical hitsWell having more attacks is better to kill critical immune foes, while having good critical hits is good to bypass high resistances. -/- However having less attacks would be REALLY bad against any critical immune foes, like most bosses, no? Well unless critical damage against other foes offsets this by a large margin.
|
|
|
Post by KnightErrant on Jan 12, 2013 1:14:55 GMT
As far as I can tell from testing and reading my notes...any free/extra attacks put on the stack follow the -5 per attack progression....even monks. I don't know if Acaos is planning on or even can hack the free/extra attack iterations. I think most would agree that more attacks is better than less but the value of two extra attacks at -20 and -25 to hit would seem nearly pointless in most cases, IMHO. I'm guessing there's some "happy medium" that can be arrived at thru number crunching...(Which I'm going to leave to the math guys on the staff ) KE.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Jan 12, 2013 1:54:46 GMT
Well, if iteration isn't possible to change maybe a raw damage multiplier could work (tough monk weapons need to be thrown back to 100% to make up for the progression). Another way would be adding or subtracting AB depending on weapon type (-3 to +3).
I could imagine stuff like: -Assassin Dagger / 75% Damage per hit / +1 AB / Crit 17-20/x2 (avg dps ends up similar due no WoC) -Trident / 110% Damage / -1 AB / Crit 20/x3 -Spear / 95% damage / 0 AB / Crit 20/x3 -Dwarven Waraxe / 115% damage / 0 AB / 20/x3
|
|
|
Post by gandoron on Jan 12, 2013 5:59:12 GMT
Funky,
Actually the extra attacks (Haste/tensers/CW/HS, etc) start at the highest AB, ignoring dual/double penalties and always progress at -5 (even for monks). That's pretty important for balancing. 2 years ago, I did a bunch of YAL log testing and wrote up a pretty complex xls that does all the discrete math calculations. Based on your iteration/range/multi changes, I actually have somewhat different effective damage numbers than your weap sheet.
for a standard 20 BAB 4 att/rnd tank, dual wield with haste+CW using a 5 iteration weapon the attack progression is the following prim, -2, -7, -12, -17 off, -2, -7 bonus, 0, -5
So the highest AB attack is actually the first attack from the bonus pool of attacks.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Jan 13, 2013 0:30:11 GMT
So, since these engine hacks aren't ready yet, could these underused weapons get edits like these one I mentioned? Making them reasonably usable?
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Jan 13, 2013 1:04:55 GMT
Interesting reading. Damage types work like Rock Paper Scissors while the balance between iteration and critical damage is an attempt to make them homogeneous. Not really, no. The entire distinction he was trying to make between homogenous vs RPS was unworkable. If anything, we're adding complexity, making things less homogenous, trying to give all the weapons a role, and iteration/crit damage edits are intended to do that. Funky
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Jan 13, 2013 1:05:27 GMT
So, since these engine hacks aren't ready yet, could these underused weapons get edits like these one I mentioned? Making them reasonably usable? No, the edits are still planned. Funky
|
|