|
Post by chirality on Feb 21, 2016 20:11:03 GMT
I am nowhere assuming that. I actually made an exception and read the last of your posts, shortly after you posted it. I will not be making another exception until you increase the useful insight / text ratio significantly. *stares at ground, shuffling feet* If you weren't judging that the power of dualtype weapon is reducible to a %value improvement over other weapons with no other premise/strings attached (I saw no mention of "25% damage increase vs noncrittable mobs" or "20% valuation of averaged damage increase vs singletype weapon against top 10 priority mobs", how else could you arrive at--or expect input on the accuracy of--that number? I understand that you require hard math to work with, and desire more than rhetoric, intuition, fluffiness to draw conclusions. You spoke of a 20-25% damage increase as value for difference of dual vs single, which as I said, is probably pretty close for a universal average (str tank + dex tank averaged together; all mobs averaged together; all runs averaged together). This was good! But then I saw (perhaps wrongly) an expectation that modifying crit stats would have enough bearing on that issue to be a balance tool. With little else to go by, I did indeed assume (likely incorrectly! sorreh!11 ) that you didn't understand crux issue of phys types and why we care so much about them. I apologize for snarkiness in last post (you answered with more respect than was due), but it honestly was SMH moment to think that for the better part of a decade, the weapons edit was planned and balanced upon premise of dual phys type being nothing more than a %dmg increase vs single type which could be balanced by increasing overall %dmg output (with no caveats attached) by modification of crit frequency/multiplier. What all this means is: I felt you were asking the wrong question, and didn't realize until the last 24-48 hours that a better question was "if mstar didnt crit, would it still be chosen over other weapons?" This question made me jump for joy, as it indicated a giant leap of progress toward more effective understanding of why, what, and how the game should be changed. Seriously not a troll, but a legit recommendation: If you just let raj make all the dev decisions (fine, at least brought on as Head Dev ), you'd save incalculable amount of time and stress. Just imagine how much easier life would with the confidence that knowledgeable and wise player with heart of gold has taken always the interest of HG and its players as main priority, with deep understanding of the game to balance it with best potential result, with no exception. The best balance tool you could ask for is his brain. Bit much? Eyeroller moment? This is no joke, and I hope as time passes it looks less like a joke.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 21, 2016 20:22:05 GMT
If you just let raj make all the dev decisions, you'd save yourself incalculable amount of time and stress. Just imagine how much easier your life would be without needing to post or read anything at all, with the confidence that pro player with heart of gold has taken always the interest of HG and its players as main priority, with deep understanding of the game to balance it with best potential result, with no exception. The best balance tool you could ask for is his brain. I pretty much agree with that, but I like to solicit input from everyone. We're already planning several of his changes (ones not already made, that is). I wasn't trying to be too harsh with you either, but you need to understand that when I'm confronted with a text wall, I have to decide whether or not to invest the substantial amount of time to read it. When the person posting it tends to post train-of-thought, it means a lot of added time to digest said post. You really need to work on condensing your thoughts, as a courtesy to those you are implicitly expecting to read them. Think of it as inviting guests over to dinner and then forcing them to cook everything themselves. Most of the time, I am simply not going to invest that time, when I could spend it, for example, coding the mod. Funky
|
|
|
Post by sabregirl on Feb 21, 2016 20:36:13 GMT
One more thing to add to the discussion is a bit of a historical perspective (I've been here a looong time ). In some of the earlier (created longer ago) LL runs there are a lot of monsters that were almost immune to physical damage but vulnerable to certain elements - think desert. It was a big deal when physical damage was made noticeably useful - really first in the hells. Originally, if I recall correctly, most of the big baddies had no physical immunes at all and perhaps not even resists. So at the time the hells were first out it didn't matter too much which weapon type you used - as far as slash, bludg etc. Then things got a bit ridiculous with power creep and physical damage resists and immunes got added and we added a variety - some mobs were vuln to piercing, others to slash etc. Now physical damage is still one of the best damage types as has already been pointed out. This ads up to dexers doing pitiful damage and dual weapon users being almost nonexistent with dual physical type weapons being the most desirable (halberd, scythe and morningstar). So in some sense it's less the weapon's fault than the monters we have - at least that's what has actually changed the preference over the years. Morningstars and Halberds used to be total jokes as far as weapons went many moons ago but that was because it was the elemental and exotic damage on weapons that did most of the damage, not the physical. Under that environment multiple attacks and multiple weapons were the better choice since damage was all about what damage types a particular weapon had - since none were craftable at the time and multiplying that damage with big and regular crits. So while we can talk about weapon balance what we're really talking about is balancing weapons for the monsters we have in endgame areas, it's also possible (though probably a lot harder coding and time wise) to do the reverse. -S
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 21, 2016 20:44:33 GMT
So in some sense it's less the weapon's fault than the monters we have - at least that's what has actually changed the preference over the years. Ahh, perspective. I knew there was a reason we made you a DM. A lot of this stuff is always going to come back to statting differently, yeah. We keep changing the way we do it (getting more complicated every time). This fix requires a relatively minor tweak, I think, though it won't really have much effect until it's in the game (basically statting more of the high-CR non-instakill tank-kill mobs as crittable, but also most of that subset as NoDevCrit). Other more immediate tweaks under discussion include dropping the dice on physical spells (vs. removing loreboost from them, which I don't favor), as well as the tweaks re: flying creatures already mentioned. Funky
|
|
|
Post by sabregirl on Feb 21, 2016 21:09:04 GMT
So in some sense it's less the weapon's fault than the monters we have - at least that's what has actually changed the preference over the years. Ahh, perspective. I knew there was a reason we made you a DM. And here all these years I thought it was because I'm a lady. Those are good measures, and I am well aware of the complexity but to some degree I think a lot of our balance issues stem from the importance of physical damage *in general*. Perhaps there should be some subset of endgame mobs totally immune to physical. Make them vulnerable to some exotic/element combination (or even just exotic!), crittable but no devcrit give it high SR and the Orthon no-rest ability and/or buer type spell fail and things get more interesting for the tank types. -S
|
|
|
Post by Raj on Feb 21, 2016 21:17:54 GMT
[ot] sorry Bale, I'm straight [/ot]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2016 21:22:37 GMT
Have to say I do think TC's idea of letting toons easily get foci in a second weapon is pretty cool, would add some diversity to the mod in terms of weapon choices for sure, as well as making weapon swapping carry greater potential reward than at present (can better tailor specific weapons to specific mobs). AFAIK many tanks do tend to have a 'spare' Paragon feat, compared to cores who have many options that need to be compressed to only 6, so introducing more attractive tank Paragon feats could be interesting in that respect too.
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Feb 21, 2016 21:28:50 GMT
One more thing to add to the discussion is a bit of a historical perspective (I've been here a looong time ). In some of the earlier (created longer ago) LL runs there are a lot of monsters that were almost immune to physical damage but vulnerable to certain elements - think desert. It was a big deal when physical damage was made noticeably useful - really first in the hells. Originally, if I recall correctly, most of the big baddies had no physical immunes at all and perhaps not even resists. So at the time the hells were first out it didn't matter too much which weapon type you used - as far as slash, bludg etc. Then things got a bit ridiculous with power creep and physical damage resists and immunes got added and we added a variety - some mobs were vuln to piercing, others to slash etc. Now physical damage is still one of the best damage types as has already been pointed out. This ads up to dexers doing pitiful damage and dual weapon users being almost nonexistent with dual physical type weapons being the most desirable (halberd, scythe and morningstar). So in some sense it's less the weapon's fault than the monters we have - at least that's what has actually changed the preference over the years. Morningstars and Halberds used to be total jokes as far as weapons went many moons ago but that was because it was the elemental and exotic damage on weapons that did most of the damage, not the physical. Under that environment multiple attacks and multiple weapons were the better choice since damage was all about what damage types a particular weapon had - since none were craftable at the time and multiplying that damage with big and regular crits. So while we can talk about weapon balance what we're really talking about is balancing weapons for the monsters we have in endgame areas, it's also possible (though probably a lot harder coding and time wise) to do the reverse. -S I think another considerable factor in the historical rise of the importance of physical damage was the removal of irresistible damage in form of bard song and divine might - once these moved over to physical, physical quickly became a lot more important.
|
|
|
Post by simpetar on Feb 21, 2016 21:44:03 GMT
One more thing to add to the discussion is a bit of a historical perspective (I've been here a looong time ). In some of the earlier (created longer ago) LL runs there are a lot of monsters that were almost immune to physical damage but vulnerable to certain elements - think desert. It was a big deal when physical damage was made noticeably useful - really first in the hells. Originally, if I recall correctly, most of the big baddies had no physical immunes at all and perhaps not even resists. So at the time the hells were first out it didn't matter too much which weapon type you used - as far as slash, bludg etc. Then things got a bit ridiculous with power creep and physical damage resists and immunes got added and we added a variety - some mobs were vuln to piercing, others to slash etc. Now physical damage is still one of the best damage types as has already been pointed out. This ads up to dexers doing pitiful damage and dual weapon users being almost nonexistent with dual physical type weapons being the most desirable (halberd, scythe and morningstar). So in some sense it's less the weapon's fault than the monters we have - at least that's what has actually changed the preference over the years. Morningstars and Halberds used to be total jokes as far as weapons went many moons ago but that was because it was the elemental and exotic damage on weapons that did most of the damage, not the physical. Under that environment multiple attacks and multiple weapons were the better choice since damage was all about what damage types a particular weapon had - since none were craftable at the time and multiplying that damage with big and regular crits. So while we can talk about weapon balance what we're really talking about is balancing weapons for the monsters we have in endgame areas, it's also possible (though probably a lot harder coding and time wise) to do the reverse. -S From historical perspective you left out a particulary important fact that we used to have unresistable damage, which was at least on par with elements and exotic types - think the famous combination of Divine Wrath + Divine Might on a double weapon / nunchaku CoT. It was with the removal of these and shortly before the monster tweaking, that dexxers were decimated.
|
|
|
Post by sabregirl on Feb 21, 2016 22:30:53 GMT
From historical perspective you left out a particulary important fact that we used to have unresistable damage, which was at least on par with elements and exotic types - think the famous combination of Divine Wrath + Divine Might on a double weapon / nunchaku CoT. It was with the removal of these and shortly before the monster tweaking, that dexxers were decimated. That was relatively recent in the grand scheme of things and sort of the last gasp of ways dexers could compete a speed bump on the way to where we are now. Unresistable damage is something that's difficult to balance but being converted to physical moved the bar further on the physical damage importance issue. -S
|
|
|
Post by Raj on Feb 21, 2016 22:46:05 GMT
Morningstars and Halberds used to be total jokes as far as weapons went many moons ago but that was because it was the elemental and exotic damage on weapons that did most of the damage, not the physical. -S Dual Dmg value increased after patch 1.69 fix: Before, they were a terrible choice because the opposite was true.
|
|
|
Post by sabregirl on Feb 21, 2016 23:42:05 GMT
Morningstars and Halberds used to be total jokes as far as weapons went many moons ago but that was because it was the elemental and exotic damage on weapons that did most of the damage, not the physical. -S Dual Dmg value increased after patch 1.69 fix: Before, they were a terrible choice because the opposite was true. You have something of a point there but, the 1.69 patch came out in 2008, dual damage weapons didn't become popular until a good while after hells came out (2007) - maybe it just took that long for people to figure it out - but hells did make physical damage important in a way it hadn't been before. It was likely the update that added phys immune/resists to hells mobs that really pushed things in favor of dual type. -S
|
|
|
Post by versengeteriks on Feb 22, 2016 13:43:52 GMT
Well I do hope you decide to go for a more critical available option as I've just gone old school and started my Half-Kyton as a dual wield scimitar ranger with a twist......
Otherwise, the build will be a bust..... Just sayin......
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Feb 22, 2016 20:23:43 GMT
Is the twist that it's a Half-Kyton instead of a Drow?
|
|
|
Post by versengeteriks on Feb 23, 2016 9:47:11 GMT
Is the twist that it's a Half-Kyton instead of a Drow? Nope, going wisdom all the way..... Just because i never have.... Intuitive Attack: ... So far its going ok in the lower levels, Hitting is easy but my damage output is terrible!!
|
|