|
Post by Twilight Semner on Dec 12, 2014 21:39:42 GMT
Perhaps if there were a way to add certain enhancements to weapons (aside from gem crafting) akin to the socketable weapon gems in tabletop DnD that would be a nice way to add some variety.
Another possibility, along those same lines, is to have weapon "add-ons" that enhance the inherent properties of the weapon (limit of one per weapon), rather than add additional effects. For example, you could have a stone which when used on a bludgeoning weapon adds piercing or slashing as a secondary physical damage type (which would be a pretty sweet boost for classes that really suffer from access to a single damage type, like Arcane Archers, Staffmasters, Lashes, Warchanters, etc). Or maybe something that increases the critical threat range of a weapon by 1. Obviously you would have to exclude certain weapons (like halberds) that already have two physical damage types and 18-20 crit ranges. They would also have to either be either pretty high rarity (like... almost BUR augment rarity) or low chance set/secret loot in end game content.
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Dec 12, 2014 21:50:47 GMT
Actually, an additional thought on that too: make them crafting gems with much lower drop rates. Add one more type that increases the base number of dice for a particular damage type on a weapon (these could probably be used on the broken weapons like halberd without much issue). Give DB weapons 1 socket, Dis weapons 2 sockets and Abyss weapons 3 sockets. This would help decrease the power gap between different types of weapons, as well as the imbalance between DB/Dis/Abyss weapons that currently exists, as well as increase the value of unidentified gems so that they're more desirable than before, while placing an item like this within an already established drop table without too many extra complications.
|
|
|
Post by Yojimbo on Dec 12, 2014 22:08:13 GMT
Actually I believe it has been discussed that adding physical damage that is not part of a weapons damage type requires heavy engine hacks I think getting monk gloves to have multiple types was a huge challenge to do without making is a separate damage packet. The DB Halberd for example has has 2d12 Bludgeoning damage but does not in fact do Bludgeoning damage it just additional physical damage and will match the base type used.
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Dec 12, 2014 22:20:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bazukar on Dec 13, 2014 10:54:04 GMT
Nice spreadsheet, there is some interesting data there. It does confirm a few things that we already suspected, like others pointed out, which is how powerful physical damage and dual damage types are. However, in order to go out and own me on a messageboard for a game you don't play anymore I think you missed the mark. I won't question your math, insofar as what you plugged in to the spreadsheet I'm sure it's fine. However, it seems like many of the calculations are based on data and calcs we can't see. Am I missing something and just derped? But what are the builds used? Were they offensive, defensive or balanced? The STR, CON, DEX, INT? You also show ideally crafted and (buffed? unbuffed? how did you actually calc the damage? min/max/avg? You seem to calculate elemental damage oddly) weapons in every scenario, and we all know that isn't usually the case; due to the logistics of weapon buffing you go in with two or three weapons crafted for the area. You say tanks should never hit crittables but that is just plain false. Why do you give everyone the same hit rate when that does not reflect reality? And using 80 for 60 areas. I realize you probably wanted to simplify things, but in game it never works out that way and in doing this you ignore some of the issues cropping up between classes, heck builds, and separating them. As an example, me and bad theorycrafted heavily on an xbow rogue...on paper it looked great, and we got excited. Bad built it and...it was awful. Same with a GI, everyone was excited, and paradoom put work into it but....well. AA anyone? Woqued brought up a good point I didn't consider, since I figured just rattling off a few stats was enough. I forgot that it got buried and I never moved it. To continue that discussion, the builds in question should be there to discuss as well, and in good spirit. What was this magical barbarian that destroyed dmg logs? What other factors were in question? Was there perhaps something to improve in the staffymonk / staffmaster builds... But as those were not present, it was hard to continue the discussion and thus peoples egos clashed back and forth. My staffmonk build is here. Sadly, I do not have grevens build anywhere as he became gunshy about posting them, as some of the supervets had become. The story goes that his builds had gotten a few classes nerfed, and we jokingly called him Greven The Thrice Nerfed. I can ask stick for permission to post his build. He cannot himself, as he was banned for some funky commentary. Someone who can contact greven might be able to get his build as well. I'm trying to remember if grevens was WM or ftr/weapon spec, iirc he changed it at some point.
|
|
|
Post by fallenwizard on Dec 13, 2014 14:48:33 GMT
As an example, me and bad theorycrafted heavily on an xbow rogue...on paper it looked great, and we got excited. Bad built it and...it was awful. Same with a GI, everyone was excited, and paradoom put work into it but....well. AA anyone? There's 1 and simply 1 common factor with these classes being bad. Ranged vs melee. Getting 12d12 (generaly, some times up to 16d12) damage that "doesn't belong there" is simply unbalanced in that comparison. Now if you'd substract that from all melee damage, AA would be top 3, if not the top damage on server followed by staffy and dualtype paladin. Even after the wep buff changes AA can deal roughly 80% of barb damage in abyss, but that is whole another discussion. Now what comes to asking about the builds being used on the spreadsheat (which btw wasn't done by Tank in any way - not taking credit my self either), they were all very damage focused ones. Basicly everything that can reasonably go for weapon spec has it. Purpose of the sheat was to find out (not really post on forums) that barbarian damage isn't overpowered. Barbarian as a whole is in my opinion are and likely many will agree with that. This threat was about Qstaff damage and while it is somewhat weaker than barb damage is, monk's defences arent exactly something to be sneezed at. 140'ish AC with 70'ish conceal with crit imm and total mind imm. Not the same level of damage immunity that barb gets from armor/shield/class bonus, but still more than enough to perform tank role. As for staffmasters, imo they've been hellstompers ever since I started on HG, abyss I haven't ran much with, how to call it, potential staffies (ones that know all damage types by the heart and which mobs to avoid to not get destroyed etc). Sadly my logs are lost with my laptop (R i pieces), but during 5 full abyss cycles (pre 2hand bonus) no staffie was a match to AA in damage. But as I said, it was only few staffies with low abyss experience at the time that I encountered. Based on that, I wouldn't be opposed to giving Qstaff as a whole the same 20% bonus that barbs are enjoying. However, like it has been said so many times, we're talking about lvl 70+'s toying in lvl 60 enviroment. Even without buffs good staffies stomp in hells, even lvl 60 ones. But still, my take on the grand scenario is to remove entire 2hand bonus. It has decreased number of desired tank classes down to barb and paladin (+ monk/staffy before nerf).
|
|
|
Post by bazukar on Dec 13, 2014 15:32:42 GMT
Wish you had shown up on more of our runs man I don't think barb damage is OP; it's simply the baseline..err standard that everything doing damage gets measured to atm. If buffs came down the pipe and some other class became a monster they would be the benchmark. I also feel the need to differentiate between tanks and damage dealers: Those monk stats you gave are not on a damage oriented monk. My monk, as an example, was focused as a damage dealer. I gave it just enough AC and offstat so that it wouldnt be a carpet tank. It had 131 ac at 60, 103 AB, 40 dex and only 62% conceal with a seriously small ki pool. The math is here somewhere for conceal, but blindfight takes a chunk out of that, and listen would take a bigger one. The mind immunities are amazing no doubt, and tbh that is really the only reason it works imo. If not for that covering immunes would be a nightmare gearwise with boots belt and neck spoken for. A tank is something you build that just won't die. Like the MMOD, a warchanter, or a tank bard like vichyas build (which I used and loved for years). These things can survive, but they bring very little damage, and sometimes limited utility. (varies wildly based on class) They usually don't have good AB or attacks per round, don't have disarm or KD (that is functional) and use other abilities to make up for not dealing damage. My point, and what I was trying to make this conversation about were classes/combos that went to the damage end of the spectrum, forsaking, or seriously gimping their tank attributes in order to deal damage. There are plenty of viable tank combinations, all with various flavors, with not huge disparity between them. But when it comes to damage...it is a different story. And that was the conversation I was trying to have.
|
|
|
Post by fallenwizard on Dec 13, 2014 16:56:13 GMT
Wish you had shown up on more of our runs man :) I don't think barb damage is OP; it's simply the baseline..err standard that everything doing damage gets measured to atm. If buffs came down the pipe and some other class became a monster they would be the benchmark. Not many DT's ran abyss at that time, and when I did run with you guys, you often had overload of tanks so I was on pariah, thou my AA was also tagged way before pariah. There was only 1 Koly staffy that I remember, who was somewhat close, like 80% of my AA sadly dont rmember the name, then there was a salamander staffy who had like 50% AA's damage, another one who's name I dont remember.. And then there were couple of juggernaut staffies who went for defence and goes pretty much without saying that they weren't even close in damage. Anyways, so barb damage is a baseline, but funnily a char who doesnt need to build for offence sets the baseline for it, that sounds pretty OP to me. Althought, gotta keep in mind when comparing all things here, many top-notch barbs, like Greven, have wraps and other gear you can dream of. Those aren't really comparable to your average joe lvl 60 immo barb who rocks 128-130 AC and strugles when have to swap weapon via healer not being able to keep shield on untill next spawn.. that -17AC at that point is massive drop in defence, not to mention imms from shield aswell. This once again is about lvl 80's running 60's. If we were imply to revert all plvl, 2h etc, we might still have WM's to do the disarmin... Although even then I only remember 2 WM's running abyss, KE and Max (think there were couple others being dragged as playing casters, like Lee and Gand) but that's still more than I see now.
|
|
|
Post by tank on Dec 13, 2014 19:30:20 GMT
Now what comes to asking about the builds being used on the spreadsheat (which btw wasn't done by Tank in any way - not taking credit my self either) It was in fact The Rajah, since this thread started we have been theory crafting for no reason whatsoever really. we have come to a conclusion that tanks suck, don't play them
|
|
|
Post by leid on Dec 13, 2014 19:52:03 GMT
hahahahahaahahahaha
|
|