|
Post by drunkenboastor on Feb 21, 2016 2:44:42 GMT
Giving all weapons a second damage type would be the best base to balance weapons from. If short sword became the only multi damage light weapon for a dex build, it will be the only weapon option for a dex build.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 21, 2016 6:45:25 GMT
If that's the case, then we are undervaluing dual-damage types. What are you basing that assessment on?
Thanks, Funky
|
|
|
Post by woqued on Feb 21, 2016 7:42:53 GMT
Edit: answering on drunkenboastors behalf:
Swapping weapons = unideal so your elemental and exotic damage types are always lagging behind physical (can't have ideal damage type for every mob or you will get 100% miss permanently thus doing nothing).
Physical types are not universally good - most mobs are sturdy or even immune vs at least one. Unless! Dual-damage type weapons, which allow a weapon to excel vs almost all mobs and bringing it to across the board usefulness. Mob (especially boss) base DR gets so high that the elemental and exotic immunities can largely be neglected unless wielding a mega damage weapon (and even then..), thus physical is the only penetrating factor so you want it to deal the most it can, so it needs to have the fitting damage type for the job.
Most mobs aren't super sturdy to two damage types; and usually are weak to at least one. Thus a dual-damage type weapon is the way to go, almost regardless of anything else. Other factors for weapons are crit modifier and range, which can for most "super bad baddies, kill me fast, casters stumble against me" be counted as unimportant - thus the choice of weaponry will always be a dual-damage type for any minmaxer or a tank willing to do the job vs all of the big baddies.
Edit: basically not wearing a dual-damage type weapon will make you irrelevant vs at least some of the few targets you are supposed to deal with, while dual-damage makes you good or at least capable vs them all.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 21, 2016 9:14:23 GMT
I understand the basics. I'm looking for a more nuanced assessment. What damage multiplier would you suggest? Binary valuations, while useful for making play decisions, don't hack it for development decisions.
Thanks, Funky
|
|
|
Post by versengeteriks on Feb 21, 2016 9:23:16 GMT
I already putted it in the Pool but think i should also put it here just a idee like this why not to have in paragon lvls a feat who can allow the melee to add another type of wps focus who will give him the same as his wp focus with all others feats he already have to a second wp of his choice, then the melee will be more effective as like if he had as wp focus a longsword he could by this feat have the same of it with another wp with a different physical dmg type like a heavy hammer or morningstar, etc. I think this will make tanks more attractive to play as a melee will be able to without sacrifice many feats to be able to use different type of wps depending of mobs he is fighting, as at paragons lvls we can say a toon should have a lot of experience in fight and he surely praticed with a different kind of wp to be more effective in combat. Not a bad idea at all. I think it should probably wait for the weapons rebalance, though. I am still hoping to get that done. We might simply allow the selection of multifeat options in the leveler premised on possession of certain feats. Not sure how we'd handle WMs though. Funky Just have it run like old d+d (yup p+p ref again!) Give them an option to focus on a weapon group. 1 hand blades, 2 hand blades, hammers, axes, polearms etc... then let them specialize in the group and so on. Of course, only if the engine can take it...
|
|
|
Post by woqued on Feb 21, 2016 10:57:41 GMT
I understand the basics. I'm looking for a more nuanced assessment. What damage multiplier would you suggest? Binary valuations, while useful for making play decisions, don't hack it for development decisions. Thanks, Funky It is not possible currently to determine exact mathematical difference in value for crit modifier vs dual-damage type. I am not a modder, but if I was and I had to do something about it: I'd -TRY- to do the following: Make crit modifier matter more to make it easier to balance weapons. In order to do that I would make more of the important mobs crittable with 127+ parry but not hb / cs-able, akin to laghlatlis. Then it would be far easier to balance different weapons and make a proper assessment on what the exact power difference is between various (dual-dmg with low modifier) vs (one-dmg with high modifier). Well, currently it is nice crits with dual-damage so its a bit bonkers. I do think double types will reign supreme as long as there are priority mobs completely immune to certain damage types. Arcane ooze / Alkilith vs. bludgeoning as example, though a flexible player will wear a battle axe instead of his feated warhammer, but same issues as ever: more weapons to swap, more weapons to buff. Not handy, not effective, but it is a thing you must do to avoid being literally useless. If i tried to look at it from devving perspective: I would not pay any attention to any imbalance among weapons, it is not a high priority and it will not "fix anything" and doesn't need fixing - it wil only change the object of farming. There will always be "the best weapon" and people will use and seek the best ones. Alternatively if not the best, the only one - as is with weapons locked to a class (rapwit rapier, threader sickle, staffy qstaff, wc heavy flail, blah blah etc). Locking weapons related to quasis in this manner is quite smart, giving them enough perks to make the imbalance between different weapons completely irrelevant. But - I can not talk from developers point of view, for I don't know how much time you have, what tools you have and what you can / want / will about it - and I am but a shortsighted fool of a player. I can not put myself in your shoes, so this will be the last of me on this matter. Hope you can reach a satisfactory conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by simpetar on Feb 21, 2016 11:01:50 GMT
Just have it run like old d+d (yup p+p ref again!) Give them an option to focus on a weapon group. 1 hand blades, 2 hand blades, hammers, axes, polearms etc... then let them specialize in the group and so on. Of course, only if the engine can take it... That would not address the issue we have here, even if it was possible in the game engine. These weapons are in groups because they are similar in the way they are used in combat; from gameplay point of view they have the same damage types. Hammers of all types will still be bludgeoning, axes will still be slashing etc. The only merrit I could see here is more leniency for newer players who lack a wide collection of one specific weapon.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Feb 21, 2016 11:26:26 GMT
It is not possible currently to determine exact mathematical difference in value for crit modifier vs dual-damage type. I am not a modder, but if I was and I had to do something about it: I'd -TRY- to do the following: Make crit modifier matter more to make it easier to balance weapons. In order to do that I would make more of the important mobs crittable with 127+ parry but not hb / cs-able, akin to laghlatlis. Then it would be far easier to balance different weapons and make a proper assessment on what the exact power difference is between various (dual-dmg with low modifier) vs (one-dmg with high modifier). Well, currently it is nice crits with dual-damage so its a bit bonkers. level IV Spell immunity also works to stop hb and grant some love to Assassin and Rangers. I do think double types will reign supreme as long as there are priority mobs completely immune to certain damage types. Arcane ooze / Alkilith vs. bludgeoning as example, though a flexible player will wear a battle axe instead of his feated warhammer, but same issues as ever: more weapons to swap, more weapons to buff. Not handy, not effective, but it is a thing you must do to avoid being literally useless. If they had 75% and 0/- to physical instewad of full immunity, on top of critical immunity it would already limit melee with the wrong weapon type a lot. If i tried to look at it from devving perspective: I would not pay any attention to any imbalance among weapons, it is not a high priority and it will not "fix anything" and doesn't need fixing - it wil only change the object of farming. There will always be "the best weapon" and people will use and seek the best ones. Alternatively if not the best, the only one - as is with weapons locked to a class (rapwit rapier, threader sickle, staffy qstaff, wc heavy flail, blah blah etc). Locking weapons related to quasis in this manner is quite smart, giving them enough perks to make the imbalance between different weapons completely irrelevant. But - I can not talk from developers point of view, for I don't know how much time you have, what tools you have and what you can / want / will about it - and I am but a shortsighted fool of a player. I can not put myself in your shoes, so this will be the last of me on this matter. Hope you can reach a satisfactory conclusion. Agreed. And is in the spirit of what I said earlier. A rebalancing of weapons doesn't affect gameplay as much. That would not address the issue we have here, even if it was possible in the game engine. These weapons are in groups because they are similar in the way they are used in combat; from gameplay point of view they have the same damage types. Hammers of all types will still be bludgeoning, axes will still be slashing etc. The only merrit I could see here is more leniency for newer players who lack a wide collection of one specific weapon. Thus I suggested giving bonus weapon options for specific classes. Perhaps at LL.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 21, 2016 17:30:59 GMT
If i tried to look at it from devving perspective: I would not pay any attention to any imbalance among weapons, it is not a high priority and it will not "fix anything" and doesn't need fixing - it wil only change the object of farming. There will always be "the best weapon" and people will use and seek the best ones. This is just wrong. It does not, however, address the problem of the thread, but an issue of loot value. I'm not asking you to do or know any of that. I'm asking you to be more specific in your valuation of double damage types that 'if you add one to short sword it will be must-have for dexers'. Actual gameplay is not that binary. If, as it sounds, you and drunkenboaster think they are currently undervalued, what value should they have, and why? We currently have them pegged as a 20% net damage increase over a single-type. I'm aware that the current thinking is that morningstars/halberds/dual-types are king, but it is difficult to discern how much of that is due to ersatz wisdom and convenience (ie not bothering to check due to nuisance of swap miss percentile), and 'king' is not mathematically quantifiable. Approaching this another way: suppose morningstars couldn't crit. Would you still opt for them over single weapon types? Funky
|
|
|
Post by Twilight Semner on Feb 21, 2016 17:42:07 GMT
Approaching this another way: suppose morningstars couldn't crit. Would you still opt for them over single weapon types? Funky I would. Tanks should be focused on dealing with crit immune, uninsta-able, problem mobs and the vast majority of these take either bludgeoning or piercing.
|
|
|
Post by sabregirl on Feb 21, 2016 17:55:25 GMT
Approaching this another way: suppose morningstars couldn't crit. Would you still opt for them over single weapon types? Funky I think as the mod currently stands - at least primarily in hells I still might answer yes. This is because most "trash" mobs lack critical hit immunity but can also easily be killed by casters or assassins/rangers. It's the really bad ones (PF maleb) that are crit immune and they vary in their physical immunities. The calculus is a bit different in abyss where there are some nasty mobs that aren't crit immune. You would certainly see an end to the Mstar str assassins, though. The problem a tank faces is to get an additional physical type without a dual physical weapon (other than being a monk) requires an additional weapon focus with all the feats that entails. You could get away with a non focused weapon in some situations but especially in abyss with high ACs, this isn't really an option (unless you're a fighter CC, but nobody does that). So if you recognize your role is to mostly kill crit immunes that vary in physical immunity and resistance, then mstar is still an excellent choice. Now if we have mobs that must be killed by tanks (high sr or spell immune) but are ARE crittable and/or are immune or nearly so to physical damage, then the calculus changes. -S
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 21, 2016 19:34:48 GMT
Approaching this another way: suppose morningstars couldn't crit. Would you still opt for them over single weapon types? Funky The problem a tank faces is to get an additional physical type without a dual physical weapon (other than being a monk) requires an additional weapon focus with all the feats that entails. You could get away with a non focused weapon in some situations but especially in abyss with high ACs, this isn't really an option (unless you're a fighter CC, but nobody does that). So if you recognize your role is to mostly kill crit immunes that vary in physical immunity and resistance, then mstar is still an excellent choice. Now if we have mobs that must be killed by tanks (high sr or spell immune) but are ARE crittable and/or are immune or nearly so to physical damage, then the calculus changes. -S Fair point, but then you get back to the weapon buffing and swapping issues. It will be interesting to see if things change when the next areas drop. We may need to alter our approach to statting creatures somewhat in terms of crits. I do not think the current valuations of elemental types will change (much) until the area set after the next. I can only see one nasty critter that is tank-killable and sonic vuln, and acid damage will probably not be much more sought after either. Of course, edits to RG and Fissure may tweak perspectives somewhat as well, though perhaps not directly on this point. Thanks, Funky
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Feb 21, 2016 19:36:23 GMT
Edit: answering on drunkenboastors behalf: Swapping weapons = unideal so your elemental and exotic damage types are always lagging behind physical (can't have ideal damage type for every mob or you will get 100% miss permanently thus doing nothing). Physical types are not universally good - most mobs are sturdy or even immune vs at least one. Unless! Dual-damage type weapons, which allow a weapon to excel vs almost all mobs and bringing it to across the board usefulness. Mob (especially boss) base DR gets so high that the elemental and exotic immunities can largely be neglected unless wielding a mega damage weapon (and even then..), thus physical is the only penetrating factor so you want it to deal the most it can, so it needs to have the fitting damage type for the job. Most mobs aren't super sturdy to two damage types; and usually are weak to at least one. Thus a dual-damage type weapon is the way to go, almost regardless of anything else. Other factors for weapons are crit modifier and range, which can for most "super bad baddies, kill me fast, casters stumble against me" be counted as unimportant - thus the choice of weaponry will always be a dual-damage type for any minmaxer or a tank willing to do the job vs all of the big baddies. Edit: basically not wearing a dual-damage type weapon will make you irrelevant vs at least some of the few targets you are supposed to deal with, while dual-damage makes you good or at least capable vs them all. Great post. It's true that 100% perfect weapon at any given time for any given mob is unrealistic/impractical; luckily mob stats are such that it's easy to at least hit 2/3 ele types perfect and result in ele/exo mainly lagging behind simply due to mobs being more resistant/imm to even 2nd/3rd best type than they are to their 1 or 2 "workable" phys type. There is 1 reason, far more important than any other, why dual phys type is so powerful: you can't craft phys. You are limited to your base weapon and stuck with it for as long as you wish to use your build's feats to your advantage. You can craft the rest but you cannot change phys without changing weapon type and losing multitude of nice things (feat bonuses/whatever). Nonetheless, it's time-honored tradition since PnP and still in HG of ditching AB/special feats in order to use proper phys type (in HG we really only see this when non-slashweap user finds their damage output vs aboleths or oozes to be so poor that they may switch to an axe for better damage; rarely is the reverse true of slash/pierce user switching to a mace or flail, because pierce will surely at least work a little bit) There is a 2nd reason, which is as simple as your Edit: comment. There is a 3rd reason, extremely important as well, which also plays a large role in why fiss/rg/flense is so imbalancing and gamechanging: scaling of paragon mob stats. The swapping/phys vs ele exo type is not really as severe as to be a main reason why phys is so important, and why dual type phys is so important; although it's a very important point to make. Ele/exo lags behind phys simply because it is, as general rule, not as high to start with, so less penetrates, even fully-buffed, even for lower-phys tank. It's quite possible to have "almost perfect" damage types in hand, if one has enough weapons to craft and knowledge of mob stats to craft them perfectly, and swapping weapons isn't nearly as crippling as importance of phystype period. HG mob design does not preclude the use of 3-5 weapons and have very high penetration (90%+ "perfection") of all 3 ele types on many mobs. Exo is a different story because they're generally unbuffed/barely buffed. Phys is #1 extreme importance because paragon scale ignores phys; because it penetrates the most on vast majority of even non-para mobs (given caveat of beating soak + using proper phys type/at least not the 1 that it's almost immune to, as you rightfully indicate); because it is delivered in greatest packet since it's by far the highest number, and although a dexer or low-str tank doesn't enjoy quite as much phys, it will still nearly always be higher than ele exo, albeit if only by a small amount (example 37 phys /28 ele 16 ele 19 ele 8 exo 18 exo 0 exo on low-phys tank vs triple-digit phys on high phys tank. 2h% made phys even more important and "powerful" by exacerbating the extreme amount of phys damage which penetrates soak/resist. Phys, as general rule even before 2h, is highest portion of damage packet a tank deals per hit. It's important for calculation of "value of dual phys type" for your Edit: reason, because you can't craft phys type or modify it at all; because switching crafted weapon doesn't allow you to change phys type. Phys is the thing that you can't change without changing into a different weapon type entirely, so it benefits you to pick a weapon that can naturally have as most diverse application as possible. It's a calculus of the most bang for buck. As you address, most mobs generally have 1 weak phys type, 1 "meh" phys type, and 1 "lol nope" phys type; or at best 2 "eh" phys type and 1 "i'm immune entirely!" phys type. After 2h, this is only more relevant when phys is getting a multiplied boost. Dual phys type weapon allows player to have more given mobs either "nice! that's their type" or "eh, at least it gets through", with only 1 "crap, zeroes" phys type. Mstar pwns bludg-victims and at least works on stuff taking pierce/pwns pierce-victim and at least works on the one that takes bludg, only missing stuff like oozes that really needs slash to pwn; scythe halberd pwns slash/pierce and really misses bludg. Single type weap pwns only 1 sort of mob and really misses the other 2 categories, which dramatically reduces effectiveness and enjoyment, even for low-phys dexers (else we wouldn't care if 1h dexer rogue uses mstar or shortsword or mace). Weapon swap miss is annoying and certainly QoL issue but it's simply not as important as the facts that phys types is critical to performance and approaches make-or-break factor for tanks; only increasing in importance the deeper into endgame you go and higher demi parties you play (aka more sup/leet mobs that you kill faster with huge phys packet than anything else). I'll roll with db suggestion, but obviously I think it's still more OP and inappropriate answer than make them all 1type (bring 50 weaps up to level of 3, of bring 3 standouts down to level of the rest?). dual type should not exist in HG; it's relic of PnP game and is far too important factor in HG. It's acceptable to argue tanks need buff so let's give them dual type phys no matter what weap they pick, but the buff tanks truly need is to tank better/die and disable to unavoidable things+autofail/enjoy more by feeling less useless, not deal more damage. Tanks demanding to deal more damage is exactly what put us in the position we're in now: still reeling from 2h% boost which made staffusers extinct, divtank even more OP, and didn't do anything to help poor newbie/casual player wanting to spend an hour soloing with his tank, but allowed OP 2h uber tank to be even more uber than ever. ______ Funky: I feel you miss a critical issue by assuming statistic of total dmg across run is worth measuring without strictly controlled rules for the experiment. There is no valuation other than boosting the phys of singletype weap to make up for using bad type; in which case as I mentioned earlier in thread, you might as well just make it dualtype anyway (as db suggests). There's no single number that defines this; it's not about whether the weapon is "worth" XX% more damage than the other; it's about the weapon being unable to compete with the other, period. If you insist on a number, then look at each mob stat and the answer is "the difference between good phystype and offtype" There's no generalization or averaged-out value to be given, or at least not one that makes any sense; if that's required for your decision, then it's obviously tied to total rundmg (a useless metric as I pointed out earlier in the thread). The meaningful % would be?? 20-100?? depending which mob is being attacked--how much less slash than bludg does a balor take? how much less bludg than slash does an ichor take? Basing this discussion of balance on % damage across a run has zero value. If mob has 20% bludg imm and 80% slash imm and 40% pierce imm, the damage difference obviously is not as clear-cut as 60% when comparing bludg vs slash, but we could estimate what % of total packet is phys, and arrive at a conclusion by combining what % of hit is phys + what % of phys is gained by using non-bad phys type. Your number of 20-25% for overall damage increase may not be necessarily underestimated if I understand correctly what this "valuation" is meant to measure, but the point is that no amount of critical improvement may make up for lack of noncrit damage vs mobs that tank should be hitting. What's the use of boosting crit damage when the amount of time they spend attacking crittables/portion of total run dmg they deal to crittables is, with extremely few exceptions, entirely inconsequential (and misleading to anyone that places import upon damage dealt to a mob that could have been/should have been instakilled(or many times was instakilled after delivering the crit). Expecting people to pick a singletype weap with uber crits in favor of mstar with no crits is faulty and failed; only player that lacks proper play theory would be excited by such a prospect, and therefore their opinion/pleasure should be given little or no weight. This isn't some kind of biased rhetoric or unfounded generalization, but as I said earlier in thread, just a fact of life that any non-nub HGer knows perfectly well. ________________ Dual phys type for all weapons must avoid b/s combination for balance sake (sadly, b/s makes most realistic sense such as flanged maces), making all weapons either b/p or s/p. This about as homogenizing as possible, since b/p doesn't make much sense (either realism--only bludg weapon could be imagined to deal pierce, such as a spiked warhammer for instance; using spear to strike with pommel is a stretch; or balance--b/p is by far a more potent and desirable combination than s/p; there would be little call for choosing s/p with more options than mstar for b/p). I assume this post will be ignored like my last, but if you struggled through the walls, you might gain some useful insight.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 21, 2016 19:46:46 GMT
______ Funky: I feel you miss a critical issue by assuming statistic of total dmg across run is worth measuring without strictly controlled rules for the experiment. ________________ 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. Funky
|
|
|
Post by sabregirl on Feb 21, 2016 20:05:42 GMT
Fair point, but then you get back to the weapon buffing and swapping issues. It will be interesting to see if things change when the next areas drop. We may need to alter our approach to statting creatures somewhat in terms of crits. I do not think the current valuations of elemental types will change (much) until the area set after the next. I can only see one nasty critter that is tank-killable and sonic vuln, and acid damage will probably not be much more sought after either. Of course, edits to RG and Fissure may tweak perspectives somewhat as well, though perhaps not directly on this point. Thanks, Funky When I play tanks they're nearly always buff tanks (Pally, BG, battle cleric, ranger, lash, BK etc.) since I like being at least moderately self sufficient buff wise. The main downside to swapping weapons in that situation is the round of misses you get. At current the only reason I do much swapping is due to healers. And then there's the situation of the barbarians . . . swapping is such a pain I usually just won't do it unless absolutely necessary. There are runs though where I use megadamage weapons almost exclusively and do good damage. Shed is great with a cold weapon - assuming you know not to hit black puddings. Fire for abos obviously, and Thanatos, Stygia, Cania to some extent. I make that choice based on demicount high demi = use a fire/elec weapon only otherwise I use a crafted hell weapon. But generally speaking I will pick two weapons to buff for a run even on a buff tank. Three if things get really wacky but that's pretty rare. -S
|
|