|
Post by Methes on Feb 24, 2020 22:17:17 GMT
So Desocupado already compiled issues of dual-wielding in this post highergroundpoa.proboards.com/thread/25340/weapon-style-buff-suggestionThese issues are relevant up to this date and were not addressed. I'd like to summarize weapon wielding issues in general yet again in order of my viewed importance with more detailed info below when needed. I'm talking about sword'n'board, dual-wielding and two-handers: - Damage differences are too huge between the categories in current environment where players are not forced into any choice
- Dual-wielding requires more weapon buffs
- Dual-wielding requires twice as many weapons
- Only dual-wielding reduces AB
- Only dual-wielding requires 3 feats
- Only dual-wielding produces more kickback
- Not much reason to use a shield
Ad 1 - Damage differencesUsing immunities of Pit Fiend from HGX and assuming: Bludgeoning CES DPN weapon fully elementally buffed + GMW 15 + Bardsong vs PF with ~4000HP Stat | Wield type | Average dmg per hit | Total # of attacks | Rounds to kill PF | STR 68 | Main Hand | 111 | 5 | 7.2 | STR 68 | Off Hand | 99 | 7 | 5.3 | STR 68 | Monk |
| 10 | 3.7 | STR 68 | Two-Hander | 174 | 5 | 4.6 |
|
|
|
|
| STR 44 | Main Hand | 101 | 5 | 7.9 | STR 44 | Off Hand | 94 | 7 | 5.7 | STR 44 | Monk |
| 10 | 4 |
As you can see, a STR tank using two-handed weapon deals 15% more damage than a STR tank using dual-wielding. Two-handed weapon has 56% damage increase over sword+board. This would have been fine if not for other issues mentioned above and summarized in table below. I do not propose to change damage for any wielding category.Ad 2 - Weapon BuffsWeapon buffing is awful, painful and absolutely outdated when considering todays gaming standards. It's annoying for casters and even more for tanks who have to beg for correct buffs using chat only. It limits the number of weapons you can effectively use cause you don't want to be THAT guy who asked for a 4th weapon to be buffed. Weapon swapping having 100% concealment penalty is another story. Buffing dual-wielders is even more absurd. Buff AurasTo make matters more comfortable to everyone and remove this issue of dual-wielders, I highly suggest the following system: * Weapon buffs are no longer casted on each individual player wielding a certain weapon, instead they're casted on the caster himself, providing an area wide aura. * Every weapon of a partymember is automatically imbued by the correct weapon buff if the weapon already has corresponding basic damage type. * Duration of this aura is ~5 turns at max CL, automatically recasted when duration ends. (considering current state of 3 tanks on average, each one has 2 weapons = 6 slots per spell. Having duration at 5 turns leads to 30 minutes of playtime    using the same amount of slots) * When the caster is in different area, 5 minute timer starts running. When the timer runs out, buffs are stripped from weapons until A caster with active aura enters the same area again. * Only the highest buff applies to weapons automatically. * This system does not apply to Shadow Dancer's Neg buff (cause they're OP already), Ranger's Pos buff and to Staffmaster's Blackstaff (cause who would use staves anyway without the % modifier) * This system is swappable by !weaponaura command to either use the new one or the old one. Ad 3 - Dual-wielding is more expensive Dual-wielding requires you to obtain and craft twice as many weapons. The more rare they are the more expensive this gets. That's fine, however dual-wielding should not be the only category that's expensive. Increasing the power of shields would increase their price. See table below. Ad 4 - Only dual-wielding has AB penaltyHaving -2 or even -4 penalty to AB is so much fun when two-handers get no maluses. Mind you my damage analysis above does not include the lowered hit chance of dualwielding so the difference should be even larger (slightly). Waving an oversized stick around should lower your AB as well as using two weapons, better balancing these two categories. Ad 5 - Only dual-wielding requires three featsThree feats (pre epic) for 2 more attacks sounds reasonable. Three feats (pre epic) for two-handers, each increasing the % damage bonus would bring better balance. Three feats (pre epic) for more shield stats and powers would bring life to sword'n'board category, see point 7). Ad 6 - Only dual-wielding produces more kickbackMore kickback -> more heal pots chugging -> less dmg output. Right now more attacks -> more % dmg increase but also % kickback increase that is almost on par (see table below). Two-handers should recieve 1,5x kickback to follow their increased dmg output same as other categories do. Ad 7 - Shields are badShields are a problem due to several design issues. * Monk AC with Demi+16 easily netting +12 AC with only 14 starting WIS while BUR shields provide 19 AC with girding. With +WIS subrace this difference is even lower. * On top the other stats shields provide are nothing to write home about. When chosing between either -7AC and a bit of fluff vs 1.5x damage, 1.5x damage is a lot better. * Tower shields (and heavy armors) are so outdated. * If shields were better overall they would be more appealing to use. There are some nice abilities shields have already e.g. autorestore, bash damage+knockdown (not sure how that is viable) and more.   These could be much more common to force choices. * Add 3 shield feats that unlock better shield powers and/or increase defensive abilities of the shield. Note: NOT just add AC, that's lame. Lock special powers behind shield feats, add %immunities based on # of shield feats and similar. SummaryIf points 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 were to be implemented the pros and cons of different weapon types for a STR tank would be: Category | Sword+Shield | Dual-wielding | Dual-wielding (monk) | Two-handed     | Damage | 100% | 136% | 194% | 156% | AB | Full | -2/-4 | -2/-4 but gentle progression | -4
| Price | Weapon+Shield | 2x Weapon (+Shield) | 2x Weapon | Weapon | Kickback | Normal | 140% | 200% | 150% | Shield?  | Yeah | Yeah, flexible | No | No |
With the table above, a player could: A) Choose to invest 3 feats and use shield full time for its added defensive capabilities + can use Expertise to get even more AC with pretty much same AB. B) Choose to invest 3 feats and craft another weapon to switch between sword'n'board/dual-wield at will based on current battlefield situation (with shield being not as good as pure shield user) + can even use Expertise to get similar AB to two-handers with even more AC when using shield. C) Choose monk weapon with similar outcome to a two-hander except require 2x as many weapons OR switch to a torch when needed D) Choose to invest 3 feats for full time two-handing with more damage but limited choices otherwise. As you can see, I do not advocate for lowering the two-handed damage. Tanks were a joke for a long time and as is they have finally gained a lot of needed strength in comparison to casters, especially in lategame. Lowering their dmg would only bring the outcome I fear a lot: increase run times even more. There's a reason single LoL game takes ~35 minutes. Instead, I advocate for yet another power-creep of dual-wielders and sword+board users, to bring them on par and to force the player to choose. Thanks for reading, Methes EDIT: Miscalculated two-hander damage, fixed now.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Feb 24, 2020 22:48:52 GMT
Removing weapon buffs necessity, making it self cast only (for +2 dice) would be less frustrating in party. All weapon's base elemental and exotic damage could be upped then.
No dual wield ab penalty would solve some issues. In fact the dual wield feats could give an AB bonus since you can find better angles to attack. A third offhand attack would be better than bonus ab if it's easy to implement by any chance.
|
|
|
Post by tomaan on Feb 25, 2020 0:32:09 GMT
While I agree that shields can use some love, I'm not sure you've made a compelling case that they're "bad". For example, if all you're getting out of one is 7AC and "fluff" then you may have a gear issue....your shield should be filling out your immunities/resistances, making you less gear/buff dependent. Moreover, you should expect significantly less damage when wielding a shield than not....they're defensive items and that's the sacrifice you make for extra survivability.
The only thing I'd really change with them (and heavy armor) is the maximum dex bonus - either increase by default or (as you suggested) through feats....maybe allow a Dwarven Defender or other unused class to bypass certain checks with them.
EDIT: on second thought....instead of requiring feats to unlock shield benefits, maybe the main benefit of using a shield should be that it can free up one/more defensive feats? Randomly assign a Legendary/Paragon save feat to each BUR shield and include Paragon Ability Skill feats on the higher end items.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 25, 2020 2:13:45 GMT
Nice summary, though like tomaan I'm not sure where I stand on your conclusions.
I will say that we are looking to change up the status quo in Mechanus, the next area set. Somewhat unrelated, though we are looking to address gear, stat, and class issues.
Also, we need someone to design loot, unless Raj reappears. Loot will not be a fix for these issues, but does require an understanding of the current balancing situation. I can do it, but that might result in really bad or too-good loot.
Funky
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 25, 2020 2:20:04 GMT
Having reviewed briefly the planned edits, one of them is both a general increase in monster ab and the addition of certain monsters with considerably higher ab - not just a random boss here or there. This addresses some issues, though not the core dualing/non-dualing one.
Funky
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Feb 25, 2020 6:03:59 GMT
i don't think it will ever be possible to truly fix TWF, or at least not in a way in which 1hing, 2hing, and DWing are egalitarian (or even close enough to be a competitive meta). Much like 2hing, and to a lesser extent, fists-as-gloves, it's simply a deeply-integrated part of the d20/3.xE system that is, unfortunately for video-game adaptations, completely and utterly broken.
the 2h experiment had the best intentions and essentially failed miserably. i could hardly expect a twf attempt to do any better (especially considering that, as above explains nicely, DWing is even more broken and harder to fix than 2hing).
keep in mind that i only refer to the system as broken, just in terms of essentially what is outlined above in Ad1-7 (as well as keeping in mind the fact that losing any gear slot to a weapon--be it offhand or bracer slot--is extremely painful in d20/3.xE). now consider HG and monks added into the equation and it's pretty intimidating, i mean monks and dualwielding in 3E/NWN splash system is a whole extra bag of phalli.
i'm all for it, but you know what, i'll be honest, as much as I wanted and tried to love the changes to date that deal with dexers and dwing, i dislike them. the game is less fun when stuff was changed to help dexers/dwers, and it still didn't help promote build diversity or anything, 2h is still OP asf and that meta won't change until it's nerfed into crap again (or outpaced by dexing, to yield same result). i'm not going to start a bandwagon fallacy but i'm not alone here, is all i can say, the heart is in the right place but in practice it's too messy and cumbersome to try fixing something that's so broken. tbh i don't really see any improvement now vs when i started in 2010, the only difference is 2hers replaced dexers/dwers, which would obviously immediately change if a bigtime patch was made to "buff" dexers again. it's just the d20 system, you can't have your cake and eat it too. dual wielding is broken from the start, the fix was 2 extra attacks, which yes i would 100% translate completely into the 2h 50% dmg buff; it was OP, got nerfed out of existence (2h didnt but it definitely still nerfed monks and staffies out of existence), meta reverted to standard broken d20 state of affairs. 2h% is in a wierd limbo (huk huk) of not being nerfed too badly, but definitely the next big change is gonna knock down from the throne, which would quite obviously be claimed by dwing once more.
i don't know, just like if you didn't have XR weaps that right there would have been a huge 2h buff that never materialized. it's so ironic that (iirc) part of the whole planning of XR weaps (alongside limbo and pre-limbo endgame mob stat tweak) was to buff dexers/dwers and nerf 2hers, but in fact it simply provided yet another ginormous buff for 2hers, and while yes technically did improve the lot of dwers (i mean yes, new weapons, technically buffs all tanks), it certainly was in the end, another boost for 2h.
big ramble and i don't have anything useful to submit but really it's a lost cause. TWF is broken cuz D&D sucks. that's all. fixing it would be as simple as re-instating the +2 attacks, which actually i'm fairly sure has been suggested by myself and others more than once in the past few years. tldr:
+nerf 2h more, -nerf staffies/barbs, +2 attacks for DWers, mobs tweaked back to favor Str/2hing more; completely re-design *from the floor up* weapon buffs, and weapons as items.
|
|
|
Post by Methes on Feb 25, 2020 6:25:52 GMT
Thanks for the reply. Maybe you're right and I just wasn't that lucky with randomization for super good shields. I see them as equivalent to any other gear slot and that's where I see the issue - they should be better than any other gear slot.
Increasing monster AB would give slightly higher incentive to go dual-wielding to be able to use a shield when needed BUT taking paragon weapon alternative is a better option to also get different damage type. (Speaking of which I can't see that feat in Documentation Summaries, maybe I'm blind. There's still old info there about two-handed bonus being 50% though.)
The weapon buff, kickback, feat requirement and AB loss still stands.
I don't really agree with you Bale. Yes, it's difficult to balance and there always will be a certain meta. But take a look at other (competitive) multiplayer games with many classes with completely different mechanics. It takes years of small tweaks to bring better balance to everything. While something may shine at the first glance to be the best, it usually has a counter at some place or another. While bludgeoning has the most edge in Hells, slashing deals the real blow in Limbo. Different meta forcing choices. On HG due to time issues there are little to no tweaks at all leading to one meta being the ultimate for all areas. There's no point in giving up on the balancing act, you may as well just remove the feature from the game, cause we know how full 119 is and where else would you use it?
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 25, 2020 6:53:15 GMT
i don't think it will ever be possible to truly fix TWF, or at least not in a way in which 1hing, 2hing, and DWing are egalitarian (or even close enough to be a competitive meta). . . . big ramble and i don't have anything useful to submit but really it's a lost cause. What a weirdly pessimistic post. I had to actively resist the urge to Billy Madison it. Bottom line is we could make dual-weild the most awesomest thing ever, if that's what we set out to do. This is all about numbers, and all context-dependent. The sheer variety of factors available to tweak makes your pessimism ring a bit silly. A small sample: Shields not good enough? Up monster abs. Two-handers doing too much damage? Reduce the bonus or limit it to physical. Kickback too much a pain for dual wielders? Limit the mechanic or reduce kb for successive attacks, link it to log scaling, or drop more items reducing kb taken. This is just a small sampling, and most of these ideas are not new. You seem to be laboring under the impression that because things have been out of balance for a while that that's some kind of necessary state. It isn't. The balance is continuously shifting as we release new areas, and will continue to do so until we hit the final endgame. Then we can drill down on trying to get a much more honed balance on a variety of axes, be they wiz-sorc, dex-str, 2h-dual, damage type balancing, and so on. will it all ever be in such perfect equilibrium that everyone will agree that all build options are perfectly balanced? Obviously not. But as to whether it is possible to get them refined to a level where a huge variety of build choices are viable alternatives, the answer is a trivially obvious 'yes'. Doesn't mean it will be easy, but possible? Tautologically yes. This isn't a dichotomous on-off switch, but a fine-tuning numbers game. It's honestly surprising that a player who has been around as long as you have would have such a short memory. What do I mean? Look at the factors on which Methes bases his assessment. Then look at whether we have altered them to meaningful effect in the past, or made edits that would. Then draw a conclusion about whether any of this is an inevitable state of affairs: 1 Damage differences: Have these changed in the past? See, e.g., two-hander bonus, weapon edits. 2. Dualing requires more weapon buffs. Make buff spells buff both weapons? Trivial, though I'm not saying we're going to do that. 3. Dualing requires twice as many weapons. Make twice as many drop. Again, won't be doing this, but the point is that we could. 4. Only dual weilding reduces AB. As Methes himself proposed, we could have it increase AB. Not sure that's the right choice, but it's not out of the question. 5. Only dualing requires 3 feats. We've added new feats in the past, and have plans for more, to force meaningful choice. 6. Only dualing produces more kickback. Kinda spoke to this above. Could also make certain weapon types not produce kb at all. You do realize that adding kb to monsters is a choice we made and continue to make, yes? 7. Not much reason to use a shield. One of Raj's suggestions for Mechanus was upping ab across the board on monsters. Amount uncertain, though I think the prsent plan is by 4. As you can see, all of the factors leading to dualing being out of favor are anything but inevitable. Anyway, to arrive at something approaching constructive criticism: posts like this don't help, in that they don't accomplish anything. Methes' post, by contrast, did, even if you disagree with his conclusions. Funky
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 25, 2020 6:54:44 GMT
I don't really agree with you Bale. Yes, it's difficult to balance and there always will be a certain meta. But take a look at other (competitive) multiplayer games with many classes with completely different mechanics. It takes years of small tweaks to bring better balance to everything. While something may shine at the first glance to be the best, it usually has a counter at some place or another. While bludgeoning has the most edge in Hells, slashing deals the real blow in Limbo. Different meta forcing choices. Bingo. FWIW Acid will be one of the best damage types in Mechanus. For reasons much like these. Funky
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Feb 25, 2020 7:56:44 GMT
You seem to be laboring under the impression that because things have been out of balance for a while that that's some kind of necessary state. It isn't. The balance is continuously shifting as we release new areas, and will continue to do so until we hit the final endgame. Then we can drill down on trying to get a much more honed balance on a variety of axes, be they wiz-sorc, dex-str, 2h-dual, damage type balancing, and so on. been hearing this about wizards for literally years. not holding my breath. the meta is the meta, it shifts continuously, yes, but the only one laboring under faulty impressions is whomever thinks that there's a nugget of gold hiding anywhere in the OP. i don't see much that would provide an improved or more enjoyable game (let alone the changes mentioned here are staggering in complexity?). weapon buff auras? what? i'd rather buff 3 sets of stygian razors with all 4 of my bots than play a tank that has to stand in an AURA for a WEAPON BUFF shields need love or are outdated i dont even? uhm yeah maybe it's the whole GIANT DPS INCREASE associated with "not" wearing a shield that needs some attention? the game's default setting is that shields are OP, and again as i said, losing it is such a penalty than HG required YEARS OF BUFFS!!! to overcome, creating a series of 2 eras, each definable by the reigning tank meta: DWer Age, and 2her Age. again, without any of those buffs, sword+board would reign supreme , as in any other server or PW, *up to and until* the point that the character/player is OP enough to pull of a DWing monk/monksplash dexer. this is pretty much universal! monk dex DWer is the most op thing in vanilla NWN! so i guess all im saying is this is all a series of unfortunate events but it's not too late.
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Feb 25, 2020 8:10:08 GMT
his response was classy enough. he found the time to say this: Thanks for the reply. Maybe you're right and I just wasn't that lucky with randomization for super good shields. I don't really agree with you Bale.
nice, thank you. i appreciate the time and attention to detail in your OP.
there's so much wrong here that i didn't have time to break it down step-by-step (historically doesn't prove fruitful anyway). here's a start:
Tanks were a joke for a long time and as is they have finally gained a lot of needed strength in comparison to casters, especially in lategame.
no. this is so much hearsay. it's just wrong. tanks were never a joke. the only time a tank isn't "needed" is exactly when the hell (no pun) it shouldn't be: when the core classes that are so OP enough to ONLY NEED THOSE 4!!! (@ the core hater crowd) that they can handle low-mid endgame runs without a tank. almost by definition this requires a) vet players or knowledge/guidance/practice; b) again, vet players or otherwise strong toons. but a joke? i dont get it. this is like forumbuild logic. that's what i'm labelling it. it's the same reason why deso's linked post is cool yet fail. it's forumbuild theorycraft. tanks were a joke for one period only, imo, that was the brief frenzied heyday of OP summons. in fact the truth is the opposite, tanks are too strong now. "Lowering their dmg would only bring the outcome I fear a lot: increase run times even more." Correct, but that's because the runs are slogs now, either by design (limbo), or due to the combined effects of nerfed casters+buffed mobs (pre-limbo. yes, tank dmg nerf would make limbo nearly unendurable, yet that's even considering how OP 2h XR wielding tanks are! this meta is so wacked out, but you don't even understand how or why. i'm the ugly troll but even not playing this game anymore i can tell you why limbo and 2hers and XR and Str and Dex and dw is screwed up. wanna know what makes runs sloggier? casters no longer able to insta very common mobs as in the past, for the pretense of "buffing" craptier dexers/DWers. it was a fail gesture imo (sorry sg--as for reader, yes i spoke with & supported her with a lot of past updates including a lot of those changes i reference here, don't assume me to be hating for the sake of hating). overnerfing RG, fissure, really hurt, overnerfing poison really hurt, overnerfing shifter really hurt. these things increased slogginess. things that decreased slogginess: XR weapons, 2h%.
if this is pessimistic it's cuz there's no positive reaction? how is the grandiose schemes oft presented in OPs such as this or the author of the OP-linked-thread, how are these things taken more seriously or more favorably than me saying adjust this % adjust that % undo that change undo that change, the only real hard devwork i'm asking for is a complete redux of the weapon buff system, which i'm far from the first to state as a *critical* issue. other than that all i'm saying is tweak numbers that were already tweaked. all this periannual pie-in-the-sky stuff about making NWN more like WoW or a ARPG/MobA, it just doesn't fly for me, and i don't think many are buying what you're selling there either, you know it's funny, the LoL mention makes me think, yeah I bet you spend a lot more time playing LoL than HG huh? just like couple of my HG friends, guess why, cuz HG kinda got little misbalanced and sloggy on top of the population doldrums, but hey if you want to play HG you play HG, if you want to play LoL you play LoL yafeelme? HG has enough auras for me, to me that sounds worse than just weap buffs as they are now?! but either way, the basic principle that enrages us is tying the most essential part of a tank's dmg output so closely to something "other than" herself, while casters suffer ZERO such consequences (i mean imagine if every map of every run had brood serpents on it?), or effectively zero once a particular player/toon is out of the early stages of broke poor newbie LLness.
i don't understand what the OP implementation suggesetion is and i don't agree that shields need love. shields are bad "who writes this crap" like seriously "heavy armor is outdated" i don't even? since when is outdated? sure, in the world of Endgame Scythe Monks (sorry couldnt resist the troll), but uhm the main driving force between heavy gear getting less meta and monks/dexsource AC getting more meta, is powercreep and PLs (seriously this thing has been analyzed to death so many times, but again like i said above it's inherent to NWN, once Player AC potential A meets or exceeds Monster AB avg B, then you can sacrifice everything for a giant sword or 2 swords to max out your dps, cuz now your a richboy, HG is not unique or bizarre in this regard, neither in world of NWN nor RPS in general), i mean yes there is a world where the optimal tank is so OP that it only needs dex and/or wis AC + some other BS (conceal of XYZsource+XYZcritimm/tempACboost), and a 2h weap, but that is not *the* meta in the way that 2h weaps or sorcs is *the* meta (imo). what i mean is that i can list some other tier1 heavy armor/tower wielders or things that arent monks: shiftertank. battlecleric. tankbotclerc. Str lash (don't have one myself but how could it not be better than dexlash if OPlygeared enough, and dexlash is a solid Alister considering how much of HG runtime is based on 2h XR wielding dmg to be inflicted). ok, not a big list, but it's there. is it being nitpicky? i'm not trying to be a jerk im just saying, i think it's a false statement and any argument derived therefrom is off kilter. in the sudden near future update world where dexers are the new kings? i dont know, again how can we have the cake and eat it too, so you're saying the only optimal tank is a 2h monk and everything else is outdated and bad, but at the same time we definitely know for sure that there are plenty of builds and toons playing on a daily basis that are extremely strong and are not monks or use a shield. the one good thing about this meta is that while 2h XR is THE! best, the synergy of other tanks to improve limbospeed or serve as much-welcomed tanks when needed in hardstuff, works well. but changing stuff to OP degree to match an endendgame meta is wrong imo, the real problem is that people forgot that before your 2h monk gets an XR 2h weap, you prolly better off with something that actually wears armor and a shield, like someone who wants to play a tank that tanks not a carpetfail useless bot. like stormlord is a 1h thing that cool proz have actually played in kewl places like limbo ya know? this is hard to believe, again, forumbuild theorycraft, reading this you'd think the only viable tank is a 2h monk, cmon. but buffing all this other crap and leaving those same OP boyz to their OP 2h ways would just result in>!>>!>! the same thing as now where they're OP and then runs are sloggy without them and then what mob stats will be changed to help make it easier for dexers/dwers again but gasp it's still 2h XR buffed damage that is the elephant in the room.
"Two-handers should recieve 1,5x kickback to follow their increased dmg output same as other categories do." no, that's why KB is a mechanism that punishes for quantity not quality, its like saying well coldball deals more damage than 1 round of evards to that PF so emp coldball should deal more kb to follow suit. i think a better question is, should two handers recieve bonus conceal penetration to match their improved damage? (actually it's my preferred solution to 2h buff, partially memed from another game, but i like the idea of "massive" weapons penetrating dodgey AC/conceal/parries etc better, ah derailnuu) give dwers 2 more attacks like they had back in the day. maybe 1, 2 depending if it's a really crappy weapon/weapon only picked in practice by a really crappy class (coff DwD). i wasn't there to see it much but if you ask me the similar treatment that both staffies&barbs, and DWers got, was overnerf to an OP situation. dwers not only lost the extra atks but they also lost the irresistible dmg; hard to say which one is/was more OP but both combined was def outta control (same as 2her%+PLs+XRweaps atm), losing both was a big hurt that they never recovered from. #facts. fissure/rg getting both base dmg dice nerf, as well as flying/wing dmg% loss nerf, literally killed those spells. pariah never recovered. shifter never recovered from this poison thing, just at a time when tank shifter was on the rise, caster shifter got a sick nerf, i wouldn't even take construct now other than abos, there's no need for a real shifter now and as a result/sympton feedback loop runs are sloggier, hells is so slow now without poison (plus then the other crap that can no longer be insta'd so now that assassins can get a buff rolleyes), no more siege golems to dmg spam bludg, no more OP dmg spam from RG, again back to staffy and staffmonk, RIP, deleted from existence, the 2h% dmg nerf and the loss entirely of the benefit just was too harsh in comparison to other tanks.
anyway i find it just weird that you on the one hand hone in on "not much reason to use a shield" but on the other hand " I do not advocate for lowering the two-handed damage". do you not see the direct link between 2h% and reason not to use a shield? you know, if my fuzzy memory serves correct, it was actually raj who had long championed for the 2h% change--long laboring under the impression, if you will, that 2h needed some lovin. however, we all agreed immediately, and as well in the past years, that post-2nd-2h-update it still wasn't right. but to act like this is fine is just wrong. it was done improperly in the first place--classes such as monks,divtanks,barbs,staffies, which already are built to go shieldless, were buffed equally with the rest--and wasn't properly fixed. i'm not trying to be a hater im just saying, this isn't news and it's not a state that makes any Occam sense to fix by inventing new crap. what makes sense is taking a close look at the trifecta of OPness revolving around XR weapons, 2h%, and buffed dmg. now this is a simple yet complex puzzle so allow me to explain: all 3 things create the meta, it's the state of OPness atm. if you don't untangle this knot then the rest of the thing is still screwed. a more nuanced re-look of 2h% dmg is definitely required. there is no question here, this sounds arrogant but understand it's my attempt at a sillogism, disagreeing with this means that you instead chose to engineer yet another layer of BS on top of this cumbersome structure. i just don't get why. look, limbo is ridiculously sloggy even WITH 2herXRwielders being crazystronk, cano drops sux, 2h% is too strong across the board, non-tanks got nerfed a lil, this is my opinion and i'm sorry it's so negative, but toss me a like if you read this sentence and agree at all
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Feb 25, 2020 9:03:26 GMT
Truth be told, physical damage is roughly the new unresistable damage type, thus two-handed weapons make everyone into the new cot.
If you want to favor wielding two weapons, spread more epic Dodge (perhaps triggering once per flurry) and less damage resistances into enemies. Make some monsters have a negative kickback, reducing their own damage immunity with each attack received. Maybe such monster could have auto restoration in order to require repeated bashing. What if a monster used party mode but didn't have that many attacks?
|
|
|
Post by horbag on Feb 25, 2020 9:43:08 GMT
i very much like this post, at least for me it is interesting as i am not good with testing and such, although i must agree the damage output dual handed vs two weapon fighting is bigger than expected i would not agree on buffs being a drag to do, i myself often fit the role of a cleric, and i happeley give everyone their buff as i look at it like this: one buff makes my life in the run easier but that might just be my strange thinking and yes indeed a shield lowers the damage, seems quite normal to me but they make for better tanks witch sometimes is a huge boon to have, sometimes it is nice to have that one person they just can not seem to kill wile he is helping the group get out of a sticky situation i like the idea that for giving bonuses to shields/certain feats you would need but i expect this is a huge amount of work and not that much fun to implement due to a whole lot of testing this will take to make sure it is all balanced i would not agree on increasing the KB you get on using two handed weapons, people who just get to hell already die to dam kb so often that this would ruin the experience as most don't start out with a chest full of good gear the first time they see hell
|
|
|
Post by Methes on Feb 25, 2020 12:17:16 GMT
I understand your negativity or perhaps even frustration. However, you've mixed multiple issues together as well as I have. Regarding buff aura I've stated it would be area wide. So definitely no area tanks have to stand in, that would be stupid of course. I don't advocate weapon buff system being good at all, I think it's faulty and the damage die should be implemented directly into weapons themselves, you correctly state casters have no such dependency on tanks. Adding damage die to weapons and leaving only nerfed self buffing as a flavor was suggested before and wasn't implemented so I offered an alternative, even though quite complex and requiring dev time. Tanks being a joke is simplification. Tanks tank, sure, they do that well and are needed in that regard, no question there. Their damage impact however was underwhelming for a long time and with two-handers bonus they finally started to get of the ground. That's what I mean. I like playing bards and don't mind my job being invisible to loggers and sometimes other players. Tanks vs. casters in terms of damage have finally improved though. Other changes that increased run times are not relevant to the weapon wielding balance issue. I periodically spend a lot more time playing Minecraft, haven't ever played LoL so you can bet what you want. The comparison I've made is because games evolve and NWN should evolve too if it wants to keep or increase its playerbase. People who started here in their teens are now in their thirties. They have jobs, families and other priorities than HG which requires astonishing amount of time to progress in a sane matter. Time people lack more and more. People playing here do so mainly out of nostalgia. Can't imagine teens delving into NWN anymore. Heavy armor + Tower Shield is outdated due to demi+PL+16 gear bonuses exceeding armor AC bonus even with 8 starting dex. If kickback is not altered and remains the same, two-handers have yet another advantage over dual-wielders trying to reach same damage with more attacks. True, the quantity/quality aspect would be nullified in this regard. The advantage of dual-wielders would have to be greater elsewhere then to reach balance cause as I said - more kickback -> more healing -> less damage output. But yeah, increasing kickback is probably not the way to go. The purpose of OP is not to fix all issues at once, definitely not broken classes that need individual approach. Sword+Board vs Dual-Wield vs Two-Handed is a general problem that needs general balancing. After you've done that and you've created a standard for damage/survivability, go ahead and individually balance each broken class and quasi. I only recently started adventuring in Hells despite my long playtime on HG. I don't know Abyss, Abo, Ely or Limbo or XR weapons, so I'm no expert. However in the areas I know I now find two handed tanks dish out nice damage that does not seem OP vs casters, more like finally equal. And it's subjective, I fully admit that.
|
|
|
Post by woqued on Feb 25, 2020 13:07:08 GMT
Almost can't believe bale wrote that thick wall that is quite irritating to read but I actually agree with most of it; perhaps because some of it has been influenced by our lockerroom talk.
You'll see the tank damage skyrocket when people get XR weapons. They vastly outrank Casters against any dangerous monster; oneshot crit trash, and cleave whole packs. Good tanks even pre-XR weapons were high quality goods; they just took more knowledge of damage types to pull off, and gearing was harder. Well-built 2h tanks will clear trash faster than casters due to the nerfs in Hells bale mentioned as well. Consider that dual-physical weapon types were so good they had to be removed from the game (though this was probably done more so with intent to balance weapon selection, not to nerf tanks but point stands).
Increasing KB damage across the board will only hurt new players; rich, smart or otherwise well prepared ones will simply gear around it and when it becomes impossible to gear around (see, Limbo has high esoteric and divine Kickbacks...); it will simply pigeonhole party setup and gear selection in a terrible way. I would not go that way, at all.
I agree that many shields are outdated, but even if they made your character nigh-invulnerable (they do, with proper gearing and building) people won't choose them because damage is more valuable after you reach a breakpoint. Even if you die occasionally, it will be worth it to do a huge chunk of extra damage 90% of the time rather than get a minor setback every other run. Shields need something other than defenses to attract users past a certain point, after that you will only use them if you're a high utility character that can't pull off 2h well (shifterlash - we'd 2h these if whips were 2h-able, lash, stormlord to name a few).
I'd rather see shield/dualwield get buffed by existing feats that you can gain by reading a dropped book pandect-style (hey, another goal to fight for, similar to caster books being a really exciting milestone) and limiting some of the existing 2h damage behind the same thing - and nerf XR weapon damage slightly, while nerfing Limbo mob HPs slightly (and I assume Mechanus when it arrives if they are similarly dodgy fellows as Limbo mobs). Though I'd appreciate an endgame zone with nigh 0 conceal and sr that just sport big BEEF machine-style.
You know, you could do a feat that makes you do an extra attack per round as a "shield bash", you could do a quick action like rogues that does damage or stuns/dazes; all shield users could get the warchanter taunt thing and warchanters could get something else in return for losing this speciality (they'd still be able to feat it in though ^^).. 2h damage could be nerfed to 40% physical 20% non-physical types; dualwield could get one extra attack, etc.
I'd use a slab of beef with 15/- dr as a base balancing dummy, below that DR dualwielding is supreme and above that 2h is supreme; and balance numbers as such. Dualwielding gets to take extra KB damage and reign supreme in terms of damage dealt majority of the game, where 2handers get to shine when their big blades cut into boss tier enemies.
--
Now weapon buffing is a tricky one. I think you already had this right if you let go of the spell slot requirements on them and let casters buff everyone with the cast of a button after a certain point in time has been reached, such as Legendary Levels where people start to have a lot of weapons and *require* a lot of weapons. The Roleplaying 2d6 bonus we get for going through the manual labour of buffing people is vastly outranked by the inconvenience 3d30 penalty we get for going through it. We already have the spellslots required to buff everyones' required weapons 95% of the time and the metagaming value we could get by optimizing against those low level slots is negligible.
|
|