Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 284
  1. #201
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,241

    Default

    Trap XP

    The release notes say that the XP bonus for disarming traps is increased. I don't understand why; it was already attractive for people to stop and disarm, even when the trap had zero threat as an obstacle. In fact, trap XP had already been cited as a good reason to take 1-2 Rogue levels on a TR character.

  2. #202
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,241

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    You mean on builds that were underperforming? Because we players to have more build choices.
    1. I mean on all builds, including the ones that were already on the higher end. The ones who benefited from PPR, MMR, and Meleepower include not just S&B Fighters, but Monk Ninjas and Caster Blasters too.

    2. An answer of "class balance" or "build balance" was expected. But this is a classic example of nerf refusal: by buffing most all kinds of characters, they are now universally overpowered compared to the monsters. So now are you going to go through and buff every single monster and trap, anywhere in the game?

    3. The goal of "build balance" was not achieved, as a quick look at the Barbarian capstones will remind us. Predicted reply: "Barbarians will be in U25". Yeah, but it would've been better to fix the glaring problems in existing systems before creating whole new systems.

  3. #203
    Community Member Qhualor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    Trap XP

    The release notes say that the XP bonus for disarming traps is increased. I don't understand why; it was already attractive for people to stop and disarm, even when the trap had zero threat as an obstacle. In fact, trap XP had already been cited as a good reason to take 1-2 Rogue levels on a TR character.
    In my experience its a hit or miss. If there were traps between the start of the quest to the end of the quest, a trapper would sometimes disarm them. A lot of groups dont bother with side passageways to get the extra trap bonus like say Rainbow. Its actually rare to see groups specifically looking for a trapper, even in my daily Von 3s. If someone does get the traps, they are usually left behind. There are few traps I actually see groups pausing for the trapper instead of just running through them.

    This boost to trap xp might get some to slow down for the extra xp, but I doubt it will change most how they run quests. Traps need to be more deadly to get players to care more.

  4. #204
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    3. The goal of "build balance" was not achieved, as a quick look at the Barbarian capstones will remind us. Predicted reply: "Barbarians will be in U25". Yeah, but it would've been better to fix the glaring problems in existing systems before creating whole new systems.
    My problem with balancing one at a time is that it has resulted in FOTM builds.

    Bard swash was arguably one of the top classes, specially because with very little grind you could have a fantastic character for all kinds of content. It packed heals, massive PDS (SWF plus swash), self casted displacement.

    Now paladin is better than bard offensively (THF is king now with twitching, plus holy sword) and only behind defensively (but since overall defenses have become a bit of an overkill in this Lama update, it is not so crucial).

    Do we have to expect next update to have barbarians better than paladins?

    If you had updated paladin and bard at the same time, people would have complained that one was better than the other. Because bard was passed alone, most of us just let it go with a: "meh, bards deserve love even if it is too much".

    But now I personally worry that this is a trend, that every update will make king the class revised.

  5. #205
    Executive Producer Severlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    1. I mean on all builds, including the ones that were already on the higher end. The ones who benefited from PPR, MMR, and Meleepower include not just S&B Fighters, but Monk Ninjas and Caster Blasters too.
    One of the top concerns for players was that melee damage on Epic Elite was too high. This comes from player feedback. The PRR buff addresses that particular issue.

    2. An answer of "class balance" or "build balance" was expected. But this is a classic example of nerf refusal: by buffing most all kinds of characters, they are now universally overpowered compared to the monsters. So now are you going to go through and buff every single monster and trap, anywhere in the game?
    Our buffs address specific feedback from players in the balance threads and ongoing player communication.

    3. The goal of "build balance" was not achieved, as a quick look at the Barbarian capstones will remind us. Predicted reply: "Barbarians will be in U25". Yeah, but it would've been better to fix the glaring problems in existing systems before creating whole new systems.
    It is not our plan to balance the entire game at one time. We are balancing things in the order that players have reported to us that they need fixed. Trying to balance more than the large amount we already are would introduce too much change and risk in the system at one time. It would also make updates much too infrequent. If we dropped updates to every 6-9 months we would lose players.

    Sev~

  6. #206
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    1. I mean on all builds, including the ones that were already on the higher end. The ones who benefited from PPR, MMR, and Meleepower include not just S&B Fighters, but Monk Ninjas and Caster Blasters too.

    2. An answer of "class balance" or "build balance" was expected. But this is a classic example of nerf refusal: by buffing most all kinds of characters, they are now universally overpowered compared to the monsters. So now are you going to go through and buff every single monster and trap, anywhere in the game?

    3. The goal of "build balance" was not achieved, as a quick look at the Barbarian capstones will remind us. Predicted reply: "Barbarians will be in U25". Yeah, but it would've been better to fix the glaring problems in existing systems before creating whole new systems.
    Even when you increase difficulty accordingly (I still have hope that you will)... when 2 builds are better than 50 others, sometimes it really is better to nerf the 2.
    Now we have 6 builds that are good and 56 left behind.
    Barbarian pass will make that 7 versus 55. Yay.

    Okay, a lot of melee builds were improved to being close to competative, but other builds have fallen behind comperatively even more Like ranged non-furyshot (the sad joke that is artificer needs attention way more than barb now), many kinds of hybrid between spell and melee damage, etc.

  7. #207
    2015 DDO Players Council Seikojin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    gamertown usa
    Posts
    6,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigErkyKid View Post
    PS - Something that I think could work is to abandon the pretention of having PRR in a formula.

    Set the values of damage reduction that you want at certain PRR tresholds and then "connect the dots" for the PRR in between.

    This allows you a lot more flexibility to accomplish your different goals (early PRR mattering, but crazy damage reduction not reached to soon, etc.)

    I guess the devs already have in mind the sources of PRR. For instance, a pure caster is most likely getting at most 1 item and 1 enhancement, for a total of around 30-50 PRR. A heavy armored lad can get easily 100PRR. A more specialized defensive class goes up to 130-150 PRR. etc.

    The other option is to bring back the hard caps to PRR.
    I think having the hard caps is the best idea. This is why I mentioned having it on Lam before making a design decision. They could have adjusted caps based on feedback. Instead we had a huge uproar to it before it hit test, it got removed, and now everyone is powered up significantly and they are asking for a nerf. Seriously. People need to give feedback on actual test. Look at Cetus. Went crazy about the blitz changes, and in the last round spun 180 after actually testing it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    U23 Second Look Feedback Summary

    I didn't play the first Lamannia u23 test, but I did some of the second one. Of system changes that were noticeable, they were almost all bad. Players have way too much defense, and also do too much damage, especially Paladins. The overall game challenge was already too low, meaning not only the chance for a player to win or lose a fight, but also the experience of winning it (the number of milliseconds of attacking before each monster dies, how long I can survive AFK mid-battle, what percentage of monsters can be a threat, etc).

    It's baffling why they decided to take gameplay that was already "too soft" and make it globally softer. All I can figure is that a handful of specific combinations of character features were overpowered so they could do Epic Elite pretty easily, and instead of fixing the outliers they decided to boost all players in that direction, without noticing what it does to the rest of the game. Epic Elite was never supposed to be manageable, not for characters below level 35+. It existed as a "safety valve" so that players who happened to be too strong would have someplace to test their prowess, not something that everyone's entitled to beat.

    If it were up to me, I would honestly cancel adding MMR, the new PPR formula, Paladin buffs, most of the defender tree. Since it's not, I'll probably quit for 6 months and then peek at how things have gone in u24.
    They should put a hard PRR/MRR cap favoring heavy armors to get the best benefit. This way evasion has its place and non-evasion has its place. Given self healing, heavy armor should be viable even if at a more restricted amount than currently on Lam.

    In a perfect world we would have healer roles and tank roles, etc. So I personally don't mind if my solo player runs require me to have a hireling if I run elite.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    u23 Paladin stuff


    • Paladins are further from balanced than they were previously. That is, in comparison to Fighter and Barbarian (the other heavy melee classes, meaning full BAB without Evasion or strong spellcasting), they're now more too high than they were previously too low.

    • The biggest thing missing from Paladins now is an aura to protect nearby allies from phyiscal attacks. That would be an obvious way to make the class better without piling on DPS. The AC aura used to do this, back in a different AC system. Since you probably won't fix the AC system, the aura needs something else (like PPR).

    • Holy Sword is very overpowered. We could tell it would be, but testing confirms. (Even after the +W effect was removed). Aside from being too strong in general, Holy Sword means that Paladins gain too much power from level 14, as opposed to each of levels 2-13 and 16-20.

    • For an ability called "Slayer of Evil" to do full damage to Neutral and Good opponents is very stupid.

    • It is stylistically bad for Paladins to do passive Light damage on every swing, and a bit bad for balance too. It should be Bane or Physical, or otherwise not flashy.

    • It is very bad for balance that Paladin Slayer of Evil damage applies to non-Evil enemies. It should not hurt non-Evil, and have extra damage when they are extra-evil (subtype).

    • The KOTC core3 Slayer of Evil blurb is redundant with the core2 blurb. Advancing Slayer of Evil in core2 looks like the pattern is off.

    • For the benefit of new players, Extra LOH enhancements should require LOH first.

    • I'm not much attracted to KOTC tier5. In a lot of classes players will rush to get tier5 enhancements as soon as they're level 12-13. But since I didn't have Beholders on the menu, I was pretty happy to wait and fill it in later. Overall that's because KOTC t5 doesn't include a single super-damage effect. The 10 melee power is pretty strong, but it's not as obvious an improvement as crit profile, and putting it behind Censure Demons just kinda hides the true purpose of the enhancement. Holy Retribution was non-attractive because it didn't refill a Smite (and because it would subtract Divine Might duration). Having the Harper tree to consume AP distracts from getting t5, because I can obtain even more meleepower over there (although not from just 1 enhancement). The more meleepower I have from elsewhere, the less important it is to get this 10 points.
    The holy sword is to align pally with swash in terms of mechanic. The ability to increase threat range and multiplier for their favored weapons of that class. Since it doesn't stack with everything, it is balanced to be strong. Which is good. You have to use the spell slot and cast it, so that is good.

    I agree that instead of light damage they should do bane or physical with their passive abilities. If physical, have it be low and scale by melee power. If they want to stick to bane, have bane scale with alignment power. Which brings me to evil... Paladins are the zealots of a narrow worldview (stylistically in lore). Think of the Children of the light from Wheel of Time. They considered everyone servants of the dark. So even those with one step of alignment different than them... Evil. So I think it could and would be fine for their anti-evil things to work on everything except lawful good. It would make more sense if Pallys were limited to chaotic good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    U23 MMR Conclusion

    After trying it, it looks like adding MMR was a mistake.

    The Problem That Was Faced: Heavy armor builds aren't attractive enough, because they prevent use of character features that reduce damage by a percent on a successful Reflex save, and by a different percent on a failed Reflex save.


    A Straightforward Solution: Create some character features (in existing feats and new enhancements) which allow heavy armored characters to reduce damage by a percent on a successful Reflex save, and by a different percent on a failed Reflex save. (This aligns closely with the existing character feature, and doesn't stack with it, so it's easy to make them balanced)


    A Complicated Non-Solution: Create a whole new stat, available from multiple new sources, which reduces damage by a rating and applies to most things with Reflex saves, and also lots of things without Reflex saves. And which doesn't work on some Reflex saves. Allow it to work in conjunction with existing percentage Reflex-damage reducers, but with stat sources being lessened according to armor category. (This works on a much broader set of effects than the old feature, and can stack with it, so it's hard to make them balanced).

    Is it completely impossible to adjust MMR so it works acceptably? No, with enough effort and special-case rules it can be tweaked to fit. But it's not there yet, and the other approach would've been easier and more reliable. Right now Reflex-dump characters are too protected against Reflex attacks, characters in general are too protected against many non-Reflex attacks, and legacy energy defenses are integrated poorly. Wearing a big steel suit prevents Lighting Bolts, hurray.
    I think the idea of PRR and MRR is just fine. This is a scalable solution for damage mitigation. So they can have you take damage in low levels and high levels get softened proportionately. However I think light/no armor builds get a huge benefit versus medium and heavy armor users. Caps for light and no armor users is the best solution to balance that disparity, and if heavy and medium armors are too good, give them a cap.

  8. #208
    2015 DDO Players Council Seikojin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    gamertown usa
    Posts
    6,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabbler View Post
    1. I mean on all builds, including the ones that were already on the higher end. The ones who benefited from PPR, MMR, and Meleepower include not just S&B Fighters, but Monk Ninjas and Caster Blasters too.

    2. An answer of "class balance" or "build balance" was expected. But this is a classic example of nerf refusal: by buffing most all kinds of characters, they are now universally overpowered compared to the monsters. So now are you going to go through and buff every single monster and trap, anywhere in the game?

    3. The goal of "build balance" was not achieved, as a quick look at the Barbarian capstones will remind us. Predicted reply: "Barbarians will be in U25". Yeah, but it would've been better to fix the glaring problems in existing systems before creating whole new systems.
    Just as a friendly sideline fyi: Editing game code and fixing it after it has been deployed takes 10 times the resources to make any given change. So from the get go, any change takes a huge amount of time and money to make. After deployment of a product, you have to find the best return on that change. If adding MRR makes a huge return of pallys and heavy armors to the battlefield, and takes less time than to adjust the core system, then it is going to happen that way.

  9. #209
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,241

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    One of the top concerns for players was that melee damage on Epic Elite was too high. This comes from player feedback. The PRR buff addresses that particular issue.
    So EE damage was too high, but instead of reducing EE damage, let's reduce HC damage, HN damage, HE damage, EN damage, EH damage, and EE damage. I wonder how many players were concerned that HN and EN was too high...


    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    It is not our plan to balance the entire game at one time.
    A look at some alternate MMORPGs indicates doing it as an entirety leads to better balance results. True, the ones I'm thinking of have a higher staffing budget... but it comes down to the efforts of a single boss designer.


    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    We are balancing things in the order that players have reported to us that they need fixed.
    Hmm, well, it's a little bad for designers to act like a democracy. The "voters" have ulterior motives and are mostly much less expertise. But let's not get into that...

    Consider it reported that Monk Mystic Training needs a 15% bonus to staff speed

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    It would also make updates much too infrequent.
    It's hard to understand why changing the values of certain numbers in certain core enhancements would take so many days. Swapping 1d20 with 1d8, etc. It's true that doing easy, low-effort changes might not necessarily be a sufficient fix... but it'd have a chance of working, which is better than nothing.
    Last edited by Scrabbler; 09-02-2014 at 01:22 PM.

  10. #210
    Community Member Dagolar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    One of the top concerns for players was that melee damage on Epic Elite was too high. This comes from player feedback. The PRR buff addresses that particular issue.



    Our buffs address specific feedback from players in the balance threads and ongoing player communication.



    It is not our plan to balance the entire game at one time. We are balancing things in the order that players have reported to us that they need fixed. Trying to balance more than the large amount we already are would introduce too much change and risk in the system at one time. It would also make updates much too infrequent. If we dropped updates to every 6-9 months we would lose players.

    Sev~

    Epic Elite is SUPPOSED to be a difficult challenge- the hover text for the difficulty even says as much.
    For the first time in years, Elite really felt challenging.
    I just hope this update doesn't remove that-
    Lets compare (live servers):
    EN What Goes Up: Can be soloed by a level 23 toon.
    EH What Goes Up: Requires a reasonably functional party, with good teamwork, power, or level range.
    EE What Goes Up: Requires multiple of the above, and is still a challenge regardless [and if you have well built, high level toons with good teamwork, you can manage it relatively smoothly, but with just a dash of risk of danger]. [*Ignoring invisibility running and other exploits in this.]

    There are balancing flaws, especially for certain builds, yes.
    But the per-difficulty balance (with the possible exception of EN being ridiculously easy) is good.

    Honestly, once you get further along (with TR/ER, or end-gear), EEs (on live) are already a smidge too easy. Not enough to invite argument by any but the most hardcore powergamers or TR-Spammed toons; but enough that decreasing the challenge further will completely negate the challenge of EEs, to the point that they'll be swapped in for the current EH runs.

    We've already seen this problem with heroic runs, with basically noone (except newer players and casual solo players and the like) playing anything but elite.
    Unlike epic quests, heroic quests never got a pass, and have remained horribly underbalanced in regards to all the mechanic changes over the past few years [In terms of soloability, HE, relative to level, is generally a bit easier on a toon than EH- and a lot of the challenge present is due mostly to elite trap scaling (which is good)].

    Not that I mind being able to reliably get that elite xp on TR runs~

    Just pointing out that's probably not the atmosphere level-based end-game should have.
    Quote Originally Posted by Xeraphim View Post
    Fly? That would break every quest in the game. You would see folks falling from the sky in Korthos and dying. It would be a rain of newbs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dandonk View Post
    Yeah. It's not "we nuked the city from orbit", it's "the city experienced a brief population drop". Check.

  11. #211
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    You mean on builds that were underperforming? Because we players to have more build choices.

    Sev~
    Define underperforming. Speaking of paladins I have seen a few pretty awsome ones on live. Undestructable tanks. Yeah, maybe you don't need any tanks today, you can say, but imo you shouldn't have acces to god mode deffensive abilities and god mode offensive abilities in the same time (as it is now on Lammania). You have to choose either one: be great in deffensive OR be great in offensive OR be average in both.

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    One of the top concerns for players was that melee damage on Epic Elite was too high. This comes from player feedback. The PRR buff addresses that particular issue.
    I disagree. First of all it is Epic Elite. It should be difficult. And other than the threat of melee damage from mobs what other challenge in Epic Elite we get on live now? I can say you it is not beating 200k hp mob with autoattack on and cooking dinner in the meantime. I loved the Stormhorns in the time of release but by now it is discredited by all the power creep and unfortunately there is nothing challenging in that pack anymore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    Our buffs address specific feedback from players in the balance threads and ongoing player communication.
    Forum whiners ftw. /sigh
    Ryswell ~ Ryslynx ~ Naeryss
    Trolls Lair
    PewTube

  12. #212
    Developer Vargouille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Flying overhead
    Posts
    1,763

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalnarac View Post
    I have been reading most the post on the PRR math and it has been using 100 increments. I am hoping you are just doing this for simple math purposes. If I had 134 PRR, do I have a better benefit than 100 PRR?
    Yes. The math scales across each point of PRR, it's just simpler to use round numbers for examples.

  13. #213
    Executive Producer Severlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seikojin View Post
    However I think light/no armor builds get a huge benefit versus medium and heavy armor users. Caps for light and no armor users is the best solution to balance that disparity, and if heavy and medium armors are too good, give them a cap.
    We are planning to reduce the MRR caps; no armor will cap at 50 and light armor will cap at 100. We are avoiding capping PRR for now, but we have considered it.

    Sev~

  14. #214
    Community Member TPICKRELL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    1,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    We are planning to reduce the MRR caps; no armor will cap at 50 and light armor will cap at 100. We are avoiding capping PRR for now, but we have considered it.

    Sev~
    I and others have spent a lot of time farming out Divine and PDK past lives for PRR. It would be very unfair to limit the value of that PRR after the fact. So, if you do put a limit on PRR, consider either make it sufficiently high that normal PRR sources +past lives can fit, or make the past lives increase the cap.

  15. #215
    Community Member Thar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    You mean on builds that were underperforming? Because we players to have more build choices.

    Sev~
    He probably is talking about the melee power boost. If he's talking about pally's or sword/board tanks he never played one...
    Proud member of Caffeine - we aint stragicially savy, but we get &@#$% done.

    Kilthar-Thar-Delkanthalus-Carissa-Mirasina-Ktara-Imara-Thistle-Klunk-Robothar-Minithar-Tharissa-Miriella

  16. #216
    Executive Producer Severlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    One thing that's messing up our mitigation balance testing; (as players have reported) DR and energy resistance are being subtracted from damage after it is being reduced by PRR and MRR. That wasn't our intent as it makes those abilities far more powerful; the buffs to PRR are also effectively boosting the relative power of straight subtracted damage effects. We are discussing that internally.

    Sev~

  17. #217
    Community Member Thar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    One of the top concerns for players was that melee damage on Epic Elite was too high. This comes from player feedback. The PRR buff addresses that particular issue.



    Our buffs address specific feedback from players in the balance threads and ongoing player communication.



    It is not our plan to balance the entire game at one time. We are balancing things in the order that players have reported to us that they need fixed. Trying to balance more than the large amount we already are would introduce too much change and risk in the system at one time. It would also make updates much too infrequent. If we dropped updates to every 6-9 months we would lose players.

    Sev~
    the original guy is just mad that he is getting buffed and monks are not. or if he is a monk player that he isn't getting the coolness prr/mrr. keep on with tha balancing. Everyone should be able to have fun too.
    Proud member of Caffeine - we aint stragicially savy, but we get &@#$% done.

    Kilthar-Thar-Delkanthalus-Carissa-Mirasina-Ktara-Imara-Thistle-Klunk-Robothar-Minithar-Tharissa-Miriella

  18. #218
    Community Member Thar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    We are planning to reduce the MRR caps; no armor will cap at 50 and light armor will cap at 100. We are avoiding capping PRR for now, but we have considered it.

    Sev~
    prr cap would be bad since you can get 36 past life and 30+ from items + armor. melee need this damage reduction. all melee (even the monk haters).
    Proud member of Caffeine - we aint stragicially savy, but we get &@#$% done.

    Kilthar-Thar-Delkanthalus-Carissa-Mirasina-Ktara-Imara-Thistle-Klunk-Robothar-Minithar-Tharissa-Miriella

  19. #219
    Founder
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    You mean on builds that were underperforming? Because we players to have more build choices.

    Sev~
    We finally realized that you can't balance things around keeping blitzers at 250 MP.

    I think the next realization is that you can't balance things around a paladin arcane archer doing 20k damage without helpless from slayer arrow damage only on a single manyshot adrenaline volley (250 x 4 x 5 x 4) to everything in its path (easy to add helpless with pin). That is overpowered both on a single target and with IPS.

    You can't balance things around unlimited chain missiles with full spell power shiradi procs. I think this is mainly overpowered due to temporary mana boosts.

    You can't balance things around ranged attacks builds that have increased their ROF to almost the same rate as melee but also get their dex bonus added twice as two separate doubleshot chances to every target in front of them. This is mainly overpowered because of IPS.

    You can't balance things around wolves that get 30% attack speed from wolf form, 30% from SWF, 100% offhand, and high doublestrike.

    If you do balance things around those outliers then there isn't any challenge to the game.
    Everything that should be nerfed should be nerfed at once. Give the player base free +20 hearts to make up for it.

    If those outliers are fixed then you need to be very careful with the MP/PRR/MRR that you hand out.

  20. #220
    Community Member bbqzor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,034

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    We are planning to reduce the MRR caps; no armor will cap at 50 and light armor will cap at 100. We are avoiding capping PRR for now, but we have considered it.
    Why? Why make no armor so much lower than light armor? They have the exact same evasion mechanics available (both regular and improved). There is no reason for them to be artificially capped in a worse position defensively. They already have less sources of MRR available (no boost from armor and similar), why be so strict about ensuring they never reach as high?

    I can get perhaps wanting to stop "robe casters" from matching "armored tempests" or something like that, but theres no reason monks or simply high dex armorless evasion rogues/druids/etc should also be pigeonholed like this. None. Any response akin to "players thought it was too much"... its completely invalid. I am tired of jealousy resulting in biased feedback against different classes. So what if a monk can use MRR like a rogue... how is that any kind of problem?

    You have made a VERY clear divide that MRR and Evasion are two sides of the same coin, and with all of your changes this pass (from armor bonuses, to shield proficiency and evasion permission changes, to PrE based sources of MRR, etc) have supported that. This divide does NOT make sense in the context of two different MRR caps. It serves no purpose but arbitrary limitation.

    You have created two populations, Evasion and No-Evasion. There are PRR differences pertaining to armor types and the sourcing of various bonuses which result in a good distribution of ability across that curve. The MRR bonuses have only a passing relation, with some of their value derived from similar sources. But mechanically, MRR and Evasion are tied, and there is no reason to punish a subset of the evasion population with a smaller cap.

    Show even one case where this was needed to result in balanced play. I doubt such a case exists, and instead people are simply reacting over envy. I strongly hope it is reconsidered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    One thing that's messing up our mitigation balance testing; (as players have reported) DR and energy resistance are being subtracted from damage after it is being reduced by PRR and MRR. That wasn't our intent as it makes those abilities far more powerful; the buffs to PRR are also effectively boosting the relative power of straight subtracted damage effects. We are discussing that internally.
    I just tested the DR/PRR order last week. I did not see what is being claimed here. When I tested, it was the following order:
    - Mob hits you, DR is subtracted, PRR is applied to the remainder, you take damage.

    This was tested very thoroughly and held true across multiple cases. If anyone is seeing something different (ie, prr first, then dr) I would request a detailed description of what mobs/situation you were using, which sources of dr, what order it was equipped or applied in, etc. It is possible there is some bearing on the situation or order of actions which is affecting results.

    I used no dr sources except Shadow Guard Docent, being hit with melee attacks (mob swings) and ranged attacks (mob archers), with PRR swapping after the docent was on to generate a range of test values (so docent equipped first). I equipped DR first, saw DR applied first, and it worked consistently across a variety of attacks etc.

    I did not test energy resistance, but for "since I can remember" its always been:
    - Nuke hits you, protection is subtracted and/or resist is subtracted, absorb is applied to the remainder, you take damage.

    If that changed, I have no idea why, but Ill admit that one I have not tested in years. It probably relates to MRR, now that I think about it, that I didnt look into.

    If you can provide more information on either of these Sev I can test. Just post it.

Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload