April 05, 2020, 08:09:43 am

Author Topic: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK  (Read 12316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DeathCow

  • Guest
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #15 on: September 14, 2010, 10:31:55 am »
'Now this I could get behind.  This is a reasonable change.  I don't think it should be something they invoke as that implies magic.'

Outside of the +Acc suggestion I make above. I suggested something the other day I'd like to reiterate here.

Give Hunters the ability to purge caster-buffs? Like an 'energy' based skill to remove X buffs from target player. This ties in with the witchhunter theme and would make them fun/useful.

I see where this idea comes from, I'm not really a fan of spell-esce abilities for hunters.

Offline Void

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #16 on: September 14, 2010, 10:38:00 am »
[ quote]
I think that for the most part players tend to like QND until the issue of 1 round PVP comes up.  I've purposed scaling down the QND bonus somewhat, and I know that isn't what your looking for, but its a step inbetween.  Anyone else have any thoughts or feelings on this?  I personally am not too attached to QND, but I feel like alot of the player base would no favor removing it from the game.
[/quote]

Qnd is something that everyone gets.  Eliminating it completely will create a larger gap I think at high levels between the geared and not?  Does that sound accurate?  My concern there isn't that the geared will get too powerful but that the lesser geared will have an even harder time killing them?  Not sure if my thinking is off here - speaking of pvp of course.  Ideally qnd would give you a minimum bonus which depreciates as your own stats and gear surpass a barrier?  Just thinking out loud...

Offline Gardner Denver

  • Coder of Utilities
  • Administrator
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2712
  • Karma: +41/-54
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #17 on: September 14, 2010, 10:51:58 am »
I just don't think given the changes we've already made to the game that anyone should be able to get a 100% defence against an attack type.  It's not all that different from allowing someone to hit 100% dodge IMO.

DeathCow

  • Guest
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #18 on: September 14, 2010, 11:10:31 am »
I just don't think given the changes we've already made to the game that anyone should be able to get a 100% defence against an attack type.  It's not all that different from allowing someone to hit 100% dodge IMO.
Well If we went through and made it so that 50% of the monsters in the game were exclusive spell casters then yes, then it would be the same as allowing 100% dodge.

Since we aren't going to do that, it isn't the same. Also in the grand scheme of things it constitutes a very small change to the over all game.  This all seems rather arbitrary, we could cap accuracy at 75% using your argument..hehe.

I'm honestly not sooo into this idea that it would bother me to no put it in, but I've yet to see an argument at isn't about other classes..when this particular ability isn't about them, its about adding to WHs.  If there is a particular issue with having 100% res your against or just the idea in general?

Also, what changes are you refering too?

Offline Gardner Denver

  • Coder of Utilities
  • Administrator
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2712
  • Karma: +41/-54
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #19 on: September 14, 2010, 11:25:12 am »
I'm looking at it from the pvp perspective more than the pve perspective and my objection is based on that viewpoint. 

As to changes, my God man have you actually played on GreaterMUD??  And by play I don't mean sys set  yourself to lvl 75 with pimp gear, I mean just play like a normal player would.

Most classes here seem to do far better than they ever do in regmud.  I'm sure the removal of the 10 spell limit (boo!) and the changes to the way encumberance affects your combat have a lot to do with that.  I have no doubt that some of it is also due to bugs that have not been addressed but I think at this point that is a minor contribution to the way characters perform here.

Offline tab

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #20 on: September 14, 2010, 11:42:54 am »
Quote
Paladin   5-9      3   All   All   220   Priest-1   Smash2
Cleric   4-8      3   Blunt   All   180   Priest-2   Smash2,Meditate3

Okay, I really don't understand this.  A paladin gets access to edged weapons, but a full level lower of magic ability, without access to meditate, and pays 40% more for it?  Combat 3 completely marginalizes the class into obsolescence.

Offline PTERY

  • Adept
  • ****
  • Posts: 129
  • Karma: +9/-11
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #21 on: September 14, 2010, 11:55:28 am »
Okay, I really don't understand this.  A paladin gets access to edged weapons, but a full level lower of magic ability, without access to meditate, and pays 40% more for it?  Combat 3 completely marginalizes the class into obsolescence.
Sharps are much better and more readily available, both lim and unlim. You are severely limited by weapons as a cleric. Basically you need a TSM or hope you get a 2h questor (and even those are weak relative to their 2h sharps counterparts). The heaviest-hitting unlim weap that a cleric can get (besides questors) is a gargantuan stone maul. Eep. Compare that to a WBS.

#: 1207, Name: gargantuan stone maul, Type: 2H Blunt, Damage: 18-45, Speed: 3600, LVL: 40, Str: 110, Enc: 400, AC: 0/0, Acc: 7, BS: No, Limit: 0, Dmg/Spd: 17.5
>> Abilities: Quality +5, HitMagic +5, Del@Maint

#: 876, Name: wicked bone scythe, Type: 2H Sharp, Damage: 20-65, Speed: 4400, LVL: 40, Str: 90, Enc: 250, AC: 0/0, Acc: 0, BS: No, Limit: 0, Dmg/Spd: 19.32
>> Abilities: Magical +4, Quality +4

Personally I think the game could use another unlim 2h blunt weapon, something that hits for 20-50ish. As it stands, you're almost better with a stormhammer (vs. a GSM). The stormhammer hits for a little less but it's faster, has the lightning extra and allows you to equip a shield. So really, unless you get a TSM or that 2h questor, a cleric holds no real weapons advantage over the 1h classes.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2010, 12:11:54 pm by Ptery »

DeathCow

  • Guest
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #22 on: September 14, 2010, 11:58:41 am »
I'm looking at it from the pvp perspective more than the pve perspective and my objection is based on that viewpoint.
The players whom were arguing against this idea already pointed out that it is "impossible" to kill a WH with spells anyway so if that argument is correct...then this kind of upward migration doesn't change anything for them.
Quote
As to changes, my God man have you actually played on GreaterMUD??  And by play I don't mean sys set  yourself to lvl 75 with pimp gear, I mean just play like a normal player would.

Most classes here seem to do far better than they ever do in regmud.  I'm sure the removal of the 10 spell limit (boo!) and the changes to the way encumberance affects your combat have a lot to do with that.  I have no doubt that some of it is also due to bugs that have not been addressed but I think at this point that is a minor contribution to the way characters perform here.
Its not like I didn't know changes have been made, I'm just failing to see what changes are incompatible with this one.  Or any that are even related?

Since we are talking about changes that have been made, I'd like to point out that  4 second combat rounds negatively impact the game, as well as the encum changes negatively impact the game.

The 4 second combat rounds make everyone's exp/hr askew, and drastically change the relationship between spell and combat round. Unless you've changed spell rounds to be 2.4 seconds. I had a level 25 human warrior I was working with and with standard plate he was running at 95% enc...How slow is he moving at that point? Making changes to game play based of realism is almost always a bad idea. :(.  I wasn't a fan of removing 10 spelling to begin with, but its kinda just a personal choice what we wanna do with that, and I can live with either way.

Offline tab

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #23 on: September 14, 2010, 12:11:59 pm »
Sharps are much better and more readily available, both lim and unlim. You are severely limited by weapons as a cleric. Basically you need a TSM or hope you get a 2h questor (and even those are weak relative to their 2h sharps counterparts). The heaviest-hitting unlim weap that a cleric can get (besides questors) is a gargantuan stone maul. Eep. Compare that to a WBS.

#: 1207, Name: gargantuan stone maul, Type: 2H Blunt, Damage: 18-45, Speed: 3600, LVL: 40, Str: 110, Enc: 400, AC: 0/0, Acc: 7, BS: No, Limit: 0, Dmg/Spd: 17.5
>> Abilities: Quality +5, HitMagic +5, Del@Maint

#: 876, Name: wicked bone scythe, Type: 2H Sharp, Damage: 20-65, Speed: 4400, LVL: 40, Str: 90, Enc: 250, AC: 0/0, Acc: 0, BS: No, Limit: 0, Dmg/Spd: 19.32
>> Abilities: Magical +4, Quality +4



That's an itemization issue and not a balance issue.  We're talking about adding classes and races to the game, a hammer that's better than a garbage trash drop to compare with a garbage chest drop doesn't exactly seem beyond the pale.

On purely level grounds in an ideal situation, a cleric is objectively better in every way than a paladin.

120 Agility, light encumb, and combat 3 will not be QND with a wicked bone scythe until level 77.
Gargantuan Stone Maul is QND at level 59.

A paladin with a scythe will lose in damage to a cleric with a maul.  In the meantime, the cleric will have better healing spells which completely nullifies any scant hp advantage the paladin may have over the cleric, while paying less experience for the whole package.  This is not a compelling change for the paladin class, or the diversity of class selection on GreaterMUD in general.

DeathCow

  • Guest
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #24 on: September 14, 2010, 12:12:22 pm »
Okay, I really don't understand this.  A paladin gets access to edged weapons, but a full level lower of magic ability, without access to meditate, and pays 40% more for it?  Combat 3 completely marginalizes the class into obsolescence.
Ptery has my theory on the matter sumed up pretty well

Sharps are much better and more readily available, both lim and unlim. You are severely limited by weapons as a cleric. Basically you need a TSM or hope you get a 2h questor (and even those are weak relative to their 2h sharps counterparts). The heaviest-hitting unlim weap that a cleric can get (besides questors) is a gargantuan stone maul. Eep. Compare that to a WBS.

#: 1207, Name: gargantuan stone maul, Type: 2H Blunt, Damage: 18-45, Speed: 3600, LVL: 40, Str: 110, Enc: 400, AC: 0/0, Acc: 7, BS: No, Limit: 0, Dmg/Spd: 17.5
>> Abilities: Quality +5, HitMagic +5, Del@Maint

#: 876, Name: wicked bone scythe, Type: 2H Sharp, Damage: 20-65, Speed: 4400, LVL: 40, Str: 90, Enc: 250, AC: 0/0, Acc: 0, BS: No, Limit: 0, Dmg/Spd: 19.32
>> Abilities: Magical +4, Quality +4



In general, access to all type weapons is pretty big when compared to blunt.  I'd consider lowering paladin's exp chart from this, but I'd prefer to have that justified by game play rather than conjecture. I am fairly confident that paladin are far from obsolete like this, but obviously not the power house they were before. Not to sound crass, but the idea is balance..not to placate every class.

Offline tab

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #25 on: September 14, 2010, 12:19:39 pm »
Ptery has my theory on the matter sumed up pretty well

Again, it's an itemization issue, not a balance issue.

Quote
In general, access to all type weapons is pretty big when compared to blunt.  I'd consider lowering paladin's exp chart from this, but I'd prefer to have that justified by game play rather than conjecture. I am fairly confident that paladin are far from obsolete like this, but obviously not the power house they were before. Not to sound crass, but the idea is balance..not to placate every class.

The whole point of balance is that every class has a compelling reason to be picked and to be played.  These changes to the paladin class are not in balance, it just marginalizes them.  There's no compelling reason to pay more for less with the paladin class at combat 3.

Clerics get more tools in their kit and they pay for it with less experience and the only concession that they make is to lose access to an edged weapon that really isn't that great to begin with.  Do you not see the flaw here?

Offline PTERY

  • Adept
  • ****
  • Posts: 129
  • Karma: +9/-11
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #26 on: September 14, 2010, 12:23:37 pm »
A paladin with a scythe will lose in damage to a cleric with a maul.
The paladin can smash with the wbs from level 40, but I see your point. The proposed changes certainly limit the paladin's abilities, but the paladin has long been the strongest class in the game. It's just something different from what we're used to. And really if we see fewer paladins over time that's not so bad is it?

In re: your point of edged weapons not being that great to begin with, I think they are...I think it is a pretty massive advantage, even if paladins are reduced to combat 3.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2010, 12:26:29 pm by Ptery »

Offline tab

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #27 on: September 14, 2010, 12:30:19 pm »
The paladin can smash with the wbs from level 40, but I see your point. The proposed changes certainly limit the paladin's abilities, but the paladin has long been the strongest class in the game. It's just something different from what we're used to. And really if we see fewer paladins over time that's not so bad is it?

And the paladin pays with it in the experience penalty of 220%.  The only classes that paid more are Mystics and Rangers, but both of those classes are now below the Paladin in costs.  The Ranger is at 200%, keeps Combat-4, and gets upgraded to chainmail armor.

So, let's recap:

Most expensive class in the game. 
Fights like a cleric. 
Heals worse than a cleric. 
Less mana pool than a cleric. 
Less mana regen than a cleric.
Can use a sword.

DeathCow

  • Guest
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #28 on: September 14, 2010, 12:31:02 pm »
Again, it's an itemization issue, not a balance issue.
I don't think.....your using that word right??  If you're trying to say what I think you're trying to say then you're just not getting it.  Blunt weapons are weaker because they are suppose to be, they have intentionally been made that way, it isn't by mistake. Sharp weapons out damage Blunt weapons...by design.

Quote
The whole point of balance is that every class has a compelling reason to be picked and to be played.  These changes to the paladin class are not in balance, it just marginalizes them.  There's no compelling reason to pay more for less with the paladin class at combat 3.
Thankfully now that I've explained it you can see that the Paladin isn't necessarily less, because having access to Sharp, is more than access to Blunt.

Quote
Clerics get more tools in their kit and they pay for it with less experience and the only concession that they make is to lose access to an edged weapon that really isn't that great to begin with.  Do you not see the flaw here?
You're manipulating the truth in an attempt to justify your argument. 
« Last Edit: September 14, 2010, 12:32:34 pm by DeathCow »

Offline Prescience

  • Novice
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
  • Karma: +4/-2
Re: Tackling Balance issues, ATTACK
« Reply #29 on: September 14, 2010, 12:41:11 pm »
Not that I played Paladins much to begin with (I have hard time role-playing as a Jewish Paladin), but changing Paladins to combat-3 means I will never play them.

I understand that Pally's can wield edged weapons but Clerics can out-heal Pally's. In essense both classes are even with the combat-3 change, but a Paladin is more expensive to level. I'd play a Cleric if I ever wanted to play an underpowered priest class :P

Make Rangers combat-3 and I'm switching to Wardancer :P