RE: PSA: Dexterity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest] >> AdventureQuest General Discussion >> Game Balance Issues



Message

Strength.designer -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 0:17:11)

The problem I see with making Dex for Rangers as Str is for warriors is that by doing that you're just making a "clone stat" of Str with just another name and maybe even a "clone" build of warrior, lesser and with just a few differences. Nowadays we kind of have something like(ranger being a "lesser warrior"?) that and it may sound like that I don't want things to get better for rangers, but I do, just not like in the way many people are proposing.

I agree with the OP and I think that Dex should be its own particular stat with its own particular characteristics, there should be other ways to tinker with the Ranger build and make it unique and relevant without for it to necessarily need a "main stat" like warriors and mages have.

Another thing I wanted to comment on, with the danger of being off topic, is the matter of str affecting ranged weapon damage, I know for a fact that bows require considerable strength to be able to be wield properly in real life, also I presume that spears must be the same, but of course that the same can't be said of every ranged weapon in this game, as we have guns etc. It seems to me that the OP is considering the possibility of introducing to the game the distinguishing of kinds of weapons beyound the three basic distinctions(ranged, melee, magic), like "finesse melee", "blunt melee" etc. If after a lot of deliberation by the staff and a lot of testing it is found to not break the game or anything, I think this idea could add a lot to the game, both to the gameplay aspects but also to the rp aspects, specially now that we are going to get crafting. This way the graphics of the weapon might matter actually other than being solely for aesthetics and could reflect "what kind of weapon" that weapon is.

This way we could have some melee weapons using more dex for accuracy, others leaning more towards the "str side"(even though heavy melee weapons should require dexterity too of course), same with ranged weapons.

As for mages, I'm not a native English speaker, but I went to the dictionary and searched for "dexterity", and it looks like it refers to things of the wit as well, so there's that.

To sum it up, if it doesn't break things I would like if the game moved away from the "str for warriors", "dex for rangers", "int for mages" one dimensional "clone" thinking. Maybe not mess with warriors and mages(let's not fix what works), but please let's not turn dex into another one dimentional stat, that would ruin a lot of build diversity and uniqueness of builds in my opinion.



Primate Murder -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 1:08:25)

@ Kaelin

With Dex becoming a not-main stat for warrior/mage builds, how would the block/dodge work? I mean, at the moment it presumes 15% dodge at 200 Dex (250?). If Dex is changed to become non-vital, then what number would the dodge rate be based on? 0 Dex? 100 Dex?


@ Strength.Designer

Dexterity is a one-dimensional stat right now. It is a requirement for every single build, which means that it is the least unique stat in the game.

Furthermore, rangers as a build do not actually exist right now - they're just a subset of warriors, using the exact same stats.

Presuming Dex is changed to provide around the same boost to melee/magic as Luck (and no boost to companions), it stops being crucial for pure builds and creates an actual identity for the ranger build - not to mention the fact that being able to remove points from Dex actually increases build diversity, as promised in the newsletter.



Branl -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 1:14:02)

quote:

You're not. Kaelin heavily implied that DEX already plays a substantial role in determining ranged weapon damage (outside of accuracy), which is ridiculous, to say the least. Even if she were right, however, ranged weapons always get the shaft (ah, pun honestly unintended) and 98% of the best items are only toggleable between melee/magic, meaning there'd never be an incentive for a 0-STR "ranger" or mage to use a spear in the first place. :/


She... didn't imply that.

quote:

* As for why Ranged stat damage is skewed towards STR, we're operating on a "20 turn standard" where warriors can do 1 Melee per turn with 20 Melee attacks, and mages do 4 Magic spells and 16 Magic weapon attacks. The Magic spells are considered 2 Melee in power, and weapon attacks are 0.75 Melee in power, so 4*2 (Spells) + 16*0.75 (Magic weapons) = 20 Melee damage. So, Mages and Warriors come out the same. What you see with Ranged weapons currently was a plan to have a Warrior using Ranged weapons (STR and DEX) be able to deliver the full 1 Melee per turn, but for conventional mages (INT and DEX, but no STR) be able to do 0.75 Melee per turn. Despite the STR component being so large on Ranged weapons, it only leaves 20 proc Ranged weapons doing a little less than the target of 75% (although the cap raise has changed this a little): about 27% of damage comes from "specials" that ignore stats, about about half of the rest (37%) comes from base/random and not stat, already putting a player at 64% Melee damage if the player had full accuracy -- it didn't take much more to put a 0 STR player up to their 75% limit.


Because they don't want mages cheating the 20 turn model by investing in Dexterity , then never using magic weapons, Ranged Weapons and Dexterity are set up in a way that Warriors can make use of ranged weapons to get their normal damage output while Mages can only use ranged weapons to about .75 effectiveness, the same weapon penalty magic weapons ensue.

Most of the damage of a 20 proc ranged weapon comes from factors absent of stats. Rangers investing in Strength would straight up do less damage than if they invested in pets (or would be if the way multipliers interact with each other got addressed). Rangers get weapon damage similar to mages, but instead of an extra resource bar, they get extra stat points.

quote:

Mages can abuse Ranged Damage with DEX and end up doing more weapon damage with ranged attacks while spamming spells which imo is one of the biggest design flaws that need to be addressed with DEX.


This isn't a thing. They do the same amount of damage. Factoring in Booster Pets, magic weapons do more damage for mages than Ranged Weapons.

Also, how does making Dexterity yet another damage stat increase diversity?
250 Str/Int/Dex 250 Luck 250 Charisma would be literally all you see.

quote:

With Dex becoming a not-main stat for warrior/mage builds, how would the block/dodge work? I mean, at the moment it presumes 15% dodge at 200 Dex (250?). If Dex is changed to become non-vital, then what number would the dodge rate be based on? 0 Dex? 100 Dex?


I know this isn't aimed at me, but I would guess it all depends on how much (If at all) Dexterity contributes to bth. The more Dexterity contributes to bth, the higher the assumption for blocking/dodging, and the less it contributes, the lower in order to compensate.
She appears to just be throwing around ideas, I don't think we'll have a solid answer for at least another week or so.



AliceShiki -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 1:28:53)

@Primate Murder FD Rangers are still a thing, yanno? Don't write off the existence of Rangers just because they're the same as warriors when using FO... >.>



Primate Murder -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 1:48:50)

I know, I was just talking about the build stat-wise. Rangers and warriors both need to max their Str and Dex.

Sorry if that was unclear.



Aura Knight -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 4:05:08)

It would be very nice if rangers didn't need strength and only had dexterity as a main stat. Unfortunately this is probably not an easy change. What dexterity offers is no doubt important for many builds. And just moving effects to another stat wouldn't work since the other stat may already serve a purpose. Perhaps it's time AQ gets another stat that can take the place of what dexterity does currently to allow for dexterity to become its own main stat and not a necessary secondary one.



CH4OT1C! -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 4:16:56)

quote:

@Alchim said:
Resonating with what LUPUL LUNATIC is saying; I do not understand how making dex a main stat is bad or even how it restricts builds. Isnt one of the main problems how dexterity is like a mandatory stat no matter what (exception to the newly released werepyre hybrids)
I dont know about anyone else but when i created my account in 2005, you were given an option between 3 classes; warrior, rogue and mage. But it turns out only 2 of them actually got an specialized stat, hell even beastmaster got one and they werent even there. You even had a 3rd type of weapon called ranged alongisde melee and magic yet it is the only one that needs 2 stats for its damage!
Warriors and rangers both need Dex and Str, and so do beastwarriors and beastrangers. They are virtually the same builds because of how dex is tied to melee but somehow str is also tied to dex.
You would actually be creating a new build class (like you would assume if you made a new account for the game)!
STR is for warriors
DEX is for rouges or rangers
INT for mages
Then you get customizations because each build only needs one stat to actually work (beastmaster would need two) so thats how many variations?
STR with DEX and INT (Being able to utilize all 3 types of weapons, blocking and spells)
STR with DEX and END, STR with DEX and CHA etc etc
What you get for training dex is being able to utilize a weapon type (ranged). You should be able to choose a build and not be obliged to train any other stat other than your main one. i dont want dex to become END2.0. I want it to be viewed like INT, STR and CHA, a stat you base a build upon.
FTR, this is just my opinion as a player who was introduced to the game by a friend in 05, soon going to be playing for 14 years. If the direction that the game developers wants to take ends up being a defensive dexterity then so be it, it is just sort of counterintuitive from what the game is.

I understand your point, but I agree with Kaelin. Let me explain:
Kaelin's argument is that a player will train [mainstat] That provides damage and accuracy. In other models (like mine) you wouldn't need damage and accuracy from other mainstats because you've already provided it. The only remaining benefit would be type blocking. That isn't much of a benefit. Yes, you'd still probably get hybrids. With that said, similarities between builds means that you're not necessarily encouraging people to be as creative. Kaelin's system changes that. He's suggesting that ranged weapons should deal less damage, but in return offer blocking for everything and initiative. There's more of a reason to use DEX than just "STR but with ranged". It further differentiates the builds. In total:
Melee weapon attacks - 100%
Magic weapon attacks + spells = 100% (average)
Ranged weapon attacks + blocking + initiative = 100% (average)
So overall, DEX would be just as powerful as Melee/Magic. As for why ranged weapons need 2 stats (STR/DEX): Ranged weapon attacks equal [x]% damage.
[x] + blocking + initiative = 100%. DEX contributing to ranged damage should equate to [x]. STR should bring [x] the rest of the way to 100%. Without it, ranged weapons would be inherently weaker than their melee counterparts. Anyone running STR and DEX would just run melee weapons. Making it add to 100% means both are equally in favour. You could argue "what about magic weapons?" but this is a different situation. Magic weapon users are expected to use spells too. These average out to the 100% damage. If STR were to contribute to magic weapons, hybrids would be inherently stronger than mages.

Now here's where LUPUL's argument starts to fall apart. If ranged weapons equate to 75% melee, they do no more damage than a magic weapon. If mages chose to run DEX, they'd get it for blocking and initiative, not extra weapon damage. Again, that is fine provided:
Ranged weapon attacks + blocking + initiative = 100%
Essentially, Kaelin's turning DEX into a pseudo-[mainstat] by using this system. Provided it's balanced correctly, it should work out. LUPUL's other argument concerns 100 proc users. They don't benefit from melee investment because there aren't 100 proc weapons to exploit it. In this sense, you need the 100 proc melee weapons to fully benefit from investing in STR. Kaelin's argument does this, provided 100 proc melee weapons get introduced. 100 procs would also deal [x]% on DEX alone, then have blocking and initiative take it to 100.



LUPUL LUNATIC -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 10:09:03)

quote:

Kaelin's argument does this, provided 100 proc melee weapons get introduced.


Imo, DEX wouldn't even be broken if we had such weapons introduced and not force 100 proc Rangers into an UP position!
This and DEX not affecting Beastmasters are the only changes that solve the current DEX being UP for 100-proc Rangers and Beastmasters situation.
Therefore we wont even need drastical DEX changes then.
We had sooo much time to see such weapons and still yet those do NOT yet exist.



CH4OT1C! -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 14:49:12)

quote:

@LUPUL LUNATIC said
Imo, DEX wouldn't even be broken if we had such weapons introduced and not force 100 proc Rangers into an UP position!

However, this point is about items rather than the stat being unfair. The stat would be fair, there just aren't items (currently) to take advantage. That can be solved in due course.



Kilvakar -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 22:30:43)

I guess I would just like to first ask the question, WHY? I know that a lot of people are annoyed that DEX provides so many bonuses, and is a requirement for all builds due to it being the main defense stat and providing a large chunk of everyone's accuracy. But to me it seems like this stat cap increase, when combined with us not getting more stat points but the formulas being changed so that we're required to have our main stats at 250 just decreases build diversity, not the other way around.

For example, I had to increase INT to 250 just to get my mana back up to where it should be, and I've also been told that I need CHA at 250 now as a beastmage since pet status infliction has been rebalanced to require 250 CHA to work well. It seems that when DEX gets changed, I'll have to decide whether to max DEX to avoid getting hit every turn, or LUK to be able to deal damage. All these changes effectively remove my ability to both be avoid damage and be able to deal it as well.

I have to admit that I REALLY have no understanding of the math behind the game, so I could be totally in the wrong in my assumptions. But from what I see people saying, it looks like these combined changes are just going to have the effect of forcing most people into three stats at 250 with their options for different play styles being severely crippled. If someone could explain how all this is supposed to help improve the game, that would be much appreciated. I don't mean to sound like I'm complaining, because I'm not. But I truly would like to understand the reasoning behind all these changes and how they're supposed to help improve AQ.



Broccoli -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/18/2019 23:52:21)

I wish dex was 100% of range so I wouldn't have to invest in str without losing damage.
Freeing up dex for other builds certainly helps them but idk if those builds needed more stats to throw around compared to something like an fd beastranger.



AliceShiki -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 0:50:50)

@Kilvakar You don't need 250 CHA to inflict statuses, but it is indeed more likely to happen if you do have it. (it's a bit complicated to explain it without entering into the numbers, but... When you're using a status that goes against END, if your enemy has END you'll want 250 CHA for maximum inflicting chance... If the enemy doesn't have END though, just 100 CHA is enough. So having high status inflicting chances depends a lot on what status you're using and against what enemy.)

INT is pretty much the only all-or-nothing stat in the game I guess, since it's almost always a waste to have any amount lower than 250 in INT... The almost part is because you can try doing some weird stuff with a few utility spells that don't care for stats, but those are rare.

In any case, being forced into having 4 stats also hampered build variety considerably, making everyone have a dump stat simply because there was nothing better to do with the last 150 points was kinda bothersome... Having 3 stats instead gives more freedom to play with, and people are starting to play around with different types of builds other than 250 in 3 stats, instead of always having 200/200/200/150 spread we always had before.


At the end of the day, no system will be perfect, but I think having 250 stats is a lot better than the 200 cap we had previously~



Ryu Draco -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 1:57:29)

I have no intention of being pushy, but do we have any kind of a timeframe for when the changes to stat formulas will go live? Also, someone made a comment about how with the current formula 100% proc ranged weapons don't need STR as is. Am I missing something there?



AliceShiki -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 4:16:41)

@Above 100% proc weapons still use STR as normal.



Ryu Draco -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 4:26:27)

Ah, alright. That makes more sense. I just thought I heard someone say 100% weapon users would be better off.



ruleandrew -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 6:18:36)

Ideal stat type role

Melee weapon damage (no stat): 0.5 units
Melee weapon damage (250 STR): 1.125 units

Ranged weapon damage (no stat): 0.375 units
Ranged weapon damage (250 DEX): 0.84375 units

DEX need a blocking role to make this stat type as strong as STR, INT, CHA, END and LUCK.

Magic weapon damage (no stat): 0.375 units
Magic weapon damage (250 INT): 0.84375 units

Spell damage (no stat): 1 units
Spell damage (250 INT): 2.25 units

Number of spell casts per 20 turns for INT users: 4

Pet damage (no stat): 0.2 units
Pet damage (250 CHA): 0.45 units

Guest damage (no stat): 0.3 units
Guest damage (250 CHA): 0.675 units

Player hp pool (no stat): x
Player hp pool (250 END): 2.25x

LUCK: provide lucky strike damage, role in chance of first strike, minor role in blocking and minor role in status system save roll



LUPUL LUNATIC -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 9:46:04)

quote:

For example, I had to increase INT to 250 just to get my mana back up to where it should be


Yes, you are very right, changing the ExpStat to 250 for Mana basically negated the extra power we were promised, Beastmasters that wanted to use Summon Guests now are literally forced into investing 50 more points into INT so that they can have the same mana pool for their Guests, even though INT literally doesnt actually do much for actual Guests besides providing the upkeep!

Raising ExpStat to 250 just means we end up wasting 50 more points to have the same effect as previous with 200 points and i do hope this will be taken into account cause i can see this being a big problem,ExpStat shoulda been 200 since the beginning, even now with the DEX changes trying to solve the bth with ExpStat 250 is already a nerf to players in this context. ExpStat should be 200 for all purposes !

@ruleandrew: Make assumptions for 200 not 250 stat points otherwise we end up wasting 50 points for the same effect as 200 stat caps before ! This is your flaw with your suggestion!

quote:

At the end of the day, no system will be perfect, but I think having 250 stats is a lot better than the 200 cap we had previously~


As long as ExpectedStats dont go up to 250 you are right, otherwise we end up doing the same with 250 like we did with 200 this is the main catch and problem with raising the stat caps.

quote:

I wish dex was 100% of range so I wouldn't have to invest in str without losing damage.


Your best hope should be 100% proc Melee weapons, at least for now they provide better stats for lower points invested,like 250 STR 100% proc Melee weapons would be better than a 250 DEX with 100% proc Ranged weapons.



Branl -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 11:37:31)

@LUPUL LUNATIC
Let's be real here, players do need some kind of a nerf. The game is entirely too easy due to inane multiplier interactions. Each build should have their strengths and weaknesses. Beastmaster Rangers have the most accurate pets and most likely status inflections, but among the lowest Player damage. Nobody uses the build because there are other builds you can play that don't incur any kind of penalty. Booster Pets either need their funky interactions with other multipliers removed, or have the 3 MC effects in one nerfed heavily., or even both.

Before you could run 150 Endurance and still deal out the highest damage and have the highest accuracy the game can possibly offer. Broken player items and stats may be good in the short term to please people who love seeing big numbers, but it's horrendous if yoi're trying to give this game the largest lifespan possible. If the game is no challenge, you aren't going to have a game people keep coming back to.




LUPUL LUNATIC -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 12:27:13)

quote:

Booster Pets either need their funky interactions with other multipliers removed, or have the 3 MC effects in one nerfed heavily., or even both.


See, thats a problem with pure builds right now and why those were the top for a long-time without actually having any weaknesses as you want to say. Yes their pets wont have status effects,but they will deal and top every other damage pet in the game(including pure damage beastmaster ones) when only paired with Armor Lean and Elecomp.
And no,even if those were pure CHA they would still be broken unless the interactions were fixed/tweaked (which kinda means butcher them or still be broken one out of the 2 there is no fine in-between line)

quote:

Beastmaster Rangers have the most accurate pets and most likely status inflections, but among the lowest Player damage


See, you'd rather overcap Damage than Accuracy because overcapping Accuracy is strictly worst than Damage considering most monsters arent extremely dodgy like some of them.
Its a design problem but one relevant enough to just consider Damage over Accuracy any time of the day.
Which is why Rangers would prefer DEX being FULL damage rather than FULL accuracy for their ranged weapons , it would help 100-proc ranged weapons a lot even if that may not make it thematic.(or maybe it would ?)

quote:

Let's be real here, players do need some kind of a nerf.


We can get to the nerfs later,as of now we have to make design of stats great. Nerfs however are more related to items rather than stats which is the discussion right now.




AliceShiki -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 16:54:14)

quote:

As long as ExpectedStats dont go up to 250 you are right, otherwise we end up doing the same with 250 like we did with 200 this is the main catch and problem with raising the stat caps.

Cap is 250, it only makes sense to have expected stats go to 250. I don't mind if this reduces the overall powelevel of players.
quote:

Your best hope should be 100% proc Melee weapons

If you want one, I think you should make a thread in the suggestions subforum about it... Rn I can't think of how this kind of weapon would make sense flavor-wise, so I don't see them ever happening.
quote:

Nobody uses the build because there are other builds you can play that don't incur any kind of penalty. Booster Pets either need their funky interactions with other multipliers removed, or have the 3 MC effects in one nerfed heavily., or even both.

Well, boosters already got a severe nerf with this new update, now they need CHA, cap bonus at *1.1 stat and require 250 stat for the same output they gave before... I don't see them getting nerfed any further than that in all honesty.
quote:

We can get to the nerfs later,as of now we have to make design of stats great. Nerfs however are more related to items rather than stats which is the discussion right now.

Most broken items in the game will never be nerfed though? Like... EO will probably remain the same until the ends of time~



CH4OT1C! -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 17:19:14)

quote:

@AliceShiki said:
Well, boosters already got a severe nerf with this new update, now they need CHA, cap bonus at *1.1 stat and require 250 stat for the same output they gave before... I don't see them getting nerfed any further than that in all honesty.

Taking a middle line here - @branl is right. Booster pets are still not fairly balanced. However, @AliceShiki is also right in that it's unlikely the staff will nerf them again. Sort of follows on with...

quote:

@AliceShiki said:
Most broken items in the game will never be nerfed though? Like... EO will probably remain the same until the ends of time~

EO should be nerfed. It is overpowered (reasoning, on the HP cost GBI). Fixing such things aren't quite that simple

quote:

@AliceShiki said:
Cap is 250, it only makes sense to have expected stats go to 250. I don't mind if this reduces the overall powelevel of players.

Not sure how I feel about this. Your logic makes sense. However, the opposite also makes sense. The logic was to boost points in one stat, not nerf all stats. Bit of a grey area



Kilvakar -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 17:30:46)

I agree, I really hope that the Expected Stat calculations aren't raised to 250. It pretty much defeats the purpose of raising the stat cap. What AliceShiki says about wanting to have a "super-effective stat" instead of a dump stat makes sense, but not if all the formulas are changed to expect the corresponding stat to now be at 250. The fact that people can play around with builds with stats less than the maximum doesn't mean much if those stats aren't going to be very effective. For example, right now I feel like pet affliction is pretty unreliable against most high-level monsters, even at 200 CHA. Yes, they may have 0 in a certain stat, but most monsters have either high DEX, LUK or END, making status infliction difficult no matter what. Dropping CHA to 100, especially if the expected stat is going to be 250, will only make pets worse. The idea of removing a "dump stat" sounds good in theory, but in reality that fourth stat provides a very big bonus and removing it, you are effectively nerfing every build, not making new, better ones.

I do like the idea of STR, DEX and INT becoming the sole accuracy stat for the respective weapon types, with LUK providing a small additional bonus. Not so much that it becomes necessary to invest in LUK like it is for DEX now, but enough to still make annihilator builds viable.

The main problem I see is with defense. If DEX is still the main blocking stat, then people will be forced to choose between DEX and END for the defensive stat. DEX for blocking, or END to not get destroyed in a couple turns since monsters do so much damage. While having to pick between two essential stats instead of one is technically giving us more options, the end result is the same issue we have now.

Also, I really don't like the idea that this is supposed to be a nerf to everyone. The whole hype around the stat cap increase was touted as a long-awaited feature, not a way to make everyone weaker and ensure that battles take longer.

I guess the TL, DR version of what I'm trying to say is that unless we either A: have expected stats remain at 200 for all calculations, including INT, or B: get more stat points to put into other stats after getting your three at 250, the end result is going to be that all builds become less effective in everything but their main stats.

That's just what things look like to me from my point of view, and I hope that all of this discussion brings about something great for us in the future.



LUPUL LUNATIC -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 19:35:46)

quote:

The main problem I see is with defense. If DEX is still the main blocking stat, then people will be forced to choose between DEX and END for the defensive stat. DEX for blocking, or END to not get destroyed in a couple turns since monsters do so much damage. While having to pick between two essential stats instead of one is technically giving us more options, the end result is the same issue we have now.


Well if i had to choose DEX for Blocking or END for more HP i would choose no doubt END because relying on RNG to block/dodge something is simply not strategic for a turn based game (at least in my view).
Would rather try to make DEX as a controllable Dodge of some sort so that it competes with the guaranteed END defense.



roobee -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 20:49:48)

quote:

I don't see them getting nerfed any further than that in all honesty.

I dunno. The boosters have been nerfed multiple times already. So it wouldn't be surprising if they get nerfed again. Although I'd prefer they just get nerfed once exactly however much they should be nerfed. That way people who are considering getting it can make an informed decision.



Kilvakar -> RE: PSA: Dexterity (1/19/2019 20:55:32)

Yeah, most people pick DEX right now because of the combined effects of blocking and accuracy. If we take away the accuracy factor, then grabbing END will make more sense for the guaranteed survivability factor.

I think that as long as DEX becomes a main stat and accuracy is switched from DEX+MainStat+LUK to just MainStat+LUK, we should be ok. But if DEX still factors into accuracy for all builds, then beast builds and hybrids are going to see a huge drop in effectiveness.

If we could actually go without DEX and not miss all the time, I think things could be relatively well-balanced. I guess it all depends on if the're going to go with leaving the expected stat at 200 or recalculate everything based on 250 expected stats. On that note, I would also hope that they re-adjust INT so that we keep the same amount of mana we used to have at 200. I know, having the ability to cast 5 spells would make people really upset at mages, but as it stands the cap increase was actually a big nerf to mages. Again, that probably makes some people happy. But even so, doing this piecemeal before actually thinking through the results of the changes is just going to leave us all in limbo with less effective characters until the final decisions are made.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.125