Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

"Inflexibility" Principle

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> "Inflexibility" Principle
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
6/1/2013 15:19:54   
Stabilis
Member

This is a balance suggestion for health.

The bind:

  • weak stat points
  • low health

    The effects:

  • short battles
  • stat imbalance
  • strategy is neglected for shoot 'em up

    Possible solutions (only 1 of these [or a new idea] will be used):

  • more health per stat point
  • more stat points
  • nerf all damage
  • buff all defences
  • more health scaling per level

    More Health per Stat Point:

    Consequences = Ease of exploit. Health can be used to improve certain builds, such as those with Reroute or Thorns. This can also shrink the impact of Blood Shield and poison.

    More Stat Points:

    C. = All stats can be exploited. This also reduces the impact of equipment (damage, armor, stats).

    Nerf All Damage:

    C. = Imbalances Strength and Support with Dexterity and Technology.

    Buff All Defences:

    C. = Imbalances Strength and Support with Dexterity and Technology.

    More Health Scaling per Level:

    C. = Further reduces the impact of stat points in health. Autonomous help for Reroute and such as seen in "More Health per Stat Point".


    So I came to the conclusion that it would be best for balance to work with "More Scaling per Level" as it disallows players to directly exploit/abuse ...whatever you want to call it... health. Now, let us be honest here, this can still be abused by leeching off the benefits from extra health like Reroute. What this can do negatively for balance is imbalance whatever directly calculates health: damage will have a lesser impact, time in battles will increase, poison will remove less of a % from the total... etc.

    And what about allocating stat points to health? They would have an even smaller impact, yes? Instead of buffing that specific stat type, it is best we exclude from further balancing by discontinuing that stat. This is the inflexibility principle, stat points can no longer be added to health. This places a greater emphasis on damage vs defences.

    But how much more health will we gain? This is not within my area of information, that is up to Rabble and Titan. But if I did suggest numbers, every player at level 35 (or 30) would have 150 health.

    < Message edited by Depressed Void -- 6/1/2013 15:24:03 >
    • AQ Epic  Post #: 1
    6/1/2013 17:22:01   
    Kd
    Member

    		good post. My opinions:

    More Health Per Stat Point:
    This should return. If you think about it all other stat points (besides energy) have multiple benefits for increasing (i.e. increasing tech boosts robot damage, certain skills, resistance, and deflection chance) so having health increase at a faster rate seems logical. Ill go through the downfalls you mentioned- reroute: with the passive-->active switch the possible abuse of this should go down. Blood Shield: increase the cost, or change the skill in another way..lets face it blood shield needs to be re-worked anyway, but that's a different topic. Poison: increase the damage or lower the energy cost. Thorns is the only one i'm not sure about.

    More Stat Points:
    IMO this should happen alongside the health point increase...enhancements were bad because they created too wide of a gap between p2p versus f2p players, but they were good because they allowed for more build creativity. If everyone was simply given more stat points this creativity could return. Now, this obviously opens up room for abuse, but with diminishing returns/the ability to have both more health or defenses to combat high strength/support or vise versa the benefit of more creativity is greater.

    Nerf All Damage:
    Not in favor of this. Long battles are good, hitting 10 damage is boring.

    Buff all defenses:
    Not in favor for same reason as nerfing all damage.

    More Health Scaling Per Level:
    I was going to say that this was the downright solution to the problem except for the fact that the player base isn't large enough so that you always face people that are your level. This would further the gap between a level 30-35 (more stat points and health) or even a level 33-35, you name it. This would also make juggernaut an absolute disaster.

    The Inflexibility Principle: not a fan. The largest issue IMO right now is the lack of build creativity-the game just gets boring. By adding this absolute limit we are making this even worse. What if I want to sacrifice defenses for high hp? what if, what if, what if...? The game shouldn't just be based on damage vs defenses. That both takes out strategy and variety.
    Epic  Post #: 2
    6/1/2013 18:20:48   
    DANGER LOVE
    Member

    		Probably i dont like ....omega version epicduel....... i like previous version... please titan and Rabble,,, can u change this version .. there have many pro players also like previous version of epicduel.. that was interesting.. .... not this one... :(

    < Message edited by DANGER LOVE -- 6/1/2013 18:21:44 >
    Post #: 3
    6/1/2013 18:28:34   
    Stabilis
    Member

    		I am here to un-confuse any misconceptions in the event I did not articulate what I was trying to communicate very well.

    To begin:
    quote:

    What if I want to sacrifice defenses for high hp?


    I suppose I did not expand on the part where I said:
    quote:

    This places a greater emphasis on damage vs defences.


    What I was thinking when I texted that was picking a better of 2 situations in terms of stat balance. The greater would be accounting for only "damage vs defences"; the lesser which I did not mention, would be accounting for "damage vs defences vs health".

    Suppose 2 players could only allocate their damage and defences while they both have 100 health. Now, because health is our controlled variable while da. and def. (Strength, Dexterity, Technology, Support) are our independent variables, we can easily calculate if anyone is more likely to win (this is false) while paying attention to balance between stats. Because we are only allocating 2 sets of stats (damage dealt and damage reduced) we can ensure that no matter how the 2 players set their stats, nobody has better stats. As soon as you allow players to allot points to health, you added another variable dependent on da. or def. so you now have to balance health with the basic 4 stats. After all, 1 stat point is convertible to 1 health or 1 Strength, etc.

    Health as a changeable stat is horrific for stat balance because it cannot be compared to Strength or Dexterity, for example. And important note from earlier, health is dependent on damage and defences, not independent. This means health is only as effective as the 2 players fighting. To explain, we must remember that health lost is equal to damage minus defences (minimum of 3). Therefore health as a stat to be equal to defences must be equal in quantity to the sum of the enemy's damage reduced by the player's defences. This changes with different opponents, and therefore health is not quantifiable in balance comparisons. That is why I ditched the option to bring more health from stat points. This is like when the coders implemented more health scaling but on a larger scale.

    < Message edited by Depressed Void -- 6/1/2013 18:29:55 >
    AQ Epic  Post #: 4
    6/1/2013 18:59:33   
    Kd
    Member

    		Right, i understand what you are saying when you say, "damage vs defenses" versus "damage vs defenses vs health", I am simply disagreeing with you on your premise that the former is superior to the later. Ill address both of your paragraphs:

    the first: You discuss how adding health as an independent variable would mean all stats have to be balanced, which is essentially your whole point: that adding another variable to a system makes it more complicated, so health is hurting balance in the current system. However, you once again aren't accounting for the level difference, which is what your point is based on: if the players are the same level. Not to mention how this would hurt build variety as well.

    the second:
    quote:

    health as a changeable stat is horrific for stat balance because it cannot be compared to Strength or Dexterity...
    . Well, this is precisely why I suggested that health should scale faster (ie 2/1). This also doesn't link into your case that health should become a static factor in the game...it is simply an observation. You also aren't looking at the fact that certain classes do better with higher health builds. In general, bounty hunters don't need as much health because they gain health back through bloodlust, while other builds such as glass cannon tech mages need more health (which is what i meant by sacrificing defenses for health). Health being dependent on damage minus defenses and therefore not being
    quote:

    quantifiable in balance comparisons
    is also not a justification for this change that you are suggesting....and quite frankly makes no sense.
    Epic  Post #: 5
    6/1/2013 19:02:29   
    Stabilis
    Member

    quote:

    However, you once again aren't accounting for the level difference, which is what your point is based on: if the players are the same level.


    Unfortunately there needs to be a health difference between 2 players of different level as there is a difference of 4 stat points per level difference, equipment stats, weapon damage, and armor score. Including another advantage, health, is damaging as well although this can be compensated. If a player duels another of a different level, the lower-levelled player should start. The first strike can reduce the health advantage immediately.

    quote:

    Not to mention how this would hurt build variety as well.


    I agree that build variety drops with fewer destinations for stat points to go to, but balance is greater than variety. I will be explaining balance more here.

    quote:

    Well, this is precisely why I suggested that health should scale faster (ie 2/1).


    But we do not know for certain if health is lesser than the other stats. We have to be able to compare them on the same scale to make calculated findings that 1 stat point should be worth more health.

    quote:

    quote:

    health as a changeable stat is horrific for stat balance because it cannot be compared to Strength or Dexterity...


    This also doesn't link into your case that health should become a static factor in the game...it is simply an observation.


    The problem is, we already are assuming that 1 stat point is equal to 1 health: which is equal to 1 energy, or Strength, or Support, etc. We claim to think (not understand) that the difference between damage dealt and damage reduced is equivocal to the same thing that provides damage to the Primary and Sidearm. Any changes to health based on this way of thinking will only lead to experiments without hypotheses.

    Health should be excluded from stat points because it cannot be balanced. The comparisons are "apples to oranges". What stops players from exploiting health over defences after we buff health as a changeable stat?

    quote:

    You also aren't looking at the fact that certain classes do better with higher health builds. In general, bounty hunters don't need as much health because they gain health back through bloodlust, while other builds such as glass cannon tech mages need more health (which is what i meant by sacrificing defenses for health).


    I thought I did mention this in the first post. Reroute to name 1, directly benefits off of higher numbers in health clearly. We will just have to manage with what changes in balance this does to this assortment of skills. As for the statistics part of your argument, I am clueless. I stopped using statistics in my research since all I get from statistics is a way to visualize information, like graphs.

    quote:

    quote:

    quantifiable in balance comparisons


    is also not a justification for this change that you are suggesting....and quite frankly makes no sense.


    Well, this goes back to the old point where I refer to health as being incompatible with other stats, and then you become a fox news reporter and question my role in politics, then we have cake and move on. Then we do it all again the next day.

    < Message edited by Depressed Void -- 6/1/2013 19:48:46 >
    AQ Epic  Post #: 6
    6/1/2013 21:32:41   
    edwardvulture
    Member

    		add diminishments to health starting from two. Maybe add a zero to all the numbers so that there are less rounding as xendran suggested.
    AQ DF MQ  Post #: 7
    Page:   [1]
    All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> "Inflexibility" Principle
    Jump to:






    Icon Legend
    New Messages No New Messages
    Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
    Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
     Post New Thread
     Reply to Message
     Post New Poll
     Submit Vote
     Delete My Own Post
     Delete My Own Thread
     Rate Posts




    Forum Content Copyright © 2018 Artix Entertainment, LLC.

    "AdventureQuest", "DragonFable", "MechQuest", "EpicDuel", "BattleOn.com", "AdventureQuest Worlds", "Artix Entertainment"
    and all game character names are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Artix Entertainment, LLC. All rights are reserved.
    PRIVACY POLICY


    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition