Sapphire
Member
|
quote:
@SapphireCatalyst2021 argues that you should split blocking between STR, DEX and INT (though many others have argued this before). This typically involves giving Melee Blocking to STR, Magic Blocking to INT and Ranged Blocking to DEX. Doing this means investing in DEX will no longer provide Melee and Magic blocking. Thus, to get the same blocking you today, you would need to invest in all three stats. This forces you to hybridise if you want to use a blocking strategy. @SapphireCatalyst2021 states that this is ok because you don't have to use a blocking strategy if you don't like that downside. I fundamentally disagree with this notion for two reasons. Firstly, you could apply the same rhetoric to any implemented change. For example, if you don't like blocking being tied to DEX, you don't have to invest in DEX. The only underlying difference is that @SapphireCatalyst2021 makes the sweeping assumption that players only care because it's a META strategy and uses this to claim the change is justified. I believe this to be morally wrong; we shouldn't discriminate against META strategies simply because they are META. This brings me to my second point: this change would significantly weaken all blocking strategies and reduce the blocking design space. As described above, instead of this strategy being readily available to anyone with DEX investment, only those with STR/DEX/INT wiill be able to follow the same strategy. For obvious reasons, this is a narrow design space in a 3-stat system).
My proposal purposefully reduces blocking throughout all stats as I believe the blocking meta in-game is greatly OP. In addition, if Ranged damage remains as-is, and you keep blocking as-is, Dexterity as a stat evaluation does far more than INT and STR, thus making investing in DEX grant a player more overall power. 250 stat points in Dex doesn't equal 250 stat points in STR or INT. No matter how anyone wishes to mince words on this one assertion, I don't think anyone can entertain an argument against that. If people feel that's ok, by all means die on that hill, but technically Dex >Int and STR.
More importantly, the design space argument is actually the complete opposite of your argument. Decoupling DEX from universal blocking INCREASES design space. Staff can now design monsters in a way that it's attack (MRM) type MATTERS. In today's game, there is little difference between total MRM when you add stats, an armor, and a shield. Not enough to significantly challenge players. In my scenario, a player with STR/INT/LUK would lack Ranged blocking compared to Melee and Magic blocking and so the enemy, who is attacking with Ranged, would be more difficult for this character but easier for a character who trained DEX. This CREATES design space for staff to build monsters that cater to builds, make it harder for other builds, and doesn't limit design space due to such closely tied overall MRM stats. This means you CAN play blocking META, but not universally. Everyone then gets some blocking. WARD pointed out that currently, non DEX builds will always be hit with how the chance to hit formulas work. Now, anyone who trained at least 1 mainstat can play blocking at least sometimes. This simply opens up the game to more variety and isn't pigeon-holing the game with the same old, tired, stale ideas.
quote:
Keeping blocking attached to DEX obviously has issues. I went into detail about some of these e.g. there's a fine balanced between reducing damage to pay for blocking and making sure FO ranger stays competitive. With that said, splitting it among STR, DEX and INT makes things even worse. Both strategies force hybridisation (either DEX or STR/DEX/INT), but Sapphire's argument also removes a distinctive part of DEX. If you removed blocking, you could justify not giving DEX a damage penalty, but this would result in DEX becoming very similar to STR (undermining the very purpose of this latest stat update). We would be moving backwards in terms of creating a unique identity for Rangers. I don't argue, as claimed by Sapphire, to perform as little labour as possible. I simply believe we shouldn't give ourselves extra work for no reason.
Again, there is no forced decision. In fact, I would argue leaving DEX as-is is a greater influence to hybridize over decoupling it. In my proposal, everyone in the game no matter the build is making sacrifices somewhere... It's far more ideal to create these "If I train this, then that means that" scenarios. Leaving Dxeterity as-is will have a greater influence on build decisions in comparison to decoupling it.
I will admit, though, this may leave DEXT in a conundrum compared to STR in that STR will outperform DEXT in damage, and thus, may look to become the more valued stat. However, remember the initial proposal makes STR look weak and staff even asked for ideas to improve STR. I simply viewed DEXT as still OP, and my proposal solved the issue without introducing power creep and creating a Mainstat Arms Race. This decoupling you now admit, makes STR look better, too. So decoupling solved that problem. Now the issue if you decouple blocking, is what the design space looks like for Dexterity and THATS the issue IMO.
Dex looks weak compared to STR, and it's too strong compared to INT so players will hybridize and be INT/DEX and use Ranged weapons. So we now must reduce Ranged damage so that INT/DEX hybrids don't exceed the damage over time balance, but also create a Ranger niche. This is the hard part.
STR gained 2.5% Melee increased damage. What if DEXT gained 2.5% Melee blocking ? I still think blocking needs a quantifiable power in Melee% to really assess it.
In addition, An idea I just now had in looking through old Pedia info subs, is what if Ranged damage = magic weapons (would need to be a stat reduction) , but Rangers gain damage on skills WITH decreased SP costs for SP based quick casts.
Give Rangers the "Quick Cast" identity. Staff would need to create an entire slew of quick cast skills . What I am referring to is Terror, Sneak, Imbues, and a multitude of things that add stuff onto your attacks that, by default, are lower (to keep mage variants from abuse) The other thing that keeps Mages in check is the decision on spell slots. Will a mage use spells or these quick casts ?
Another thing I think needs to happen (if it's even possible) is the bonuses implemented on END need dropped, and then added back in based on End + which Mainstat you trained.
If STR + END is trained, the players gains a damage decreaser to itself. Because warriors are in tight, and thus need to be more resistant to damage up close.
If DEX + END is trained, the players gains blocking. BUt only if DEx is trained with END.
If INT + END is trained, the player gains a buff to healing.
All 3 is defensive boosts that can be equally quantified but remains different flavors.
I think if you can make imbues, quick cast skills like GTerror, Sneak, etc , etc shine with Rangers either through increased damage due to
|
Printable Version
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
