Booster Pets (Again) (Full Version)

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



Message

CH4OT1C! -> Booster Pets (Again) (12/29/2018 14:27:31)

Credits to @LUPUL LUNATIC for doing a lot of the work behind this GBI

A recurring theme of the GBI section since their release, booster pets (specifically Poelala, Dunamis and Thernda) have been notoriously difficult to balance. Each offer a way to significantly boost player attacks. This, when combined with the nuke meta, make them must-have items. They're also well-known to be overpowered. This is down to 2 main reasons:
1). Each pet relies on [Mainstat] rather than CHA: Pets deal 20% melee with 0 CHA. This scales to 40% at 200. Using [Mainstat] rather than CHA offers a 20% incease in damage, the equivalent of 4 mastercraft bonuses. The pet also uses STR rather than CHA to begin with!
2). Unintended item interactions: These pets boost player attacks rather than having a seperate damaging attack of their own. This has unintended consequences. Normally, pet attacks cannot interact with items that specifically boost player damage. Booster pets can interact with these items because they boost player damage instead of attacking themselves
Both of these issues need addressing in order to properly balance booster pets. However, I also want to preserve 2 characteristics of booster pets:
A). They boost player attacks rather than attack themselves
B). Use Mainstat to increase the boost

Addressing [mainstat]: Using [mainstat] rather than CHA accounts for 4 MCs worth of damage. Therefore, booster pets must scale with CHA. Replacing it with [mainstat] would be unfair to other pets. However, I still wish to include [mainstat in the formula. The simplest solution is to add a mastercraft effect similar to macka-lot buckler. In this case, the damage boost would increase by 10% scaled using [mainstat]. This is shown below:

Boost = 20+(20*[CHA]/[VStat])+(10*[Mainstat]/[VStat])

This boost would apply to all melee/ranged/magic attacks respectively. However, this would incur a penalty. It increases player attack damage regardless of element. As such, pet damage technically follows weapon element. It will also cap at 1.1* VStat (to prevent abuse)
Chickencow clone is the best analogue for the situation since it also follows weapon element. The pet received a penalty for compressing 8 elements (*0.6) converted to a +(+0.06/1.4)% increase in monster damage to the player. The pet mastercraft has already been used, meaning a penalty for 7 element comrpession is required. As such, the boost must receive a *0.65 penalty.
Furthermore, this pet attack also autohits. This incurs a further *0.85 autohit penalty. Therefore, the final formula is:

Generic (in %)
Boost = (20+(20*[CHA]/[VStat])+(10*[Mainstat]/[VStat]))*0.65*0.85
Specific (in %)
Dunamis: +(20+(20*[CHA]/[VStat])+(10*STR/[VStat]))*0.65*0.85
Thernda +(20+(20*[CHA]/[VStat])+(10*DEX/[VStat]))*0.65*0.85
Poelala: +(20+(20*[CHA]/[VStat])+(10*INT/[VStat]))*0.65*0.85


Note:
A). This boost applies to player attacks only. Therefore, it applies to normal weapon attacks, weapon specials and spells. It DOES NOT apply to skills. These form a part of the player turn formula seperate to solo player damage. As such, they do not receive the boost.
B). Mages DO NOT receive the *4/3 bonus and *1/2 penalty on magic weapon attacks/spells respectively. If these boosts were applied, they would interact with certain unavoidable modifiers such as armour lean and elecomp.

Addressing Unintended interactions: By removing the *4/3 and *1/2 to magic weapons/spells, some of these unintended interactions have already been curbed. However, unintended interactions can also arise with other damage boosting items like miscs and CIT. As such, this damage boost needs to be treated as a "pet attack", applied separately:

Original player attack = X
Player attack + Misc boost + Armour boost (etc.) = X + Y + Z
"Pet" boost = + X*[(((20+(20*[CHA]/[VStat])+(10*[Mainstat]/[VStat]))*0.65*0.85)/100]
Final boosted player attack = (X + Y + Z) + "Pet boost"

This will avoid unintended interactions and give an appropriate boost from Dun/Thern/Poe.



Primate Murder -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/2/2019 3:55:24)

Three things worth mentioning here.

First: Mack-a-Lot Buckler gives +7.5% boost, not +10. The 10 in the formula refers to max possible boost.

Second: Kam mentioned how stat-scaling effects should cap at 1.1. Therefore I suggest adding a max of 1.1x to stat boost. No more hax interactions with AA/BBB.

Third: Making it a pet attack is a horrible idea. Stuff like Aria's Rattle boosts your pett attacks by 45%, which would break the boosters all over agains. I think somebody suggested making it a 'type other' attack, like GD or PWD? That seems much more reasonable.


Other than that, I do agree on all points.



CH4OT1C! -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/2/2019 5:18:50)

quote:

@Primate Murder said:
Three things worth mentioning here.

First: Mack-a-Lot Buckler gives +7.5% boost, not +10. The 10 in the formula refers to max possible boost.

Second: Kam mentioned how stat-scaling effects should cap at 1.1. Therefore I suggest adding a max of 1.1x to stat boost. No more hax interactions with AA/BBB.

Third: Making it a pet attack is a horrible idea. Stuff like Aria's Rattle boosts your pett attacks by 45%, which would break the boosters all over agains. I think somebody suggested making it a 'type other' attack, like GD or PWD? That seems much more reasonable.


1) First, I'd need to change it anyway as I've realised it is 1.05* damage rather than 5% melee total because it's a pet. As such it would run 0-3% boost (that's why Chickencow clone has +(0.06/1.4)% monster damage.

2). It would obviously have that buffer included. I tried to just rework the bits that were broken.

3). Yes, exactly. That is intended. I'm tagging the boost itself as "other" because I don't want it to interact with other damage boosts that affect player attacks. However, the intention is to deliberately treat the boost as if it were a pet attack (you know, because it comes from a pet).



Primate Murder -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/2/2019 5:38:33)

Hm, you have a point. I'll admit to being a bit worried, since player-boosting miscs cap at 20% and pet-boosting cap at 50% (because pet's 40% total), but maybe it could work out. I do wonder how it would interact with celerity stuff, though.


I've just realized another point. Boosters should not have an autohit penalty. It's not that they always hit, it's that their accuracy is tied to player accuracy. If the player misses - so do they. An autohit implies that damage would be dealt anyways.



CH4OT1C! -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/2/2019 9:02:00)

You'd think so.
However, I'm treating this as a specific pet attack. The job of this pet is not to damage your opponent but to boost your damage. In this regard, it cannot miss. That is why it takes the autohit penalty.

Put it another way. A pet has a seperate bth roll to determine whether or not their attack lands. If booster pets didn't have an autohit penalty, the roll would essentially be the same as the player attack. For 1 roll, you'd get double or nothing.



Primate Murder -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/2/2019 9:23:32)

That way, the rate remains 85% for both player and pet.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm all for nerfing the boosters. It's just that with the current formula you pay an extra 15% damage for a hit that doesn't land. It's like saying that Lucky Strikes should have *0.85 rate because you can't miss with that LS damage.



AliceShiki -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/2/2019 9:37:41)

I didn't want to bother with commenting on this thread until the stat cap rolled in because boosters will definitely need to change once stat caps change, but...

I just realized Boosters don't seem to have an element seeking penalty at them (I think their current penalty is the *0.9 of always useful?) I suggest changing it to the usual *0.8/1.2 penalty of element seeking to put it in line with the new extra BTH spell.

And I agree with Primate Murder, boosters should also get a cap in their boost to 1.1x mainstat, to avoid broken interactions with stat boosting stuff~



CH4OT1C! -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/2/2019 13:46:47)

Edited in the cap. (I had already said that would be included, but just for future reference it is included)

@Primate Murder
Yes, but that is not the primary job of this pet. This pet's job is not to make sure that damage is dealt to your opponent. This pet's job is to apply a damage boost to you. That always occurs, which is why it should receive the bonus. What you do with that bonus is up to you. Take it like a pet that applies celerity to you - it applies that celerity, but what you do with the free turn is up to you. If you waste it, that's your problem.

@AliceShiki
Yeah, and that's why the *0.65 penalty exists in my model. It essentially works like an omnielement boost. However, when you think about it the omnielemental penalty is wrong. Why are you paying for 8 elements. The pet should freely get one and then you take a penalty for the other 7. 7*5 = 0.35. Hence the *0.65.



Legendary Ash -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/3/2019 22:25:37)

The element compression penalty is 5% between two elements.
Chickencow uses its MC to ease *.6 penalty to *.65, if Boosters were to assume this and take a stat substitution, that cumulates into double MC, which is not allowed to exist.

The problem at hand is how much stat substition should be worth, the Devs have a handwave explanation that its worth one MC.
The stat substition that is most common currently is Ferocious Strikes which uses Cha in place of Luk, that is worth 5 BtH and 11.5% stat damage.
100*.85/((100-11.5)*(.85-.05)) = 1.2, a +20% gain with *.85 accuracy applied that is worth 17% melee.

A 200 Str or Int, Dex and Luk build has -15 BtH and -38.5% pet damage from not having 200 Cha, 40(.85-.15)(.5+.115) = 17.22% melee
Stat substitution of Boosters with Str/Dex/Int produces 40*.85(.5+.385+.115) = 34% melee
34 - 17.22 = 16.78% melee gained with the substitution.

If the attempt to balance Stat substitution is to make it equivalent to one MC instead of four MCs, the most appropriate action is to take a player controlled trigger value of 7.5% from Cha's stat damage and 35*.075 = 2.625 BtH, Cha's new values are 31% stat damage and 15 - (35*.075) = 12.375 BtH.
40(.5+.15+.02625)(.5+.075+.115) = 18.6645% melee

(18.6645 - 17.22)/34 = 4.2485% melee for a standard pet with a MC's worth of stat substitution at 85% accuracy.

If applying Auto hit to its Booster pet's damage, it would be erroneously be multiplicative with player's accuracy .85(100+(40*.85)) = 113.9%, compared to 140*.85 = 164.7058%.

A representative equation would be to use player and pet output proportions to determine the quantity of an average accuracy.
(100*.85 + 40(.5 + .15 + .02625))/140 = .800357 accuracy

85% melee from Pure build + 18.6645% standard stat substitution pet = 103.6645% melee
.800357(100 + 40(.5 + .075 + .115)) standard stat substitution booster pet = 102.1256% melee

102.1256/103.6645 = 98.515% representation by average accuracy equation



ruleandrew -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/6/2019 6:47:07)

Poelala is a guest that is a bit too powerful for a 0 CHA build.

Poelala deal the equivalent of 0.36 melee unit (assume 0 CHA and 200 INT) per turn. Normally a guest deal 0.3 melee unit (assume 0 CHA and 200 INT) per turn.

Poelala deal the equivalent of 0.36 melee unit (assume 200 CHA and 200 INT) per turn. Normally a guest deal 0.6 melee unit (assume 200 CHA and 200 INT) per turn.

Ideal solution
Poelala deal the equivalent of 0.185 melee unit (assume 0 CHA and 200 INT) per turn. Normally a guest deal 0.3 melee unit (assume 0 CHA and 200 INT) per turn.

Poelala deal the equivalent of 0.39 melee unit (assume 200 CHA and 200 INT) per turn. Normally a guest deal 0.6 melee unit (assume 200 CHA and 200 INT) per turn.

---
0.39 melee unit is chosen on the merit, the booster can stack with any 8 standard elements and the fact this guest is a mastercraft item (*0.65 penalty is picked).

Booster guest problem stem from the fact Poelala use INT instead of CHA as a way to improve guest output.



LUPUL LUNATIC -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (1/6/2019 7:40:08)

quote:

0.39 melee unit is chosen on the merit, the booster can stack with any 8 standard elements and the fact this guest is a mastercraft item (*0.65 penalty is picked)


Thats 1 MC you want to add.

quote:

Booster guest problem stem from the fact Poelala use INT instead of CHA as a way to improve guest output.


And this is the actual MC.

The main problem with Boosters are the UNINTENDED INTERACTIONS with player boosting items, those items are only meant to boost player attacks not pet/guests ones too for the at least the cost.
Second one is the actual MC which is too strong, you have to fix both these issues.



gavers -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/6/2019 7:17:26)

Sorry for the partial necro, trying to add on to the discussion.

Boosters suffer from 3 main issues as of today.
1. Pets & Guests account for a total of 100% melee at 200 CHA, and 50% melee at 0 CHA.
That means that the usual 0 CHA mage should see a damage increase of 52.5% when at 0 CHA, and 105% when at 200 CHA (When assuming a +5% damage MC).
Due to the changes in VStat boosters were actually nerfed a bit, requiring 250 "CHA" to operate at full damage.
But at best, if not accounting for any multiplicative bonus, and ignoring Lucky Strikes, with the current ratio of Mainstat / CHA requirements, we get booster damage of:
87.5% Melee at 0 CHA, and 105% Melee at 250 CHA.
At worst, when accounting for the Mastercraft, boosters should deal 52.5% at 0 CHA, and at best 55% at 0 CHA.
Lets go with the best case scenario, this means the ratio should be 5% Mainstat and 95% CHA.

Since this is something that in no way will be done, lets try a more conservative outlook.
The usual suspects (Dunamis, Poelala, and Thernda) receive a penalty of *0.6 due to being omni-elemental.
Lets assume the additive part is evaluated AFTER the penalty, meaning they receive a flat +5% melee instead of a relative one.
This means that from dealing 30% at 0 CHA, they would deal 35% at 0 CHA, bringing the ratio up to: 8.33% Mainstat, 91.67% CHA.

2. The synergy is just too strong.
Since boosters apply to your attacks instead of being standalone, they synergize extremely well with any multiplicative bonus, be it Leans, Chieftain's Ironthorn, or Elecomp.
With an assumption of a very conservative elecomp of *1.7, even with the *0.6 penalty, boosters deal an additional 1.7*0.6*100% = 102% Melee, overpowering normal Guests + Pets.
To solve this, Boosters would have to be brought out of the euqation, adding a tag of Booster damage, and having the formula change from:
quote:

(Weapon Damage) * (Accuracy) * (Multiplicatives) * (1 + Additives)

to:
quote:

(Weapon Damage) * (Accuracy) * (Multiplicatives) * (1 + Additives) + (Weapon Damage) * (Booster Damage)


3. The penalty is unjustifiable.
The *0.6 penalty is just too big, resulting in the above changes making boosters too weak, but it could be solved with changing their synergy. They operate the same way Chickencow Clone and Ultimate Dragon Scythe of Elements are balanced and should receive, along with the above nerfs, the change in their penalty to be -15% and additional damage taken.



AliceShiki -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/7/2019 10:21:45)

Boosters don't receive a *0.6 penalty. Rather, no item in the game has a *0.6 penalty for Element-Seeking, the standard Element-Seeking penalty is *0.8 damage and *1.2 cost.

IIRC boosters get a *0.9 Always Useful Penalty, but it's hard to be sure due to their numbers not being as straight-forward as most pets.

Lastly, pets don't deal near close to 100% melee at 200 CHA, nor do they give 50% melee at 0 CHA. The correct numbers are 40% and 20% respectively... Though this may have changed with the stat cap upgrade to 250.



gavers -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/7/2019 11:41:16)

Boosters get a *0.6 penalty.

Lepre-Chan:
quote:

+(20 + 20 *YourCHA/EXPCHA)%


Dunamis:
quote:

+(12.12 + 12.12 *YourINT/ExpINT)*/1.01%


20 *0.6 = 12.12/1.01 = 12.

And if you're not convinced yet, this is what you're looking for.

Pets + Guests deal 100% Melee at 200 CHA. Boosters as you know are both guests and pets. 40% Pets, and 60% Guests.
Current in-game standards are mostly based around the old stats model, so that's how I built my argument.

Don't assume ignorance unless it is clearly presented.



s_venom -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/7/2019 14:17:41)

I have to ask.
Is there a reason booster pets are discussed so much ?



AliceShiki -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/7/2019 15:15:57)

@gavers I didn't read the part about guests on your argument, my bad on that one~

Mmmmmm, I guess the penalty is technically 60% indeed, not that it matters much since they still give more damage than any other pet in the game... My bad my bad~

As for the assuming ignorance part... Well, you presented an argument in which you suggested making Boosters multiplicative again and reducing their damage penalty... Sorry if I was skeptical of your knowledge in the game when you suggested giving two buffs to the best items in the game... >.>

It's not happening either way. But my bad for not paying proper attention to your post, I made some mistakes.

@s_venom Mainly because they're bonkers and AQ is supposed to be a balanced game. It's kinda hard to not discuss an item that outclasses all other items in its category by a humongous margin.



CH4OT1C! -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/7/2019 15:47:27)

quote:

@Gavers said:
Since this is something that in no way will be done, lets try a more conservative outlook.
The usual suspects (Dunamis, Poelala, and Thernda) receive a penalty of *0.6 due to being omni-elemental.
Lets assume the additive part is evaluated AFTER the penalty, meaning they receive a flat +5% melee instead of a relative one.
This means that from dealing 30% at 0 CHA, they would deal 35% at 0 CHA, bringing the ratio up to: 8.33% Mainstat, 91.67% CHA.

The logic is sound. However, you've already raised the glaring flaw in this suggestion. If 5% leaning on mainstat will not be done, 8.33% isn't that much more likely. You'd also have to try and justify having a flat 5% mastercraft on Dun/Thern/Poe where all other pets/gets must live with a relative 5%. As the "damage limitation" (restriction to nerfing) is comparatively small, justifying this wouldn't be much better than going the whole hog.

quote:

@Gavers said:
2. The synergy is just too strong.
Since boosters apply to your attacks instead of being standalone, they synergize extremely well with any multiplicative bonus, be it Leans, Chieftain's Ironthorn, or Elecomp.
With an assumption of a very conservative elecomp of *1.7, even with the *0.6 penalty, boosters deal an additional 1.7*0.6*100% = 102% Melee, overpowering normal Guests + Pets.
To solve this, Boosters would have to be brought out of the euqation, adding a tag of Booster damage, and having the formula change from:
quote:
(Weapon Damage) * (Accuracy) * (Multiplicatives) * (1 + Additives)
to:
quote:
(Weapon Damage) * (Accuracy) * (Multiplicatives) * (1 + Additives) + (Weapon Damage) * (Booster Damage)

For all intents and purposes this functions as the second idea raised in my original post. With that said, pet boosters must activate on Dun/Thern/Poe to keep things fair in these circumstances.

quote:

@Gavers said:
3. The penalty is unjustifiable.
The *0.6 penalty is just too big, resulting in the above changes making boosters too weak, but it could be solved with changing their synergy. They operate the same way Chickencow Clone and Ultimate Dragon Scythe of Elements are balanced and should receive, along with the above nerfs, the change in their penalty to be -15% and additional damage taken.

The penalty is proportionate regardless of whether it's additional damage intake or reduced output. With that context, so long as that penalty exists, I don't really mind how it's handled. What would be more difficult (again) is justifying such an increase in damage intake. Where you could do so with UDSoE and co. because they're unwieldy is one thing, justifying it here is another matter entirely? Perhaps a cost would be appropriate? (give some SP/MP to reduce that penalty. as you're paying for the benefit. After all, they are sentient and can converse with you?)



gavers -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/7/2019 16:14:31)

@AliceShiki
I have never suggested them being multiplicative. I suggest you review my post again. I have suggested 2 direct nerfs, and 1 buff.

@CH4OT1C!
quote:

The logic is sound. However, you've already raised the glaring flaw in this suggestion. If 5% leaning on mainstat will not be done, 8.33% isn't that much more likely. You'd also have to try and justify having a flat 5% mastercraft on Dun/Thern/Poe where all other pets/gets must live with a relative 5%. As the "damage limitation" (restriction to nerfing) is comparatively small, justifying this wouldn't be much better than going the whole hog.

I suggested that as a way to justify the Mastercraft bonus, since I feel like too big of a nerf would dissuade staff from implementing it. I should have noted, the first point can be ignored for the sake of the next two being implemented.


quote:

For all intents and purposes this functions as the second idea raised in my original post. With that said, pet boosters must activate on Dun/Thern/Poe to keep things fair in these circumstances.

We have discussed this over Discord, and you mentioned you did suggest that, and I simply wanted to go into more details, since the X + Y + Z example felt a bit underwhelming in my opinion. It was not my intention to make it seem like an original idea, but simply part of a package I'm offering.

quote:

The penalty is proportionate regardless of whether it's additional damage intake or reduced output. With that context, so long as that penalty exists, I don't really mind how it's handled. What would be more difficult (again) is justifying such an increase in damage intake. Where you could do so with UDSoE and co. because they're unwieldy is one thing, justifying it here is another matter entirely? Perhaps a cost would be appropriate? (give some SP/MP to reduce that penalty. as you're paying for the benefit. After all, they are sentient and can converse with you?)

If you're familiar with the saying "some are created more equal than others", a *0.6 penalty is very severe, making them weaker them virtually weaker than having a pet at INT = 250.
I feel a change in boosters implementation requires a remaining incentive to play them. As such, a penalty that still promotes their use is appropriate.
Also, Chickencow Clone is a pet with the same penalty, so I don't see a reason not to have that penalty? I do support the idea of another good penalty, but the main argument is that if the second point is to be implemented, they need to be buffed in terms of damage, or they'll stop seeing use, and that will prevent any changes from being implemented.



CH4OT1C! -> RE: Booster Pets (Again) (4/7/2019 16:22:11)

quote:

@gavers said:
If you're familiar with the saying "some are created more equal than others", a *0.6 penalty is very severe, making them weaker them virtually weaker than having a pet at INT = 250.
I feel a change in boosters implementation requires a remaining incentive to play them. As such, a penalty that still promotes their use is appropriate.
Also, Chickencow Clone is a pet with the same penalty, so I don't see a reason not to have that penalty? I do support the idea of another good penalty, but the main argument is that if the second point is to be implemented, they need to be buffed in terms of damage, or they'll stop seeing use, and that will prevent any changes from being implemented.

My point is not that it's impossible to justify a Chickencow clone-esque ability, but that a basic justification is necessary. Glossing over the extent of the nerf (we all know the severity of a *0.6 omnielemental penalty) such a penalty (or equivalent) is necessary. It makes sense to limit the penalty as much as possible, given they are locked behind paywalls. I simply suggested an additional mp/sp cost as a way of justifiably reducing the damage penalty.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.09375