Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest] >> AdventureQuest General Discussion



Message

Bu Kek Siansu -> Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 12:32:43)


Feel free to post your concerns, ideas, wishes, etc including your Vote to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia.

Please list them including some reasons and comments in your first post.
You can edit your first post anytime.
When you edit your first post, please let us know about what you have edited.

If you like the concerns/ideas/wishes/etc from other(s), please add it/them to your list/post to get more Votes.

Feel free to discuss including some reasons and comments.

I'll collect our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc and put them in my first post including the number of Votes.

The purpose of this thread is to give the staff members a quick view in 1 post/thread
about our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia.

--------

I'll start myself.

In-game Encyclopedia
A detailed with an SWF file showing how the item looks like + stats and location would be more reliable and time-efficient.
Taken from this post: An in-game Encyclopedia is that you would not have to resort to the forum
to get information about an item, the information would instead be accessible in the game itself.
  • It could save time and find an item easier. +1

    Stat System
    Taken from this post: Stat system update for more build variety.
  • I would like to experience by sacrificing DEX for more build variety. +1

    Trading System
    Taken from this post: Trading between accounts or the very list accounts you own/control.
  • Trading items at least between your own different AQ game accounts. +1


    ........................................ Votes

    Bow of Awe!!! ..................... 2
    1. Yes, Bow of Awe please and thank you.
    2. 100% proc No-drop weapon. +1

    Dracopyre Subrace ............. 4
    1. I would like to see is a rework on the Dracopyre Subrace.
    2. I too would love to see a Dracopyre Subrace revamp.
    3. Dracopyre rework. +1
    4. +1 to Dracopyre subrace as well, even though I'm not likely to use it over Werewolf. The Dracopyre race has always been a personal favorite, and there could be an interesting dynamic of choosing between Nightreign and Gracefang (like Sol/Luna Neko) to get slightly different skills.

    In-game Encyclopedia ........ 8
    1. Preview of all items instead of only faces, weapons and house painting.
    2. A detailed with an SWF file showing how the item looks like + stats and location would be more reliable and time-efficient.
    3. The in-game Encyclopedia would be nice I admit that.
    4. You would not have to resort to the forum to get information about an item,
    the information would instead be accessible in the game itself.
    5. I like the idea of an in-game pedia. I forget what half of my stuff does sometimes and I have to surf the forums to find out XD

    Necromancer Class ............ 3
    1. I would like to see is a rework on the Necromancer Class.
    2. I too would love to see a Necromancer Class revamp.
    3. Necromancer Class rework. +1

    Paladin Class ..................... 3
    1. I would like to see is a rework on the Paladin Class.
    2. I too would love to see a Paladin Class revamp.
    3. Paladin Class rework. +1

    Stat System Update .......... 12
    1. That affects everyone.
    2. Stat system update for more build variety.
    3. A crackdown on the changes have done in early 2019 would be more important.
    4. Currently, dex is too strong of a secondary stat. For details => http://forums2.battleon.com/f/fb.asp?m=22372104

    The Fountain Update .......... 2 <=> It will help you for Full Heal HP/MP/SP
    1. I'd love if the fountain (currently a tree) in Battleon would give full SP alongside healing HP/MP. It'd save time going to Combat Practice and spam-clicking Essence Orb, or mindlessly attacking him until the SP bar is full. I'm not sure if this conflicts with the theming behind SP (since you also start with 0 upon logging in).
    2. An excellent idea. Sure it'd save time. A lot of players would like/wish this to be updated. +1

    Trading System ................. 4
    1. Trading between accounts or the very list accounts you own/control.

    UltraGuardian 100% Proc . 2
    1. I liked was 100% proc ultra guardian.
    2. 100% proc No-drop weapon. +1

    Wand of Awe!!! ................. 3
    1. I liked was 100% proc awe.
    2. Also Wand of Awe.
    3. 100% proc No-drop weapon. +1

    Void Challenge .................. 3 <=> New monster per month or as soon as they have time.
    1. I have an idea about Void Challenge - New monster per month.
    2. I like that you are mentioning Void Challenge!
    3. +1 to Void Challenge/Takeover changes. Currently the Void Takeover feels like it sits unchanging for too long (fair enough, given the current system of waiting for a new monster to be planned & created). If the void monsters are rotated (weekly/bi-weekly/monthly/more maybe), some of the staleness of the game could be alleviated, as it gives new/returning players something extra to look forward to every so often (new players having access to bosses with unique mechanics, or items missed). This rotation could provide content for older players too, if an item were added to the rewards shop for a boss rotating in (not necessarily every rotation).

    Void Challenge .................. 2 <=> Ability to get old Void challenge items.
    1. Ability to get old Void challenge items. +1
    2. +1 to Void Challenge/Takeover changes. Currently the Void Takeover feels like it sits unchanging for too long (fair enough, given the current system of waiting for a new monster to be planned & created). If the void monsters are rotated (weekly/bi-weekly/monthly/more maybe), some of the staleness of the game could be alleviated, as it gives new/returning players something extra to look forward to every so often (new players having access to bosses with unique mechanics, or items missed). This rotation could provide content for older players too, if an item were added to the rewards shop for a boss rotating in (not necessarily every rotation).


    We wish once a month or 3 months or 6 months or even once a year any of the Player's Suggestions would be implemented.

    Feel free to add your own suggestion and/or from other(s) you like/wish to be implemented including a link & your Vote.
    It would be better if you give a comment and/or a reason instead of just +1.
  • The Player's Suggestions part contains the total amount of Votes from Items/Class armors/etc by all players.

    ................................................. Votes

    Player's Suggestions .................... 2

    The Warden Set by Primate Murder ** 2
    1. I like this MC Energy set with its passive effect. This set could be as a 50K Z-Token Package Set or a GGB Set. +1
    2. +1 to the Warden set...but maybe add a wand/bow variant?




    • I Overlord I -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 13:06:14)

    0+1=1



    J9408 -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 13:29:35)

    +1

    Stat System.

    That affects everyone.



    joac1144 -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 14:17:33)

    New stat system: +1
    In-game encyclopedia: +1
    Preview of all items instead of only faces, weapons and house painting: +1

    EDIT:
    Class reworks (especially Paladin and Necromancer): +1
    100% proc No-drop weapons: +1
    Dracopyre rework: +1
    Ability to get old Void challenge items: +1

    EDIT #2:
    Add shops for all Package items (and other items that should have shops) for the items that still do not have a shop: +1
    - Whenever a new package item is released, its shop should be released with it.



    sunblaze -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 15:35:37)

    The ingame encyclopedia would be nice I admit that, but better statsystem and a crackdown on the changes done early 2019 would be waaaaaay more important.
    So that gets my vote! +1



    Lord Markov -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 15:56:43)

    On a more serious note, +1 for a stat update. Always a stat update.



    Removed off topic part. Scakk



    Bu Kek Siansu -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 16:50:50)

    Till here, added including some reasons and comments.




    lolerster -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/9/2019 21:17:41)

    +1 for the stat system.

    Currently dex is too strong of a secondary stat. Every build going for optimization is going to go for 250 main stat/250 dex. No reason to do anything else. On the other hand END is such a weak stat that investing in int can give you a mana shield stronger than what END can provide you. Warriors and Rangers have virtually the same stat build.

    Also, update old standard armors, nerf booster pets to scale from CHA only (like lepre-chan) and nerf CIT. Maybe balance bloodmage/bloodzerker/subrace armors slightly so the gap between those and other armors aren't quite as large.

    Finally, I would like to see a bit more FD items, especially magic. FO is cool and all, but does every release need to be FO?



    Deaf of Destiny -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 0:15:56)

    quote:

    Also, update old standard armors, nerf booster pets to scale from CHA only (like lepre-chan) and nerf CIT.


    Lolerster, HELL NO we dont want to nerf CIT.



    lolerster -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 0:39:16)

    The item is so incredibly broken that any SP armor skill that doesn't scale with it is automatically invalidated if a scaling alternative exists. Explain to me how such a fundamentally broken item doesn't need a nerf?



    joac1144 -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 6:44:42)

    quote:

    Explain to me how such a fundamentally broken item doesn't need a nerf?

    Personally, I don't see the problem with items like CIT in a single player game like AQ. People can just choose not to use it if they find it "cheating".



    CH4OT1C! -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 7:33:42)

    The problem with not nerfing CIT isn't to do with PVP. It has everything to do with how the game is balanced. Monsters and player items are designed in a way to make the monsters beatable, but not ridiculously easy in normal circumstances (not counting player optimisation. I'm talking just a regular, casual player that doesn't care about maximising damage etc.). The problem comes when the staff want to make a boss/monster that is difficult, but beatable, for all players involved. Interactive boosts (i.e. CIT) enable optimised players to deal outrageous levels of damage. Many of the most challenging monsters in the game have countermeasures against nukes, like soft damage caps and boss boosts to discourage nuking. Those that don't, like Carandor, try to nuke you first. The staff are essentially forced into adding these effects in order to give the monsters a chance to fight back. The problem with doing this is two-fold.

    1). It can make the monsters almost impossible for a regular player, who can't deal these levels of damage in the first place
    2). It doesn't necessarily hinder optimised players because these effects cut heavily into monster power, either reducing damage output or reducing their survivability.

    The argument of "just don't use it" is akin to the age-old trope of asking someone not to push a big, shiny red button. They're going to push it. The problem here is that the countermeasures involved have to deal with an item directly outside of the standard. It's almost impossible to make a boss that is beatable for the casual without making things relatively tedious for the serious player.



    Dr Disrespect -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 11:39:46)

    +1 for the stat system revamp and for CIT to be nerfed. The latter's existence in its current state is a slap on the face to game balance.



    Kurtz96 -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 14:08:33)

    +1 to both stat update and in game encyclopedia.

    On the topic of CIT nerf, I am sure there is a way to rebalance items so warriors can still nuke. Mages can deal almost as much damage and all their equipment is balanced. No reason warriors can't be brought to equal footing in a balanced way.



    Bu Kek Siansu -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 14:25:56)


    Till here, added, thanks. :)




    Aura Knight -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 15:49:50)

    No please, leave my CIT alone. It's ok to not be that balanced in a single player game. But if it must be changed, I think the most fair way to do it is make it have a berserker effect as that would remain close to what it's originally intended to be. More damage with less accuracy. And when it comes to stats, having the system be revamped could potentially see a rise of some more unique builds which could make the game more enjoyable for anyone bored. And if Dex is updated to not be so powerful, a potential change to CIT could be likely as our accuracy from stats wouldn't offset the built-in negatives of the shield's accuracy removal passive effect. Possibly making it more balanced if it were to receive an update.

    I am also in support of a better way to move things around between accounts we own. The vault is nice in its own right but the constant relogs to transfer equipment does get annoying. Hope the future brings something great to the game, not that we've been getting bad stuff.



    lolerster -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 16:19:18)

    I don't agree with the argument "because it's a single player game, it's OK to be broken" or "don't use it if you think it's too strong". To me that's the same as saying "balance doesn't matter in single-player games". CIT might just be 1 exception. The question is, why are we making that 1 exception. In fact, CIT being the 1 exception actually makes it far worse from a balance standpoint than if it had competition as it is very overcentralizing.

    As for possible redesigns/replacements...As suggested above, perhaps the answer is to make the bth penalty a lot more impactful. Or perhaps we can replace it with a Strength drive. Perhaps we need to revamp strength to give the user a small hp boost on top of what it does now. Regardless of which option we go with, it is too strong in its current state.

    Also, I'm seeing how a lot of people are associating CIT with warriors. It's not a warrior item. Mages can use it just as well as warriors. This association is really kinda strange to me.



    Kurtz96 -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 18:57:06)

    quote:

    Also, I'm seeing how a lot of people are associating CIT with warriors. It's not a warrior item. Mages can use it just as well as warriors. This association is really kinda strange to me.

    Might be derailing but the reason CIT is being connected with warriors is because Warriors need it (and other unbalanced items like WKZ) to nuke really hard. Whereas Mages nukes are using all balanced items. So the loss of CIT (and other broken items like WKZ) has a bigger impact on warriors that mages.
    WKZ without CIT would be a 7.0257 multiplier instead of a 10.5385 which is huge gap. And that is assuming WKZ isn't also rebalanced which would decrease it further.



    lolerster -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 19:14:13)

    That may be true, but even Bloodmage armors (witbout weapon boosters only have something like 6.8 modifiers. To get to a modifier of about 10x melee, mages are still forced to use CIT + old std armor or CIT + Bloodzerker + Morningstar Cross.

    The nukes are all balanced the same way. The only difference is that CIT is artificially bloating the numbers

    What mages DO have, is the versatility of choosing between mana and sp options. However, my argument is that this is paid for in the 25% higher SP cost of the magic version of armor skills, the 1/4 penalty on magic weapons and the lack of elecomp on regular mp spells. MP armor spells are fairly rare.



    Kurtz96 -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 19:25:09)

    That is true but if you remove CIT, then instantly every warrior nuke is weaker than 7.7 (roughly bloodmage nuke numbers). Which is why CIT is more linked to warriors. With out CIT, mages lose 35% nuking power (bloodzerker+cross 10.5 -> lumenomancer 7.7 ) whereas warriors lose 50% power. 50% is of course bigger than 35%. Hence warriors get linked to CIT more.

    quote:

    The nukes are all balanced the same way. The only difference is that CIT is artificially bloating the numbers.

    Except WKZ and other old standard armors are not balanced. That is the point. A balanced WKZ would look like the ebil knight.



    Bu Kek Siansu -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 19:50:12)


    My opinions regarding CIT:

    As examples:

    1). You deal +50% damage.
  • You take -10 BTH and your enemy deals +(40/1.4)% damage or +(35/1.4)% damage or +(30/1.4)% damage or?

    2). You deal +50% damage.
  • You take -15 BTH and your enemy deals +(35/1.4)% damage or +(30/1.4)% damage or +(25/1.4)% damage or?

    3). You deal +50% damage.
  • You take -20 BTH and your enemy deals +(30/1.4)% damage or +(25/1.4)% damage or +(20/1.4)% damage or?

    So, we don't need to nerf CIT. Instead, you take more damage from your enemy.

    CIT is more useful when you want to end a battle ASAP especially during a war.

    You want to end a battle ASAP while you take the risk to be killed.



    • Kurtz96 -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 19:54:18)

    @Bu Kek Siansu

    Since people usually use CIT as part of a nuke strategy to kill monster quickly and not let them attack, isn't the "take more damage" part irrelevant?
    Perhaps increasing the -Bonus is a more impactful balancing change.

    I hope this CIT discussion isn't a derail.



    Aura Knight -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 20:15:17)

    The only way I can see a higher bth reduction from CIT as being impactful is if Dex is changed to not give as much of a bonus to our hit chance. As it is now, CIT allows for near constant hits. I guess at the time it was made -10 bth was huge but nowadays we can make up for any bth loss from stats or skills or some spell. The balance issue here isn't a fault of CIT rather a fault of how overpowered the Dex stat is and that's what should be looked at first. Of course I'm also fine if nothing happens too since I'm currently able to accept things as they are. Guess I'm just used to things.



    lolerster -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/10/2019 22:20:22)

    @Kurt96: My guess is that you got those numbers from the wiki page. The calcs there are outdated. Bloodzerker hits much harder than bloodmage with Booster pets. The misunderstanding comes from the fact that nobody looks at the calcs, just the final numbers. Furthermore, 7.7 is not a fair number to use for bloodmage. If you would hear me out here:

    The page uses the following formula from Bloodmage:

    2*(1+0.3+0.5+0.28125)*1.84977

    However, the 0.28125 comes from Arcane Cutlass (Arctic Athame for Cryomancer and Tsunami Pen for Hydromancer). This is all well and good...if you are gimping your weapons inventory. The problem with running Arcane Cutlass is that you are sacrificing that slot for a Bloodblade/Bloodzerker blade for every element you want the spell boost in. This is hardly a fair comparison considering that CIT can be ran with almost 0 drawback and you need to reserve only 1 weapon slot for Morningstar Cross. If you have Blade of Briar, this is not even a drawback. If you choose to run a neutral no-drop, the combination of Gemini Shield + Firework Buckler/Cerberus Ward or War Torn Heirloom + Firework Buckler will cover every element with a 26% shield. If you choose to run an elemental no-drop, you need only 1 compression shield. Conversely, running the spell booster require you to sacrifice multiple slots for very inferior weapons.

    Also, the formula is very outdated. (it just doesn't assume the max possible boost). Double booster pets caps out at 0.34 for spell damage bonus, not 0.3 as suggested by the formula (0.204 from guest, 0.136 from pet, as suggested by the tooltip). This is also the maximum possible boost. That being said, the difference is pretty marginal.

    More even more misleadingly, the formula for Bloodzerker + Morningstar Cross is as follows:

    2*2*(1+0.6+0.2-0.05)*1.1*1.5/1.1

    Which suggests that booster pets is contributing to 0.6 additive damage in the formula

    However, in reality, booster pets boost weapon damage by 0.905 (0.543 from guest, 0.362 from pet). These are numbers from Poelala's tooltip and also the maximum possible boost. Maybe someone want to confirm with Therndas/Dunamis. From what I know Poelala no longer has the 4/3 bonus for magic weapons. The maximum possible boost is 0.905 * 3/4 = 0.67875

    So in reality, when you nuke, a more apt comparison would be (assuming you are optimized on items):


    Bloodmage:
  • 2*(1+0.34+0.5)*1.84977 = 681% melee

    Bloodmage + Arcane Cutlass
    2*(1+0.34+0.5+0.28125)*1.84977 = 784.8% melee

    For those that are wondering, +0.34 is the Poelala boost, +0.5 is the 50% extra damage from the blood spell, *2 is the spell multiplier and *1.84977 is the elecomp.


    Bloodzerker + Morningstar Cross
  • 2*2*(1+0.9050.67875+0.2-0.05)*1.1/1.1 = 731.5% melee

    Bloodzerker + Morningstar Cross + CIT
  • 731.5% * 1.5 = 1097.25% melee

    For those wondering, the first *2 is the skill melee multiplier, the second *2 is the Morningstar Cross multiplier, +0.905 0.67875 is Poelala boost, +0.2 is Bloodzerker's health cost boost, -0.05 is Morningstar's downtrigger, *1.1 is the damage boost given to 100% proc no special weapons, /1.1 is the inherent penalty for these types of skills


    Bloodzerker + Blade of Briar
  • 2*2*(1+0.9050.67875+0.2-0.25)*1.25 = 814.375% melee

    Bloodzerker + Blade of Briar + CIT
  • 814.375% * 1.5 = 122.15625% melee

    I don't know Blade of Briar's effect too well, so I just copy pasted the wiki formula being used. Sorry, but no explanation for the +0.2 and -0.25 numbers. The *2 is the melee skill boost, the 2nd *2 is the BoB active, +0.2 is Bloodzerker's damage boost and -0.25 is the penalty for using BoB


    But wait there's more. Bloodzerker costs a more 30 points of health per use. Bloodmage costs 151 points per use. More fair comparison below.

    But WAIT, there is EVEN more. Due to the fact that Bloodzerker + Morningstar or Bloodzerker + Blade of Briar have much higher multipliers (numbers being multiplied outside of the bracket), the gap between them and Bloodmage grows even higher with additive effects. For example, if you are using Chilly/Ramssy/Moglightnaut, their effects are 33% stronger. The 0.905 becomes 0.996 while the spell boost is increased from 0.34 to something like 0.374, so the absolute difference in power only widens.

    And WAIT, there is yet EVEN more. If mages use the same combo, they are using 490 SP instead of 392 SP. This is straight up wrong. Warriors' cost is 491 per use. Mages require 540 SP.

    Don't forget magic weapons also have a 3/4 penalty just in general, though this does not effect skill damage.

    Even if we assume I made a mistake with the 0.905 and use the 0.6/0.3 provided by the wiki, we are looking at 666% melee for bloodmage vs. 700% melee for bloodzerker if you don't want to gimp your weapon inventory. It was a mistake. Calcs now fixed.

    So I'm not sure why this idea of mages being able to do more damage stuck around. This has not been true since Bloodzerker/Old-std nukes were introduced. Mages are much more convenient and versatile due to their access to mana and mana getting healed every 2 battles in non-challenge quests. Mages are tankier due to mana shields being so broken ( see this post I made on Reddit). Because of this, they are also better in many challenge quests. But more damage? This hasn't been true for a while. Their max damage output has been the same for a very long time and there is a pretty big gap from the runner-up. Basically:

  • Blade of Briar/Bloodzerker Warriors will always beat out any kind of Bloodmage set-up in damage, regardless of if Cutlass/CIT are used. Costs 491 SP/30HP (mages can achieve the same using 589 SP) vs. 653 mp/151 Hp
  • Morningstar Cross/Bloodzerker/CIT Warriors will always beat out any kind of Bloodmage set-up in damage as well, regardless of if Cutlass/CIT are used. Costs 491 SP/30HP (mages can achieve the same using 540 SP) vs. 653 mp/151 Hp
  • Morningstar Cross is beaten out by Bloodmage + Cutlass by about 53.3% melee. This is a lot less than it sounds as means it deals about 6.8% less damage. It will always win by a large margin when using CIT. Costs 491 SP/30HP (mages can achieve the same using 540 SP) vs. 653 mp/151 Hp.

    So it feels kind of strange to say warriors can't nuke if CIT gets changed/nerfed, because, well, the damage is more or less the same.


    Perhaps someone might want to check my calcs and numbers just to be certain.
    Ty to Gavers for checking my work.

    For those wondering, HSVV + CIT works out to be 1046%, Taladosian works out to be 1060% and WKZ works out to be 1106%.


    This is also part of the reason that I believe that Booster pets cannot exist in their current state. They are absolutely bonkers op while saving you 250 points of stats in CHA.


    @Buk Kek Siansu: As mentioned by others, CIT even now is used primarily under stun/celerity, for a OHKO or where damage taken simply doesn't amtter. Increasing damage taken is a superficial change, though this is more of a flaw with stun meta than with the idea. Even if the damage is increased to the point where I get 1-shotted by any attack, I would still run it. However, maybe it can be a toggle that consumes health each turn it is equipped.



    • gavers -> RE: Our concerns, ideas, wishes, etc to improve AQ in-game & Encyclopedia (12/11/2019 1:52:59)

    @lolerster
    quote:

    My guess is that you got those numbers from the wiki page. The calcs there are outdated. Bloodzerker hits much harder than bloodmage with Booster pets. The misunderstanding comes from the fact that nobody looks at the calcs, just the final numbers. Furthermore, 7.7 is not a fair number to use for bloodmage.

    As the guy who actually maintains that page, what you said is incorrect. The calculation used there is not outdated. What it is, is a very close approximation. The overleveling multiplier, as well as the part CHA takes is ignored for the sake of simplicity since, while they change the number, it's not by a lot.
    Also, I have gone through the effort of providing the calculation, so people like you can read it, realize where numbers have been rounded, and make a more accurate comparison (which will still be in the same ballpark).

    quote:

    The problem with running Arcane Cutlass is that you are sacrificing that slot for a Bloodblade/Bloodzerker blade for every element you want the spell boost in.

    A Bloodblade/Bloodzerker Blade will boost your attacks with any Bloodzerker armor or Weapon-Based skill regardless of their element. While there's a 5% additive difference when using with a non-matching Bloodzerker armor, it's hardly anything worth mentioning unless you don't have a better use for these slots, in which case, you do: Cutlasses.

    quote:

    More even more misleadingly, the formula for Bloodzerker + Morningstar Cross is as follows:

    2*2*(1+0.6+0.2-0.05)*1.1*1.5/1.1

    Which suggests that booster pets is contributing to 0.6 additive damage in the formula

    However, in reality, booster pets boost weapon damage by 0.905 (0.543 from guest, 0.362 from pet). These are numbers from Poelala's tooltip and also the maximum possible boost. Maybe someone want to confirm with Therndas/Dunamis. From what I know Poelala no longer has the 4/3 bonus for magic weapons.

    This is also incorrect. As per IMR's post:
    quote:

    # Boosters that boost normal player attacks (like Poelala) will only give a Melee-level boost to weapon-based skills (anything that's a normal player attack and has its stat bonuses doubled).

    So the boosters' tooltip provides the numbers for either a Spell-level type of boost, or a Magic-level boost, Bloodzerker uses a Melee-level type of boost. Thus rendering your following calculations irrelevant.

    quote:

    I don't know Blade of Briar's effect too well, so I just copy pasted the wiki formula being used. Sorry, but no explanation for the +0.2 and -0.25 numbers.

    +0.2 is the Bloodzerker additive multiplier, and -0.25 is the additive penalty of the Blade of Briar.

    quote:

    But wait there's more. Bloodzerker costs a more 30 points of health per use. Bloodmage costs 151 points per use.

    But WAIT, there is EVEN more. Due to the fact that Bloodzerker + Morningstar or Bloodzerker + Blade of Briar have much higher multipliers (numbers being multiplied outside of the bracket), the gap between them and Bloodmage grows even higher with additive effects. For example, if you are using Chilly/Ramssy/Moglightnaut, their effects are 33% stronger. The 0.905 becomes 0.996 while the spell boost is increased from 0.34 to something like 0.374, the difference in power only widens.

    A partial misleading context is worse than honestly providing no context at all.
    The Skill Power Ranking page specifically ignores things like efficiency and cost, to provide only damage numbers. You however included the bloodcost, while omitting the fact Bloodzerker costs about a third of what it's supposed to in SP due to elecomp going into cost. There's relevant context here.
    Additionally, a power ranking page simply can't follow your entirely specific setup, which is why miscs aren't used, and the assumption is of dual omni-boosters (no elemental ones).

    I sincerely request you do your research before throwing similar bold accusations and misleading players for no reason.



    Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

    Valid CSS!




    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
    0.171875