RobynJoanne -> Backlash and EleComp (7/25/2023 21:15:36)
|
Recently, the Retro Nightmare set was released, and the armor had a Backlash effect. Now, that's not noteworthy on its own, as it's the fourth Ice armor with Backlash that's been released, but it did have both Harm and Ice Backlash on it. Furthermore, the Ice Backlash originally gained EleComp, which has been removed. The reasoning is as follows: quote:
Kamui: Yeah, I initially put EleComp on the Ice Backlash because I was misremembering how it had been applied on prior things. The fact Backlash already scales based on the damage you take means it would double-dip if it also got EleComp, so the EleComp to the Ice Backlash will be removed shortly. However, the EleComp on the "Blocklash" will remain, since that does not scale with the damage you take. EleComp is a free multiplier applied to something's power or cost due to being elementally suboptimal in some way. A core assumption in AQ is that one defends against a monster's base element and attacks the monster with the opposite element. One can think of EleComp as either a boost to compensate for putting oneself at risk of taking a lot of damage for attacking with the right element but not defending against the monster's base element or as a boost to compensate for attacking with a wrong element while defending against the monster's base element. Both are true, but I actually want to know which is the scenario that is assumed. This is because they actually have opposite assumptions: the former assumes the player is doing the opposite of the defense component of the core assumption while the latter assumes the player is doing the opposite of the offense component of the core assumption. The nature of the EleComp calculation that involves taking into account solely an item's elemental defenses and MRM makes me think the former's correct. If it were the latter case, EleComp could be as simple as using the assumed monster resist spread and dividing 130 by the effect's base resist (i.e. 130/70=1.857 for the same element as monster's base element, 115/70=1.643 for allied elements, 100/70=1.429 for neutral elements, 85/70=1.214 for poorly related elements, and 70/70=1 for the opposite element. That's clearly not what happens and is arguably fairer that way. We all know that most people don't use EleComp while defending against the proper element; they use it to attack with the proper element. The current system also provides a bit of compensation for attacking with the element opposite the monster's base element, which I prefer since I believe there should be something for locking something to an element even if it's usually the optimal one. That's a lot of words on something that's not even the subject of this post, so I'll get back on topic. Currently, Retro Nightmare defends against Ice and Backlashes for Ice but does not get compensated for it because the effect itself scales with damage intake. There is an implicit assumption here: the player will not actually use Retro Nightmare against Ice monsters. Backlash damage is absolutely maximized when fighting Fire monsters since they will both deal more damage against the armor, causing Backlash's baseline damage to be greater, and take more from Ice damage in general. Inversely, Backlash damage is minimized when fighting Ice monsters since they will both deal less damage, causing Backlash's baseline damage to be lesser, and take less damage from Ice. This is the same assumption that I propose EleComp uses. So, shouldn't Backlash get EleComp? It's a dilemma to which I have a few possible solutions, each with their own pros and cons. 1) Elemental Backlash should get EleComp. Pro: Attaches the proper assumption and compensation to the effect. Con: Double-dipping as Kamui explained and does not actually fix the problem of rewarding play that is the inverse of core assumptions (if anything, a multiplier only increases the reward). 2) Elemental Backlash should EleSeek or follow weapon element. Pro: Rewards both normal and inverse defensive play equally and uses the standard assumption for armors and shields where they only lose EleComp when able to do damage of any element. Con: Makes Backlash even stronger/more versatile and also further rewards inverse defensive play. 3) Delete Elemental Backlash from armors/shields and make them all Harm. Pro: Rewards both normal and inverse defensive play equally without majorly strengthening certain Backlash options over others. Con: Still rewards inverse defensive play even if less so. 4) Normalize Elemental Backlash (i.e. divide damage by monster resist). Pro: Similar to Harm Backlash but has a flavor benefit Con: Same as Harm Backlash and has nebulous justification on an armor/shield (I don't believe I've ever seen elemental normalization on an armor/shield). 5) Leave it as is. Pro: Frostwyrm has been doing the same thing for years, and it's viewed by some as the best Backlash armor. Con: Disproportionately rewards inverse defensive play and disincentivizes normal defensive play. Ultimately, however, none of these solutions solve the issue of Backlash rewarding inverse defensive play. That's just an unfortunate reality of an effect that scales off damage intake. It's fundamentally the inverse of normal AQ gameplay, and that comes with a whole host of GBI potential (sadly, exploration of such is beyond the scope of this post).
|
|
|
|