=AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (Full Version)

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



Message


Lorekeeper -> =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 13:26:13)

Hello, everyone! Hollow has just posted the details for the upcoming stat revamp in the design notes!

I noticed folks looking for a place to discuss it in other threads, so here's an official thread. Please read the announcement thoroughly before posting feedback, and be sure to follow the rules. This is a very important project, and as the last chance to take feedback on it, we will have to enforce the rules more strictly rather than lock the discussion thread if it grows too toxic.

We're really excited to approach completion on this project, and can't wait to read what you have to say about it!

CLARIFICATION REGARDING LUK'S PROPOSED CHANGE TO HAVE AN ACCURACY FLOOR OF 5% CHANCE TO HIT.

This means that base accuracy will NEVER be reduced to 0%. You will always have a minimum of a 5% chance to hit your enemy. For Players with 250 LUK, your MINIMUM Accuracy will always be 10%.

Recommended Reading for Summary of Stats by RobynJeanne: http://forums2.battleon.com/f/fb.asp?m=22414221

~Ward




Aura Knight -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 13:34:14)

Those stat changes to come seem good. I especially like the chance of extra damage from guests and the removal of dex to pet/guest accuracy though still remains true for rangers due to the mainstat+charisma mentioned with the proposed update.

Not too keen for how range will start weak and get stronger through fight progression. As battles end quick it might be worth increasing the power boost per passing turn. Or have an added effect where we can do a bit of damage from blocking. A backlash with the proper conditions. I'm limiting this to range but can work with other ones.


Intellect offering bonus damage depending on target resists is an interesting idea. This should make even poor element options better. Though I'd imagine most will still use the best and go for the 5% extra damage.

The 20 turn model is outdated as no fight I'm aware of is so long. I hope we can more away from it. Maybe I don't understand it well.

The luck change, I guess it's fine though can't think of the extra effect as something too relevant. It probably is and I can't think.

And the change to strength seems too powerful. At base we take 80% incoming then put a choke effect to further reduce out target's damage. Doesn't this mean we end up doing 30% more damage than we take? The status effect should be on other styles too with appropriate choices. While strength can choke, have intellect or dex blind or inflict a poison. Something that works for it, you know?

Changes sound decent and until tried these are my initial thoughts. Hopeful but wary too. There's some things sounding better than they will be and it's too soon to claim perfection, however might be the proper path for changes.

I will like the lower hp from enemies with high endurance. Can't tell you how many times I see a mob with 11k+ and I think why. Thank you Fragile effect for lessening the pain.




Lorekeeper -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 13:44:13)

No worries! Here's a quick clarification on the model: It's not a statement that battles should take that long, or that we want them to, but kind of like a cog at the center of our code. If a character only does the bare minimum basic actions, that many turns pass between heals. It's the root of our calculations that tells us how much everything is worth, not an actual duration limit of some kind. The base from which we mix things up.




Mananite -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 14:40:04)

Neat changes all around. I'm ambivalent to some of the specifics of the changes though:

STR:
- Warrior lean is amazing, and the only issues it has going into the revamp is a lack of itemization due to nonexistent FD-adjacent support, but that's a "it'll be solved with new toys" situation, so I won't comment much more than that.
- Clarification on the weapon boost: is it strictly attacks made with the weapon, or is it a boost to weapon-based attacks? Regardless, 15% seems a bit ridiculous, considering people already invested into CHA just for about as much damage using double Dunamis/Therdna/Poelala (while completely ignoring all other pets/guests). I feel that starting with a more conservative buff (10%?) would be a safer start, especially if the +15% is strong enough for people to use STR just for the boost. Which ties into my next point:
- The free Choke is nice in theory, but in practice it's ripe for abuse. It not being locked to Melee pushes STR over the edge when combined with the above-mentioned boost; if implemented as-is, there's very little reason not to use STR, regardless of build. Not kicking in until a weapon-based attack is just icing on the cake, given that Spells can just be used to delay the initial Choke until an opportune moment presents itself (such as say, a monster SP attack), greatly reducing risk for functionally no opportunity cost.

As it stands, STR was overbuffed, making it really hard to justify not taking STR for builds, which also has the unfortunate side-effect of making DEX much less appealing as a stat.

DEX:
- Rampup is still kind of gross, but there's not much that can be done without making it "better/worse STR".
- Lessened BtH lean penalties is great, no issues with it as a mechanic. My issue with it relates more to the frankly ridiculous ways of stacking Berserk while either making the downsides nonexistent with the plethora of BtH boosts we have, or bypassing it entirely with Auto-Hit (which for some reason gets all the damage from negative leans despite literally ignoring hitcheck). But that's more of an issue with Berserk and less of the style bonus.
- Blocking is neat, nothing wrong with this.

DEX in a vacuum is fine, but the overbuffed nature of STR makes it extremely hard to justify taking DEX when STR provides way more practical utility and better up-front damage.

INT:
No real issues here. INT was always in a good spot mechanically.

END:
Reduced enemy scaling is a net buff for everyone, especially since tanky mobs had a tendency of being offensively hard to kill for no real good reason if their tankiness comes from END and obnoxiously high base HP.

CHA:
- Decoupling from DEX is a long time coming.
- Reducing the power of Guests and increasing their upkeep was also a long time coming.
- Ferocious Strikes should just be relegated to damage like Lucky Strikes; making it apply to overall Guest performance is just begging to be abused, especially since Guests are "minmaxed" insofar as paying half their power for effects. Adding this in also opens future avenues for more broken support in the same vein as how LS support is something that deserves a GBI due to how little it costs for their effects, and how easy it is to hit 100% LS rate.

Ferocious Strikes aside, these were changes that everyone expected to happen. Only concern is that they'll go the way of LS, and be way too easy to guarantee, making Guests and even bigger problem than they were before the revamp.

LUK:
- Decoupling it entirely from accuracy is very welcome.
- Direct hits is something I am very much against on principle. I understand it's a "necessary evil" given how trivial it is to become unhittable, but the very concept of an RNG-based chance of just getting punched leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. The fact this is here speaks more about how broken dodge is more than anything. A better solution would be a rebalance of MRM boosts, but that's something better left to a GBI to figure out the specifics. That is to say, it'd probably take more work than the stat revamp to find a good spot.
- The style bonus is both potentially overpowered, and also slightly confusing. A 1 in 5 to "invert" an effect seems ripe for abuse, especially since there's effects like Choke that would get inverted into a gigantic damage boost. At the same time, the wording is ambiguous; is the inversion for that turn, or does it invert the status for the remainder of its duration? At the same time, will it invert DoTs into Regens? The whole thing seems needlessly complicated, especially without clarification on the specifics. Regardless, I feel that inverting is way too swingy of an effect, and will create degenerate situations where "optimal" play can devolve into "get hit with a super fat negative effect and stall until it inverts". Would it possible instead for the style bonus to just "shrug off" a turn of status, negating its effect for the turn (or alternatively, just make it decrease an extra turn) instead?

LUK is the one stat I'm the most skeptical about, owing to all the bonuses either being an RNG fiesta (direct hit/style bonus), or problematic due to related effects being extremely overpowered (LS). Unfortunately tackling my gripes with it would be far outside the scope of both this thread and the stat revamp.

Overall, the changes are overall amazing, with my only gripes being the specifics of how things are being changed.




Dardiel -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 15:40:31)

Always a good day when I get to see a big ol' dev post. I have only a few deep thoughts, but that's because most of my feedback is along the lines of "okay, cool, small suggestion though".

Strength: Okay, cool. The choke idea is interesting, I would greatly enjoy if it was a permanent choke to really solidify the niche of the long-term defensive setup (as opposed to "defensive while you fire nukes, then normal") but I'm sure that's just me. I also wonder if it's viable to make the bonus equally split between offense and defense, such as with a 10% damage boost and 10% permanent choke every 10 turns.

(Skipping Dexterity for now because my thoughts are longer)

Intellect: Excited to see this, I always like seeing the fun ways that game devs add sideways power. It does feel skewed toward rewarding elecomped armor spells more than anything cast from the Spells slot though, which worries me a little. I would lean most strongly toward a style bonus that works for both offensive and defensive builds, and that can provide some benefit to hybrids - I think it could also be a neat quirk for the INT style bonus to scale based on current MP %, such as having 1.5x the bonus at full MP and scaling down to no bonus at/below 25% MP.

Endurance: I'm on board, no comments; the stat is in a weird spot where it's technically the strongest but feeling the worst / least interesting but I have no suggestions so I'll trust whatever the staff does here.

Charisma: I'm largely on board, however for purely aesthetic purposes I'd lean toward any way to have guests output 40% or 60% on average - if I see a pet does applies a status with power X it's very easy to know a guest version will apply X or 1.5X, as opposed this proposed way which would be X and 1.125X. I'm also unsure if changing guest power away from 60% affects any items that are balanced around guest power being 60%.

Luck: The 5% accuracy floor likely isn't going to do a ton by itself to combat the builds that optimize around not getting hit; that said, I also don't think that we necessarily need to add mechanics that entirely balance any individual build so it's just more of a "more will need to be done" situation rather than a "don't put this in because it's not extreme enough" situation. Regarding inverting statuses, I feel that it's too reliant on what the enemy does;I wonder if a way to achieve a similar goal could be for the to be a small chance of gaining a status from among a list - for example at the start of each turn there's a 10% chance to pick from among eleEmpower, eleShield, etc, and apply 100% melee of that status divided among a random duration from among 1, 2, 5, or [permanent] turns.




Dexterity: This is where I get extra invested in the topic, but I'll try to be clear and not too boring:
quote:

The style bonus allows DEX to play with a wider range of damage leans

Out the gate I'll have to disagree, unless the previous range of damage leans contained only one lean and even then it might just be staying the same. A percent mitigation means it's basically always optimal to pick the most extreme damage lean; anything else means you're losing damage. Accurate lean might become more viable due to not losing as much damage, but it's also a percentage so the motivation is still to pick the most extreme lean that doesn't overshoot the BtH goal of 100% accuracy. And that's not to mention status effects either, because those are also optimal in the most extreme damage lean; a weapon with neutral lean might have a /0.85 multiplier, while a -20 weapon is doing 131% damage and getting a /0.65 multiplier (also 131% stronger than neutral) despite its accuracy being 70% - you're basically getting another 8% boost (0.7/0.65) to applying statuses if you go the most extreme damage lean, and going anything else is strictly worse on average.

Aside from the lean idea not really making lean variance viable, I think it would also be very easy for it to centralize the ranger meta and/or contribute to powercreep - if the style bonus rewards extreme leans it means that most "meta" ranged weapons will inherently lean toward that (and since going for damage is more optimal than going for accuracy, that means extreme damage lean ranged weapons will most likely be objectively the best in many situations) - if you want damage then an extreme damage lean is just a free damage boost, if you want statuses then an extreme damage lean is just a free status power boost. That means there's typically only one desirable lean, so design space is heavily skewed toward that lean specifically (which also notably causes rangers to be the less accurate ones, due to extreme damage lean being mathematically optimal; that could itself also be an issue of the flavor, where rangers are apparently just firing off the strongest and least accurate weapons they own), and now it's harder to design interesting new items without power creep because lean has no real room to contribute anything unique.

I also feel a mark was missed with the ramping - it was capped "at turn 20 so as to keep from outperforming STR at its own niche" but even that cap isn't stopping ranger ramp from still outperforming. For example, a Melee build is doing 115% melee per turn (due to the style bonus). A ranger build with a neutral lean will reach 115% by turn 8 (meaning they deal more damage turns 9+), and their average damage will pass 115%/turn by turn 16. I'm not saying Melee becomes useless due to ranged weapons getting stronger after a ton of turns, but it does mean that when it comes to the consistent long-term damage, ranger is still outperforming melee at that niche and especially when they use weapons that have extreme damage leans. On top of that, since style bonuses are type-agnostic (which they should be, because otherwise there's not much reason to plsy anything other than INT hybrid where you use MP without losing weapon damage AND without missing out on having two stacking style bonuses), a STR/DEX hybrid has no reason to use melee weapons after 3 turns since ranged weapons would get the ramping damage on top of the melee style bonus.

My proposal might be familiar because I've suggested it before, but I still believe it to be doing a better job at achieving the ranger identity:
- Premise: Changing the ramp from turn-based to accuracy-based and from a damage multiplier to a form of lean.
- Details: Each time you land a hit your lean shifts toward damage, and each time you miss your lean shifts toward accuracy. The distance that the lean shifts is based on the lean of the weapon itself - accuracy-leaning weapons will more quickly push the lean toward accuracy when you miss so that you can quickly adjust against evasive enemies, damage-leaning weapons will more quickly push the lean toward damage for enemies that don't evade so much, and neutral lean will travel both directions at neutral speed as a good all-rounder lean.
- How it accomplishes the goals:
- - It achieves the goal of being a unique damage curve (not flat like melee, nor downward like mage; this one is a squiggly line that will constantly move up and down throughout the entire fight), while avoiding the current ramping problem of just outclassing melee by virtue of waiting a few turns.
- - It also accomplishes the goal of making ranger identity about accuracy, by rewarding accurate hits with damage and course-correcting inaccurate hits with extra BtH; as opposed to the current ramping identity of "only" being delayed damage.
- - Lastly, it achieves the goal of making a wide range of leans viable by giving each lean a unique interaction with the ramping; it's no longer strictly better to use an extreme damage lean, because an accurate lean can course-correct faster against evasive enemies and can still convert its excess accuracy to do good damage against non-evasive enemies (as opposed to currently, where any accuracy over 100% is wasted).
- Example math: Start each battle with a Cool Ranger Stat (name pending) of 100%. On a hit, multiply the stat by 1-1.5/100*85/(85+[weapon lean]). On a miss, multiply the stat by 1+8.5/100*85/(85-[weapon lean]). Multiply all ranged damage by the Cool Ranger Stat (same as the current ramp system), and divide all ranged accuracy by the same amount. This would allow the ranger to have a lean that can continually scale at a consistent pace (rather than accelerating/decelerating and getting to really skewed values at high amounts of change the way actual lean changes work). This would be uncapped - I'm sure if this username were to be known for anything it'd be that I will always promote effects without caps, I believe it's particularly important with this mechanic due to its self-correcting nature and the fact that putting a cap would actually flatten the damage curve to make it more similar to warrior (most particularly when it comes to accuracy boosts and low-MRM enemies). With various weapon leans that would mean:
- - neutral lean: On hit, damage goes up by about 1.5%; on a miss, it goes down by 8.5%. With accuracy assumptions of 85%, this means the damage squiggle will pretty evenly trend to bounce around above/below 85% accuracy.
- - -20 lean: On hit, damage goes up by 2%; on a miss, it goes down by 6.9%. This means the weapon makes large jumps toward dealing more damage, but is much slower to gain accuracy. Its damage squiggle will therefore be lower, still trying to reach 85% but taking much larger jumps toward damage.
- - +20 lean: On hit, damage goes up by 1.2%; on a miss, it goes down by 11%. It's the reverse of the damage lean, where it's very quick to gain accuracy but slower to switch to damage - however, it notably can still eventually convert any excess accuracy into damage.
I would be a little disappointed if the DEX changes went through as they're listed; it feels like a missed opportunity to have an accuracy-based damage curve for the class that's most closely associated with sharpshooting.
- - Autohit: For the sake of completeness I figure it should be brought up - I think autohit should be treated as an extreme accuracy lean; that way, it serves a unique niche in the ranger playstyle as a way to opt in to the infinite ramping playstyle; similar to mana regeneration for mages, autohit for rangers is simultaneously a flavor match (wizards meditate for mana, rangers take aim for accurate shots) and a way to directly interact with the damage identity (regenerating mana allows adding more bursts to the curve, autohit allows adding more upward jumps to the curve).

Dexterity Style Bonus: I have less complicated thoughts on this one - I am very attached to giving ranged weapons a unique and rewarding damage curve, and trust others to come up with neat style bonuses. That said, for the sake of having any suggestion at all I'd put this one out that's inspired by the Opportunism concept Dreiko and Chaotic propose as a ranger identity later on in this thread (which I think would work better as a style bonus):
- You gain status potence that scales with the enemy's current HP as a percentage (reaching 0 when the enemy reaches 25% remaining)
- At the start of each turn, you gain Momentum charges based on the enemy's Missing HP as a percentage (reaching the maximum value at 75% missing / 25% remaining); every X charges, you reset the charges to 0 and gain a turn of celerity
- The armor that you start your turn in multiplies these values; FD is 0.8x Momentum in exchange for 1.2x potence, FO is 1.2x Momentum but 0.8x potence, and neutral is 1x to each.
I like to think that this idea would help give a niche to DEX users regardless of whether they want to follow the defensive status playstyle or the aggressive "setup + payoff" playstyle, but would happily support other ideas with the same goals and better implementation.




Ogma -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 15:45:32)

I have barely returned so I'm not into the game proper, so my experience isn't worth much I suppose. But I like that idea of each stat having a "Base behavior" and "Style Bonus". You may even take it a step further, separating Style bonus from base behavior, the latter related to the intended pure build (STR -> Warrior, INT -> Mage...), and the former for a general buff bonus that hybrid build may enjoy (STR+INT hybrid build, or STR+CHA hybrid build). For example, INT's style bonus, instead of just being spell only, affect any weapon/spell/pet/guest.

Speaking of pure build, it seems to me there are 4, warrior (STR+END+LUK), ranger (DEX+END+LUK), mage (INT+END+LUK) and beastmaster (CHA+END+LUK). STR/DEX/INT/CHA come naturally as primary stat, and END/LUK as secondary stat. END/LUK can be their own standalone bonus that any build can enjoy, but maybe it can also further define each build with special interaction with the primary stat : for a pure warrior build, END gives you plain HP, for a pure mage, you get 25% HP and 75% extra MP, for a pure beastmaster you get 50% HP and pay less guest upkeep. This is probably makes END/LUK stat unnecessarily complicated, but I'm just throwing this idea out there because it wouldn't leave my brain after reading the revamp post.

That's about it for me, the revamp looks good to me.




Grace Xisthrith -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 16:43:18)

Thank you AQ team for making such an organized, clearly communicated, and exciting set of stat changes!

Although not everything is exactly how I personally would want it, I think it does a good job of separating STR and DEX, and managing beastmaster behavior (abuse :P ), and giving each mainstat its own thing it is best at. Someone would have to work hard to convince me a mage without STR will perform better with weapon based skills than a STR build now.

I will list my three concerns I think are the most important though, since you all did ask for feedback. Before I do that though, I want to say I'm generally very happy with the ideas and numbers presented.

I think Dardiel raises important questions about DEX. The concerns are explained very well in that post above. I'd add as well, you're only getting 10% melee out of the effect if you have a ~-34 bth lean (34x.25=8.5 bth), or 10% melee, given that it takes up half the style bonus, that might be an issue. I would say also that I'd be satisfied if DEX came to live servers as written, as someone who plays FO all the time, I personally am not concerned about doing less damage for 3 turns (what I am "concerned" about is losing out on that +15% bonus damage from STR, but that's good because it'll make me change from picking DEX for weapon based FO every time to now having to make a choice between it and STR, exciting stuff). But that being said, I do want to say clearly Dardiel brings up very strong points. +5 BTH lean and -5 BTH lean weapons would see effectively no difference from how they are now. Lastly, a clarifying question about this lean expertise. If I were to say, use Grakma Harbinger, Legion Fenrir, and Mark of Wrath's Meteor Skill (a total of -50 BTH), would lean expertise apply to this? Would it only apply to the Skill's (spell's) -20? Or would it count additional leans?

About Charisma. I think taking guest cost up to 30% and keeping output the same is a generous power budget to CHA, and I think it's nice that it's there given that players have been used to ~80 upkeep for so long. I'm not too concerned about that debatably unbalanced feature, just like I'm not too concerned about STR's +15% damage, which theoretically upsets the 100% melee baseline. I don't think it's a big deal at all. What I am mildly concerned about with CHA is the lowering of guest output to 55% base to make room for ferocious strikes.

Edit: Half of this paragraph is wrong because I misread the changes, thinking base guest output was 55% melee and ferocious strikes brought it to 60%, but the ideas are still relevant) At the moment, guest power is exactly 1.5x pet power. Pet and guest clone and you want to know how much the guest does? Exactly 1.5x. Pet does poison, guest does poison? Easy to figure out. If guest base output drops to 55%, suddenly guests will be 1.375x (admittedly a nicer number than I thought lol) pet power. This number is a lot uglier, and would mean a lot of infosubs would have misleading information (as well as guides which I may or may not be attached to : p ), and overall it would be harder to know exactly how much a guest would do, compared to a guest. This is not a huge problem, but I would be surprised if I'm alone in having this concern.
Finally, if guest power is dropped by 5% melee baseline, guests specifically coded to do a certain thing (like Mogdin, Corgi, and Ancestral Wraith inflicting exactly 1 paralyze) would suddenly have a low random chance to not do that thing. As someone who loves reliable stuns, and loves Queen Corgi (especially the art :) ) I'd be bummed to see this happen. Is this enough reason to remove ferocious strikes? Or maybe weaken them? I don't know, but I want to bring it up.

Edit: Now that I know base guest output is 45% melee and averages 55% melee with ferocious strikes, I'd strongly advocate for removing ferocious strikes and bringing guest output to 55% reliably. 45% melee is ~1.125 Pet output (ignoring MCs because that's too much math, but it would get even uglier). All the same reasons I listed above still apply, but emphasized dramatically if guest output is 45% melee base. Also, 45% melee base would gut the reliability of those three stun guests I listed, rather than just making them a tiny bit unreliable. I'd be quite bummed to see guests come into the game with base output at 45% melee, rather than the almost 60% they could have without ferocious strikes.

Finally my last thing is luck status removal. A 20% chance to remove statuses is pretty strong. A 20% chance to flip them (also, how would you flip a paralyze? Celerity? How would you flip a 35% daze? 35% chance of celerity? Would these have to be hard coded if new named status variants came out?) is crazy strong, in my humble opinion. I'd personally enjoy seeing either the status be removed instead of flipped, or removing 100% melee worth of negative status instead, (20% chance of 100% melee for 20% melee style bonus), or lowering the chance of this status resist effect, however it ends up, happening. Status monsters are already countered by a boatload of items we have, I'd hate to see them countered by stats (this hard at least) too.

I'll also take some time to politely disagree with some opinions stated by other players. As they're opinions, of course I'm disagreeing with my opinion. For Aura Knight and Mananite, who both remarked that the STR choke seems good. 12.5% for 4 turns is nothing compared to doubling your HP, especially when you consider bosses usually only do 200-300 damage per turn on 13% resistances (from a sample of 12 or so I did a while back). You'd be saving ~150 HP with that, by my numbers (which are in FO, and that's 150 HP over 4 turns, not each turn). Of course, my numbers are of a simple situation, but I do think they prove a point. I'd also like to respectfully disagree with Mananite on Ferocious strikes not affecting statuses. I've been enjoying the winter warden weapon's RNG chance to have stronger statuses, I think it's a fun mechanic, and adding it to guests would be cool as well (although my concerns about the 55% baseline still remain).

And one last thing, with players get minimum a flat 20% melee per turn boost in power (or more for hybrids? I'd have to think about if you could realistically use multiple style bonuses at once), will monsters be receiving any buffs? I'd hate to see the game stall into easy mode and only be broken up by bosses with special mechanics, which may be unapproachable or less approachable for players with less experience / seasonal items / rare items.

Now that I've expressed my concerns, I'll again say thank you to the staff for this well written and clearly well thought out proposal. Thanks for being so open to feedback, and willing to communicate with a sometimes demanding playerbase.




Aura Knight -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 18:01:13)

I now think the wallbreaker effect is a disappointment in that it offers no benefit to the INT stat. You'll still use harm where an elemental advantage doesn't exist. I think the option of some type of mp regen should be considered. We see this on the no-drops so why not improve on it through the stat meant for mages?




J9408 -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 18:16:59)

^Instead of Wallbreaker, perhaps a MP regen Poison infliction?

A MP ver of Nemesis Aura. Instead of healing HP, the player heals MP from the poison damage on the enemy.




CH4OT1C! -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 18:41:11)

Before anything else, I'd like to wholeheartedly thank the staff for their work to make this stat revamp a reality, as well as for clearly communicating and asking for feedback in advance.

I think that the bulk of the mechanics suggested in this update work very well. I also think that there are some potential issues in terms of interaction. I'm going to distill this down as I've already elaborated in more detail elsewhere.

  • STR: Warrior lean is an excellent addition as it'll allow Warriors to play defensively without being easily outcompete by Rangers and Mages (but then I'd be biased). I think that the weapon damage boost is a tolerable option as an investment for the style bonus, but agree with @Mananite that +15% is excessive. This is especially important because, with this update, Rangers are clearly being geared towards defensive benefits. Under the current plans, it would take Rangers 7 turns to approximate the 115% base damage Warriors would do before beginning to make up the difference. This is before we discuss the Choke warriors also receive. For obvious reasons, it would take too long for Rangers to catch up (north of 15 turns). This would be even worse for FO rangers, and make it very difficult to see why one would want to play as a Ranger.
    I don't think that this necessarily means that the mechanics being discussed here need to be completely redrawn. However, the numbers being proposed definitely need changes for Rangers to stand any chance. I also agree with @Mananite that the choke needs bubble wrap if it's implemented.

  • DEX: If the goal is to encourage Rangers to play with a wide variety of leans, then @Dardiel is absolutely right that these changes would not facilitate it. That does not mean the mechanic is necessarily a problem, only that it doesn't meet the goal you've set. @Mananite is also absolutely right to raise that this could cause some serious problems regarding the stacking of berserk. This would need to be looked at if it were implemented. I'd prefer the ramp to be changed at this stage, but if it must stay, it needs to be buffed. Either that, or STR needs to be nerfed to create a more equal balance of powers. The +6 blocking also seems somewhat tacked on. One of the first things we discussed as a community was whether or not DEX should retain more of a blocking focus, with the result being a general "no". I think that power would quite easily be spent in a useful way, such as a damage boost for weapons with higher proc rates to emphasise the benefits of defensive play.

  • INT: As with the others, no problem with this. I've loved the wallbreaker mechanic since it was first suggested.

  • END: On board with this. It's in a difficult position and, aside from making enemies more dangerous, there's not a lot more you can do with it.

  • CHA: Decoupling from DEX is fantastic. I fully support the changes to Guests (though again, I'm biased!). After mulling it over, I can get behind both ferocious strikes and a flat damage boost, so long as the former doesn't have anything so risky as a version of Hypercritical created.

  • LUK: I like the style bonus and the removal of the stat in accuracy and blocking formulae. However, I dislike the small chance to autohit. When one chooses to use autohit, they crave reliability. A 5% chance to automatically hit something is the opposite of reliable. I would simply use an autohit weapon instead. I fully realise why you would want to achieve this for the monster side given the problems currently caused by dodge-based playstyles, but this feels like a way of spending power you've assigned to the player in a way that benefits monsters. Why not just apply the flat rate without taking out of stats?




  • dizzle -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 19:40:23)

    Im gonna swagger jack gibbys politeness and reiterate the appreciation of the devs communicating w us on the changes and also outlining reasoning behind the changes. With that being said, I think between everyone who’s commented so far most of my thoughts are already out there so I’ll just emphasize supports/concerns that have already been raised.

    Str - first thoughts when reading was that I too believe STR is getting too much compared to the other mainstats in terms of raw power. However, I’ve seen comments about dropping the +15% boost to +10% to reel it in a bit. It’s 5%… I don’t think this difference is significant at all. As cool as I think the choke mechanic is, I too think it would be too easily abusable. My preference would be to drop the choke completely, keep the warrior lean idea, and just leave the +15% dmg boost as is. No need to make things more difficult than they need to be. Warriors identity is steady consistent damage. Rather boring, but it’s not changing so just give them the slight dmg bump. Leave it independent of weapon dmg type to create more incentive for STR hybrids.

    Dex - meh I’ll come back to this later. I hate damage ramping but admittedly have no other suggestions for it atm that wouldn’t be inflammatory

    Int - I think the damage boost when attacking low ele mods could potentially cause some unforeseen issues in the future and it already does with some niche set ups, but all in all it’s fine. No complaints and right on par w what I think INT should get

    End - no comment. I’ll prob come back to this later as well.

    Cha - finally a decoupling from dex and paying proper resources for what you get. Ferocious strikes seem very interesting, especially if they work on status guests. Given it’s a flat rate of ~22% occurrence I don’t think ferocious strikes on status guests will be that big of an issue. I understand others worry for this getting out of hand but this opens the door to a lot more creativity and shenanigans, on top of more opportunity for unique items that could manipulate this rate.

    Luk -
    quote:

    I like the style bonus and the removal of the stat in accuracy and blocking formulae. However, I dislike the small chance to autohit. When one chooses to use autohit, they crave reliability. A 5% chance to automatically hit something is the opposite of reliable. I would simply use an autohit weapon instead. I fully realise why you would want to achieve this for the monster side given the problems currently caused by dodge-based playstyles, but this feels like a way of spending power you've assigned to the player in a way that benefits monsters. Why not just apply the flat rate without taking out of stats?


    Summed up perfectly. I understand the monsters need for this auto hit chance rate but it does seem kinda silly devoting precious value to something so insignificant (for the player) (respectfully). RNG based effects/mechanics are incredibly unpopular, and for good reason too. I also would like to see luk have a more significant role in initiative. Aside from lucky strikes luk just does not offer much

    Anyway, I’m happy to see this revamp getting jump started back up again. Hopefully everything goes smoothly and good luck to the team on the big change!




    Aura Knight -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 19:42:29)

    quote:

    perhaps a MP regen Poison infliction?


    I don't know if that would help. I favor immediate regen to delayed.

    The only reason the proposed effect to the intellect stat isn't a major concern is due to the power of the stat itself. Mages are spoiled with what they can do. Still, wallbreaker is a fail concept in my opinion and the excitement for the nonexistent benefit it will offer is concerning. It is quite weak compared to how the other mainstats will change.




    Korriban Gaming -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 19:44:52)

    Whew, lots to go through, here goes.

    STR
    Really good changes, Warriors getting a lot of love this time. Nothing I would change tbh.

    DEX
    It does seem that there's a bigger focus on FD for DEX with the Blocking and Ramping. People are worried about Rangers outperforming Warriors in terms of damage in long battles. I think this is a non-issue. Most battles don't take that long unless you're dragging it out on purpose, in which case, you're sacrificing real time (not something that's calculated or accounted for), this is a downside in itself and people don't see this. I think the Ramping is fine if playing a 20-turn game is what you really prefer.

    INT
    I hope the staff can clarify how this works with EleVuln, permanent ele resist increment pets, Freeze and ele scramble items. Does it take from the monster's base ele value or? It seems like a nerf to these items because using it while the monster has low resists would be counterintuitive. If my understanding is correct, this wouldn't be a buff then, it would be a nerf. Also, Aura Knight has a point regarding using Harm instead of the standard elements. I think this needs a whole relooking at. For the MP regen idea proposed, I'm not opposed to it but I think we could have something better/more interesting. Don't have any suggestions of my own for now, will post when I get ideas.

    END
    Nothing much to say here. I think it's fine as it currently is. The reduction in monster HP is great for lower levelled players.

    CHA
    I've said it previously and I'll say it again. The cost is too high and the output is too low. I'm not a fan of the Ferocious Strike idea unless I see some Hypercrit items for Guests. This is straight up RNG aka non-guaranteed damage. I would rather you split this % Melee from Ferocious Strike into lowering the cost and increasing the base output power. Agree with Grace on this though rather than just increasing base power I think lowering cost can be included too. Decoupling from DEX is a good change that we've been waiting for for a long time.

    LUK
    BTH in the game is already horrible as it is. While of course, non LUK builds aren't affected by this, I hope some extra BTH gets thrown into all mainstats in some way. I agree with CH4OTIC regarding the autohit mechanic. If I wanted to hit, I would just use a autohit weapon instead. Flipping a debuff into a buff sounds like an interesting idea and I'm onboard for it though similar to Grace, I would also like to know how this would work in more detail. Overall LUK needs a few changes.




    Rastaban -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 20:10:10)

    For STR I would rather have a "battle lust" sort of feature than the choke. An extra amount of SP at the start of the battle or every ten turns? Slightly greater SP regeneration every turn? Some percent chance of gaining SP upon hitting or being hit? There are many ways to spin it. If I want this sort of choke, I can just pay for it. Considering what will soon happen to Essence Orb, I would have preferred something along these lines even without reading about the extra guest cost.

    Still not sure I like the DEX ramping thing and the extra MRM feels like it could be better used elsewhere.

    The new INT thing seems like it could produce some interesting results under certain circumstances. Looking forward to playing with this. I would prefer a built-in harm spell, however.

    I strongly agree with Grace about eliminating Ferocious Strikes.

    Happy to see monster END scaling being addressed.

    I like the idea of flipping a status positive but it seems like there should be a limit to these sorts of things. I'll also say I feel strongly that guaranteed status cleanse items are a huge mistake. We shouldn't be able to just end a 9,999 turn effect like that.




    battlesiege15 -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 20:11:15)

    STR:
    - Warrior Lean: No real thoughts against it. Adds some reason to use Defensive armors I guess.
    - Global damage boost: I think this might get a little out of hand with certain set ups such as Initiative boost, ele-locked armors, Dual-nami boost, etc. If this applies to Magic weapons as well, then Poelala-lala combo might be even more deadly.
    - Choke: I don't know if I like it thematically.
    - What about something like "Cripple" or "Daze" chance because of brute force?
    DEX:
    - Ramp-up makes sense but going from 80% --> 101% at turn 3 --> 160.5% at turn 20 seems insane.
    - What if you split the damage into adding BTH as well? Since you use your Ranger skills over time to find the weak spots of enemies.
    INT:
    - Seems fine
    END:
    - Seems fine. Gives END a small buff too if it provides some sort of resistance.
    CHA:
    - Removing DEX is a great idea
    - Guests getting less damage and increased cost is a little hard on Beastmasters that have to use SP for multiple things. I get that it needs changing though.
    - Ferocious Strike: A 2/9 chance of double output seems nice but not reliable. It's somewhat like a lucky strike?
    - What about the thought of an "Efficient Strike" where there is an X% chance the guest will attack without using any MP or SP?
    LUK:
    - Not sure how to feel about these changes




    Aura Knight -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 20:17:43)

    quote:

    20% chance per turn to flip one status debuff on the player into a status buff.


    Do we choose which if there's multiple or will it try to do it for the first listed?

    quote:

    Whether or not you're using a Ranged weapon on a given turn, it increases by +7% per turn until it hits 101%, then +3.5% per turn until turn 20.


    Rather than per turn can it be per hit? There's no point slowing down an already slow combat style.




    Weeum -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 20:35:47)

    When I originally pitched the wallbreaker effect I explained it's use case as taking the edge off of using spells that are not the best element, and generally increasing the usefulness of multi-element spells. It was never intended to be a power boost to INT from the baseline it's at now. I pitched it expressly to take advantage of how good INT already is to let people play around with stuff they might not otherwise use. Mages definitely don't need anything in the vein of mana or SP regen, they're already spoiled for choice for resource manipulation. Harm is harm and will do harm things. It definitely shouldn't be tied to Mage's style bonus, it's available on plenty of melee and ranged weapons. It's pretty plain to see that harm is always going to be build agnostic with no build (In this context build is meant to be read as main stat choice, not itemization) specializing in it.




    Grace Xisthrith -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 22:13:38)

    Exciting to see more discussion, very cool. Also again thanks to the staff, I've had a very fun time thinking about these changes.

    I had some more time to think about the changes, and I do have a few more thoughts. But first, I wanted to ask a question officially on the forums, about the luck "auto hit" type changes. If I understand this correctly ("Global 5% chance of hitting, regardless of defence. Player-only: with 250 LUK, this can increase to 10%."), this means that if a target can't hit another target at all (IE, their bth is 100 or more less than the foe's defense), they instead have a 5% chance to hit. If I understand correctly, this would not impact the following situation:

    My character has 100 bth, and is fighting a Super Sneak Mob with 170 MRM. I have a 30% chance to hit, so my chance of hitting is greater than 5%, so the LUK bonus doesn't apply. --- But would impact ---

    My character has 100 bth, and is fighting a Super Duper Sneak Mob with 210 MRM. I have a 0% chance to hit, but with the LUK bonus, I know have a 5% chance (or 10% chance).

    If my understanding is correct, then the LUK passive bonus will pretty much never actually affect players, outside of unbeatables and weird things. I don't think that's a problem necessarily, but I'd love to have clarity on the situation, is this an effect players will regularly use and see their unlucky attacks hitting? Or is this pretty much just so monsters still have a chance to hit when the player is uber-dodge boosted, since player accuracy is almost never below 5% (base accuracy at level 150 is 78 with stats, so a monster would need >173 MRM to trigger this)

    Now onto my more thoughts about the potential implications of the stat changes.

    STR:
    Warrior lean: It may really weaken most players' reasons to play FD Ranger. Yes, 100 Procs do 1.1x damage compared to 0 Proc 1.08x, but is that really a motivation given STR is getting a raw damage boost? I'd say FD Ranger would be locked to status builds, or else be outperformed by FD warriors just with raw damage (until ~15 turns when ramping balances out total damage, see spreadsheet below). I'd potentially give this some thought, and consider whether something like warrior lean dealing x.95 or x.9 damage could be a reasonable alternative. If STR wasn't getting a raw damage boost, I'd have no issue.
    Choke: If a boss does on the high end 300 damage against an FO armor (again, taking from a pool of ~ 10 bosses I collected data from), the choke would only prevent ~150 damage. I don't think that's a big deal at all. You'd have to be in an off element armor and taking massive damage for the choke alone to do much. It could eventually have synergies in the future, but it's really not that strong, in my opinion.

    DEX:
    Ramping: Is ramping a multiplicative damage modifier? There's not a super great way to test in game, so is there any chance we could get staff confirmation? This would have implications for its power in FO builds, so I'm curious.
    Lean Expertise: Assuming this is valued at 10% melee given the other style bonus is 6 MRM, which is also 10% melee. If it is valued at 10% melee, I did some calculations to see when it would * actually * be worth 10% melee. Essentially, it would either have to make up 8.5 BTH on a negative BTH lean, or make up 10% damage on a positive bth lean. These thresholds are at -34 BTH and +55 BTH (25% of 34 = 8.5, 85/140 = 60% outgoing damage, so gaining 25% of the damage lost, 40%, makes 10% damage). Given these leans are extreme to actually get 10% melee, I'd volunteer this Lean Expertise should be valued at 5% melee instead (this will come back later).
    6 Defense: I think giving DEX some dodging isn't a big deal, although it is a powerful passive. It fits thematically, and doesn't really change gameplay too much. No dodge player needs to go DEX if this goes live, it's just a nice bonus for DEX dodge players, and basically passive HP income for FD and FO rangers. Players won't actively notice it, but it's there.

    INT:
    I truly believe this is a placebo style bonus, and I think it should stay that way. Mages are extremely powerful, and don't need a raw 15-20% melee power budget tacked on the way warriors or rangers (debatably) could use.

    END:
    Style Bonus: At the moment, it's receiving 12.5% Heal res (basically) and 5 Status resistance. That's only 10% melee out of an alleged style bonus of 15%. I don't think that's a big deal, but I'd say another small thing you could add on could be a 5% chance to break out of stuns. Not really significant, but nice when it happens. 5% chance of getting 100% melee out of your turn, so it kinda fits 5% melee value. Why I'm aiming for 15% instead of 20% is because I actually think style bonuses could be shrunk to 15%, I'll get to that at the end.

    CHA:
    Guest Upkeep: If guest Upkeep is 30% Melee, and Output is 45% melee, is part of CHA's style bonus being spent on reducing guest costs? This isn't in the style bonus section, so are player's just being given a freebie on that, guests pay 15% melee less than they "should?" I think that's a fine thing, and it will lead into my next suggestion.
    Ferocious Strikes: Just like people don't like Mogsterio blowing their ba- ahem - HP bar out with an RNG health cost, I'd wager many players don't want to be relying on RNG guest output. I'd be much happier with a flat 55% guest output and no RNG personally (not to mention how crazy Rammsy sometimes boosting fire damage by 90% would be lmao). This would also lessen the weight on status guests that no longer have guaranteed paralyzes (Mogdin, my beloved). To get to my real devious point though, if the style bonus isn't being spent on lowering guest upkeep, then we have 15-20% melee to play with to affect guests, if Ferocious Strikes aren't implemented. (this logic is somewhat faulty, since Ferocious strikes are only worth 10% melee in the first place, which leads me to believe the style bonus was being applied to guest costs. I'll still continue though). If we use my ideal number of 15% melee of style bonus, you'll notice guest output is 45%. Add 15% melee onto that, and we're back to guest output being the same as it was, for 30% melee. Is this too powerful? Maybe, IDK, but I figured I'd throw it out there. CHA TLDR: Ferocious bad, guest base output good

    LUK:
    Autohit esque feature: Same questions as above. Is this actually for players? Or just for monsters?
    Status Super Cleanse / Flip: Very strong as written. People have brought this up a lot I won't beat a dead horse

    Overall vision:
    If style bonus was 15% melee instead of 20%, you could have:
    STR: 10% damage, 5% damage reduction / once per battle choke effect. This solves the problem of warriors getting a passive bloodblade, which is kinda nuts, while still keeping them above ranger for several turns and having bonus damage.
    DEX: 5% Lean expertise, 5-10% MRM, 5% Raw damage up to 85% or 90%. Ramping: Just use Dardiel's version!!!! If not: If warrior damage is dropped to 110, a lighter ramping curve makes more sense. I'd love starting at 90% with 2 turns of 5% damage, and then 18 turns of 2% damage. Compare to it STR and INT on my spreadsheet (scenario 3). This would feel less bad for FO rangers turn 1-2, not beat STR for damage for several turns, and be not too crazy by turn 20.
    INT: Looks good boss, push it to live : p
    END: Maybe add my idea or something to push it to 15% to match up, or just don't. END does what it's supposed to do, makes players tanky, doesn't need a change unless to make it match with the rest in terms of melee%.
    CHA: Please no ferocious strikes, please as close to 60% guest output as possible while mainting 30% melee upkeep (potentially placebo nerf Summon Guests to cost 5% melee more to balance LBM builds, call it a magic decompression penalty or something idk just nerf LBM before it's too late. Half kidding with this)
    LUK: Status cleanse is really good. Consider taking initiative off mainstat and solely on LUK again? Would give LUK more identity outside hypercrit.

    And finally, maybe some monster buffs could come through at some point in the future to counter this raw power jump we're getting. Thank you again to the staff for managing all this community feedback, and a game that's been fun for 20 years.




    Korriban Gaming -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 22:41:03)

    quote:

    This is mostly a nerf to dodge mechanic, which is needed.

    If staff can confirm this is indeed the intention then I'd say just give all monsters a 5% chance to autohit and not tie it to LUK. Seems like LUK's power is wasted on this as per the reasons I stated in my earlier post




    Lorekeeper -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 22:54:57)

    Quick clarification: The change to accuracy means that all attacks have an accuracy floor of 5% (10% for a player with max LUK), meaning that they can't be brought below that value. Baseline accuracy has not been lowered for this (LUK is simply not required for all accuracy anymore), and LUK does not affect it for monsters.




    Korriban Gaming -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 22:58:01)

    Is it possible to clarify these 2 points as well regarding INT and LUK
    quote:

    I hope the staff can clarify how this works with EleVuln, permanent ele resist increment pets, Freeze and ele scramble items. Does it take from the monster's base ele value or? It seems like a nerf to these items because using it while the monster has low resists would be counterintuitive. If my understanding is correct, this wouldn't be a buff then, it would be a nerf.

    quote:

    (also, how would you flip a paralyze? Celerity? How would you flip a 35% daze? 35% chance of celerity? Would these have to be hard coded if new named status variants came out?





    Lorekeeper -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 23:21:30)

    That wouldn't be set up in a way that makes Wallbreaker a nerf if we can at all help it; not that an item not having synergy in a specific future use case would constitute a general nerf, but it's worth reassuring. I've also asked Ianthe to post examples of how status reversal would work when she has time, so we can show presets with their values.




    Macho Man -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/22/2024 23:37:49)

    I'm just glad that we finally have an update for the stats, its going to be fun testing out all of the new potential builds but I will pay my respects to CHA. I know the guest upkeep was mathematically too low and too effiicent but idk how I feel about the CHA nerf just yet, maybe the removal of DEX for accuracy will make it feel better to play.

    But like I said earlier Im so happy to have this update finally come out.




    Aura Knight -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/23/2024 0:46:32)

    quote:

    Guests gain Ferocious Strikes: A flat 22.2% chance to have double output (Damage, status effects, boosting features, etc).


    It should 2x everything.




    JhyShy -> RE: =AQ= Stat Overhaul Discussion & Feedback! (1/23/2024 1:54:56)

    Not much for me to say to be quite honest, but I would like to add a few of my own adjustments on the proposed ones:

    STR:
    Bump down the boost from +15% to +10%
    Rather than the choke, I'd like to bring up my old suggestion of letting weapon ranges be closer together to deal much higher consistent damage, or maybe even let STR give higher chances of high roll damages

    Edit: Figured to try and justify why this would be much more fitting to have this over the choke is that while it does fit defensively, opening the fight with an immediate choke on the enemy seems too good, alongside it having no saves. While my proposal won't exactly bring a much better defensive boon to warriors, I feel this would be an all around useful and thematically fitting use of the style bonus for warriors, them being consistent long lasting damage dealers, having better chances of a high roll or them letting their mastery be on their weapon's damage range to make them much more consistent would be nice. Also bump down the +15% damage boost, +15% seems a bit excessive after thinking about it.

    DEX:
    While I don't know what to feel about the implementation of the ramping damage, some ideas were pretty nice with the damage ramp being tied to whether we hit the enemy or not, if I had to change the style bonus it would be keeping the ramp damage but rather than the BTH mastery it would be that the ramp up goes faster with how many hits connect

    INT:
    Int is already strong enough by itself, no need for me to adjust the style bonus

    END:
    No changes for me

    CHA:
    Ferocious strike should hopefully not do all 3 but be dependent on what the guest is doing, for example if it's in status mode, it's just boosts status and not damage as well

    LUK:
    No thoughts from me




    Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

    Valid CSS!




    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
    0.171875