15+ Positive BTH Leans (Full Version)

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



Message


Grace Xisthrith -> 15+ Positive BTH Leans (5/10/2024 19:07:30)

Accuracy standards have changed hella over the last few years. We've gone from a 40% autohit penalty to a 15% autohit penalty, which is honestly nuts. While I'm a big fan of autohit becoming a more mainstream useful option, it does come with some potential confusing situations. The main confusing situation I'm talking about is positive BTH leans greater than or equal to +15 BTH. Any lean greater than +15 BTH reduces damage more than autohit while simultaneously providing less benefit than auto hit effects. It does seem rather illogical now, although of course at the time of most of these items creation, the autohit standard was much more restrictive, so these leans had a purpose. Now however, I view, and I suspect many view them as antiquated.

My proposal is that items that have a +15 BTH or greater accuracy lean are simply adjusted to be on the modern autohit standard. This would have relatively few items needing to be changed (to my knowledge), as extreme leans like +20 are quite rare. I can only think of a few off the top of my head, the ectomancer weapons, the Hyperbarbarian Giftboxen spell, the Reigndeery Giftboxen pet, although I'm sure there are at least a half dozen more I don't know of off the top of my head. There's definitely a case to be made that updating these older, less used, and particularly some of these rare items isn't worth the dev time invested. I don't have a strong way to disagree with this view, but I'm simply say that I view it as advancing the game and making sure these types of outdated BTH leans are removed as much as possible, and kept out of game design moving forward, just like what recently happened with mid offensive and defensive leans in the recent past.

One topic I've struggled to figure out with this is the Ranged stat identity, bth lean adjustement. I believe if you miss three hits, you go above a +15 bth lean. On one hand, this is definitely an example of the faulty lean I identified earlier, it does less and pays more damage than autohit. On the other hand, giving all ranged damage the ability to be autohit if you plan it right is probably a horrible idea. That's my current dilemma on the topic, and I don't have a solution aside from ignoring it, I'm curious to see what others think.

Conclusion: Positive bth leans 15 or greater are objectively worse than autohit. They certainly shouldn't be created in new content, and I'm advocating for their adjustment to autohit in older items and gear (and perhaps monsters!).




Sapphire -> RE: 15+ Positive BTH Leans (5/11/2024 7:03:56)

By extension, all auto-hit items needs an adjustment to the new standard. This includes old Samurai armor and Legion Shogun's FSB and other auto hit stuff.




RobynJoanne -> RE: 15+ Positive BTH Leans (5/12/2024 12:40:05)

+15 or greater BtH leans are clearly underpowered and would need to be adjusted (Other items Grace missed include Undead Beast from Necromancer, Superb Owl, and Ring of Precision. The last is most important as a quick and easy source of potential auto-hit, especially for low-level players. Also worth noting are Masamune, whose toggle isn't a lean but provides +15 BtH and should thus instead pay to be auto-hit; Eye of Naab, which similarly provides +15 BtH and should've been changed anyway when Queen of Hearts updated [:(]; and New Year's Surprise, which provides +16 BtH).

I believe a broader topic worth discussing is when should accuracy leans just be auto-hit even outside of those that are underpowered. For instance, +14 BtH lean is technically not underpowered, but I'd reckon most people would prefer to get the reliability of auto-hit for a ~1% relative decrease in damage. The same could be said for +13 BtH lean. At what point do we make this demarcation for accuracy leans between auto-hit and a +BtH lean? The same could be said for +BtH effects. Helm of Frostval Past provides +12.75 BtH. Would it not be better to have a marginal resource cost to provide auto-hit?

+10 BtH seems to be a decent number to start the discussion. I use +10 because it's the most common increase in BtH provided by Miscs at level 150 and is relatively common for +BtH leans.




Sapphire -> RE: 15+ Positive BTH Leans (5/14/2024 15:28:40)

In my opinion, using baseline accuracy and thus, auto-hit standards can't be the only thing considered. While +15 BTH gets you to 100% accuracy , there is a difference between +15 BTH as a feature that is paid for and a +15bth lean. Also, this is simply vs "the average monster". The lean system caps and auto hit valuations does overlap, so I get it. But here's the thing below...

If you changed the +15 BTH lean from a lean to auto hit, on paper there's no difference. However, reality has to be considered, and in this case, a monster such as shadow roc with super high MRM a +15 bth lean item is very much different than auto hit. So, altering the +15bth lean to auto-hit is an actual buff because it's always useful.

It begs the question, should auto hit have that penalty? I think so.

Auto hit is in-fact, always useful. If you tacked on a .9x penalty, that 85% becomes 76.5% melee for melee/ranged and 57.37%?? for magic.

I believe this should be the real auto-hit numbers, and it provides breathing room for the +/- lean system.

By properly valueing auto-hit this way, the original post becomes moot as the +/-20 lean system has breathing room to be meaningful. This would end up becoming a more consistent application of standards across the board and since most auto-hit items need to be changed anyway still, changing only those to include what I think is a missing always useful penalty should get us to where it should be and no other items get touched.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.125