Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

The Evolution of Battle Mechanics

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel General Discussion >> The Evolution of Battle Mechanics
Page 1 of 212>
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
5/14/2012 13:34:19   
drekon
Retired ED Guest Artist


 Have you ever debuffed an opponent to the extent that you expect to get a block or deflection, only to see them hit you every time without fail? And in this moment of awe, your only response is "wow"? Have you experienced this in multiple consecutive battles that discouraged you from playing PvP? If so, you are not alone.

In an effort to make battles more predictable and fair, I've proposed the Battle Mechanics Upgrade plan and would like some feedback from the community. Here's a summary of how it would work.

- Block, Deflect, and Critical chances will increase by a fraction of a percent for every stat/buff points added to their corresponding stats.
- Stun chance will increase by a fraction of a percent for every Support stat point advantage a player has.
- More upgradable weapons with debuffing capabilities should be added to combat the growing percentage chance as level caps increase.

Please read the linked post above for more details.

So how do you feel about this alternative? Agree or disagree? Why? Also, what do you think of making skills like Fireball and Plasma Bolt subject to deflection?

< Message edited by drekon -- 5/14/2012 13:37:55 >

_____________________________
Epic  Post #: 1
5/14/2012 18:43:21   
Wraith
Member
 

 ED hasn't evolved. Sure, it changed, but I believe devolution is possible.

_____________________________
AQ DF AQW Epic  Post #: 2
5/14/2012 23:22:14   
Mr. Black OP
Member

Nothing has been done about the main problems, there is still a minimum block/deflect/critical chance and deflects and criticals are to effective. I only support having support be improved a bit but your system will end up encouraging stat spamming. 65% maximum block chance will just lead to even more high dexterity builds.
Epic  Post #: 3
5/15/2012 1:18:24   
Shadronica
Member

The battle engine has always been a problem.

The percentages for blocks/crits/deflect/stuns has always been suspect. I know that Ashari did a battle count on blocks once before(100 battle sample) ... however, at that time she was usiing an OP bounty hunter build and did not find that the blocks were a problem. BUT I have found that the OP classes/builds tend to get favoured by the battle engine.

This doesn't happen ALL the time but it does happen far too regularly and I have also noted that when the "un" luck factor steps in it tends to stick to you like a march fly.

Why is it that the "un" "luck" percentage factor in this game hits us like a ton of bricks instead of spreading out more evenly? (Unless you are using the latest and best class/builds.)

This is probably not a major contributing factor to balance in this game but I can well imagine that it is what keeps us all trying to use the latest OP classes and builds.

The battle engine has always been flawed regarding these statistics. Titan would never acknowledge or admit it but it is definately amiss in the distribution.
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 4
5/15/2012 1:33:05   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 @shad Well at least she took the initiative to collect data on luck, as compared to the majority of players here who base their numbers off one unlucky battle out of several dozen battles where luck was fine for them. Numbers without data is anecdotal for all I care. It doesn't prove anything without data to back it up. I could say I got blocked 3 times in one battle and have high dex. How high is my dex, how high was my opponents, how many attacks did I use that were blockable, did I have a +% to connect item on, was I Smoked, etc. That proves nothing right there other than someone got blocked 3 times and maybe not even that since it's all too easy that three was a two in reality.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 5
5/15/2012 2:06:13   
Shadronica
Member

You can fancy schmancy up all the data/stats that you wish ND. I am a totally experienced player (not the best but still a worthwhile opponent or was). I am not having a go at Ashari either and yes she did try.

My observations over a long period of time has been that the engine is faulty with its distribution. You can nit pick all you like and ask me who had what dex, tech or sup ... I am telling you that it has long been my observation that the engine is flawed. It became far more obvious towards the end of beta. Prior to that my builds and stats worked fine as expected. Towards the end of beta things started getting messed up. It did have a few odd minor flaws but nowhere near what we are seeing today.


< Message edited by Shadronica -- 5/15/2012 2:08:08 >
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 6
5/15/2012 8:49:59   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 @shad Data doesn't lie unless you smudge the numbers. A lack of data is nothing more than anecdotal, a story. No amount of experience in the game will prove a rate unless you're a super genius capable of finding the percentages of the luck factors in your head and being able to average them over hundreds of battles. Also, it would make sense that the luck factors on your build have changed over time because the formulaes for most of them have been changed since Beta. I'm just as experienced as you are and I provide proof when I need to(although the general forum population ignores it entirely to argue their own ideas even if broken).

< Message edited by The ND Mallet Guy -- 5/15/2012 8:51:38 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 7
5/15/2012 11:19:23   
ScarletReaper
Member

@mallet Ok, if battle mechanics are as fine as they have always been, then why are so many people complaining now? Are you suggesting that we aren't smart enough to be able to notice the difference because we don't have figures to back it up? If 1 or 2 people say it, they may be wrong. But when dozens are noticing, that says to me that there may be a problem.
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 8
5/15/2012 11:35:23   
Ranloth
Banned


 You know why people complain about luck..? Enhancements. Much more stat points which make difference in damage/defence thus creating a gap, and crits also do more damage. More stats = more chance to block/deflect if invested in appropriate stats hence more damage/blocking. Try to play few test matches with someone with little to no enhancements and maybe non-Varium equipment too, and see the results of luck. Remorse and I did it a while ago, Crits, blocks and deflects were fair as we still had an edge over eachother so it was battle of skills and using them wisely as well, but with enhancements it was about same amount of luck but higher damage, higher Crits of course, and Tankier too which causes Rage to accumulate faster.

Issue is not with luck completely but enhancements being a must to win nowadays. Unless the do something about them *cough* Goony's idea ;) *cough*, then luck will be something people hate when happens to then (bad luck) but won't care if they get lucky streak and win. Luck complaints are usually from ones with bad streak, I never seen one complaining about too much luck. ;)

quote:

Also, what do you think of making skills like Fireball and Plasma Bolt subject to deflection?

And Stun skills are also affected, right? Damage difference between let's say Overload and Bolt exist but difference is due to Stun on Overload, so if Bolt was to be deflected then people would go for Overload and Multi in 1v1, and same build is in 2v2. And if such a change would occur to Stun, we must change Multi as well to keep it fair. But with Multi's 75% damage in 2v2, chance of deflection, that skill would deal in 10s at most. :P
AQ Epic  Post #: 9
5/15/2012 11:53:40   
drekon
Retired ED Guest Artist


 @Mr. Black Op, you are correct. The method I proposed would indeed be an invitation for stat spammers. However, there would be counter measures in place to combat ridiculously high stats/chances. One such method is the upgradable weapons. Think of the Celtic weapons with a percent chance to Connect(ignores a % of enemy block chance). If this were to be upgradable to a maximum of 25% Connect or so, in addition to other items, one could develop an effective counter build for spammers. When I envision this method in practice, it's not just the Battle Mechanics I see improving; but a whole range of features and capabilities that would make the game more fair and balanced.

@Shadronica, I agree with you that the current method of calculating chance is flawed to some degree. It could be improved, but I would rather see it replaced altogether with a more effective one.

@The ND Mallet Guy, I've been an experience player for almost 2 years now. I'm constantly testing the effectiveness of various builds and creating unique ones to combat OP builds. I've also developed a simple software that calculates my % chances that I often use when battling PvP. If the numbers/data is that significant to you, then I will provide you with the relevant data. The problem I mentioned was experienced in 4 consecutive battles. My opponents were 1 Tech Mage, 2 Bounty Hunters, and 1 Blood Mage; all were using strength builds(apparently that's popular these days). In each battle, after using Smoke, their defense was reduced to less than 15 base. I vividly remember the Blood Mage's defense was reduced to 9 base because this was the one that bothered me the most. You can do the calculations to figure out how much Dexterity they had after Smoke. Keep in mind that I have 106 Dexterity which gives me a 30 Defense base. In addition, I have a level 5 Shadow Arts, adding a bonus 5% block chance. In each of these battles, after using Smoke, I did not block a single melee attack despite having the maximum 40% Block Chance. I don't know how the Developers use the % chance to determine when a player receives a block, but if it's anything like how I imagine, then it can be improved significantly. There have also been cases where my opponent's Block chance was reduced to it's minimum, but they blocked my melee attacks several times in a row. Do you not see a problem with this?

More than anything, I would like to know, if you had to replace or improve the current Battle Mechanics, how would you do so? If you see a flaw in the method I've proposed, please explain how it can be improved? I know my idea is far from perfect, so I would greatly appreciate any constructive feedback.

Thanks


Appended Response to Trans

quote:

And Stun skills are also affected, right? Damage difference between let's say Overload and Bolt exist but difference is due to Stun on Overload, so if Bolt was to be deflected then people would go for Overload and Multi in 1v1, and same build is in 2v2. And if such a change would occur to Stun, we must change Multi as well to keep it fair. But with Multi's 75% damage in 2v2, chance of deflection, that skill would deal in 10s at most. :P

Good point. Although, I don't think Overload or Plasma Rain need be amended. I acknowledge the need for Plasma Bolt to be more powerful than Overload, but the problem that I've seen is that in the hands of a stat spammer, PB is next to impossible to counter for most classes. I would like to see EpicDuel evolve to the point where Credit/Varium players of all classes have the "potential" to effectively counter all possible OP builds. If this were to happen, I don't see any good reason why people would complain about unfairness.

< Message edited by drekon -- 5/15/2012 12:21:55 >
Epic  Post #: 10
5/15/2012 15:51:42   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 @drekon There is a huge difference between your situation and the system. Your situation is observed rate of occurrence. It is generated by a RNG over a small period of time. Take a coin and flip it 4 times. Chances are it shows an inequal ratio like 3 to 1 tails-head ratio. That is observed ratio. It's what you see directly over a short period of time. The system uses actual ratio. It's a number it tells the RNG is special. Under that number, luck happens. The actual rate is not wrong, the observed rate is. But how does one get the actual rate? You take the average of your observed rate in each battle you have over many battles. A simple 100 battles is enough to remove some of the observed ratio problems but you would need multiple hundreds to effectively reduce it enough that it doesn't matter.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 11
5/15/2012 17:16:22   
Shadronica
Member

The issue is as stated above ND Mallet that the "luck" factor is unstable.

I am not providing you numbers because there isn't a need to provide YOU with numbers and I did state that it is an observation over 2 and a half years now.

Look at the threads we have had just in the last week about how unfair the luck factors are. AND I also stated that the "luck" factor is biased.

It makes no sense to invest in dexterity unless you use a skill that requires it .. if ... your opponents have very little dexterity and they manage to block you every time while they can hit you every time. What is the sense in that? These scenarios have been written so many times in the forums you cannot ignore it. I have observed it time and time again myself. Sure they are anomolies but they are still quite frequent.

I can even go far enough back to remember how lower level mercenaries with a level 3 or 4 bunker buster with little support would do criticals 90% of the time. And for your information ND Mallet no I didn't get figures on that because I was far too busy keeping my own mercenary on the all time leaderboard. :P

By the way ND do you not see that your questioning everyone that expresses an opinion is viewed as inflammatory? It is probably not your intention but it is viewed that way. The point to this discussion is not how the "luck" factor works over 100, 200 or even 1,000 battles the point is that these random "luck" factors really shouldn't have a place in ED. Luck factors belong to a younger childrens game.

What we all have to realise is that EpicDuel, whilst being a nice little browser game, is far from being a professional pvp game.

< Message edited by Shadronica -- 5/15/2012 18:01:39 >
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 12
5/15/2012 18:14:06   
Stabilis
Member

ND Mallet, no replies to this post?

Shadow Arts - Re

I recommend that you answer or I have no more reason to understand your realism approach by using luck. "I believe that everything happens for a reason" ~ Marilyn Monroe
AQ Epic  Post #: 13
5/15/2012 22:46:08   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 @shad When did I question anyone on their opinions and how exactly is it considered flaming? I do not have to agree with your opinions in order not to flame you. I've argued against ideas before and that is not necessarily questioning opinions. Also, luck is everywhere in the world and in pretty much every game. Slot machines rely heavily on luck and those aren't young kid games. Yahtzee isn't a young kid game and you roll dice for that game. Cribbage deals with cards and is also luck based. Any game you play with dice or cards is luck. Like I said, the RNG decides who gets blocked and who doesn't. Unless it's bugged, there probably is no way to make it more random with the numbers. You can't base luck observations off of memory over two years since you'll tend to remember the battles you lost due to luck rather than the many times bigger number of battles where luck didn't make you lose.

@void I don't see how me not replying to a thread awhile back renders my opinions invalid. There a many threads I haven't replied to before and my opinion is still valid.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 14
5/15/2012 23:24:40   
Stabilis
Member

^

So as a result of what you stated, at the same time, it does not give you the right to call out the opinions of others as invalid.
AQ Epic  Post #: 15
5/15/2012 23:34:23   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 @void Where did I ever mention that I considered someone's opinion invalid because they didn't post in a certain thread? I'm considering it invalid because it's based on long-term memory and will lose much accuracy due to it because numbers were never written down anywhere to be remembered. No averaging was done either in that course of two years either. It's basically, "I've had a lot of battles over two years that were unbelievably unlucky for me." It never said "I've had unlucky battles but I've had lucky battles as well, probably enough to offset the balance of bad battles." I could tell you several battles I lost because of luck right now. I probably couldn't tell you half as many that I won without or with luck helping me and not helping the other guy.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 16
5/15/2012 23:47:55   
Stabilis
Member

No, not Shadronica in this thread for example, but in general. Open-minded approaches to any thought at all whether it be from others or yourself, as long as there is no bias, will allow greater insight into the goods and bads, having one's self reaching enlightenment in a non-religious way. Enlightenment here being, seeing both sides of a mirror, opaque and reflective.

Regarding Shadronica's evidence though, I would partially agree that without enough data to display a common error or reverse, it would be difficult to show an important claim of regular misfortune for example.
AQ Epic  Post #: 17
5/16/2012 0:02:00   
Shadronica
Member

Meantime back on topic there is far too many people that agree that the "luck" factor is amiss.

Luck should not be an issue in a "strategic" pvp game. Luck and strategy have no correlation. I find it puerile to have it play the large role that it does. Sure I wouldn't mind the odd critical or block etc. but not all the luck factors crap on you in one battle alone. I really feel that they need to be decreased.


< Message edited by SMGS -- 5/16/2012 10:05:13 >
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 18
5/16/2012 3:09:48   
drekon
Retired ED Guest Artist


 @The ND Mallet Guy, you asked for data about my battles that corroborates my assertions of the flawed method of determining % chance. After providing you with the data, you flatly rejected them by basically declaring the 4 consecutive battles in which the flaws of the system were apparent is not substantial enough to be used as evidence that the system is flawed. So my concerns are not valid because they don't meet your standards? Tell me how 40 out of 100 is a different from 4 out of 10 in regards to percentage. Then explain what's the point in using a high Dexterity build with a Smoke combo if their intended effects are NOT realized a total of 12 times in a row. (4 battles x 3 rounds of Smoke)

You've conveniently ignored the intention of this topic, as well as the alternative method I've proposed, and seem to be defending the current system. Please note that the focus here is about "making battles more predictable and fair" for everyone. This luck factor is currently too unpredictable with the minimum chances and the maximum adjusted chances. I'm not advocating that we remove luck altogether. I'm simply proposing a method that would give players "total control" over their % chances. I mentioned before that the current method could be improved. One way of doing this would be to remove the minimum and maximum % chances and allow for them to be reducible to 0% (without stun) and able to increase to their maximum potential. However, doing this without the means of combating high % chances would be the equivalent of putting a band-aid on a broken arm. This is why I'm calling for a more effective method. What do you think?

< Message edited by SMGS -- 5/16/2012 10:06:11 >
Epic  Post #: 19
5/16/2012 3:41:29   
Shadronica
Member

Next time you get an urge to ask me to validate my opinions on a discussion forum ND, just give yourself an upper cut.
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 20
5/16/2012 8:54:04   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 @shad That's the power of constructive criticism at work. I do complain, but I do it in a way that it matters most. I have argued for nerfing BMs constantly by removing Berzerker and giving them Bludgeon rather than Assimilation. I've complained in the Frysteland War that Super Bombs were too powerful and needed nerfed.

@drekon Let me do an example for you. I have a coin here. All 4 times I flipped it I got heads. Do you think I could possibly do that 40 times in a row? Maybe 400-4000 even? That's the problem of using smaller numbers. The RNG tends to go in streaks it seems(whether that's coincidence or fixable is beyond me). You cannot look at one unlucky battle and say luck is broken. You cannot look at ten. If I flip the coin up to 10 now I have 7 heads, 3 tails. If I were to go up to 100 flips it would me much closer like 47-53. If I keep going the difference between heads and tails becomes so miniscule you can ignore it(100099-99901 is basically ignorable in this situation because a difference of 99 is puny compared to 100k). Constructive is not agreeing with everyone's opinion on everything.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 21
5/16/2012 9:10:37   
Shadronica
Member

Yes we all understand that doing a sample of 100 to 1000 battles evens out the luck factor but that is NOT what we are talking about here.

We aren't flipping coins or playing Yahtzee either. We are supposedly playing a game of strategy where we make builds to overcome situations. If the game is going to run rough shod over the builds we strategically have planned with random "your doomed anomolies" then what is the point of making a strategic build? Do you fail to understand what we are saying throughout the topic ND?

We are trying to say that the "luck factor" in this game is not appealing the way it is now. It needs to be revisited.

< Message edited by SMGS -- 5/16/2012 10:06:50 >
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 22
5/16/2012 10:14:31   
SMGS
Member

Flames have been edited out of posts. Please read the =ED= Reminder About Courtesy, respect each other's opinion.
If you have a problem with someone titled, Lord Barrius or Ashari about it, do not post about it here.
Post #: 23
5/16/2012 10:29:45   
Shadronica
Member

Thank you SMGS. I apologise that my temper is a little frayed today because I am a little weary of someone's repeated attempts to discredit not only my opinions but others over a period of time. My apologies also to the OP.
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 24
5/16/2012 17:31:20   
drekon
Retired ED Guest Artist


 @The ND Mallet Guy, You keep using a coin toss analogy to justify your position. Please understand that a coin toss is 100% luck and has a 50% chance of resulting in heads or tails. As Shadronica said, EpicDuel is supposedly a game of strategy. Do you agree or disagree? Strategy games are not "overly" determined by luck. The player should have more control over their chances. This is what I'm advocating. The chance to block an opponent's melee attack is "limited" to a mere 40%. Meaning that there is a "minimum" of 60% chance you will NOT block your opponent's attack even though your build is designed for it. How does this equate to a fair and balanced strategic game?

Even if you flip a coin 12 times. What are the odds of getting heads 12 times in a row? 1 in 4096. I must be extremely unlucky, huh?

I understand what you're trying to say about the RNG, but it doesn't matter if it's a low or high number, a statistic of 40% block chance in 12 total rounds should equate to at least 5 blocks. The same way that 40% of 100 should give you 40 blocks. This is not what is happening though. You don't have to agree with me to give any constructive feedback on the issue I'm proposing. I'm only saying you're not being constructive because you're rejecting my experience as not credible enough, while ignoring the focus of this topic.
Epic  Post #: 25
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel General Discussion >> The Evolution of Battle Mechanics
Page 1 of 212>
Jump to:






Icon Legend
New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Content Copyright © 2018 Artix Entertainment, LLC.

"AdventureQuest", "DragonFable", "MechQuest", "EpicDuel", "BattleOn.com", "AdventureQuest Worlds", "Artix Entertainment"
and all game character names are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Artix Entertainment, LLC. All rights are reserved.
PRIVACY POLICY


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition