Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

RE: A change to how strike works

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> RE: A change to how strike works
Page 2 of 2<12
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
7/11/2014 9:32:20   
Silver Sky Magician
Member


 Mother1, could you elaborate on how STR will be affected? Will it still improve the damage of not only percentage-based skills like Bludgeon, but also strike-based skills like MoB or Assimilate? How will STR remain relevant when it does not boost the effects of any widely-used skill?
Post #: 26
7/11/2014 9:36:45   
Ranloth
Banned


 But why waste time on a feature to patch up something, when you can just patch the actual problem once and for all? Stamina Points would be just another bandaid, and once it wears off, you're stuck with the same issue again.

Also, SP would be like HP/EP, a whole new stat. It's entirely different to rage which is implemented into damage and defenses, code wise. SP would cover skills, possibly Strike, dunno how it'd regenerate either, etc. It's like adding another stat to the game, and then adjusting EVERYTHING that is to cost SP. It is essentially rewriting a lot of stuff, vast majority. It's a waste of time if you can just take a little bit longer and fix the entire issue, by rewriting the game.

Put it this way - if you need a new feature (SP) to balance the game, then you're already doing it wrong, because you should just need to balance the game, not use something else to patch it up, which may still not work.

Also, you CANNOT copy the code from HP/EP and change it to Stamina... If you're inexperienced with coding, don't make such statements because they are outright wrong. With each release, a lot of existing code is rewritten to work with the newer code. It's not copy and pasted. Never was, never will. That's NOT how it even works. If you seriously think it's really easy to code, and Devs genuinely thought SP is a good idea, it'd be in-game sooner than you think. Sorry, but you're wrong on a lot of stuff about coding. Just... Sometimes, you gotta think realistically, and not have an ideal vision of the game - it will never be balanced, it never was either. It's PvP after all.
AQ Epic  Post #: 27
7/11/2014 9:50:20   
Remorse
Member

^ Firstly when I say copy code I mean use the same technique that they used to code energy in terms of costs for skills.



What I mean is, they added energy costs to cores in the space of a few weeks, that's proof that they can give a very similar cost system, costs for things.


This issues stamina addresses fixes them at the cores as I state how in my thread for the system.


Also it is not essentially another stat because like rage it is fixed, it can't be influenced by outside factors (you can't get extra stamina with more points invested) aside from using it up in the form of a cost for a certain skill/core.



You have the right to call my idea a waste of time similarly how I can call your entire class tweaking page a waste of time, so I guess I will just accept that.

But the fact that all you do is call it a waste of time without supporting facts as to why it won't improve anything hypocritically goes against what you have stated time and time again, and that's the need for supporting evidence, why?

For example you say this:
quote:

Stamina Points would be just another bandaid, and once it wears off, you're stuck with the same issue again.


Yet you give no reasoning as to what the issues are, and how stamina points doesn't fix it, begs the question did you even bother to read the idea, it or did you just decide to automatically shut it down with empty sentences nit picking every little mistake I may have made in explaining it just to taint the quality of it without actual supporting evidence, because I typed it?


The way I see it is you are consistently attacking my ideas with haste and frankly I am tired of it.

< Message edited by Remorse -- 7/11/2014 9:57:45 >
Epic  Post #: 28
7/11/2014 10:03:07   
Ranloth
Banned


 If you need a different feature, to balance the game, then there's an issue already. The issue is - why need something else, to balance the game?
Put it this way:
Agility = Stamina Points
HP = issue with the game (that SP would supposedly fix)

Now, why not just fix the issue (HP) instead of patching it with Stamina Points (Agility)? I don't need to provide evidence, when common sense is more than enough.
Is SP a good idea? It may be. Will it fix the game? It may do. Is it necessary to fix the game? No, it isn't. Why is it not necessary? Because you fix the root of the problem, not patch it with something else.

In the end, it would be a waste of time to code SP if they can fix the root of the problem instead. It's one of those features that would work well, but isn't necessary if you're willing to deal with the actual problem, not directly avoid it and try to patch it with something else. You don't really need evidence for this - as I've said, common sense is more than enough. And I'm not directly talking about SP, but any other feature thats to solve balance, by patching up the broken part of the game with something that may - or may not - work.
AQ Epic  Post #: 29
7/11/2014 10:15:59   
Remorse
Member

^


In a lot cases I would agree with that,


But I believe in this particular case they literally require something to fill in the empty gaps created when they changed passives to actives, when they gave cores energy costs, then slowly removed variety through compensating classes with low energy manipulation. (such as static grenade etc).




The way I see it, is they could fix it without adding a new feature and sacrifice variety, creativity in builds and classes which then in turns leads to frustrating RNG due to high similarities between classes.


PVPs like this can never have 100% balance that is true, but the best style of balance I think they can get is when you cannot compare things between one another, we shouldn't be able to go, bam static charge is clearly better then EMP because it has no cost and gives energy.. ( With stamina points static grenade /static smash and EMP/atom smash would be un-comparable enough to be about preference, EMP/atom smash gives a stronger drain and costs energy, Static Grenade slightly weaker drain and gives back energy and costs stamina)


Classes strengths and weaknesses need to be un-comparable and ultimately come down to preference.


If they want to incorporate their current system of ED into a world where we can have balance through un-comparability the they need a new feature like Stamina points to fill these empty gaps. My opinion anyway.


< Message edited by Remorse -- 7/11/2014 10:21:30 >
Epic  Post #: 30
7/11/2014 10:25:26   
Ranloth
Banned


 Exactly. I'm not saying SP is a bad idea, nor that it shouldn't be implemented, but I see it as pointless only if they are willing to fix the actual problem.

I remember the concept of SP being used for 0 EP skills, to give them some cost. I think Strike is now on the list too. I do remember discussing it with you too, in the thread, ages ago. But why do 0 EP skills exist? Ah yeah, because of the EP strain nowadays. Why is like that? Because the Devs made EP an important resource, a lot more important, compared to before actives and costless cores. A solution? Perhaps changing EP so players actually train it, not leave it at base amount. In the same way, EP draining got a lot more important - something you also dislike, and you're not the only one here, and why is that? Because EP is broken and imbalanced now. That's why, in this case, I'd rather fix EP instead of introducing SP. But it doesn't mean SP is already a bad idea, it's just that there's an alternative that may work better instead.

I'd really not attack a good idea without a decent reasoning. You should know me better, Remorse, since we've spoken many times about balance, maaaaaaaaany phases ago too. Especially since the concept of SP is interesting, and I've not said it's a bad one, so, yeah.

Getting on topic again, I'd agree with Mother on the issue. It'd make Strike buildless and not favouring anyone. At the same time, making the damage increase (for up to 100%) with Focus, as suggested on previous page, is also an interesting idea.
AQ Epic  Post #: 31
7/11/2014 10:35:51   
Remorse
Member

^ But is EP broken that's the thing?


I don't think so I just think it has way to much strain on it and merely just needs to have some of that srtain removed.


TBH I think trying to change EP to fit the system will do more damage then adding a new system to relive some of the strain.


Of coarse they could go back in time and reduce the things that gave it strain , but this game needs major improvements, not going back in time.



I still think a new feature would be the best thing for it PROVIDING it was made to fill holes not to be made for the sake of it.


Though if the game is to make a major improvement in terms of player base and enjoyment then it needs to be something drastic, and unfortunately it will come down to taking risks which might not always turn out to be the best for the game. And I think a risk of a new feature that has so much potential is just the thing.




P.S I appreciate the kinder tone of discussion.

< Message edited by Remorse -- 7/11/2014 10:44:28 >
Epic  Post #: 32
7/11/2014 11:42:56   
Mother1
Member

@ SSM

This has nothing to do with strength itself but strike. This idea as Trans said would make it so strike doesn't favor any build. If you use a skill the strength that is there will work normally such as if you used intimidate or Mark of blood. However, when you use strike itself you the bonus damage you get from strength itself will not be added in.

Lets say you have 500-540 damage with your primary. If you are level 40 the bonus you get would be 150-190 assuming you have your primary weapon max out and you don't have legendary ranks. that bonus will not be added whenever you use strike. This means that with legendary ranks and you have strike power maxed out you will gain you will have a max of 380 damage that you can do with strike before defenses are applied.

So in a nutshell it will be this. All moves affecting strength outside of strike will work the same way they work now. However, strike itself will not get the bonus damage from the primary as I explained it to only the strong. This change will only affect strike itself in other words press the strike button you will be doing only primary weapon damage without the bonus. If you use a skill it will work as it does now.

Epic  Post #: 33
7/11/2014 11:47:06   
Remorse
Member

^ It is a very interesting concept mother, and I think I was wrong to say it will restrict variety.



By all rights it shouldn't necessarily restrict variety and possibly could enhance it when you consider the domination of basic striking build have currently.



I support.


Epic  Post #: 34
7/11/2014 15:05:34   
Silver Sky Magician
Member


 @Mother1

With your suggestion the vast majority of builds would have no reason to add to STR, and build variety will be whittled down to 5 focus, Dex TM and STR TM. The reason why this is so is that STR-utilising skills, unlike SUPP-utilising skills, require a higher level and more energy for effective use. The effects of these skills (which is the desired aim, not the skill damage itself) are unaffected by increases to STR, which is not the case for SUPP-based skills. The exception, of course, is TMs with their unparalleled energy regen, but for any other class it would be foolish to invest in STR beyond the threshold for 5 focus. In other words, my concern is that such a change would further limit build diversity, and will moreover be biased towards TMs.

Of course, I could be wrong - CHs, Mercs and maybe even TLMs may find reason to invest in STR. I think rigorous testing is needed to see if STR builds remain viable after this change, and more importantly, if any other builds are unwittingly stifled as a result. I'm not sure how comprehensive testing can be with the current team - I still recall the TLM debacle when the team thought that Smoke+Technician was OP while completely missing the elephant in the room: Mineral Armour + Reroute + Smoke. I think the team could use some help from active, experienced players.
Post #: 35
7/11/2014 15:25:12   
Ranloth
Banned


 What if the Strike was unblockable, at all times? Low damage but guaranteed. It could really work this way, sorta.
AQ Epic  Post #: 36
7/11/2014 16:02:23   
Remorse
Member

^ I disagree with that,

Simply because there is strategy in making sure you have reliable attacks as much as possible.


Making strike reliable even if it is low, means that this strategy is also removed and once again the game become even less about thinking.



Hear is a thought that just came to me,


What if mother's idea was in place, but when you use skills like blood commander and field commander you regain the bonus damage onto strikes from strength (for the duration plus a little extra), thus buffing these skills, and lets be honest these skill could do with a buff.


Also intimidation would need adjusting if mothers idea was in place.


perhaps intimidation could also lower the base damage from strike, as well as reducing strength,

eg. the skill description: Intimidate: Reduces strength by ...., and reduces ... % primary base damage for 3 turns.


Overall this would give intimidate the same effect it has now with a slight buff as it will reduce strength based skill using strike slightly more having reduction primary base and strength, a needed buff might I add.

< Message edited by Remorse -- 7/11/2014 16:07:41 >
Epic  Post #: 37
7/11/2014 16:18:28   
Ranloth
Banned


 Well, if not that, I'd rather go with kittycat's idea; here, which works better. Focus 5 retains the 100% damage but they sacrifice stats to get Focus 5, thus less damage. Str abuse will likely have no Focus thus 85% damage, which may be the same as Focus 5 with 100% damage (roughly). It's a fun concept to play around with, especially when it could make us decide what we want from our builds.
AQ Epic  Post #: 38
7/11/2014 16:56:59   
Remorse
Member

^ If that were the case, there would be only one scenario I wouldn't object to this idea.


And that is if in compensation focus loses the ability to improve robots damage.


Focus is already a variety constricting problem as it is, enhancing it further with stronger strikes will make it the ONLY viable option...

No, there needs to be compensation and that would have to come in the form of removing the robot damage increase.



However this beggs the question what will improve robots?

I don't think technology alone would be a good idea as it would easily become abused.


So I propose robots improve with a mix of both support and technology, half and half, that means if say you spammed technology to the full and completely neglected support you would get the same robot damage as say someone with average supp and tech, thus resulting in less potential abuse.

If you spammed them both, that's fine, perhaps potential counter-able builds will be created that would increase variatry and the viability of support.


The only reason why it would be bad to have it as tech alone is because full defensive tanks are also extremely hard to counter and hard to counter builds cause less variety, tech and supp spamming builds would have trade-offs in lower defenses, low dex, and low attack in-between cool downs of bots/auxs/supp/tech improving skills.








< Message edited by Remorse -- 7/11/2014 17:12:39 >
Epic  Post #: 39
7/11/2014 16:58:41   
Ranloth
Banned


 Uh, I'd rather Tech loses the ability to improve Robots, and Focus gets a small boost to make up for the lack of Tech Bonus on Bots (minimal). Which leads me to the conclusion that we won't agree on this - since you're against Focus + Bots, and Focus + Strike would only be done (for you) if Bots aren't improved by Focus - which is something I want, purely Focus and no Tech boost.
AQ Epic  Post #: 40
7/11/2014 17:04:49   
Remorse
Member

^ I have a major problem with focus, ever since they made it improve bots,

And that's because it massively restricts variety.



There is very little flexibility in options when doing a focus build but large flexibility if say robots were improves by tech and support together.


The power advanatge focus builds have over all builds (except Maye some STR spamming builds) means that the builds are actually non existent, I haven't seen much creativity outside of either focus/STR and that mainly to blame to focus.



I do however want to understand your reasoning, how could you like focus if it causes this massive reduction in variety?

Perhaps you do not share this variety reduction opinion?


I think things like diminishing returns, and focus are poorly constructed band-aid fixes.

The best types of strategy games is when creativity is not limited,

You should be able to spam to your hearts content, or go average in all stats, neither should have features aimed at specifically advanatge either one and disadvantage another.



If this has to be the case then that is proof of broken foundations in the game.

All variety styles should be both viable and counter-able.

< Message edited by Remorse -- 7/11/2014 17:19:49 >
Epic  Post #: 41
7/11/2014 18:16:36   
veneeria
Member

Wouldn't this also indirectly buff auxiliary damage and high health/defenses?

It feels like it would just change the table instead of fixing the actual problem.

-INCOMING UNASKED SUGGESTION, HOLD ON TO YOUR BELTS-
...

Maybe an number of uses (or strikes in this case) would do the justice!
  • Increasing STR : Keeps the same
  • Support: Increasing the number of uses for buffs.
  • Dex: Increasing the number of uses for debuffs.
  • Dex: Increasing it would (VERY) slightly increase the number uses you can do with your gun/aux.


    Increasing the value of other stats while making str less of a big deal.
    • AQ AQW Epic  Post #: 42
    7/11/2014 19:08:48   
    Remorse
    Member

    		^ I can see the logic in it,

    But how would it be applied..


    Using buffs/debuffs rarely occurs more then twice per game.


    So how would something like dex and support be able to infleunce it?


    Require 50 dex to use a debuff?? require 75 for 2? then its puts more bonuses onto focus.

    Then what about lower levels?


    I'm afraid that practically this idea could not work sorry to say. ( At least I can't see it being able to work)
    Epic  Post #: 43
    7/11/2014 21:28:14   
    Noobatron x3000
    Member

    		Strengh and hp just need to be brought in line is all , Its that simple

    Focus
    casters
    tanks all seem to be in the same place

    dex tech support energy there isn't much in it

    Strengh hp your in another league the stats are way more powerful and beneficial then anything else and always useful thus the problem is created. Deal with the strength hp combo and the problems solved ebing able to pack 1200 hp above 300 def / res with around 110 dex (making blocks unlikely) and still have 500+ primary secondary dmg is to much.

    Start adding in legend ranks your getting to 540+ strength and 340+ish def/res its insane.
    Post #: 44
    8/11/2014 11:57:17   
    Mother1
    Member

    		Hope this isn't breaking any rules but this topic IMO needs a bump seeing as IMO it would be a great solution to the some of the problems going on in game now.
    Epic  Post #: 45
    8/25/2014 3:30:13   
    djc2098
    Member
     

    		 Well first off, this would lock people out of turns, as I've seen many people who only use their basic weapon and armor. Second off, you say this is a problem only because "Why because then strength will no longer have a move that is free of cooldown and can be used every turn without problem just like Dex, Tech, and Support.
    "
    Just so you know:
    Dexterity based attacks deal far more damage then strength based attacks, dexterity affects defense unlike all other stats and dexterity affects block % unlike all other stats.
    Technology based attacks deal far more damage then strength based attacks, technology affects resistance unlike all other stats and technology increases the deflection % unlike all other stats.
    Support based attacks deal far more damage then strength based attacks, support affects first turn % unlike all other stats and support increases auxillary damage which has a higher base damage then a strike.

    I think strike which is literally the lowest base damage statistic in the game (tied with gun, which deals a higher damage % when deflected compared to a basic strike's block and is upgradeable a level before the class basic weapon.)
    is a fundamental part of this and most if not all battleon games and shouldn't be changed. I would also like you to explain why a staff, club, or claw would have to cool down after being used.
    Post #: 46
    8/25/2014 3:47:28   
    Mother1
    Member

    		@ Djc2098

    I never said to give strike a cooldown. I don't know where you got that but that is not what I am suggesting.

    My idea is to remove the bonus damage that you would get from strike that is given due to strength. This means that whenever you use strike and strike alone you only do primary weapon damage without the bonus damage strength would award.

    However, when you use a move like bludgeon, double strike, or any skill that is a melee you would get that bonus damage.

    The idea behind this is to make it make it so all stats are equal in power, and as it stands now they are far from that.

    One of the reasons being is that strength is the one stat that can deal non stop damage without stop where as dex, tech, and support cannot. This is due to strike being powered by strength. Remove strike from strength's corner and the stats are just that much closer to being equals with one another.

    TL:DR This idea is not about putting the primary on cooldown. It is about balancing the stats by making strike the one move that has no cool down or cost work with no stat instead of strength.
    Epic  Post #: 47
    8/25/2014 4:03:46   
    djc2098
    Member
     

    		 Seems I got the wrong idea from your previous posts. Still it makes logical sense for one's strength to increase the damage inflicted on other when hitting them with a blunt object,
    and I've never actually thought as strength as overpowered before. I've always thought of dexterity and technology as overpowered because they improve your offensive and defensive effects,
    in fact I would laugh at someone who was taking advantage of basic strike at it was consequence free. it's the lowest base damage move in the game as is, and is useless on defense. Meanwhile dexterity
    helps me easily block it, increase my physical defense while I have some tech and armor for resistance, increases my overload damage and increases my plasma rain damage.
    Post #: 48
    Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
    All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> RE: A change to how strike works
    Page 2 of 2<12
    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