CH4OT1C!
Member
|
quote:
@AliceShiki said
While I understand that everyone would love to have their own GBIs addressed, could we please stick to the topic at hand? I can't see how HP costs, convertion ratios and elecomp bonuses are relevant to the discussion that we can stunlock CEBs for 3+ turns and then stay on a wrong element armor nuking them away, I think everyone is well aware that unless each click of EO starts costing 500 HP, HP costs will never matter one bit for anyone trying to play the meta builds.
I've also already answered this question. I'll address the former given @gavers already mentioned his threads. Quickcast skills might be useable as many times as you want in a single turn (excluding capped ones like mesmerise). However, they are all still mathematically balanced and require a reasonable HP/SP/MP input. When stacked, that cost can quickly accumulate and make casting multiple pretty difficult. Purple rain is one of the ways you get around that cost, but this only applies for one turn and so you'll be losing large amounts of your resources if you choose to use any more than one turn's worth of nukes in any one battle. With HP costs as they are now, combined with essence orb, you effectively remove cost from the equation. For 75hp a use you can heal your entire SP bar for ~1275hp. That means two things:
i) we can use as many of these skills as we want in one turn
ii) if one nuke isn't sufficient, we have more than enough resources to sustain that damage output. That also applies across multiple battles without healing.
Essence orb is fairly balanced, at least compared to the likes of other HP cost items, due to a *0.5 penalty. However, we also use them to pay for nukes ( Angel of souls) and for outright damage boosts ( the bloodblades, the bloodmages, blazing bloodzerker). Let's then assume we were to correct HP costs (as in my thread) and apply a 20% conversion tax (as in @gavers thread) to essence orb:
75*1.125 = ~84
84*0.8 = 67.
1550/67 = 22.3
75*23 = 1725
Suddenly, you spend 1725/1275 = *1.35 the amount of HP in a mathematically balanced equation to gain the same amount of SP. This does not require the use of a *0.5 penalty (applied for no reason whatsoever) and will then stack on top of other nerfs involving item interaction. I would argue, based on this rationale, you wouldn't need to completely remove/apply significant casting limitations on quickcast skills. This is because, given we are applying penalties to other parts of the system, it is completely unnecessary to go so far.
As a side benefit, correcting these costs has an implication for SP, given I argue 490sp/653mp should be worth 100% melee. That means quickcast spells/skills should provide 100% melee rather than the 125% melee currently offered. This is an additional 20% reduction in power:
Arcane amplification -> 105*0.8 = +84INT for 3 turns. Loss of 105-84 = 21 INT per turn
Shadowfeeder pendant ->309*1.25 = 387mp
You can see how, put together, these corrections could considerably impact the stunlock/nuke meta. That is why it is relevant to this discussion.
Now let's flip things around. Complete removal of quickcast is highly impractical and so I'll focus on action points. Let's assume you can use three quickcast actions a turn. Each quickcast item is worth one point (given @Primate murder doesn't believe it's necessary and this is his idea). Assuming I wanted to cast arcane amplification, shadowfeeder pendant and attempt love potion.
Scenario one: You succeed all three. You now have essentially three turns to cast 3 nukes with increased damage due to arcane amplification. Any passive effects such as bloodmage can still be applied.
Scenario two: You fail wherever possible: You still have arcane amplification to do increased damage and this can still interact with bloodmages. Alternatively, you can just wait a turn and try again. After all, the limited cost means you can afford to do so.
Most likely: Scenario three: A mixture of both. Either way, you're still getting 2 turns to do increased damage without curbing the effects.
I haven't included purple rain in that deliberately because you can just as easily cast PR the turn before, cast all your abilities in the following two turns and then revert to the original. In other words, purple rain gives you as many action points as your longest status lasts. Moreover, the attacks will still be as powerful as ever because you haven't applied any damage penalties. This brings me into:
quote:
@AliceShiki said:
Regarding the issue of balancing Action Points... I don't think there is any need to do so? I mean, why must we decide that reliable resource exchange is worth more or less than attempting to stun the opponent? The former is a reliable way of using your spells/skills more often, while the latter gives you a chance of throwing an off-element nuke on the enemy unpunished... Both have their pros, cons and strategic uses, I don't see any reason they'd need to have different action point costs.
Either the conversion has to go up or they must be worth fewer action points because because, with current item effects, one action point spent would end up giving you 20% melee or 125% melee. Like I said, the cost associated with these spells doesn't cover the temporal dimension added with action points. In theory, yes this could be solved by making those items convert more in one click. However, it doesn't address the huge underlying problems I mention above.
quote:
@Primate Murder said:
You are trying to divorce damage taken from damage dealt. By your calculations, 100% damage dealt is equal to (348/151) =230% damage taken.
This is also why you're clearly adverse to my thread, given my entire argument is based on this divorce. However, there is (what I consider to be) a good reason for this:
You have a standard 1:1.125:1.5 HP/SP/MP formula. In an ideal world, everything would align so that the two costs would be equal. We're using the same bar so for anything to make sense 100% melee must equate to the same number in damage taken/dealt. This is not really the case, and it has massive implications. If you don't, you entirely break that conversion rate. That means it's inappropriate to convert between hp and any other resource (ie, HP -> MP/SP). In fact, converting HP to any sort of damage other than standard turn cost would be inappropriate. Fixing this would require complete removal of all gear with a HP cost. The alternative is to divorce the two, using HP in a "damage sponge" and "cost" state. I decided on supporting the latter as it was a far more amicable option.
< Message edited by CH4OT1C! -- 4/28/2019 4:38:14 >
|
Printable Version
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
