Guests and Lucky Strikes, and all boosts in general


	Home \| Login \| Register \| Help \| Play

Guests and Lucky Strikes, and all boosts in general

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest] >> AdventureQuest General Discussion >> Game Balance Issues >> Guests and Lucky Strikes, and all boosts in general

Forum Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

1/12/2022 13:17:16

Sapphire
Member

I understand how the current game is coded. I understand some will justify guests not having lucky strikes. I have always felt like this is simply off. Never made sense. Not only does it depreciate the value of luck, especially as compared to dexterity when it comes to some non-standard (non-pure) builds, but the numbers validate that having dexterity for average DPT for a beast build is higher for dext builds. I am not advocating to make luck better for damage compared to dex, I am trying to bring it closer to balanced. When you discuss a beast build, you will choose a mainstat first (warrior or mage; albeit, some may be a ranger) and then charisma has to be there, and then your third stat is for support.

This leaves dexterity, luck, and end. Dexterity provides more defense, and more accuracy not only to yourself, but to your pet and guest.

My hope is a stat redesign will consider how dexterity assists with pet and guest BTH, as to me it makes no sense thematically and logically that it should play this role. That's a topic for another time, and not here.

The light turned on to this imbalance somewhat recently in a small discussion about New Year's Surprise. I know for myself, I have always wanted either a version to assist pets/guests or have one that helps boost yourself, and your pet/guest. I realize and recognize this would mean adjusting the total boost *down*.

But someone with more knowledge into the mechanics of balance (the same usual people, but I couldn't find the post, and who said it is neither here nor there) said that in order to balance a version of New Year's Spell, staff would only account for the *PET*, because ->Paraphrasing-> 25% of a BM's damage is assumed to come from the Guest as standard"

So if 25% of BM damage comes from the Guest, this means that all BTH enhancers, damage boosts, and lucky strikes that the normal attack gain from all sources are not applied to 25% of a BM's damage. The BM loses out in this respect.

So is it acceptable to assume 25% of the damage comes from guests but the BM cannot get 100% of the attributes from a damage boost misc, a BTH misc, or lucky strikes since it is assumed 25% of the damage comes from the guest? Is this really honestly balanced and acceptable?

Should there be an engine update to tack on all these boost to guests if the boost is tagged to the player? Lucky strikes? It seems to me, it should happen, assuming that "25% of a BM's damage is assumed to come from a guest"

Thoughts?

< Message edited by SapphireCatalyst2021 -- 1/12/2022 13:23:02 >

Post #: 1

1/12/2022 13:52:36

Legendary Ash
Member

The topic of Guests being affected by Dmg/BtH boosts is a duplicate of Dmg/BtH Boost, Status to Damage conversion, Damage Reduction/Heal GBI.
To clarify, if Dmg/BtH boost is flat in terms of not having a /.75 for the Cha Mainstat Weapon, the Guest should receive the flat boost.

Dexterity and Luck Post#2 already explained why Guests do not merit Lucky Strikes as is treated in the same manner as non-Hpcost Skills and Spells, whether you accept it or not is up to you, but persisting to push this false assumption is another matter entirely.

Post #: 2

1/12/2022 16:53:43

Sapphire
Member

Posted something, then read the post entirely that you provided. So reposting.

1. It sounds like perhaps you're agreeing, at least to a small extent, that if there is a flat bth boost or damage boost, that the guest should also get the boost, or at least some type of boost TOO considering the assumption is part of the total BM damage on standards comes from guests (25%)

2. But you disagree on the lucky strike aspect.

I can only view ruleandrew's post as saying that 250 is 250 luck, meaning a mage, BM, warrior etc who trained luck gets the same amount of extra damage at the same rate..so lucky strike damage is the same.
It's an attempt at normalizing...ie making it the same no matter who you are. Some of his posts can be legibly difficult to understand for me at times for whatever reason. Even yours, at times. So if I am off on that understanding of his post, I apologize

On paper, that sounds great. But something's amiss.

To use your words from post 2 from the link you provided, "Guests are a category of equipment specific to Beastmasters as mana and spells are to Mages, it wouldn't be fair if Spells didn't qualify for a boost, yes?"

You were referring to the bth/dmg boost.

I will reword your sentence. Mana and Spells are a category of equipment specific to Mages as Guests are to Beastmasters, it wouldn't be fair if Guests are the only category not to qualify for a lucky strikes, yes?

The game has decided that attacks, skills, spells, and pets all get lucky strikes. But not guests.

My opinion is, if guest damage has to come down a touch to offset the addition of lucky strikes because it is perceived that the extra average damage guests would recieve would push BM up for too much damage, THAN DO IT. Stop placating to the Dex crowd and darn near pushing build decisions to dex-based builds instead of end or luck based builds already. It's not balanced and staff knows it. Why else is there going to be a stat redesign potentially? I just hope the big picture is looked at and addressed and fix and never return to it.

It's just like Science. Oh yeah science is always so legit until it's changed. And when it changes, it means it was wrong all along. Maybe a bad analogy, and I'm not saying the design is "wrong" as it was simply a choice, but IMO assuming 25% of a BM damage coming from a item slot (guest) that cannot get bth, damage, and lucky strike boost is flawed design choice. Maybe it's a HUGE undertaking to do, and not deemed "worth it", and I will always reluctantly accept that argument, as it is beyond anyone's control, but it's simply how I feel on the issue...no matter what anyone says. And some of us arn't here to placate to the status quo, so if it means I don't accept it..and believe a better way..then that's my prerogative, no?

< Message edited by SapphireCatalyst2021 -- 1/12/2022 17:00:58 >

Post #: 3

1/12/2022 18:04:42

Deaf of Destiny
Member

cray, can you explain to him for clarify.

Post #: 4

1/13/2022 3:10:16

Legendary Ash
Member

You acknowledged that Lucky Strike damage is consistent regardless of Weapon penalties for different Mainstats, this principle also applies to Skill/Spell/Guest as indicated by their Average Core Stat Damage formulas in Master List of Game Formulae.

Your false assumption treats Skill/Spell as having their Lucky Strike damage increased by their resource cost when it is in fact identical to a standard weapon attack.
When Skill/Spell don't receive modified Lucky Strike damage, Guests are no different as they are Beastmaster equipment equivalents of Skill/Spell.

It is a matter of dispelling the illusion, the Skill/Spell's additional damage being attached to the base attack with a base Lucky strike damage, whereas Guests as independent units contributing to additional damage are detached from the Str/Dex/Int/Cha Mainstat weapon with the same base Lucky Strike damage.

Given the circumstances, next time when you have a perceived issue, place effort into a full research and confirm it in AQ Question and Answers before making a post based on false assumptions as this is the second occasion after Booster Pets-> Celerity.

Post #: 5

1/13/2022 13:26:10

Sapphire
Member

quote:

Your false assumption treats Skill/Spell as having their Lucky Strike damage increased by their resource cost when it is in fact identical to a standard weapon attack.
When Skill/Spell don't receive modified Lucky Strike damage, Guests are no different as they are Beastmaster equipment equivalents of Skill/Spell.

If guests are a beastmaster equivalent of a skill/spell, in which skills and spells receive lucky strikes, than why don't guests also receive lucky strikes? If other builds cast spells and use skills, for MP and SP costs, and a Beastmaster uses his/her MP and SP for upkeep cost, and you are claiming guests are "Beastmaster equipment equivalents of Skill/Spell", again, then why doesn't guests get lucky strikes?
Thank you for making my point.

quote:

It is a matter of dispelling the illusion, the Skill/Spell's additional damage being attached to the base attack with a base Lucky strike damage, whereas Guests as independent units contributing to additional damage are detached from the Str/Dex/Int/Cha Mainstat weapon with the same base Lucky Strike damage.

Guests are not independent units. They are assumed as standard, to make up 25% of a BM's damage. Independence would assume no build in mind. This, again, is off.

quote:

Given the circumstances, next time when you have a perceived issue, place effort into a full research and confirm it in AQ Question and Answers before making a post based on false assumptions as this is the second occasion after Booster Pets-> Celerity.

Appreciate the min-modding, and the advice. Everyone makes mistakes and in that very thread you mentioned, I owned it. It wasn't a lack of research as it was a simple oversight that afterwards was obvious. Completely and totally different things altogether. If GBI posting is being discouraged then they might as well remove it, because debate is at the heart of it...even if one who posts may have made a mistake in their thought process. And as you saw, I owned it, again.
If you feel as though you're some type of de-facto forums moderator, I hope you feel comfort bathing in the self anointment oil. I would rather you leave such things off and stick to the topic. I find it rather ridiculous for a regular forum member to persuade another to not post simply because they overlooked something.

At the end of the day, it feels as though your argument placating to current standards is actually making my point. Sorry.

< Message edited by SapphireCatalyst2021 -- 1/13/2022 13:33:38 >

Post #: 6

1/13/2022 19:03:59

Legendary Ash
Member

I can tell you are not paying attention to the details, as the clarification states the quantity of Lucky Strike damage, you dismiss this and continue go on about Guests having Lucky strikes enabled without looking at whether the values are balanced in the first place to justify the need for Guest Lucky strikes.

As you state Guests are not independent units, I question your understanding of the definition of 'independent' and 'standard', there are three independent units player/pet/guest and this has zero association with builds and what standards dictate in terms of equipment balance and mechanics, I am questioning whether you are attempting to subvert the definition of words to your point.

As stated by Cray in Post#26 you "reduce to absurdity any counter-criticism based on balance standards and openly poison the well for any argument that doesn't concede your point, ...the thorough misrepresentation of the criticism levied by others might have been construed as a simple misunderstanding, but to stoop to insults makes it transparently a strawman attack" and even take the words of others out of context to state that it makes your point.

You seem take to take pride in 'owning' a thread, when this discussion has not need for such an announcement that is obvious to anyone who can read the names of the forum members of a thread, this is an example off topic.

As you participated in Monster Formula for Hitting with Attacks, you acknowledge that Question and Answers is a place for asking about balance and bugs as well, perceiving advice to go to Q/A section for confirmation that other forumers have done so as a personal attack and thus delivering an insult as well as falsely accusing it as mini-modding is unwarranted.

Post #: 7

1/13/2022 19:15:56

Digital X

Beep Beep! ArchKnight AQ / ED

This stops now. There is no need to get this heated and it will only end badly so I am putting a stop to this now.

There is no need to discuss "who owns which thread" or bring up mini modding. If a thread is getting off topic then cease engaging in that discussion as it only adds fuel to the fire.

As this thread is indeed getting off topic I advise you to return to the topic at hand, and please do so in a civil manner. If someone new to the forum comes across posts such as this it would not be showing a good example of how the forums are expected to be seen here.

If this gets heated again I will be temporarily locking it until a period of time has passed where you can take a break and reflect.

AQW

Epic

Post #: 8

1/13/2022 19:56:22

CH4OT1C!
Member

In the interests of reconciliation, I believe I may have a solution that fits the demands of both parties.

@SapphireCatalyst: Unfortunately, Guests are not able to LS for the reasons already outlined by @Legendary Ash. In addition, I believe it would be unreasonable to provide Guests with any additional power for free because they are already worth 60% melee, but their upkeep is less than half that. There is no justification for this discrepancy other than to ensure Guests are useful. Adding extra power on top of that does not seem sensible.

With that said, I believe that Guests could be made able to LS in exchange for an appropriate reduction in damage on their regular attack. This would fulfil your aim of allowing Guests to LS without disrupting the current state of balance. A solution that aligns with the aims of both parties.

Post #: 9

1/13/2022 22:05:12

Legendary Ash
Member

Lets acknowledge that should individualized Guests be designed to have Lucky Strike they would be specialized equipment like Boosters who are split between Mainstat and Cha, it will not result in a change in Game Engine programming or balance standards for normal Guests, and the penalty would be determined by appropriate conversion of Mainstat to Luk in terms of melee%.

AQ	Post #: 10

1/14/2022 7:37:32

Sapphire
Member

@Chaotic
If you look at post#2, I mentioned the very thing that if you have to reduce overall base damage to bring in the lucky strike to even it back out, then do so. I always recognized this as a solution. And I always recognized that would entail combing through every single guest to adjust and that would entail a ton of work...and that might mean it never getting done. And I also said I would reluctantly drop the topic if that statement were made by staff, as it would be something out of everyone's control.

But I never advocated for a free add-on. My argument was never "Guests are underpowered". The argument stems more on the notion that without lucky strikes, and by a larger philosophical extension, lack of enhancements to guests considering they're damage is assumed to be within a BM's standard total damage output. Damage enhancers, bth enhancers, and lucky strikes are thus hindered for 25% of a BM's total standard assumed damage output. Its like saying only 75% of a warriors or mages assumed damage can receive these bonuses. For example, if I get myself 1.2X Elemental empowerment, and attack, only my attack gets this. My guest does not. This isn't balanced because 100% of a Pure Mage or Warrior's attack gets this. Assumed damage per standard is assumed damage per standard. Fair is fair, and consistency is consistyency no matter how you slice it. So why not adjust and make the issue universal, or build exclusive rather than build inclusive...ie leaving out guests altogether?

If guests are not to be assumed in a BM's damage, then all this is null and void. But it seems as though it is, so it should be fixed.

This design decision to leave this out is pushing many players towards choosing dexterity over luck as a support stat. And while dexterity will likely always be a more versatile and collectively favored support stat for BM's, at least allowing lucky strikes for guests would be another feather in luck's cap. I know dexterity may very well be planned for an adjustment, but not making this adjustment only serves to continue to hoist it up on top of the altar comparatively. Even this change wouldn't supplant it's value in most player's minds. I'm not advocating for dex=luck in terms of power, but at least it's a small push in luck's favor.

This is simply my opinion and sticking to it until an argument is presented that is different than "Well, this is just how things are", which is the core of it.

< Message edited by SapphireCatalyst2021 -- 1/14/2022 8:00:57 >

Post #: 11

1/14/2022 9:44:43

Lorekeeper
And Pun-isher

I'm afraid this discussion already flies in the face of Digital X's warning and every warning I've given about posting in good faith, as linked above.

This thread began from the conclusion that a change should be made and worked backwards to justify it. This is an understandable misstep when we discuss something that we're passionate about. What we want to see more of comes first in our eyes, after all, and it can take active effort to rein that in. The adequate way to argue for a proposal is to present it as such and then make supporting arguments -- Not to take it for granted that the proposal is correct. The sharing of criticism is built on falsifiable statements, after all.

The reason why Guests don't cause lucky strikes was provided with links to explanations, and then explained outright, as a correction to the assumption in the original post for why this is the case. This is not a tautological argument restating the status quo as an explanation, it's a breakdown of why the balance consideration is in place.

Suppose someone asking why 2^2= 4 is told that the equation represents the number of times the exponent is present in a function in which it's multiplied by itself, this being 2*2. They're not being given a tautological answer or uninspired restatement of the status quo. They're being given an explanation of it.

The perceived point of contention is clear. This thread is based on the argument that guests should have lucky strikes, and carries the open admission that any necessary change to accommodate it would be acceptable. Responses explaining why guests don't have lucky strikes might feel at odds with the intent, not merely due to disagreement but because one might misinterpret them as not engaging with one's premise. However, even when it was clearly explained that these constitute the reason why they shouldn't have lucky strikes, the question was nonetheless begged again.

For a further explanation: Making sweeping changes that would nerf the baseline output of Charisma builds for no other reason than including Lucky Strikes in a way that evens out the average output is not only impractical, but arbitrary. Changes to balance aren't done for their own sake, but when disproving a premise of its framework result in an improvement, be it in consistency or quality. In this case, this extensive hypothetical sweep would do much harm for no good whatsoever, by locking down two stats that all beast builds must have in order to not be stuck with an arbitrary damage reduction.

In conclusion, there is nothing to fix, nor is there a build-exclusive design direction to leave guests behind. There is a build-inclusive standard to not leave beastmasters as a whole behind. Similarly, empowerment effects applying to a whole side of the battlefield or only to part of it (Be it the character or pets/guests) pay accordingly from their power budget, in cost, output, or other penalties.

This separation of costs is, in fact, the root of resource efficiency on beastmaster builds. They don't need to pay additional resources to boost their direct damage output, in the same way that the above explanation of costs is why it is balanced for a player paying for x1.2 Elemental Empowerment for only their direct damage (And not their whole side) to receive x1.2 Elemental Empowerment for only their direct damage.

I hope this has been a helpful explanation. Unfortunately, it's time to move from explanation to warning.

As much as we'd like all interactions on this forum to be friendly, we understand that disagreement can be tense. However, when there is a consistent pattern of hostile discussion, it has to be clarified that we require that disagreement be handled constructively. This has been thoroughly and repeatedly explained before, to precisely no avail.

Poisoning the well for disagreement and reducing all opposing viewpoints to a "Well, this is just how things are" strawman makes it clear that this thread didn't entertain opposing viewpoints from the beginning.

For all practical effects, then, this discussion is over until such a time as it can be a discussion by treating the possibility of disagreement with a modicum of respect.

Post #: 12

1/14/2022 11:55:56

Digital X

Beep Beep! ArchKnight AQ / ED

I am locking this up. While there is room for a decent discussion it does not appear that is happening, despite my warning. I am not going to let this get worse.

As Cray and I have mentioned there must be respect amongst forum goers. It's fine to disagree with something, we all do at the end of the day but you have to remember there is a right way and a wrong way of dealing with those views.

AQW

Epic

Post #: 13

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest] >> AdventureQuest General Discussion >> Game Balance Issues >> Guests and Lucky Strikes, and all boosts in general

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