test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

M18 - Rewards

1235»

Comments

  • theraxin#5169 theraxin Member Posts: 355 Arc User
    edited January 2020
    micky1p00 said:



    I don't fully or perhaps correctly understand your point.

    First a DPS should be able to dodge, then failing that, the healer should compensate dodging mistakes or facetanking choices with heals, failing that, yes not using boots is the correct choice.

    I'm not sure why it is not an option? If someone think they are good enough and want to squeeze the additional 5% (or whatever) go for it, or if they rely on a healer that can allow them to squeeze that, go for it too. It will obviously not work for all people, and for all groups. But in some groups/content it is a viable option, and will push people to be better.

    My point about stupid people was in regards for those that will attempt to kick the healer instead of removing said negative effect.

    "Because, for me, getting less heals is not interesting as I'm not the one who heals myself. And I don't have much option to do so"

    Perhaps here is the view difference, IMO if you use such negative effect it is foremost on the DPS to not get hit. If you do get hit, you know that the healer will be overtaxed, will get out of divinity (or etc) and the party will wipe.
    The point is that the chain of events starts with DPS using this + not dodging red, which is fully on the DPS in terms of responsibility.
    In the case of unavoidable damage, there is a difference, and indeed, there it falls on the healers gear / skill / build / whatever to overcome such negative effect, but I will say that that only applies to ToMM and there you set up upfront, as a group effort, and depends on the group itemization, if people have the HP + Griffon = viable (for example), if not you risk it or not, or make your choices.

    Except that this game is not designed for "you should dodge that". Both LoMM and ToMM consists of damage that you cannot avoid, nor survive by your own merit, even without this item. In LoMM, the Boreworm damage cannot be dodged and even when distributed, you need to be healed out of it from an outside source. Healer is not a mere failsafe, it's fully required for a balanced team.

    And in cases where you should be able to dodge it, if you are not, the punishment is most likely meant to be death, so incoming heal does not apply for it. Or, if you survive it, like Trobriand's big AoE, you don't get hit anymore, so on how much HP did you survived is not of importance.

    But the dodgeable cases hardly matter, because the problem with those that are not able to be dodged and because LoMM and ToMM might be the only 2 challenging content for most players, ignoring those would be huge mistake.
    micky1p00 said:



    "Look at the gear, as itself: -50% for +5% damage is not nuanced and as risk/benefit goes, just does not worth it"

    Why not? You think the demerit too high for the benefit? Perhaps, but as is I'm sure there are people that will use it. Right now there are people who will use that one more darkened over tactical for even worse ratio. And other people who can take the healing penalty in stride because they are good at applying other mitigation or dodging. If it's a niche at 5/50 and popular at 5/25 I don't know. But if it is too popular it defeats its purpose IMO, items like that should become situational and after achieving the capability to compensate over their negative part, and not something in every build.

    I do not understand the legendary price part.

    " Or you can say that your group is overpowered enough to carry it's weight."

    Lets rename it to "Powerful / skilled / geared enough"
    We can take for example currently Orcus set, vs Arcturia. With Arcturia it is much easier to get needed stats, more HP, more power, yet at some point (pre-upcoming-nerf) people will swap to Orcus (or plan ahead to use it). It's the same concept of trade offs, just less pronounced.
    You are not overpowered to use Orcus, you just upgrading your gear based on your other capabilities, gear, and situation.

    Well, -50% is just not nuanced, it negates the half incoming heal you get. The 2. part, I rephase as, "it does not worth it for me". And we might can agree that, for a huge popularity, it won't.

    And yes, if it would be too popular, it might be bad. But, look around what the mod19 has to offer for the players. The citadel set might be BiS for the citadel only, but if you can't do citadel, you won't need it. If you do citadel, you did without the set, so it becomes a choice. A choice that you can disregard as it's not good for ToMM. The mod19 gears are fully uninteresting for DPS and mostly, free to get. So, making the only "interesting" item in this mod to be a huge niche means that for most of the playerbase there would be nothing to get in this mod. It does not get too popular, it'll get too unpopular.


    And as I said, if it would exists alongside other items, I'd be less inclined to change it for something that more players can consider.

    The legendary mount price comes from an earlier discussion, but shortly. If you had just enough healing for yourself, you did not invest in incoming heal, because you did not need it. To generate a need for incoming healing means that the cost to compensate for the negatives comes from this item. And the cost was 5 Tacticals and 2 +10% incoming heal companion to get into legendary. That's above 10 million AD to use this item without it's drawbacks. Or, you have to push the burden into someone else.

    Uhm, no, you can be overpowered for content. Clearly overly powered. When DPS burst all 8 Scaladar active, bugs Drufi into using the AoE before making ice and bugging out Nostura as well. These are not meant to happen, the game was not balanced it to happen. When I'm tanking Trobriand because got the aggro away from the tank that couldn't hold it and I'm actually tanking it, it's not because it was balanced to be like that. Otherwise the role of the tank should be put in question as my CW was clearly not roled to be the tank.
    micky1p00 said:



    I want 3% damage for -25% incoming heal, because it IS a clear risk/reward, but in the opposite direction. You get not that much for not that much cost. But if we get more items like these introduced, you can choose 3% bonus for -25% or +6% for -50% or maybe use 4 gear for -100%. There is a more precise optimisation for your group and your own skills and because their scaling nature, you can only use 1 for -25%, build your character and then take an other -25% when you feel ready. And you might be wrong and die and that's a learning experience. But when you die and die, your option is not to just discard the idea whatsoever, but to scale down, probably by one. You get more options with this approach.

    I think that the core concept of such items is their situational and "something to achieve" status. If you make the bonus low enough, everyone will just run with it, and what you did essentially is nerfed the entire server incoming healing. (Which I'm sure the devs will not object, but I don't think it is a good idea)
    This essentially creates the same "Healer must be capable to overheal this". From a choice and responsibility on the DPS, the wide usage becomes defacto standard, loosing its meaning as choice, and as something that you need reach to be able to use.


    As a side note, in closed beta I suggested a system of "gems" (not for items, but general) that will allow trading one stat for another with perhaps some penalty. for example loos 10k Crit, get 4.5k defense, 4.5k avoidance (just random example) and as part of it, it allows increasing the values per mod, creating viable chase items, and/or long term things to craft / use.
    (Not exactly related, but I just remembered, but such stat things or similar effects can have the sliding potency, while incoming healing is more of a special case)
    Well, that's why it needs to be balanced as a choice, not a must for general use. -50% Incoming healing is not a choice for the playerbase, because as said, sometimes you cannot choose to use it and survive, because you cannot dodge, nor heal yourself out of the situation, nor you have the capital to have 5 Rank 15 Tacticals already + the Ioun stone of allure. I never said that the -25% was the best number, but no one actually puts out numbers that they feel will be used to a wider range of players.

    And the gems would be interesting, I think that we lost a lot of statbalancing potential with the hunt items that only exist in 1 stat, but only useful for their effect.

    Edit: And I above proposed an armor with nicher effect, because it can be combined with this AND because if both item would exist, it would cater to more player, because scalability and choices.
  • thefabricantthefabricant Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 5,247 Arc User
    edited January 2020

    <
    Both LoMM and ToMM consists of damage that you cannot avoid, nor survive by your own merit, even without this item.

    False.

    Here is duo LoMM, without a healer (Wizard and Hunter).

    Here is ToMM, without a healer.

    Seems like you can survive it, even if you cannot avoid it.

    Anyhow, this is all going on far too much, so it helps if we create a reference to how much this "should" be. We already have an example where you can trade damage for incoming healing, utility slots.

    1% companion influence is worth ~360 useful stats.
    If you are at 200k power, you need ~15k power for a 5% increase. Realistically, you going to get a lot of stats you don't want and rebalancing is going to cost you an extra 20-40% more stats, so lets put it at ~20k stats from CI needed.

    20,000/360 = 55.55.

    Seems like 55% is the "sweet spot" for this item, if you were to actually value it in terms of companion influence. But seeing as that is likely a bad metric, lets drop that by 15-20% to make it more, "friendly" and it falls at 35-40%. Either way, the value is still higher than 25%.
    Post edited by thefabricant on
  • gabrieldourdengabrieldourden Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,212 Arc User
    Well to be honest Boreworm damage can be avoided. Just walk around. I usually do that.
    Le-Shan: HR level 80 (main)
    Born of Black Wind: SW Level 80
  • theraxin#5169 theraxin Member Posts: 355 Arc User

    <
    Both LoMM and ToMM consists of damage that you cannot avoid, nor survive by your own merit, even without this item.

    False.

    Here is duo LoMM, without a healer (Wizard and Hunter).

    Here is ToMM, without a healer.

    Seems like you can survive it, even if you cannot avoid it.

    Anyhow, this is all going on far too much, so it helps if we create a reference to how much this "should" be. We already have an example where you can trade damage for incoming healing, utility slots.

    1% companion influence is worth ~360 useful stats.
    If you are at 200k power, you need ~15k power for a 5% increase. Realistically, you going to get a lot of stats you don't want and rebalancing is going to cost you an extra 20-40% more stats, so lets put it at ~20k stats from CI needed.

    20,000/360 = 55.55.

    Seems like 55% is the "sweet spot" for this item, if you were to actually value it in terms of companion influence. But seeing as that is likely a bad metric, lets drop that by 15-20% to make it more, "friendly" and it falls at 35-40%. Either way, the value is still higher than 25%.
    Wow, you "proved" that +5% damage for -25% Incoming heal is too powerful. Amazing trivial information that no one argued against, that were agreed before you wrote your first comment here. The exact buff that no one proposed is wronged. Okay, your metric is bad and you know it, but if we collaboratively ignore that, at least now we can move on. I'm so grateful and pleased that you finally allow us to progress, by not dragging back any discussion that does not result in fully reverting the buff.

    Like, what do you seriously expect? Me typing the same points again to get ignored by you? An applause for finally trying to take the middle ground? An agreement, because you just threw off your bad calculations into a point I can agree with?

    Yeah, if -35% finally shuts you down, fine, be happy. I personally could afford even -40%, but I'm considering others. However I'm neutral for the 35-40% scale and not be bothered to argue with you anymore on this, so just guess whatever.

    Now that discussion is finally over.
  • rjc9000rjc9000 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 2,350 Arc User
    edited January 2020

    People want meaningful choices, but then complain when some choices are bad, when it is the existence of bad choices that give good choices meaning.

    I would agree with you on the most part ... except for this part.

    I get that unless everyone is 100% identical (which defeats the point of a class system), there will inevitably be a bottom tier and top tier, though you can attempt to lower the gap between top and bottom (to which the devs have tried to ... "interesting" results).

    But in regards to the existence of bad choices: I don't want any choices that are specifically designed to be bad on purpose unless they are clearly intended to be joke items (see: Dan from Street Fighter).

    I see no point in making bad choices on purpose just to make the good choices look better, or penalizing new players because they don't understand the system as well as veterans.


    3 Set bonus Neck/Belt/Artifact for a set which has no stats - Gain an additional encounter power slot.

    I would actually find the game a lot more interesting if some classes naturally gained more than the standard amount of encounter/at-will/class feature/daily slots through the course of natural leveling. As for which classes which get more (x) slots, use the tabletop ruleset to theme the choices?

    But the more important question I have is: how would extra At-will/encounter/class feature/daily slots be implemented in game?

    The way I would suggest adding more space for it would be to kill off one potions slot for an extra "tray" of encounter powers/At-wills/daily attacks. But I am no software engineer and thus have no clue how badly this would bug NW.

    For example, Ranger currently has the "ranged/melee encounter powers in a single slot" gimmick. I am not sure what would happen if you attempted to "separate" the different stance powers.

  • micky1p00micky1p00 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,462 Arc User
    rjc9000 said:

    People want meaningful choices, but then complain when some choices are bad, when it is the existence of bad choices that give good choices meaning.

    I would agree with you on the most part ... except for this part.

    I get that unless everyone is 100% identical (which defeats the point of a class system), there will inevitably be a bottom tier and top tier, though you can attempt to lower the gap between top and bottom (to which the devs have tried to ... "interesting" results).

    But in regards to the existence of bad choices: I don't want any choices that are specifically designed to be bad on purpose unless they are clearly intended to be joke items (see: Dan from Street Fighter).

    I see no point in making bad choices on purpose just to make the good choices look better, or penalizing new players because they don't understand the system as well as veterans.
    I think there are two design aspects here:

    One is situational good and bad, for example, you want to achieve some one outcome, lets say DPS build, and you have 2 choices of a feat.

    If for that outcome both choices will result in the same effect, then choosing is meaningless, the "pick any", choice.

    If there is a difference, hence it will effect the outcome, then for something you want to achieve one will be a better choice and one worse.

    To emphasize that this can be situational and specific to some play-style or content or whatever, but for that specific context, one choice must be "bad" and another "good" otherwise we are back to the "pick any"
    Change the context, and one that was bad, may become good. That will be an example of a good design IMO.

    Currently in NW, there is a bunch of "pick any" feats, specifically some that tied to specific encounters or dailies, that people opt not to use. Or in the example of class feats, where most are don't pick at all in any circumstance that again there is no real choice.

    The class feats example will be the second type, where in most cases there is no situation when most choices are valid, so they are a false pick. Or "Bad", then it is "reward" for knowing which to pick.

    IMO the clearer and more significant the effect of such choice, the more it becomes a players choice and less of a pitfall. Even if the result is worse than some other, the downside is that if the choice is too clear, it becomes a no-choice. And no reward for making the "better" choice. For example AoE feat vs Single target, it is clear what to pick for the matching builds. If the choice is very clear you just click and move on, no risk and no reward.
  • micky1p00micky1p00 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,462 Arc User


    2. Item trade-offs in D&D are few and exists to provoke TEAM EFFORT, IMAGINATION USE, ROLE PLAYING. Near impossible to replicate in video game.

    I'm happy to discover that we achieve the impossible on a daily basis.
  • necromanceheronecromancehero Member Posts: 24 Arc User
    I think many have already said this.
    But if you do not give more reasons for the players to pass a new dungeon - you will make a very big mistake.
    Alternative lionhead weapon, I think that would be enough
    Sorry for my English
  • gabrieldourdengabrieldourden Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,212 Arc User
    rjc9000 said:

    People want meaningful choices, but then complain when some choices are bad, when it is the existence of bad choices that give good choices meaning.

    I would agree with you on the most part ... except for this part.

    I get that unless everyone is 100% identical (which defeats the point of a class system), there will inevitably be a bottom tier and top tier, though you can attempt to lower the gap between top and bottom (to which the devs have tried to ... "interesting" results).

    But in regards to the existence of bad choices: I don't want any choices that are specifically designed to be bad on purpose unless they are clearly intended to be joke items (see: Dan from Street Fighter).

    I see no point in making bad choices on purpose just to make the good choices look better, or penalizing new players because they don't understand the system as well as veterans.


    3 Set bonus Neck/Belt/Artifact for a set which has no stats - Gain an additional encounter power slot.

    I would actually find the game a lot more interesting if some classes naturally gained more than the standard amount of encounter/at-will/class feature/daily slots through the course of natural leveling. As for which classes which get more (x) slots, use the tabletop ruleset to theme the choices?

    But the more important question I have is: how would extra At-will/encounter/class feature/daily slots be implemented in game?

    The way I would suggest adding more space for it would be to kill off one potions slot for an extra "tray" of encounter powers/At-wills/daily attacks. But I am no software engineer and thus have no clue how badly this would bug NW.

    For example, Ranger currently has the "ranged/melee encounter powers in a single slot" gimmick. I am not sure what would happen if you attempted to "separate" the different stance powers.
    As an HR player I'd love to be able to separate the stance powers and rebuild the three encounters available. I will happily give away a set bonus for that. Pure Archer and Melee rangers would also like to have the option to replace stance shift with an extra encounter slot.
    Le-Shan: HR level 80 (main)
    Born of Black Wind: SW Level 80
  • theraxin#5169 theraxin Member Posts: 355 Arc User
    edited January 2020
    While I have almost nothing against the discussions about team effort, imagination and item trade-offs, I have to remind everyone that the mod goes out in 8 days and the current item selection looks like this:



    So I think specific, easy to implement changes to gear might have a better effect on the next mod, while you can base those suggestions on your more in-depth reasons.
  • quickfoot#7851 quickfoot Member Posts: 488 Arc User
    edited January 2020
    At this point, the only items I want from next mod are the book of vile darkness, the hat w/ 5k power vs 1 opponent (for general bosses), and the shirt that gives AP if it's still the way it was when I saw it, everything else is just fluff or transmute, but I already like the way my toons look. If the artifact set was a passive 10% dmg bonus to demons, devils and whatever else, I would probably invest in that just for specific dungeons and bosses considering the nerf to demo set and that arcuria's set requires casting of a daily. The change they did recently to make it more generally useful did nothing to increase its desirability in my eyes.

    As for the boots, I'd be just as happy with enduring boots which has no handicap, regardless if the handicap is 25% or 50%. I might wear them if I knew my healer was overpowered, again, regardless of the handicap, I was fine with it at 50%, but ofc I won't complain that they reduced it to 25%.

    Would I love to see some strange gear that really changed the way you played? Sure, but that's something they'll have to decide if it's worth the development time to do. In the past, several such items have been near worthless in pve, but totally cheesed up pvp, so they would need to consider that as well if they want pvp to continue to exist. It's important for them to think about pvp from the start, because it's been my experience that once an item becomes toxic in pvp, it takes months, or sometimes mods for them to change it.

    For items that are targeted to specific races/classes of enemies, they really need to improve the QoL around switching gear and enchantments if they want to see such items gain more usage.

  • urtew3urtew3 Member Posts: 161 Arc User
    edited January 2020
    been wanting throne and mount dyes in M18 so why haven't we not seen this one yet bet it would save us alot of astral diamonds from buying mounts and if they could change the helm of the red feather clan to all classes than yes i would of bought this for all my toons if it wasn't just for the barb pally and fighter since i know this game needs some work
  • quickfoot#7851 quickfoot Member Posts: 488 Arc User
    edited January 2020
    Here's an idea for the book of vile darkness set that might be a little more interesting and would have some synergy with the boots being discussed:


    [Some flavor text involving being more powerful against denizens of the Nine Hells, while twisting everything you know to be right and wrong.]

    Deal 10% more damage to devils, demons, and X (I forget the 3rd one).

    Each time you use an at-will, encounter, or daily power you take damage. This damage is based on your Incoming Healing modifier.


    The damage you take would be modified by your incoming healing modifier such that the more incoming healing you have, the more damage you would take, and with -X% incoming healing you would take less damage, as in it would be mitigated.

    Or maybe with a negative incoming healing modifer, receive a small heal instead, something similar to an insignia bonus that heals, that would alleviate some pressure on the healer. This would be the part referenced by "twisting everything you know to be right and wrong". If the decision was made to apply a heal with a negative incoming healing modifier, then perhaps the text would be something like:

    [Some flavor text involving being more powerful against denizens of the Nine Hells, while twisting everything you know to be right and wrong.]

    Deal 10% more damage to devils, demons, and X (I forget the 3rd one).

    Depending on your Incoming healing modifier, each time you use an at-will, encounter, or daily power, you either take damage, or receive a heal. The amount of damage you take, or the amount you are healed is determined by how far your Incoming Healing modifier is from 0%.


    Again, with a Positive Incoming Healing modifier, you would take damage, while with a Negative Incoming Healing Modifier, you would receive a heal.
    Post edited by quickfoot#7851 on

  • jimmypdtjimmypdt Member Posts: 121 Arc User
    chemjeff said:

    If those -50% boots did go live and saw widespread use, one of three things would happen (for everyone beneath the Sharpedge/Lightbringer stage of advancement):

    1. The DPSers couldn't afford to use the boots because they would be constantly dying. But I doubt that would actually stop the DPSers from trying to use the boots anyway, because OMG 5% .
    2. The DPSers use the boots, keep dying, and blame/curse/kick the healer. So, the consequences of the boots actually fall upon an innocent victim, not the person using the boots. But I actually think that is less likely.

    What is more likely IMO is:

    3. The DPSers will demand that their healer have all of the +Outgoing Healing gear before even starting, so that only the top healers will be chosen even for intermediate-level content. All of the other healers are left to just run Cloak Tower all the time.

    So either: the boots are a waste of time to get because the DPSers can't ever realistically use them, and/or the consequences of using the boots fall disproportionately on the healers and not on the boot wearers themselves.

    If the devs want to make more "interesting" gear like these boots, then the devs should think more carefully about who actually suffers the consequences from their use.

    I don't know if you have noticed, but there are a very limited amount of healers in game right now. If a DPSer is going to be that picky about the healer they bring, they will be waiting a very long time to run anything. Everyone else will just form their groups and either use the boots or not depending on the healer. 5% damage is only going to speed up the dungeon by a few minutes at best.

    All the best,
    OPTank_
  • gromovnipljesak#8234 gromovnipljesak Member Posts: 1,042 Arc User
    Regarding items with demerits - if it's optional, people won't go for it. It would have to be insanely good like what was that power called, KC?
    But you could mitigate the downside so people didnt give a rat's HAMSTER about the downside. It just won't be picked, because the bonus of the top tier item with demerit needs to have a bonus large enough vs the 2nd best item to make up for the demerit. And that would be considered "overpowered" so no one will use it because everyone knows it would be nerfed like everything, including the playerbase, eventually.
  • chemjeffchemjeff Member Posts: 544 Arc User
    jimmypdt said:

    If a DPSer is going to be that picky about the healer they bring, they will be waiting a very long time to run anything. Everyone else will just form their groups and either use the boots or not depending on the healer. 5% damage is only going to speed up the dungeon by a few minutes at best.

    All the best,
    OPTank_

    That's right. Just like, pre-Mod 16, if a DPSer didn't have 4 buffers at his/her beck and call, that person didn't go in to the dungeon. And buffers were rarer than DPSers back then, just like healers are rarer than DPSers now.
Sign In or Register to comment.