If they remove power from everything, it just makes dominance insignias BIS because it has forte and grants maximum amount of stats. We will be able to adjust. I've suggested that some bonuses still have power, but others have CA, crit, accuracy etc. They should be "spread out." It would make for some interesting build diversity depending on your classes forte.
I've been building for various classes and adjusting for each patch, and in all builds the Power is easily capped because of the potions. I'll still wear the Lion's helmet and Fallen Angel's boots on my GWF for example, since I don't own a Watermelon potion factory to use in every dungeon I play. But it seems that most here still do not understand that Power's goal will end and insist that t3 items remain BIS for more than 1 module.
I posted something similar in the patch notes thread, but it seems more appropriate here.
I think that it's at least worth considering that some mount bonuses should be to "other contributions" instead of to the base stats, and that mount bonuses to HP should be a % bonus of total HP. The reason is that as item level goes up, getting a fixed bonus to base stats becomes less valuable as caps rise and stats from gear increases. Similar with HP, as item level increases and HP approaches e.g. 1 mil, 15k bonus HP is not as valuable as it is say when you 400k hp. If (at least some) mount bonuses were % bonus to "other contributions", they maintain their same level of worth as a player progresses in item level. I think the number of % bonuses to "other contributions" should be limited, but being that upgrading 10 mounts to mythic is a fairly expensive endeavor, we should ensure that their value to the player is maintained as he or she progresses even into the future.
I'm no mathematician, and personally I don't care all too much what the actual maths are (so long as they make some sense), this is what I'm thinking, if a mount gives 7,500k to a stat, for example to Crit, then at 50k item level, it contributes 7.5% to crit chance as long as the player is not over capped. However item levels increase in the future, say to 75k, then 7.5k to crit contributes less to crit chance. I think it would be better if 10x mythic mounts maintained their contribution levels so that they are worth investing in, even in the future.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, just thought it might be worth considering.
I also think that Quick Action, should add to Action Point Gain %, instead of generating 5% (or 7.5% ?) AP after daily use.
7
darthpotaterMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,261Arc User
I posted something similar in the patch notes thread, but it seems more appropriate here.
I think that it's at least worth considering that some mount bonuses should be to "other contributions" instead of to the base stats, and that mount bonuses to HP should be a % bonus of total HP. The reason is that as item level goes up, getting a fixed bonus to base stats becomes less valuable as caps rise and stats from gear increases. Similar with HP, as item level increases and HP approaches e.g. 1 mil, 15k bonus HP is not as valuable as it is say when you 400k hp. If (at least some) mount bonuses were % bonus to "other contributions", they maintain their same level of worth as a player progresses in item level. I think the number of % bonuses to "other contributions" should be limited, but being that upgrading 10 mounts to mythic is a fairly expensive endeavor, we should ensure that their value to the player is maintained as he or she progresses even into the future.
I'm no mathematician, and personally I don't care all too much what the actual maths are (so long as they make some sense), this is what I'm thinking, if a mount gives 7,500k to a stat, for example to Crit, then at 50k item level, it contributes 7.5% to crit chance as long as the player is not over capped. However item levels increase in the future, say to 75k, then 7.5k to crit contributes less to crit chance. I think it would be better if 10x mythic mounts maintained their contribution levels so that they are worth investing in, even in the future.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, just thought it might be worth considering.
I also think that Quick Action, should add to Action Point Gain %, instead of generating 5% (or 7.5% ?) AP after daily use.
No problem. They will increase bolster from mounts to 200% with 20 mythic mounts.
Jokes apart, I agree with this. Large investments like weapon/armor enchants, companions and mounts should maintain the value
I would like to suggest a slightly increase to tenebrous bonus from 24000 to 50000. I find tenebrous dealing around 1% from my total damage and I had to sacrifice one offensive slot for that. People use tenebrous mostly in endgame after they managed to get their build in place and need a slightly increase in performance. In the actual live system it seems relevant that tenebrous should not pass 24000 but with the new system our HP got almost doubled in endgame so I find relevant this increase. 8% from 600k it is 48k damage.
I did a test on preview with one tenebrous. This is the result:
My proposal will bring this result from (5*60*8/100)*24000 = 576000 to (5*60*8/100)*48000 = 1152000 with will bring Tenebrous to 2% damage increase with will make sense to give up on some overall % for a slightly damage increase.
I was thinking about the way "base stats" work, and what things would look like way into the future.
If I understand correctly, for the sake of example, suppose at some point in the future the maximum achievable total item level is 200,000. Then, all stats would incur an "item level debt" of 150,000. What I mean is that any stat with a rating at or below 150k would be "wasted" stat allocation. Here I am assuming that the maximum reduction in % one can get from being below item level is 50%, idk if that's actually the case. Sources of "combined rating" will cover some of this "til debt", how much depends on what the numbers are. This kind of resembles the current system we have, and to be clear I'm somewhat o.k. with it, but it also feels half baked in some ways, though perhaps I'm not seeing the "big picture".
I just wanted to highlight the situation because I feel it's important to consider if this is the future we are aiming for, because if it's not, then at some point we will need another total overhaul of the underlying maths.
Thinking about an alternative, I came up with this, it's by no means something I think is perfect and maybe not in line with "the vision", but I thought I'd share it just to have contrast.
If we calculate a stat's percentage contribution from the "base stats" using item level as a kind of ratio, we could get rid of the " total item level debt" like so.
y = min(0.5, a * x) x = 0.5 / (total item level)
where a is the stat's value totaled from gear, etc. and the total percentage could be calculated as p = (100% * y) + z where z is "other contributions"
For example if TIL = 200k and a character has 45k of one stat then p = (100% * min(0.5, (45k * (0.5 / 200k)))) + z p = 11.25% + z if z (other contributions) is 0, then the characters percentage for that stat would be 11.25% and there are no wasted stats.
If the same character had 220k in some other rating, and z was 0 then p = (100% * min(0.5, (220k * (0.5 / 200k)))) + z p = 50% + 0 And the character's percentage for that stat would be 50%
This creates a "scale" based on item level.
Likewise a character w/ low item levels would have a different scale, such that smaller values would scale to higher percentages.
Check my maths, correct me if I'm wrong. I don't feel strongly about things being one way or the other, I just thought I'd provide some contrast and look into the future a bit and see if that's what we are shooting for.
Due to us needing to invest in two stats to get the same return as one stat (actually lesser) i.e., 1.81x Damage Modifier with both Critical stats maxed out (compared to 1.9x for just investing in Power or CA, which are single stats), and a similar case for Deflect stats, where total mitigation is even worse than Defense despite having to max out two stats (as maxing the two gives 48% mitigation 90% of the time while Defense is 48% mitigation 100% of the time), there is 0 reason for any DPS or Tank to invest in these stats respectively.
Due to us needing to invest in two stats to get the same return as one stat (actually lesser) i.e., 1.81x Damage Modifier with both Critical stats maxed out (compared to 1.9x for just investing in Power or CA, which are single stats), and a similar case for Deflect stats, where total mitigation is even worse than Defense despite having to max out two stats (as maxing the two gives 48% mitigation 90% of the time while Defense is 48% mitigation 100% of the time), there is 0 reason for any DPS or Tank to invest in these stats respectively.
This can be fixed a variety of ways. Maybe gear bonuses that have crit/crit sev or deflect/deflect sev can grant 2x the % stats. for example a 1300 item level helmet (making stuff up) could give 5% power or 10% crit. Something like this. There is a way to balance that out without combining the stats.
> @vigor#8801 said: > And another thing. Anything you do should be visible IN GAME. We shouldn't need to play the games half way in the forum and half way in game. I should not need to come to the forum to see how you nerfed me. I don't want to read 100 threads with thousands of posts to plan my day.
On that point, you are going to get your wish. I have my complaints about this, but one thing I actually like is the UI improvement showing your caps.
Call me El, she/her only. Currently Professions-only until the next combat change fixes this mess.
if power and crit sev are capped, what would a player do to improve? Perhaps you are making this too difficult. Why not just go to having only one stat and making every player's stat the same unless they pay to have more or unless they have a comrade amongst the devs?
Combat advantage.
0
arazith07Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,719Arc User
if power and crit sev are capped, what would a player do to improve? Perhaps you are making this too difficult. Why not just go to having only one stat and making every player's stat the same unless they pay to have more or unless they have a comrade amongst the devs?
Crit chance, Combat advantage, Accuracy. If you feel like you need more survivability, there are a slew of defensive stats as well.
combat advantage has a cap too doesn't it? Unless something is changed the cap is 125k which gives 15% damage when you have combat advantage. Maybe something changed. I quit for most of a year.
IMO, the amount of def stats i need are whatever it takes to stay alive. Past that, you want to maximize offense.
Critical strike is pretty obvious when you don't have enough. So I get crit looking right and then make all other off stats that high (as much as possible). Yes, because my particular set of companion equip lacks accuracy, ususally it is accuracy I am trying to bump. If someone had a different set of companion equipment the task and relative equipment loadout might be different. I.e. i don't equip chars with the best arm pieces sometimes because a lesser arm piece has accuracy and i need it. I also keep accuracy insignias in case i need them.
the only problem i see with the current system is companion equipment is unforgiving. It contributes a lot to your overall stats but it isn't flexible at all. You have to choose to be short of something or short of everything.
I have 5 pieces of companion equipment and I make adjustments depending on what I am doing. 2 pcs def 2 pcs off 1 piece combat advantage. If survival is easy, it is 2 pcs off + CA. If i can't survive I replace CA with defense-deflection. If I still can't survive I replace whichever offense piece i think i can most easily spare with awareness-critical avoidance. At that point, if i can't survive I shouldn't be there.
Yes, all the stats have a cap, however it is not possible to cap them all at once. You have to make decisions on what to cap (or to even cap at all). Combat advantage does way more than 15% more damage. On live, the cap is 100K+enemy rating (140k for Zariel/Avernus) which once you hit, you do 100% more damage when you have advantage. With this new system, the cap was lowered to 90%, which is 90% more damage when you have advantage, nearly doubling what you would have if you didn't have advantage.
Companion equipment has less impact on preview than it does on live, which is a good thing imo.
0
arazith07Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,719Arc User
I think I read they are getting rid of companion influence too. Why, just why? Just so we have a new set of conditions to achieve? I also run high companion influence because I know I have a hard time getting enough of each stat I need. CA allows me to be more competitive while under-geared. It takes a lot of time and AD to get fully geared.
Companion Influence is being replaced with Forte, which adds to 3 stats depending on your class. It effectively functions the same as before, but instead of relying on your companion, you are just reliant on your sources of forte.
I think I read they are getting rid of companion influence too. Why, just why? Just so we have a new set of conditions to achieve? I also run high companion influence because I know I have a hard time getting enough of each stat I need. CA allows me to be more competitive while under-geared. It takes a lot of time and AD to get fully geared.
Companion Influence is being replaced with Forte, which adds to 3 stats depending on your class. It effectively functions the same as before, but instead of relying on your companion, you are just reliant on your sources of forte.
The "REASON" companion influence was removed, is so that IL (item level) will be a better indicator of character performance potential.
--- A C C U R A C Y . & . C R I T I C A L . A V O I D A N C E ---
These stat formulas need to change because... 90,000 points in each entirely negates twice as many points in their opposite. Currently, Critical% and Critical Severity combined have the same effect as power. Currently, Deflect% and Deflect Severity combined have the same effect as defense.
What makes more sense?
maxed out Critical should deal 3x more damage than investing none in critical. maxed out Deflection should reduce damage to a third of what it would be with no investment in critical.
That's as a baseline, to make them competitive.
In my opinion, Accuracy and Critical Avoidance, when maxed, should cut the gains of the opponent's stats in half.
Deflection chance of 33-66%.... (not affected by accuracy)
Deflection severity of 50% (base by default).... +0.5% per 1,000 deflect severity and -0.5% per 1,000 accuracy.
Critical chance of 0-100%.... modified by critical avoidance. (100% critical avoidance cuts the critical % chance in half)
Critical severity of 100% (base by default). 1,000 crit severity increases cs by 1%. 1,000 critAvoidance decreases cs by 1%. The total amount can range from 0% to 200% cs, representing a critical damage factor range from 1x to 3x.
Here are examples of scenarios using the system above:
Attacker: 100% C/cs, Defender: 0% cv --- Attacker has a 100% chance to crit with 200 cs. Result is 3.00x damage Attacker: 50% C/cs, Defender: 0% cv --- Attacker has a 50% chance to crit with 150 cs. Result is 1.75x damage Attacker: 100% C/cs, Defender: 100% cv --- Attacker has a 50% chance to crit with 100 cs. Result is 1.50x damage Attacker: 50% C/cs, Defender: 100% cv --- Attacker has a 25% chance to crit with 50 cs. Result is 1.125x damage
Defender: 100% D/ds, Attacker: 0% acc --- Defender has a 66% chance to deflect 100% damage. Result .333x damage Defender: 50% D/ds, Attacker: 0% acc --- Defender has a 50% chance to deflect 75% damage. Result .625x damage Defender: 100% D/ds, Attacker: 100% acc --- Defender has a 66% chance to deflect 50% damage. Result is .666x damage Defender: 50% D/ds, Attacker: 100% acc --- Defender has a 50% chance to deflect 25% damage. Result .875x damage
There are other variations possible, this is just an example. the important point is:
Crit plus crit severity can triple damage deflect plus deflect severity can cut damage to a third Counter stats halve the potency of their opposing pair.
It is also important to keep the % of deflects and criticals in a realistic range of occurance.
@noworries#8859 I wasn't sure where to put this feedback so I am putting it here. The stat system seems quite good, other than mount powers should probably be % contribution (to eliminate the diminishing of their stats), and increased combined rating on collars etc. I think one big problem involves CA/awareness with the three tank paragons.
Fighter has 3 ways to eliminate CA. Sentinel has 1 way to eliminate CA and crit chance. Paladin, correct if I'm wrong, has 0.
Maybe change the way that fighter can mitigate combat advantage. My suggestion is as follows:
One daily can fully mitigate combat advantage for one tank buster hit.
When guard is at 100%, CA is reduced to 50% (so full stamina bar means half CA negated)
When guard is at 0%, CA is not mitigated at all (so awareness stat becomes very important here and after huge tank buster hits).
Remove combat advantage negation from feats/features.
Make this identical on Sentinel and Paladin or at least similar (slight differences for diversity).
It is unfair that fighter has so many sources of combat advantage negation and sentinel has one/paladin has none. They all need some CA mitigation, in a way that player skill will mitigate the fact that awareness is impossible to cap at 90%. If a tank frame perfects their guards and dailies under this scenario, they maximize their survivability and group support.
@noworries#8859 I wasn't sure where to put this feedback so I am putting it here. The stat system seems quite good, other than mount powers should probably be % contribution (to eliminate the diminishing of their stats), and increased combined rating on collars etc. I think one big problem involves CA/awareness with the three tank paragons.
Fighter has 3 ways to eliminate CA. Sentinel has 1 way to eliminate CA and crit chance. Paladin, correct if I'm wrong, has 0.
Maybe change the way that fighter can mitigate combat advantage. My suggestion is as follows:
One daily can fully mitigate combat advantage for one tank buster hit.
When guard is at 100%, CA is reduced to 50% (so full stamina bar means half CA negated)
When guard is at 0%, CA is not mitigated at all (so awareness stat becomes very important here and after huge tank buster hits).
Remove combat advantage negation from feats/features.
Make this identical on Sentinel and Paladin or at least similar (slight differences for diversity).
It is unfair that fighter has so many sources of combat advantage negation and sentinel has one/paladin has none. They all need some CA mitigation, in a way that player skill will mitigate the fact that awareness is impossible to cap at 90%. If a tank frame perfects their guards and dailies under this scenario, they maximize their survivability and group support.
As someone who mains a Pally, I'm cool with the CA negation a Fighter has - but Pallies need it too, especially as bosses now have CA in their attacks.
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
2
darthpotaterMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,261Arc User
Paladins encounter absolution can be a good option. The cooldown may need a revision too
damnaciousMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 354Arc User
@noworries#8859, there are serious issues with the almost complete and utter major nerfs to tanks and their survivability which needs to be given greater consideration. I believe some of the issues with the changes to the system you propose have been perpetrated, perpetuated and encouraged by people providing you with opinion that is not supported by either actual factual data and/or relevant and significant experience.
With the current Preview changes, tanks experience a MINIMUM 8.9% decrease in base general survivability, and that is only obtained AFTER upgrading and changing things like companions, mounts, enchantments, runestones, companion gear, insignia etc. When it's a direct comparison of a tank's survivability on Live versus Preview, that base general survivability is significantly less on Preview.
As you can evidently and obviously observe, yes, players are worse off as a result of your changes.
I believe it's important here to identify and explore one issue which I believe you may be mistaken with, which may assist in resolving the major nerf to tank survivability, and that is your perspective that "Hit Points" is somehow directly equatable and comparable to "damage", as expressed in this post of yours:
I have no adjusted class bonuses with this update. If tanks were to say go up to 30% bonus hitpoints, we'd have DPS go up to 30% damage bonus as well. Before doing that I'd like to see how balance is working out with the new changes.
The unfortunate reality is that Hit Points (HP), is a finite 'pool', whereas "damage" is infinite. Increasing one at the exact same rate as the other does not provide 'balance' in this new system of yours.
@micky1p00 (Janne) came up with a most-apt term she called "Effective Hit Points" (EHP), which is used to ascertain the actual amount of damage a character can take AFTER all forms of mitigation (i.e. after Defense's Damage Reduction, after Deflect, after Awareness, after any additional forms of damage reduction etc.) before that character is dead.
Sadly, with your proposed changes, the EHP of characters, but tanks in particular, is significantly less than it is on Live, and that is without even factoring in your major nerfs to a tank's Shift and Tab damage-reducing capabilities. The reason why this EHP is significantly less is primarily due to the changes to Defense and how the Defense stat now reduces damage, the changes to Deflect Severity and Deflect Chance and Deflect Severity reduces damage, the increase in NPC damage, the reduction in HP provided by things like the Mount Equip Power "Stalwart", and the overall difficulty inherent in attempting to cap defensive stats.
Historically, HP has equaled a minimum (slightly greater for tanks) 400% the value of any other stat, so that if one player was to slot in a Radiant Enchantment in an Offensive slot, they might gain, say, 1,000 Power, and where that 1,000 Power might equate to a 1% increase in damage, as opposed to that same Radiant being slotted in to a Defensive slot and providing 4,000 HP. While this has barely been sufficient to assist in 'balancing' classes and roles, it has been significantly better than your current system where both damage and HP is directly linked to IL (TIL), and where tanks do not gain that 400% increase in HP as compared to the comparative damage increase, and as a result, there is a significant imbalance between tanks and other roles.
For example, i've seen some friends building DPS characters on Preview at 54k IL with capped Power, capped Combat Advantage, over 70% Critical Strike and 90% Critical Severity, and with over 830k HP, as opposed to a tank at a comparable 54k IL with a capped Awareness, 77% Defense, 70% Deflect Chance, 37% Deflect Severity and 70% Critical Avoidance, but only 1,018,000 HP. In the above example, the DPS player has not stacked HP in any way - their HP has been derived purely from gear and TIL.
I won't even bother attempting to prove which of those two characters provided in the above example is the most 'effective', as it should be pretty obvious that it is definitely NOT the tank...
Now, while i can understand and appreciate your perspective that Deflect Severity required such significant nerfing, almost purely to ensure that DPS classes such as Rogues do not end up being better tanks than actual tanks, one of the major problems with doing so is that the game does not currently provide any real, attainable, obtainable or reasonable methods of increasing Deflect Severity. Given this, your changes have significantly nerfed tanks as they have no means of increasing Deflect Severity, and even if there were, no real available stat points from which to draw upon to stack Deflect Severity without further decreasing overall survivability.
As for the nerf which reduced the damage reduction of both the Shift and Tab mechanics for tanks, I have no real idea why this was, in any way, remotely necessary, and the result, especially when coupled with the nerfs to both HP, Defense and Deflect Severity, and the increase in NPC damage capabilities, leaves a tank at a significant disadvantage which results in a tank seriously struggling to survive large hits at end-game. While i understand the desire to challenge tanks more and encourage a greater focus for tanks on ONLY using their Shift/Tab mechanics on large hits, current Stamina regeneration rates negatively affects the capacity for tanks to regenerate sufficient Stamina in a reasonable period of time to ensure they are capable of surviving these hits.
With all of this in mind, I propose making these simple, yet effective changes to improve the 'balance' of the game, and particularly, the 'balance' between classes and roles:
Hit Points and TIL Increase the bonus HP value gained from TIL for tanks to 80% from 20%, for healers to 40% from 10%, for DPS increase from 0% to 10%. With this simple change, a tank even at 54k IL will have slightly improved their survivability from TIL provided HP of 648k at 20%, to 972k at 80% - thereby slightly readdressing the current imbalance and slightly improving tank survivability.
Deflect Severity and Critical Severity Given how easy it has been claimed to be for DPS to cap Critical Severity at 90%, and how challenging it can be for Healers to do so, while it proves literally impossible for anyone but a Rogue to cap Deflect Severity at 90%, I propose removing both Critical Severity and Deflect Severity entirely from the Ratings and giving them both a base constant 90% for all classes, NPCs and roles of all levels. This change will immensely benefit everyone, while providing 'balance' without unbalancing the game.
Tank Shift and Tab mechanics Increase the base Stamina regeneration rate for tanks by 33%. This will assist and encourage tanks to use their Shift/Tab mechanics for the big hits, while slightly improving survivability at end-game.
Other sources of Hit Points Currently, there has been a logical and progressive move towards changing the stats provided by companions while in Power Slots to provide a % increase in stats. This is definitely a fantastic and much-needed improvement, as it greatly assists with future growth and evolution of the game. However, HP provided by companions and mounts are still static, and i believe that changing these values to a % also, will significantly increase the ease by which players will experience future changes and growth
The unfortunate reality is that Hit Points (HP), is a finite 'pool', whereas "damage" is infinite. Increasing one at the exact same rate as the other does not provide 'balance' in this new system of yours.
DPS and EHP behave in the same way. Considering it's the same damage function, just 1/x
micky1p00 came up with a most-apt term she called "Effective Hit Points" (EHP), which is used to ascertain the actual amount of damage a character can take AFTER all forms of mitigation (i.e. after Defense's Damage Reduction, after Deflect, after Awareness, after any additional forms of damage reduction etc.) before that character is dead.
Sadly, with your proposed changes, the EHP of characters, but tanks in particular, is significantly less than it is on Live, and that is without even factoring in your major nerfs to a tank's Shift and Tab damage-reducing capabilities. The reason why this EHP is significantly less is primarily due to the changes to Defense and how the Defense stat now reduces damage, the changes to Deflect Severity and Deflect Chance and Deflect Severity reduces damage, the increase in NPC damage, the reduction in HP provided by things like the Mount Equip Power "Stalwart", and the overall difficulty inherent in attempting to cap defensive stats.
ehp should be compared to the role and content, why is this important if it's 10 times larger or smaller if the damage of the content is adjusted? Will people be happy if they get 10 times the hp but the mobs get 20 times the damage?
Historically, HP has equaled a minimum (slightly greater for tanks) 400% the value of any other stat, so that if one player was to slot in a Radiant Enchantment in an Offensive slot, they might gain, say, 1,000 Power, and where that 1,000 Power might equate to a 1% increase in damage, as opposed to that same Radiant being slotted in to a Defensive slot and providing 4,000 HP. While this has barely been sufficient to assist in 'balancing' classes and roles, it has been significantly better than your current system where both damage and HP is directly linked to IL (TIL), and where tanks do not gain that 400% increase in HP as compared to the comparative damage increase, and as a result, there is a significant imbalance between tanks and other roles.
HP on items is still x4 times the other stats per item level, nothing changed there. The change was in the base hp, and older system was based on char level... and a mess.
For example, i've seen some friends building DPS characters on Preview at 54k IL with capped Power, capped Combat Advantage, over 70% Critical Strike and 90% Critical Severity, and with over 830k HP, as opposed to a tank at a comparable 54k IL with a capped Awareness, 77% Defense, 70% Deflect Chance, 37% Deflect Severity and 70% Critical Avoidance, but only 1,018,000 HP. In the above example, the DPS player has not stacked HP in any way - their HP has been derived purely from gear and TIL.
I won't even bother attempting to prove which of those two characters provided in the above example is the most 'effective', as it should be pretty obvious that it is definitely NOT the tank...
Please do bother, because I don't see the numbers here. Perhaps I don't understand correctly how to calculate that effective HP we talked about or I miss where you actually wrote the numbers, but the builds i've seen the tank is 4 times talkier than a dps. Lets focus on this for a moment, 4 times, as in a hit needs to be 4 times (on average over large numbers of hits, and so on..) larger to kill a tank over a dps. And that's without the tanks mitigation encounters and skills.
So, it's not enough twice, it's not enough three times, 4 times is also not enough. How much it should be? 10 times? 100 times? What's the end purpose here, to have a system where the have their own mini-game of tank busters and nothing else? Why a large scale AoE or some other mechanic shouldn't affect tanks? Or a DPS mistake dragging some targeted AoE wouldn't even tickle a tank? Positional awareness, team work, and minimal skills are so shunned at? That the game became a game of big stats?
one of the major problems with doing so is that the game does not currently provide any real, attainable, obtainable or reasonable methods of increasing Deflect Severity. Given this, your changes have significantly nerfed tanks as they have no means of increasing Deflect Severity, and even if there were, no real available stat points from which to draw upon to stack Deflect Severity without further decreasing overall survivability .
As for the nerf which reduced the damage reduction of both the Shift and Tab mechanics for tanks, I have no real idea why this was, in any way, remotely necessary, and the result, especially when coupled with the nerfs to both HP, Defense and Deflect Severity, and the increase in NPC damage capabilities, leaves a tank at a significant disadvantage which results in a tank seriously struggling to survive large hits at end-game. While i understand the desire to challenge tanks more and encourage a greater focus for tanks on ONLY using their Shift/Tab mechanics on large hits, current Stamina regeneration rates negatively affects the capacity for tanks to regenerate sufficient Stamina in a reasonable period of time to ensure they are capable of surviving these hits.
Why not ask for overall damage reduction? Or deflect severity sources, if that the main issue? btw, where is that issue exactly? Maybe some content need damage reduction?
Increase the bonus HP value gained from TIL for tanks to 80% from 20%, for healers to 40% from 10%, for DPS increase from 0% to 10%. With this simple change, a tank even at 54k IL will have slightly improved their survivability from TIL provided HP of 648k at 20%, to 972k at 80% - thereby slightly readdressing the current imbalance and slightly improving tank survivability.
What imbalance? The one that a tank is ~4 times tankier than dps?
-----
Perhaps tanks do have an issue, perhaps not, but nothing here supports the claims of doom and demise. Where are the actual effective HP and survivability numbers, or a test, a tomm, a Zariel, something? The difference of HP is not an indicator of much on its own.
Tanks need to be needed in content while still part of the overall game mechanics and not personal "tank buster or go to sleep" world. Scaling for better or worse will take care of the first part in old content, a large enough gap of effective hp will take care for up to date content before scaling, while maintaining a gap small enough to need healers, positional awareness, mechanics and use skills in actual combat.
Comments
I think that it's at least worth considering that some mount bonuses should be to "other contributions" instead of to the base stats, and that mount bonuses to HP should be a % bonus of total HP. The reason is that as item level goes up, getting a fixed bonus to base stats becomes less valuable as caps rise and stats from gear increases. Similar with HP, as item level increases and HP approaches e.g. 1 mil, 15k bonus HP is not as valuable as it is say when you 400k hp. If (at least some) mount bonuses were % bonus to "other contributions", they maintain their same level of worth as a player progresses in item level. I think the number of % bonuses to "other contributions" should be limited, but being that upgrading 10 mounts to mythic is a fairly expensive endeavor, we should ensure that their value to the player is maintained as he or she progresses even into the future.
I'm no mathematician, and personally I don't care all too much what the actual maths are (so long as they make some sense), this is what I'm thinking, if a mount gives 7,500k to a stat, for example to Crit, then at 50k item level, it contributes 7.5% to crit chance as long as the player is not over capped. However item levels increase in the future, say to 75k, then 7.5k to crit contributes less to crit chance. I think it would be better if 10x mythic mounts maintained their contribution levels so that they are worth investing in, even in the future.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, just thought it might be worth considering.
I also think that Quick Action, should add to Action Point Gain %, instead of generating 5% (or 7.5% ?) AP after daily use.
Jokes apart, I agree with this. Large investments like weapon/armor enchants, companions and mounts should maintain the value
Caturday Survivor
Elemental Evil Survivor
Undermontain Survivor
Mod20 Combat rework Survivor
Mod22 Refinement rework Survivor
I did a test on preview with one tenebrous. This is the result:
https://i.postimg.cc/wjphV0Rw/12.png
My proposal will bring this result from (5*60*8/100)*24000 = 576000 to (5*60*8/100)*48000 = 1152000 with will bring Tenebrous to 2% damage increase with will make sense to give up on some overall % for a slightly damage increase.
Thank you!
If I understand correctly, for the sake of example, suppose at some point in the future the maximum achievable total item level is 200,000. Then, all stats would incur an "item level debt" of 150,000. What I mean is that any stat with a rating at or below 150k would be "wasted" stat allocation. Here I am assuming that the maximum reduction in % one can get from being below item level is 50%, idk if that's actually the case. Sources of "combined rating" will cover some of this "til debt", how much depends on what the numbers are. This kind of resembles the current system we have, and to be clear I'm somewhat o.k. with it, but it also feels half baked in some ways, though perhaps I'm not seeing the "big picture".
I just wanted to highlight the situation because I feel it's important to consider if this is the future we are aiming for, because if it's not, then at some point we will need another total overhaul of the underlying maths.
Thinking about an alternative, I came up with this, it's by no means something I think is perfect and maybe not in line with "the vision", but I thought I'd share it just to have contrast.
If we calculate a stat's percentage contribution from the "base stats" using item level as a kind of ratio, we could get rid of the " total item level debt" like so.
y = min(0.5, a * x)
x = 0.5 / (total item level)
where a is the stat's value totaled from gear, etc.
and the total percentage could be calculated as
p = (100% * y) + z
where z is "other contributions"
For example if TIL = 200k
and a character has 45k of one stat then
p = (100% * min(0.5, (45k * (0.5 / 200k)))) + z
p = 11.25% + z
if z (other contributions) is 0, then the characters percentage for that stat would be 11.25% and there are no wasted stats.
If the same character had 220k in some other rating, and z was 0
then
p = (100% * min(0.5, (220k * (0.5 / 200k)))) + z
p = 50% + 0
And the character's percentage for that stat would be 50%
This creates a "scale" based on item level.
Likewise a character w/ low item levels would have a different scale, such that smaller values would scale to higher percentages.
Check my maths, correct me if I'm wrong. I don't feel strongly about things being one way or the other, I just thought I'd provide some contrast and look into the future a bit and see if that's what we are shooting for.
System revised and adjusted for more balance:
see post below
Combine Critical Severity & Critical Avoidance and Deflect Severity & Deflect!
Due to us needing to invest in two stats to get the same return as one stat (actually lesser) i.e., 1.81x Damage Modifier with both Critical stats maxed out (compared to 1.9x for just investing in Power or CA, which are single stats), and a similar case for Deflect stats, where total mitigation is even worse than Defense despite having to max out two stats (as maxing the two gives 48% mitigation 90% of the time while Defense is 48% mitigation 100% of the time), there is 0 reason for any DPS or Tank to invest in these stats respectively.
> And another thing. Anything you do should be visible IN GAME. We shouldn't need to play the games half way in the forum and half way in game. I should not need to come to the forum to see how you nerfed me. I don't want to read 100 threads with thousands of posts to plan my day.
On that point, you are going to get your wish. I have my complaints about this, but one thing I actually like is the UI improvement showing your caps.
Companion equipment has less impact on preview than it does on live, which is a good thing imo.
These stat formulas need to change because... 90,000 points in each entirely negates twice as many points in their opposite.
Currently, Critical% and Critical Severity combined have the same effect as power.
Currently, Deflect% and Deflect Severity combined have the same effect as defense.
What makes more sense?
maxed out Critical should deal 3x more damage than investing none in critical.
maxed out Deflection should reduce damage to a third of what it would be with no investment in critical.
That's as a baseline, to make them competitive.
In my opinion, Accuracy and Critical Avoidance, when maxed, should cut the gains of the opponent's stats in half.
__________________________________________________________________________
How would this look?
Deflection chance of 33-66%.... (not affected by accuracy)
Deflection severity of 50% (base by default).... +0.5% per 1,000 deflect severity and -0.5% per 1,000 accuracy.
Critical chance of 0-100%.... modified by critical avoidance. (100% critical avoidance cuts the critical % chance in half)
Critical severity of 100% (base by default). 1,000 crit severity increases cs by 1%. 1,000 critAvoidance decreases cs by 1%. The total amount can range from 0% to 200% cs, representing a critical damage factor range from 1x to 3x.
Here are examples of scenarios using the system above:
Attacker: 100% C/cs, Defender: 0% cv --- Attacker has a 100% chance to crit with 200 cs. Result is 3.00x damage
Attacker: 50% C/cs, Defender: 0% cv --- Attacker has a 50% chance to crit with 150 cs. Result is 1.75x damage
Attacker: 100% C/cs, Defender: 100% cv --- Attacker has a 50% chance to crit with 100 cs. Result is 1.50x damage
Attacker: 50% C/cs, Defender: 100% cv --- Attacker has a 25% chance to crit with 50 cs. Result is 1.125x damage
Defender: 100% D/ds, Attacker: 0% acc --- Defender has a 66% chance to deflect 100% damage. Result .333x damage
Defender: 50% D/ds, Attacker: 0% acc --- Defender has a 50% chance to deflect 75% damage. Result .625x damage
Defender: 100% D/ds, Attacker: 100% acc --- Defender has a 66% chance to deflect 50% damage. Result is .666x damage
Defender: 50% D/ds, Attacker: 100% acc --- Defender has a 50% chance to deflect 25% damage. Result .875x damage
There are other variations possible, this is just an example. the important point is:
Crit plus crit severity can triple damage
deflect plus deflect severity can cut damage to a third
Counter stats halve the potency of their opposing pair.
It is also important to keep the % of deflects and criticals in a realistic range of occurance.
Fighter has 3 ways to eliminate CA.
Sentinel has 1 way to eliminate CA and crit chance.
Paladin, correct if I'm wrong, has 0.
Maybe change the way that fighter can mitigate combat advantage. My suggestion is as follows:
- One daily can fully mitigate combat advantage for one tank buster hit.
- When guard is at 100%, CA is reduced to 50% (so full stamina bar means half CA negated)
- When guard is at 0%, CA is not mitigated at all (so awareness stat becomes very important here and after huge tank buster hits).
- Remove combat advantage negation from feats/features.
- Make this identical on Sentinel and Paladin or at least similar (slight differences for diversity).
It is unfair that fighter has so many sources of combat advantage negation and sentinel has one/paladin has none. They all need some CA mitigation, in a way that player skill will mitigate the fact that awareness is impossible to cap at 90%. If a tank frame perfects their guards and dailies under this scenario, they maximize their survivability and group support.Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
Caturday Survivor
Elemental Evil Survivor
Undermontain Survivor
Mod20 Combat rework Survivor
Mod22 Refinement rework Survivor
With the current Preview changes, tanks experience a MINIMUM 8.9% decrease in base general survivability, and that is only obtained AFTER upgrading and changing things like companions, mounts, enchantments, runestones, companion gear, insignia etc. When it's a direct comparison of a tank's survivability on Live versus Preview, that base general survivability is significantly less on Preview.
You initially stated in https://www.arcgames.com/en/games/neverwinter/news/detail/11481153-bonding-runestones-%26-companion-changes that no player would be worse off as a result of your changes.
Please feel free to refer to my post in this thread for the actual ACT data and accompanying supporting videos - https://arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter/#/discussion/1258846/i-dont-appreciate-being-blatantly-lied-to/p2.
As you can evidently and obviously observe, yes, players are worse off as a result of your changes.
I believe it's important here to identify and explore one issue which I believe you may be mistaken with, which may assist in resolving the major nerf to tank survivability, and that is your perspective that "Hit Points" is somehow directly equatable and comparable to "damage", as expressed in this post of yours: The unfortunate reality is that Hit Points (HP), is a finite 'pool', whereas "damage" is infinite. Increasing one at the exact same rate as the other does not provide 'balance' in this new system of yours.
@micky1p00 (Janne) came up with a most-apt term she called "Effective Hit Points" (EHP), which is used to ascertain the actual amount of damage a character can take AFTER all forms of mitigation (i.e. after Defense's Damage Reduction, after Deflect, after Awareness, after any additional forms of damage reduction etc.) before that character is dead.
Sadly, with your proposed changes, the EHP of characters, but tanks in particular, is significantly less than it is on Live, and that is without even factoring in your major nerfs to a tank's Shift and Tab damage-reducing capabilities. The reason why this EHP is significantly less is primarily due to the changes to Defense and how the Defense stat now reduces damage, the changes to Deflect Severity and Deflect Chance and Deflect Severity reduces damage, the increase in NPC damage, the reduction in HP provided by things like the Mount Equip Power "Stalwart", and the overall difficulty inherent in attempting to cap defensive stats.
Historically, HP has equaled a minimum (slightly greater for tanks) 400% the value of any other stat, so that if one player was to slot in a Radiant Enchantment in an Offensive slot, they might gain, say, 1,000 Power, and where that 1,000 Power might equate to a 1% increase in damage, as opposed to that same Radiant being slotted in to a Defensive slot and providing 4,000 HP. While this has barely been sufficient to assist in 'balancing' classes and roles, it has been significantly better than your current system where both damage and HP is directly linked to IL (TIL), and where tanks do not gain that 400% increase in HP as compared to the comparative damage increase, and as a result, there is a significant imbalance between tanks and other roles.
For example, i've seen some friends building DPS characters on Preview at 54k IL with capped Power, capped Combat Advantage, over 70% Critical Strike and 90% Critical Severity, and with over 830k HP, as opposed to a tank at a comparable 54k IL with a capped Awareness, 77% Defense, 70% Deflect Chance, 37% Deflect Severity and 70% Critical Avoidance, but only 1,018,000 HP. In the above example, the DPS player has not stacked HP in any way - their HP has been derived purely from gear and TIL.
I won't even bother attempting to prove which of those two characters provided in the above example is the most 'effective', as it should be pretty obvious that it is definitely NOT the tank...
Now, while i can understand and appreciate your perspective that Deflect Severity required such significant nerfing, almost purely to ensure that DPS classes such as Rogues do not end up being better tanks than actual tanks, one of the major problems with doing so is that the game does not currently provide any real, attainable, obtainable or reasonable methods of increasing Deflect Severity. Given this, your changes have significantly nerfed tanks as they have no means of increasing Deflect Severity, and even if there were, no real available stat points from which to draw upon to stack Deflect Severity without further decreasing overall survivability.
As for the nerf which reduced the damage reduction of both the Shift and Tab mechanics for tanks, I have no real idea why this was, in any way, remotely necessary, and the result, especially when coupled with the nerfs to both HP, Defense and Deflect Severity, and the increase in NPC damage capabilities, leaves a tank at a significant disadvantage which results in a tank seriously struggling to survive large hits at end-game. While i understand the desire to challenge tanks more and encourage a greater focus for tanks on ONLY using their Shift/Tab mechanics on large hits, current Stamina regeneration rates negatively affects the capacity for tanks to regenerate sufficient Stamina in a reasonable period of time to ensure they are capable of surviving these hits.
With all of this in mind, I propose making these simple, yet effective changes to improve the 'balance' of the game, and particularly, the 'balance' between classes and roles:
Hit Points and TIL
Increase the bonus HP value gained from TIL for tanks to 80% from 20%, for healers to 40% from 10%, for DPS increase from 0% to 10%. With this simple change, a tank even at 54k IL will have slightly improved their survivability from TIL provided HP of 648k at 20%, to 972k at 80% - thereby slightly readdressing the current imbalance and slightly improving tank survivability.
Deflect Severity and Critical Severity
Given how easy it has been claimed to be for DPS to cap Critical Severity at 90%, and how challenging it can be for Healers to do so, while it proves literally impossible for anyone but a Rogue to cap Deflect Severity at 90%, I propose removing both Critical Severity and Deflect Severity entirely from the Ratings and giving them both a base constant 90% for all classes, NPCs and roles of all levels. This change will immensely benefit everyone, while providing 'balance' without unbalancing the game.
Tank Shift and Tab mechanics
Increase the base Stamina regeneration rate for tanks by 33%. This will assist and encourage tanks to use their Shift/Tab mechanics for the big hits, while slightly improving survivability at end-game.
Other sources of Hit Points
Currently, there has been a logical and progressive move towards changing the stats provided by companions while in Power Slots to provide a % increase in stats. This is definitely a fantastic and much-needed improvement, as it greatly assists with future growth and evolution of the game. However, HP provided by companions and mounts are still static, and i believe that changing these values to a % also, will significantly increase the ease by which players will experience future changes and growth
The change was in the base hp, and older system was based on char level... and a mess. Please do bother, because I don't see the numbers here. Perhaps I don't understand correctly how to calculate that effective HP we talked about or I miss where you actually wrote the numbers, but the builds i've seen the tank is 4 times talkier than a dps. Lets focus on this for a moment, 4 times, as in a hit needs to be 4 times (on average over large numbers of hits, and so on..) larger to kill a tank over a dps. And that's without the tanks mitigation encounters and skills.
So, it's not enough twice, it's not enough three times, 4 times is also not enough. How much it should be? 10 times? 100 times?
What's the end purpose here, to have a system where the have their own mini-game of tank busters and nothing else? Why a large scale AoE or some other mechanic shouldn't affect tanks? Or a DPS mistake dragging some targeted AoE wouldn't even tickle a tank? Positional awareness, team work, and minimal skills are so shunned at? That the game became a game of big stats? Why not ask for overall damage reduction? Or deflect severity sources, if that the main issue? btw, where is that issue exactly? Maybe some content need damage reduction? What imbalance? The one that a tank is ~4 times tankier than dps?
-----
Perhaps tanks do have an issue, perhaps not, but nothing here supports the claims of doom and demise. Where are the actual effective HP and survivability numbers, or a test, a tomm, a Zariel, something? The difference of HP is not an indicator of much on its own.
Tanks need to be needed in content while still part of the overall game mechanics and not personal "tank buster or go to sleep" world. Scaling for better or worse will take care of the first part in old content, a large enough gap of effective hp will take care for up to date content before scaling, while maintaining a gap small enough to need healers, positional awareness, mechanics and use skills in actual combat.