Remove Purify Proc: Y/N. We had it coming!

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Ok lets try reading the whole post this time

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

*puts formulas in post*

*explains formulas*

*put up results*

I'll give you the super dumbed down version though

Add damage on mele combo skills is almost always static none of our fast combo skills have weapon % and a 1k damage add can be ignored via "not mattering" so we take the average of full +12 axe/dagger damage and see how many times it has to hit in order to kill modified by crit rate (modified by mage def level vs attack level and def stats) and then we take the remaining amount and divide that by average base damage for number of GoF procs needed to kill. Then you just take the total number of attacks any apply purifys proc rate to em (i used max proc rate for GoF and purify)

Furthermore most arcanes still use badge/fort so a full DPS derp spam combo is unlikely at best so instead of just the total number of Gof procs needed to kill total I ran total amount of GoF procs needed to kill in a bm's/Sins longest stun (7.5 seconds for bm 7 for sin) and just compared the % chance of gettign that many procs to purifys chance of procing on all but the last attack.

In both Scenario's Purify came up huge for escaping while saving you geni stam.

I left out HF etc because unless your flat out special your going to badge/immune or damage reduction of choice out of it. I left out TM/EP because wind shield + self buff counters at a lower energy cost. I left out GS because...lol

SBH wise Its a lot more straightforward nuber of hits needed to proc purge (because nothing with SBH is a legitimate threat to an endgame mage) + nuber of hits after purge needed to kill vs chance of purify activating in that amount of time

You can apply STA to the above if you really want to but its still a ridiculous ratio of purify to purge actually mattering. Same arguement as above for geni skills and BV has a loooong CD.

I worked it out this way because purge is unreliable enough that there is a pretty huge window to gtfo when your not under a control skill thanks to server lag alone and if at any point in time while under the control skill purify activated any purge beforehand would be useless in enough situations that the chance is pretty irrelevant.

Just use the above to make a basic x/y/etc formula the ones I posted were pretty simple and I've reposted em like 5 times, cant be bothered anymore

I ignored purify vs purify matchups

I ignored barb/seeker in the stun time vs Gof due to pretty trash control skills on those classes. I ignored seeker in base damage version because seekers work a lot more similarly to a caster class than a mele

Scroll back for formulas

On the note of zerk crit high end damage charm bypass, zerk crit alone is an 8% chance with 30% base crit high end damage as well? looooow chance

Pretty much all my arguments are based off of a mixture of logic, math, and hate. I'm sorry but saying "your just pulling numbers out of thin air" is not a valid counterarguement. I also made a rather simple challenge to you a few pages back that you conveniently ignored. Try to prove that purify is OP, if you cannot prove this based on game and class mechanics then grats, purify is balanced. Not go on a tangent or QQ or whatnot thats not proof thats BS. Not make blanket statements or dismiss others because they do not agree with you or based on some pretension of gear = skill. Prove Me Wrong Please. With numbers and formulas and logic that can be recreated with similar results for anyone.

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

Gave you formulas repeatedly

Plug in numbers

do basic algebra

learn to read above a 3rd grade level

Make that learn to read on a 2nd grade level I can tell you just scan posts at best

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

Thanks.

@Joshcja, you forgot to include debuffs/amps/skill effects and just about anything relevant to end game pvp (also used best case estimate for proc rate on purify.. it is generally assumed to be 5-8%).. so your supposed calculations are about as useful in this pvp discussion as a screen door is for a submarine. Humor me though, what class/build/skills did you use for your calculations, if I have some spare time I wouldn't mind double checking your work.. I'm getting this funny feeling that you haven't done any math at all.. and just jumped to what you wanted the conclusions to be and assumed nobody would call your bluff.

Why I left out debuffs

I used 8% purify 25% GoF 10% SBH.

Builds were full+12 and full +10 JOSD r999 with the appropriate ornies helm cape etc. Standard stuff really. Pretty much all builds were demon sans sin.

I actually did the bulk of my purify testing drunk, using old R9 stats and the R8R purify wep stats when I saw that **** a long time ago. Most of the stuff up is just a modified version I tacked together for R999. I dont care abotu a swing in accuracy too much because I didnt feel like modifying the % scale of min/max damage geni/apoc timers and skill damage adds (because that would take a complete revamp of optimal skill cycles) Seriously 8/100 what kind of way is that to work %?

In short its close enough for now because I just dont care as much as I used to (Again and for the last time anything near or over a 50% escape chance fully buffed is OP enough to break pvp). My main purpose here is to get ya'll actually debating based on numbers and such.

Seriously, 30+ pages of running on cals with a +/- error rate of 20-30% holding a metaphorical colt .45 in my mouth and just screaming "pull the damn trigger" and you finally figure it out? Was I not bloody subtle enough? There's a difference in a bluff and open provocation.

I honestly could not care less if I'm right or wrong my main irritation is not with the purify proc. I hate the proc but by the time I gear up for pvp again we'll have whole new gear tiers so to hell with it. But lets try to actually argue things based on things that are quantifiable so that while we can all hate each other and fight tooth and nail we can at least have 1 kind of common bloody ground.

TL;DR most of your "missunderstanding" or what the hell ever is from not actually reading all the way through. The numbers are real but the numbers are also old, I just gave em a quick swipe of r999 and said **** it because lets face it, nobody was going to actually care enough to read any opinion but their own until provoked. Please do actually use the grey matter to argue instead of your e-peen.

Tl;DR on the whole thread: A pair of old tacked together with gum and spit formulas that I have openly admitted to inaccuracy on multiple times are the most reasonable attempt at actually answering the threads topic in an objective manner.

Now take the damn olive branch and run with it.

AlphaOmegaX - Dreamweaver

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

Ok lets try reading the whole post this time







Why I left out debuffs

I used 8% purify 25% GoF 10% SBH.

Builds were full+12 and full +10 JOSD r999 with the appropriate ornies helm cape etc. Standard stuff really. Pretty much all builds were demon sans sin.

I actually did the bulk of my purify testing drunk, using old R9 stats and the R8R purify wep stats when I saw that **** a long time ago. Most of the stuff up is just a modified version I tacked together for R999. I dont care abotu a swing in accuracy too much because I didnt feel like modifying the % scale of min/max damage geni/apoc timers and skill damage adds (because that would take a complete revamp of optimal skill cycles) Seriously 8/100 what kind of way is that to work %?

In short its close enough for now because I just dont care as much as I used to (Again and for the last time anything near or over a 50% escape chance fully buffed is OP enough to break pvp). My main purpose here is to get ya'll actually debating based on numbers and such.

Seriously, 30+ pages of running on cals with a +/- error rate of 20-30% holding a metaphorical colt .45 in my mouth and just screaming "pull the damn trigger" and you finally figure it out? Was I not bloody subtle enough? There's a difference in a bluff and open provocation.

I honestly could not care less if I'm right or wrong my main irritation is not with the purify proc. I hate the proc but by the time I gear up for pvp again we'll have whole new gear tiers so to hell with it. But lets try to actually argue things based on things that are quantifiable so that while we can all hate each other and fight tooth and nail we can at least have 1 kind of common bloody ground.

TL;DR most of your "missunderstanding" or what the hell ever is from not actually reading all the way through. The numbers are real but the numbers are also old, I just gave em a quick swipe of r999 and said **** it because lets face it, nobody was going to actually care enough to read any opinion but their own until provoked. Please do actually use the grey matter to argue instead of your e-peen.

Tl;DR on the whole thread: A pair of old tacked together with gum and spit formulas that I have openly admitted to inaccuracy on multiple times are the most reasonable attempt at actually answering the threads topic in an objective manner.

Now take the damn olive branch and run with it.

LOL trying to bluff with a 2 pair hand b:laugh

You have been called. Royal Flush b:dirty

No data of any kind. I was anticipating pages of maths data tbh that would back up your claims. You were drunk when you did the test, which calls into question the little data you have provided. Epic Fail.

You admit you hate the proc. Not because of an imbalance, but because you know your undergeared. And as such cant compete. Against a full end game toon. This again tells me that the inbalance you have asserted is unfair. Actually isnt. It is infact the norm.

Joshcja - Sanctuary

AlphaOmegaX - Dreamweaver wrote: »

LOL trying to bluff with a 2 pair hand b:laugh

You have been called. Royal Flush b:dirty

As you call from the next room after cutting out squares of cardboard and writing "royal flush" on them they players at the table look at you strangely but not unkindly and hand you a penny

No data of any kind. I was anticipating pages of maths data tbh that would back up your claims. You were drunk when you did the test, which calls into question the little data you have provided. Epic Fail.

I'm an alcoholic I'm drunk whenever I'm not working or driving. Why should I bother doing pages and pages o math that nobody will read or discuss? I'll stay sober when I get on tonight long enough to work things out if people actually show signs of giving a damn.

You admit you hate the proc. Not because of an imbalance, but because you know your undergeared. And as such cant compete. Against a full end game toon. This again tells me that the inbalance you have asserted is unfair. Actually isnt. It is infact the norm.

Its had to call on a pair when none of you are even at the table.

There was actually quite a bit of data on how to create a scenario based off of the raw numbers and proc rates the main complaint has been an "apples to oranges" arguement on how to possibly compare a defensive proc to the old style offensive procs or how to gauge the impact of the proc in a 1v1 objectively. I give you apploranges now make applorangeaid. Lets face it no matter what numbers I give ya'll will not accept them based on a pre existing bias. Hell its taken ya'll how many pages just to actually read the original post?

Um, I hate the proc cause it makes the game less interactive overall (its a proc that punishes you for interacting with another player in pvp at all) and I'd rather not play "cow clicker". Its imba too and we can debate how imba and in what situations all you like but this IS pwi and something is always imba

"My gear is **** so everything I cant have is imba" <- I hate people who talk like this. Gear up or get out. The only balance i give a damn about is full endgame 1v1. My only negative comment on endgame gear is that the player pool with access to it is limited and that creates a pretty shallow metagame.

Nymphali - Dreamweaver

I dont think they should kill stun locks once you cant AoE stun lock, this means while you stunlock 1 person, there are probably 50 other stunning and killing you.

Raphxelion - Raging Tide

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

What is with people and pretentious "close this thread" comments?

Ya'll are kinda not mods and for very obvious reasons.

So contribute or kindly shove off

contribute to what:? pwi will never take out purify proc lol

Azura - Lost City

To Joshcja :

Stop talking and start to show numbers or gtfo.

Decus - Dreamweaver

BungaSakura - Raging Tide wrote: »

since NW launch, people can do pvp every weekend from lower to end game gear. If purify are really that OP when they have end game gear. it will show us that they have high K/D ratio and highest kill. But the fact is not.

How would a defensive proc give casters high kills? As Q said, can casters get away without Pruify? Yep, they have for a long time.

BungaSakura - Raging Tide

Decus - Dreamweaver wrote: »

How would a defensive proc give casters high kills? As Q said, can casters get away without Pruify? Yep, they have for a long time.

PVP and K/D ratio ranking show us that puri is not OP. yet, u guys are complaint all the time. AS im stating before, i dont mind puri being remove, as long purge and gof also gone.

Decus - Dreamweaver

BungaSakura - Raging Tide wrote: »

PVP and K/D ratio ranking show us that puri is not OP. yet, u guys are complaint all the time. AS im stating before, i dont mind puri being remove, as long purge and gof also gone.

See:

Decus - Dreamweaver wrote: »

How would a defensive proc give casters high kills? As Q said, can casters get away without Pruify?

The issue never was that the proc made casters killing machines. It was that it subverts the mechanics of NW.

Slivaf - Dreamweaver

I know this may seem like a silly analogy, but really just bare with me if you can/dare.

I used to play a card game, one that I wouldn't be too surprised if a few of you recognize or even.. belittle me for playing it/using it as an analogy.

Anyways in this game they have a ban list, and on, and off that list goes my favorite card, Black Luster Solider-Envoy of the Beginning. (I do indeed no longer play it, however its not due to the fact that this card is back and forth onto/off of the ban list) Still they banned it from advanced tournament play for good reasons. It is a lot like the purify proc, it can be absolutely a nightmare to counter it in the time frame that it is out on the playing field. Bare with me while I explain what it does. 1: Target 1 monster on the field; banish that target face-up. This card cannot attack the turn you activate this effect. 2: During the Damage Step, if this attacking card destroys an opponent's monster by battle: It can make a second attack in a row. Both effects absolutely have their weaknesses, but when you factor in it's attack power, this card can be quite overwhelming to MANY people, before they can counter it, and there are PLENTY of ways to counter it. (it IS a game changer, just like the purify proc. (it takes a lot of the skill out of the game, they seen it, and I think that is why it is often on, and off the ban list. EDIT: It just like the purify proc... alone isn't all that terrifying, it still can be at times, but still when you factor in everything else, its atk level, cards that allow it to stay/get back on the field... it can be quite difficult to counter, not completely unlike the purify proc.

The reason I bring this all up, and compare it to the purify proc is this: People have undoubtedly listed ways to counter it, but it like that card, can be ridiculously difficult to counter in the time frame that we melees have, especially when you factor in gear differences/the remove of amps/the anti stun/speed buff that it has now. It takes a way a lot of the 'skill' factors in game, and now it is all about who put out more than the other. (before this proc became main stream) we could argue that perhaps this game wasn't as bad of a pay to win game as others, as skill could still triumph luck/a VERY SLIGHT gear difference. Now it is hard to argue one bit that this game has become nothing BUT a pay to win game.(I do realize the gear differences even without the purify proc is still overwhelming to lower grades of gear, but still, with a little bit of skill, and luck a melee could lock down a caster, prevent them from attacking, and potentially kill the caster, but sadly as it is now... the purify proc is highly based off of luck/gear... and it has a greater chance to activate the more people you throw in, and can absolutely be extremely difficult to counter, in the small time frame between its activation and the 'opponent' noticing and 'sleeping' you all, during which you all can still attack.

EDIT2; In short just because something has a weakness it doesn't mean that the 'subject' does NOT create an imbalance in certain areas of the "game."

I still feel the best solution to this is for this proc... to only REMOVE the amps/stun at the time it activates (no cooldown), that's it nothing else added on to it. It would definitely allow for a lot of the 'skill' factors to come back into play.

*waits for rebuttal/snide remarks for bringing up the card game scenario into this discussion.*

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

Slivaf - Dreamweaver wrote: »

I know this may seem like a silly analogy, but really just bare with me if you can/dare.

I used to play a card game, one that I wouldn't be too surprised if a few of you recognize or even.. belittle me for playing it/using it as an analogy.

Anyways in this game they have a ban list, and on, and off that list goes my favorite card, Black Luster Solider-Envoy of the Beginning. (I do indeed no longer play it, however its not due to the fact that this card is back and forth onto/off of the ban list) Still they banned it from advanced tournament play for good reasons. It is a lot like the purify proc, it can be absolutely a nightmare to counter it in the time frame that it is out on the playing field. Bare with me while I explain what it does. 1: Target 1 monster on the field; banish that target face-up. This card cannot attack the turn you activate this effect. 2: During the Damage Step, if this attacking card destroys an opponent's monster by battle: It can make a second attack in a row. Both effects absolutely have their weaknesses, but when you factor in it's attack power, this card can be quite overwhelming to MANY people, before they can counter it, and there are PLENTY of ways to counter it. (it IS a game changer, just like the purify proc. (it takes a lot of the skill out of the game, they seen it, and I think that is why it is often on, and off the ban list.

The reason I bring this all up, and compare it to the purify proc is this: People have undoubtedly listed ways to counter it, but it like that card, can be ridiculously difficult to counter in the time frame that we melees have, especially when you factor in gear differences/the remove of amps/the anti stun/speed buff that it has now. It takes a way a lot of the 'skill' factors in game, and now it is all about who put out more than the other. (before this proc became main stream) we could argue that perhaps this game wasn't as bad of a pay to win game as others, as skill could still triumph luck/a gear difference. Now it is hard to argue one bit that this game has become nothing BUT a pay to win game.(I do realize the gear differences even without the purify proc is still overwhelming to lower grades of gear, but still, with a little bit of skill, and luck melee could lock down a caster, prevent them from attacking, and potentially kill the caster, as it is now... the purify proc is highly based off of luck... which has a greater chance to activate the more people you throw in.

I still feel the best solution to this is to only REMOVE the amps/stun at the time it activates (no cooldown), that's it nothing else added on to it. It would definitely allow for a lot of the 'skill' factors to come back into play.

*waits for rebuttal/snide remarks for bringing up the card game scenario into this discussion.*

You should buy my thousands of cards.

HrunsPanda - Archosaur

does it also remove caps if its just part of the post or only if its the whole post ?
WE HAD IT COMING !!!!!

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

HrunsPanda - Archosaur wrote: »

does it also remove caps if its just part of the post or only if its the whole post ?
WE HAD IT COMING !!!!!

It only does it if the whole message is caps.

So anyone gonna plug in those numbers or provide a different formula and plug in those? I'm curious and wanna see this settled once and for all. b:chuckle

anwynd

Slivaf - Dreamweaver wrote: »

I know this may seem like a silly analogy, but really just bare with me if you can/dare.

I used to play a card game, one that I wouldn't be too surprised if a few of you recognize or even.. belittle me for playing it/using it as an analogy.

Anyways in this game they have a ban list, and on, and off that list goes my favorite card, Black Luster Solider-Envoy of the Beginning. (I do indeed no longer play it, however its not due to the fact that this card is back and forth onto/off of the ban list) Still they banned it from advanced tournament play for good reasons. It is a lot like the purify proc, it can be absolutely a nightmare to counter it in the time frame that it is out on the playing field. Bare with me while I explain what it does. 1: Target 1 monster on the field; banish that target face-up. This card cannot attack the turn you activate this effect. 2: During the Damage Step, if this attacking card destroys an opponent's monster by battle: It can make a second attack in a row. Both effects absolutely have their weaknesses, but when you factor in it's attack power, this card can be quite overwhelming to MANY people, before they can counter it, and there are PLENTY of ways to counter it. (it IS a game changer, just like the purify proc. (it takes a lot of the skill out of the game, they seen it, and I think that is why it is often on, and off the ban list. EDIT: It just like the purify proc... alone isn't all that terrifying, it still can be at times, but still when you factor in everything else, its atk level, cards that allow it to stay/get back on the field... it can be quite difficult to counter, not completely unlike the purify proc.

The reason I bring this all up, and compare it to the purify proc is this: People have undoubtedly listed ways to counter it, but it like that card, can be ridiculously difficult to counter in the time frame that we melees have, especially when you factor in gear differences/the remove of amps/the anti stun/speed buff that it has now. It takes a way a lot of the 'skill' factors in game, and now it is all about who put out more than the other. (before this proc became main stream) we could argue that perhaps this game wasn't as bad of a pay to win game as others, as skill could still triumph luck/a gear difference. Now it is hard to argue one bit that this game has become nothing BUT a pay to win game.(I do realize the gear differences even without the purify proc is still overwhelming to lower grades of gear, but still, with a little bit of skill, and luck a melee could lock down a caster, prevent them from attacking, and potentially kill the caster, but sadly as it is now... the purify proc is highly based off of luck/gear... and it has a greater chance to activate the more people you throw in, and can absolutely be extremely difficult to counter, in the small time frame between its activation and the 'opponent' noticing and 'sleeping' you all, during which you all can still attack.

I still feel the best solution to this is for this proc... to only REMOVE the amps/stun at the time it activates (no cooldown), that's it nothing else added on to it. It would definitely allow for a lot of the 'skill' factors to come back into play.

*waits for rebuttal/snide remarks for bringing up the card game scenario into this discussion.*

*happy sigh* good ol yugioh that was one hell of a game i still collect the cards i have over 100k lol have about 12 copies of that card give or take a few and it definately was hard to counter but fun to use lmao *another happy sigh* think im gonna go and take out my book card protectors and look through them for old times sakeb:pleased

Adroit - Lost City

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

So anyone gonna plug in those numbers or provide a different formula and plug in those? I'm curious and wanna see this settled once and for all. b:chuckle

I'm not planning on it, I really don't think there is a way to objectively answer whether purify is "OP" or not.. there are just far too many variables involved to account for (not to mention we haven't even agreed on a definition for balance). So being that Joshcja has conceded that the numbers he came up with were fraudulent (not to mention useless even if he did the math).. neither side of the argument has any objective argument for or against purify. Unfortunately, all we have to go by is anecdotal evidence.. which is why this thread keeps going in circles. That said, when we are talking about end game scenarios and there isn't a single end game player agreeing with your assumptions (and several disagreeing), I do think it's a little silly for you to continue to use them.

HrunsPanda - Archosaur

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

which is why this thread keeps going in circles.

YES WE HAD IT COMING! b:laugh

sorry, the continued presence of this thread is slowly eating away at my sanity.

Slivaf - Dreamweaver

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

I'm not planning on it, I really don't think there is a way to objectively answer whether purify is "OP" or not.. there are just far too many variables involved to account for (not to mention we haven't even agreed on a definition for balance). So being that Joshcja has conceded that the numbers he came up with were fraudulent (not to mention useless even if he did the math).. neither side of the argument has any objective argument for or against purify. Unfortunately, all we have to go by is anecdotal evidence.. which is why this thread keeps going in circles. That said, when we are talking about end game scenarios and there isn't a single end game player agreeing with your assumptions (and several disagreeing), I do think it's a little silly for you to continue to use them.

I agree on one thing, we are all indeed at an impasse, neither side is wavering in their initial belief about whether or not this proc needs a nerf or not.

We all are definitely going in circles and circles, even with the few 'new' analogies that have come along, still neither side has relented on their first stance. (As that old saying goes you got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything.

If this proc remains as is, then let me be the first to congratulate you casters/specifically adroit for successfully 'swaying' the minds of the one's who actually have the power to 'change' this proc.

It is definitely a waiting game now.

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

I'm not planning on it, I really don't think there is a way to objectively answer whether purify is "OP" or not.. there are just far too many variables involved to account for (not to mention we haven't even agreed on a definition for balance). So being that Joshcja has conceded that the numbers he came up with were fraudulent (not to mention useless even if he did the math).. neither side of the argument has any objective argument for or against purify. Unfortunately, all we have to go by is anecdotal evidence.. which is why this thread keeps going in circles. That said, when we are talking about end game scenarios and there isn't a single end game player agreeing with your assumptions (and several disagreeing), I do think it's a little silly for you to continue to use them.

Note that you say end game, not competent. There are quite a few people who agree with my opinion, even if they aren't full end game their opinions should still be voiced as they offer competent arguments. You have yet to actually be able to do that, anyone on your side has yet to actually do that. Just because end game people agree with you doesn't make you or them right, because as I already stated being end game does not automatically grant you with intelligence and competency.

The people in agreement with me have actually put up very valid arguments. What's silly is you think only end game people can have valid opinions, especially when those "end game" people have yet to pose an actual argument in favor of Purify Spell that makes any logical sense.

What I want, what my whole side wants, is an argument from you or any other end game mage or even a non end game mage that explains why Purify Spell is balanced and needed. When you can do that, when you can prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that it's balanced I'll happily drop this whole thing. However, you have not managed to do that. I don't think you'll ever manage to do that. All you do is offer anecdotal evidence, you have offered nothing concrete whereas people arguing against Purify Spell have managed to offer logical arguments and statements against the weapon proc, along with good solutions to balance it out.

Don't give the same generic **** you've been spouting. Don't say people that aren't end game don't matter. Don't say only you and other end game people are competent. Stop being such an arrogant twit and give us an actual argument based on game mechanics and gameplay that suggests Purify Spell is needed. Do that, or get out.

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

I'm not planning on it, I really don't think there is a way to objectively answer whether purify is "OP" or not.. there are just far too many variables involved to account for (not to mention we haven't even agreed on a definition for balance). So being that Joshcja has conceded that the numbers he came up with were fraudulent (not to mention useless even if he did the math).. neither side of the argument has any objective argument for or against purify. Unfortunately, all we have to go by is anecdotal evidence.. which is why this thread keeps going in circles. That said, when we are talking about end game scenarios and there isn't a single end game player agreeing with your assumptions (and several disagreeing), I do think it's a little silly for you to continue to use them.

Fraudulent no. Inaccurate? yes up to a variance of 20-30%. To clarify a 20-30% variance on a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio is basically nothing

You cant say "well theres too many variables" mainly because many variables are extraneous.

purify vs purify can be ignored

High cost class debuffs and geni debuffs can be ignored

skill added damage can be ignored or included as a 1k constant add before reductions.

Heres a quicky (and the only one of these I'll be doing in thread unless at least one "pro" purify player also picks it up) its on the old "bad" formula but oh well

Useing your build vs a near absolute max attack r9 bm

http://pwcalc.com/6ec2f777b728f19c wiz
http://pwcalc.com/91eff75816f9bd5f bm (Shards are screwy I know but it dun matter in this case)

Self buffed: 22206+1000 average damage at 145 (if max stat) attack level vs 82% phys def and 111 def levels

(23206/4)(1.34)(.18)= 1400 base DPH.

HP = 16905 so including charm tick (leaving out auto pot, extra damage absorbed before charm tick, and def charms here so yes this is skewed in pro purifys favor) thats a total HP pool of 25358

25358/1400 = 18x base damage to kill. Or 25358/(1400)(1.3)(1.36)= 10 hits to kill when modified by crit and zerk chances

So obviously you cant stand on the bm's face forever with only self buff and no damage shields. However on the other hand the bm needs 4 extra crits/zerks over the average 5 hit stun at a chance of 12% to kill you. Purify on the other hand gains 5 chances to proc. at 5% proc rate thats just over a 21% proc rate. Vs 8% purify? lololol

So yes there is a roughly 2:1 chance of purify saving you vs a crit zerk spree.

Fully buffed you have 29k+1k (MAX buffed attack not average), vs 86% def

1.4k base damage again

31824/(1400)(1.3)(1.36)= 13 hits to kill or 23x base damage, At this point you can pretty much face sit any stunlock as long as reckless rush and HF are cooling down or the bm in question is lacking spark (though not too comfortably) and just play the RNG game via a purify escape with a finger over badge/whatever your panic button is.

I would define the fully buffed as OP as **** and the self buffed as borderline OP a roughly 20% chance to get out of dodge at no cost is a lot stronger than you make it out to be.

Adding debuffs, using any additional healing, using geni, or using apoc in the above only further increases the potency of purify.

I'm for the complete removal of purify however I can understand the need for a greater amount and more importantly variety of beastial rage/soulburn/blinding blaze style effects. The "tank" bm aps setup at this cap http://pwcalc.com/1ee820060a60c598 would do just over 3k dps vs your current build resulting in a 1 drake base kill 100% of the time self buffed. So yes, absolutely some kind of check to dps builds needs to be maintained. However purify spell is just way too damn strong and actively punishes player interaction in pvp, it slows down matchups and generally lowers the overall pace of play helping make even arcane matchups into stall wars at times. Rather than a solution to aps players or a "needed" couchbullshiiitcough survivability boost it feels more like a "buy this and win kids!" gimmick.

Darren_Kris - Morai

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

..... Just because end game people agree with you doesn't make you or them right, because as I already stated being end game does not automatically grant you with intelligence and competency.

The people in agreement with me have actually put up very valid arguments. What's silly is you think only end game people can have valid opinions, especially when those "end game" people have yet to pose an actual argument in favor of Purify Spell that makes any logical sense.

What I want, what my whole side wants, is an argument from you or any other end game mage or even a non end game mage that explains why Purify Spell is balanced and needed. When you can do that, when you can prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that it's balanced I'll happily drop this whole thing. However, you have not managed to do that. I don't think you'll ever manage to do that. All you do is offer anecdotal evidence, you have offered nothing concrete whereas people arguing against Purify Spell have managed to offer logical arguments and statements against the weapon proc, along with good solutions to balance it out.

Don't give the same generic **** you've been spouting. Don't say people that aren't end game don't matter. Don't say only you and other end game people are competent. Stop being such an arrogant twit and give us an actual argument based on game mechanics and gameplay that suggests Purify Spell is needed. Do that, or get out.

the lack of endgame people saying PS is OP is very telling and suggests most of the assumptions/arguments used don't apply in endgame scenario. surely even 1 of them shud have spoken against it, they havent which implies balance.

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

Fraudulent no. Inaccurate? yes up to a variance of 20-30%. To clarify a 20-30% variance on a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio is basically nothing

You cant say "well theres too many variables" mainly because many variables are extraneous.

purify vs purify can be ignored

High cost class debuffs and geni debuffs can be ignored

skill added damage can be ignored or included as a 1k constant add before reductions.

Heres a quicky (and the only one of these I'll be doing in thread unless at least one "pro" purify player also picks it up) its on the old "bad" formula but oh well

Useing your build vs a near absolute max attack r9 bm

http://pwcalc.com/6ec2f777b728f19c wiz
http://pwcalc.com/91eff75816f9bd5f bm (Shards are screwy I know but it dun matter in this case)

Self buffed: 22206+1000 average damage at 145 (if max stat) attack level vs 82% phys def and 111 def levels

(23206/4)(1.34)(.18)= 1400 base DPH.

HP = 16905 so including charm tick (leaving out auto pot, extra damage absorbed before charm tick, and def charms here so yes this is skewed in pro purifys favor) thats a total HP pool of 25358

25358/1400 = 18x base damage to kill. Or 25358/(1400)(1.3)(1.36)= 10 hits to kill when modified by crit and zerk chances

So obviously you cant stand on the bm's face forever with only self buff and no damage shields. However on the other hand the bm needs 4 extra crits/zerks over the average 5 hit stun at a chance of 12% to kill you. Purify on the other hand gains 5 chances to proc. at 5% proc rate thats just over a 21% proc rate. Vs 8% purify? lololol

So yes there is a roughly 2:1 chance of purify saving you vs a crit zerk spree.

Fully buffed you have 29k+1k (MAX buffed attack not average), vs 86% def

1.4k base damage again

31824/(1400)(1.3)(1.36)= 13 hits to kill or 23x base damage, At this point you can pretty much face sit any stunlock as long as reckless rush and HF are cooling down or the bm in question is lacking spark (though not too comfortably) and just play the RNG game via a purify escape with a finger over badge/whatever your panic button is.

I would define the fully buffed as OP as **** and the self buffed as borderline OP a roughly 20% chance to get out of dodge at no cost is a lot stronger than you make it out to be.

Adding debuffs, using any additional healing, using geni, or using apoc in the above only further increases the potency of purify.

you shouldn't ignore debuffs as u cant kill w/o them. also that bm has 30atk lvl and 67def lvl less than the wiz. thats a significant disadvantage

Azura - Lost City

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

http://pwcalc.com/6ec2f777b728f19c wiz
http://pwcalc.com/91eff75816f9bd5f bm (Shards are screwy I know but it dun matter in this case) (poor little bm with horrible shards that has to go against a wizard with the best shards, is that how we are supposed to feel.)
[/COLOR]

That comparison is so bad. First, that wizard has more defense level than the attack levels of the bm. Somehow, the wizard has more attack levels than the bm, I don't get how you got that. They should have the same amount of attack levels, since they are r9-3. Third, you sharded the wizard with josd (a good shard) and the bm has iceborne (a shard no sane bm would ever use even if he could). Why didn't you put josd too? Or maybe a mix of sapphire gems for maximum survivability against magic.

The attack/defense levels of these 2 characters are so different and yet you say that doesn't matter. Attack and defense levels is one of the most important variables to determine the total damage, and yet you say it doesn't matter. Good work Mr. Mathematician.

I wonder now, if the problem is just against wizards, or all mages? Why didn't you make a build of a cleric, mystic, veno, or psy? Of all the mage classes, you had to choose the one with highest damage per hit and the most offensive.

Biased people is biased...

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Darren_Kris - Morai wrote: »

the lack of endgame people saying PS is OP is very telling and suggests most of the assumptions/arguments used don't apply in endgame scenario. surely even 1 of them shud have spoken against it, they havent which implies balance.

you shouldn't ignore debuffs as u cant kill w/o them. also that bm has 30atk lvl and 67def lvl less than the wiz. thats a significant disadvantage

BM's have no debuff that cannot be countered by geni or class skill and it will always cost them more to use the debuff than to counter it. Add in purifys passive ability to remove the debuffs and the proc just looks silly.

Bm isnt running blessing, and I didnt add +25 attack levels onto axes but I just did this super awesome thing called basic addition and bam, the bm's attack levels are correct in the post math. The bm's def/def levels can be safely ignored for the purpose of this particular post.

For the record posts like this are why I really do not want to run full class comparisons in thread.

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Azura - Lost City wrote: »

That comparison is so bad. First, that wizard has more defense level than the attack levels of the bm. Somehow, the wizard has more attack levels than the bm, I don't get how you got that. They should have the same amount of attack levels, since they are r9-3. Third, you sharded the wizard with josd (a good shard) and the bm has iceborne (a shard no sane bm would ever use even if he could). Why didn't you put josd too? Or maybe a mix of sapphire gems for maximum survivability against magic.

The attack/defense levels of these 2 characters are so different and yet you say that doesn't matter. Attack and defense levels is one of the most important variables to determine the total damage, and yet you say it doesn't matter. Good work Mr. Mathematician.

I wonder now, if the problem is just against wizards, or all mages? Why didn't you make a build of a cleric, mystic, veno, or psy? Of all the mage classes, you had to choose the one with highest damage per hit and the most offensive.

Biased people is biased...

I love how "endgame pro's" have the reading comprehension level of an ADHD dyslexic Nigerian war orphan with down syndrome.

in the actual numbers used bm has 145 attack levels derpface

The bm in post is the axe form of the fist set on bottom, its an insanely 1v1 focused build thats very geni and playstyle centric. I get lazy on builds and dont custom tailor attack level blessings and r999 weps. its easier for me to just add 55 to 90

I chose wiz because theres a convenient link in adriots sig and copy pasting the real stats on r999 gear from database into pw calc is a pain. Plus veno/wiz/mystic all share similar phys def, psy's/clerics self buffs that WILL be up when a bm comes into range if they have half a brain that make bm damage flat out laughable. I dint use any "unique" mage skills in the actual comparison so class didnt particularly matter tbh.

Short version: BM def didnt matter in the comparison, wizzie def isnt unique to the class, and 55+90 is not exactly rocket science

Zanryu - Dreamweaver

Darren_Kris - Morai wrote: »

the lack of endgame people saying PS is OP is very telling and suggests most of the assumptions/arguments used don't apply in endgame scenario. surely even 1 of them shud have spoken against it, they havent which implies balance.

Uh... no. Those speaking out against it are talking about it at an end game level, even some casters can see how broken it is. When you get down to it, the intelligent people discussing it and not just random trolls, a lot of people believe it to be broken. THAT'S what's telling, not a bunch of bumbling idiots that can't form a single coherent sentence and one arrogant moron whose own logic can be used against him.

There's a lot of people speaking out against the proc. By your own logic, since we talk about it at an end game standpoint and not at a midgame one the proc is broken simply because of everyone speaking out against it. Thanks bro.

Esnemyl - Dreamweaver

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

I love how "endgame pro's" have the reading comprehension level of an ADHD dyslexic Nigerian war orphan with down syndrome.

ia aerm dyrsdlecic enrd i fnd thit offincive
b:avoid

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Esnemyl - Dreamweaver wrote: »

ia aerm dyrsdlecic enrd i fnd thit offincive
b:avoid

So am I tbh, thus the "Nigerian war orphan with down syndrome" addition

Now keep talking sexy to me

Darren_Kris - Morai

Zanryu - Dreamweaver wrote: »

Uh... no. Those speaking out against it are talking about it at an end game level, even some casters can see how broken it is. When you get down to it, the intelligent people discussing it and not just random trolls, a lot of people believe it to be broken. THAT'S what's telling, not a bunch of bumbling idiots that can't form a single coherent sentence and one arrogant moron whose own logic can be used against him.

There's a lot of people speaking out against the proc. By your own logic, since we talk about it at an end game standpoint and not at a midgame one the proc is broken simply because of everyone speaking out against it. Thanks bro.

the discussions given by the ''intelligent'' ppl all involve lesser geared ppl or things like ''you can genie/apo out of stun bla blah'', debuffs dont matter, arcanes zoom around at warp speed, more enemies help the caster etc.
you wonder why arcanes dont argue. can you share those casters who see PS is ''broken''?

Esnemyl - Dreamweaver

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

So am I tbh, thus the "Nigerian war orphan with down syndrome" addition

Now keep talking sexy to me

Its too early in the morning here XD I just felt like some lols. I apologize for the mild hijack f:brick

Adroit - Lost City

@Zanryu - There is no way to prove that purify is balanced (or not-balanced), so asking for that is pretty silly. You should also note that you haven't given any convincing arguments, I've refuted most if not all of them already.. and repeating the same garbage over and over again doesn't help your case. In regards to end game people talking about end game stuff.. imagine me trying to tell you about the house you live in, even if someone took a few pictures for me to look at beforehand.. you are probably going to know more about your house than I would. That is expected, and normal. Now if we are talking about your house for some reason and I get something wrong (maybe I think there is a window right behind your computer screen.. who knows) and you correct me, it would be reasonable for me to accept the correction, not insist I know more about your house than you do. What you are doing here is saying something obviously incorrect and use it as a premise for an argument.. I correct you and you simply ignore it and continue spouting your nonsense. You're going to have a really tough time convincing me that you are more experienced or knowledgeable about end game pvp than I am.. especially after watching your videos.

@Joshcja - Still pulling numbers out of thin-air I see (20-30% variance and random ratios lol). I stopped taking the post seriously after you stated what you neglected (lol @ neglecting everything that allows you to kill an opponent). I'd wager if you made an end game build of a bm (you know.. emperor tome, nw cape, nw r9 ring, josds, etc) and did the same calculations in reverse where the wiz is attacking the bm.. but neglected all debuffs, used base magic attack as if that was skill damage, even assuming the bm never tried to use any CC etc.. you would find that the wiizard would have a 0% chance at killing the bm with every hit critting. How could you even think these numbers had any merit whatsoever?

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Darren_Kris - Morai wrote: »

the discussions given by the ''intelligent'' ppl all involve lesser geared ppl or things like ''you can genie/apo out of stun bla blah'', debuffs dont matter, arcanes zoom around at warp speed, more enemies help the caster etc.
you wonder why arcanes dont argue. can you share those casters who see PS is ''broken''?

Last I checked you can geni/apo out of stun and 2 sparks for HF is a lot more costly than badge.

Is it possible that you honestly do not understand basic game mechanics like "Mele range"