IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Proposal For New Berserk & Whirlwind
Hugen
post Feb 6 2007, 07:25 PM
Post #21


Enchanted
***

Group: Nobles
Posts: 116
Joined: 22-December 06
Member No.: 1,467



I did a "Fighter" spreadsheet like the Rogue spreadsheet.

It is available for download, perusal, and playing with here:

http://media5.filewind.com/g.php?filepath=4680

Your last proposal (C in the workbook) is well balanced in damage, but it does have the standard problem (or benefit, depending on your perspective -- see above) of no mana use.

My use 33% of mana per zerk (A in workbook) is probably a little to rigoruous in its requirements for a Poet.

I still think your .75+1 proposal (B in workbook) might be a bit too lenient in its need for support.


What's clear is that the Current situation is really out of whack, and there has to be a better game design solution than just telling all of the Warriors who feel like they are underperforming to make Rogues.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tynan
post Feb 6 2007, 08:28 PM
Post #22


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



QUOTE
Also, for the experience spent, whirlwind is a more exp-effective spell, dealing 1.675 damage to 0 ac times the vitality. For a rogue to double effectively, he has to balance his vitality as well as mana, but for every point he puts into mana, that's less vita he has to use defensively and for taking hits.


Well, first of all, Whirlwind is 1.575 (I assume you just made a typo, just pointing that out), and yes, it is the most powerful of the four basic attacks (Lethal Strike, Desperate Attack, Whirlwind, Berserk) in typical builds. And true, the more Vitality one has the better one can take hits. I would not consider a rogue needing to balance his Vitality with a bit of Mana to be a bad thing, though, nor does it harm their Vitality that badly. As we have shown, when a warrior is 1M/150K (and most warriors will have more Mana), a rogue running 3:1 will have 860K Vitality. That is only 14% less Vitality.

QUOTE
10% and 50% remainders mean nothing. Do enough in a carnage and earn yourself a poet, or learn to heal out. It's simple. Half the tops in this game can be killed asv/sc now, your remainder isn't going to matter. Living or dying will always be based off of skill, not pure numbers. Unless you Kwi whirlwind in a Bloodlust and get ambushed after (sorry Chronic <3)


I do agree that the remainder is not a large deal. I have never stressed its importance, as yes, in PK, most kills (the important ones, at least) are made from 100% Vitality on a dis/sc + some attack(s), not after someone has attacked. Regardless, this is of some minor concern, all the same.

QUOTE
Anyway, formulas are fine as they are, we don't need mana incorporated into our attacks. I'd trade my Karak for Kae any day, even if it left me with 5%. Rogues have to balance stats, warriors have the liberty of going all vita and doing maximum damage with their attacks and being able to tank more. It's how they were created and meant to be; rogues have to balance vita and mana and have less ac.


I agree that we do not need Mana incorporated, but I disagree that the attacks are fine. Berserk is certainly not fine in any way right now. If asked, we can produce tons of evidence that shows how horribly weak it is (a full Berserk loses to an empty DA in standard builds - big problem). Whirlwind paired with Rage is too risky to cycle on aethers until one has massive statistics, whereas a rogue can always cycle without immediate fear of death. So, in that respect, warriors are not tanks - we die the most and are the most fragile, mostly due to Rage, partially due to Whirlwind.

Also, do rogues really need to balance stats? I think that is a partial myth, as a rogue who goes 9:1 could do quite fine, when one analyzes the numbers. Since Desperate Attack is so efficient at converting Vitality into damage, and it comprises 2/3 of the cycle, weakening Lethal Strike is acceptable.

Mana is one way some of this can be fixed, but it is not the only way by any means. I think my last solution is decent and uses no Mana, though I fully admit it only solves the damage issue at decently high stats and little else.

Finally, how tanky are warriors? Well, in a PA hunt, warrior have anywhere from about a -4 AC advantage to a +46 disadvantage (R6). In PK, a warrior holds about a -6 AC advantage. I am not very impressed at all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tynan
post Feb 6 2007, 09:12 PM
Post #23


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



QUOTE
Your last proposal (C in the workbook) is well balanced in damage, but it does have the standard problem (or benefit, depending on your perspective -- see above) of no mana use.

My use 33% of mana per zerk (A in workbook) is probably a little to rigoruous in its requirements for a Poet.

I still think your .75+1 proposal (B in workbook) might be a bit too lenient in its need for support.


True, they all do have their flaws and charms. I like the fact that they are all fairly balanced in damage (a quite narrow spread, all things considered). All we need to nail down now is maintenance and what the damage is based on.

I do not think your system is too rigorous at all, really, assuming the poet is of the same stats as the fighter (in experience spent). I could definitely see it being a problem if the poet was too weak to Restore, heal, and Inspire to full, though, which may be an issue. However, if the poet is buff enough, your system appears to make it easier to poet the warrior (not necessarily a bad thing). I might be interpreting what I am seeing incorrectly, though.

My first system, the one where Berserk uses but does not drain Mana, does more damage. Maybe a touch too much, but I think it is within acceptable bounds, all things considered. As for maintenance, with normal statistics, like you have used, it is actually one of the hardest systems to poet. True, one does not need to Inspire, but the healing demands are high - higher than they are now, even.

If one uses 'stupid' statistics meant solely to try to abuse the system, maybe it is too easy. But this would require a warrior to dedicate himself solely to being easy to poet. I really do not know why someone would do this - leeching people is not worth it, and can be done just fine without resorting to making a Mana warrior. I would say it is almost a fair trade - one gimps oneself in real hunting and PK just to leech Random_Poet_4820.

My second system, the one where nothing uses nor drains Mana, is in the middle of this all. Out of all the proposals it has the middle damage and the middle maintenance, for the same build. If one only looked at the spreadsheet one would probably say it is the best solution, since it is the easiest solution and everything looks right given a cycle. But, as I already mentioned a few posts ago, it has problems beyond cycling in a fairly ideal build.

I think the only problem with your proposed system is that it drains a percentage of Mana. I do not mind this personally, as my wife (my poet) would Inspire me just fine and not flinch at having to do so. Its only flaw is that people, even KRU, might not be ready to see it happen. It is one thing for Berserk to base damage on Mana, it is another for it to drain Mana and force Inspires on each cycle - too rogue-like, even given the modest Mana needs. If this was not an obstacle, I would say this is the system that should be in place.

My proposed systems have their own flaws, but I think they are the most realistic in terms of being put in place. I still like my first one, where mana is used for damage but not consumed, as I do not think abusing it is as easy nor as probable as everyone thinks (like I said, you would need to sacrifice a lot to save a poet some trouble). Still, ignoring that, it even basing damage on Mana, even though most warriors would never need to buy Mana for it beyond what they want for Rage, is an obstacle.

My final system is the least interesting, but most probable of them all. It requires tweaks that change almost nothing, just damage. Builds would not be different, nor would be poeting styles. This is the solution's strength - familiarity. There is nothing foreign about it.

I am tempted to just give all three proposals to KRU, with a ton of evidence and clear explanations of both the positives and negatives of each, and let them decide what is best.

So long as it is one of these three instead of what exists, I would be happy.

P.S. Nice work on the spreadsheets - I love them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hugen
post Feb 7 2007, 09:35 AM
Post #24


Enchanted
***

Group: Nobles
Posts: 116
Joined: 22-December 06
Member No.: 1,467



The more I think about it, the more Rogues are "broke" when paired with a mismatched Poet.

I don't have time to run the examples, but hopefully I will in the next few days.

But, the extremely high Vitality to Damage ratio of DA is going to keep a Rogue performing at some level with a MUCH smaller Poet.

Its 2 Damage to 1 Vita used really outshines the Warrior attacks (1.75:1 and 1.125:1) by a lot.

The answer to making the Warrior just as versatile across a range of Poets, while maintaining the Healing intensive nature of Warriors, probably does lie in a small free (or very cheap) mana component to their damage.

Back to work for me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tynan
post Feb 7 2007, 11:49 AM
Post #25


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



QUOTE(Hugen @ Feb 7 2007, 06:35 AM) [snapback]25631[/snapback]

The more I think about it, the more Rogues are "broke" when paired with a mismatched Poet.

I don't have time to run the examples, but hopefully I will in the next few days.

But, the extremely high Vitality to Damage ratio of DA is going to keep a Rogue performing at some level with a MUCH smaller Poet.

Its 2 Damage to 1 Vita used really outshines the Warrior attacks (1.75:1 and 1.125:1) by a lot.

The answer to making the Warrior just as versatile across a range of Poets, while maintaining the Healing intensive nature of Warriors, probably does lie in a small free (or very cheap) mana component to their damage.

Back to work for me.


Everyone comes around eventually (tongue.gif)! I mentioned this briefly a few posts ago (why rogues become broken if they choose to go high in Vitality, as very weak poets can poet them with little cost to their damage output). Your spreadsheet cemented that for me.

Indeed, Desperate Attack has always troubled me. It converts Vitality to damage well, and does so efficiently. It is also a great Mana dump, part of why it is great at ending the LS-DA double (in this double, you end up converting 1.0*Vitality + 3.5*Mana into damage, whereas a warrior doing a Whirlwind-Berserk double converts 1.65*Vitality into damage...in my preferred system it would be 1.6125*Vitality + 1.0*Mana).

Also, let us consider what is perhaps the fundamental problem: Desperate Attack makes up 2/3 of a basic cycle and does, in a standard ratio, 2/3 of the rogue's damage. This means that a rogue does not have to have a good Lethal Strike, exactly, since they can stack vitality and just Desperate Attack without much penalty; indeed, their Desperate Attack just gets stronger and more consistent in damage.

Warriors in their current form will always have a Whirlwind more than twice as strong as their Berserk. Thus, they must Whirlwind to do any respectable damage. While it only makes up 1/3 of their attacks, it makes up more than 1/2 their damage. This is in stark contrast to a rogue.

When one gets down to it, I think the best ratio for a rogue may well be one that allows them to hunt with poets weaker than them most effectively. In other words, one that allows for small Inspires, possibly even a Restore just for the sake of the poet (though rogue attacks do not really need one, except maybe buff rogues using Focused Blow).

I mean, what is the difference between a 1M/150K rogue and a 860K/285K rogue?

Well, the first one's cycle would be 875K, 1150K, 1000K, whereas the latter's would be 1142.5K, 1145K, 860K.

So, the totals are 3025K and 3147.5K, respectively. The less optimal rogue only loses 122.5K damage, and this is moving from ~3:1 to ~6.5:1! That is a large shift!

I mean, let's say the rogue basically uses no Mana at all: that is still a 500K, 1000K, 1000K cycle, for 2.5M damage. A warrior at 1M/150K does 3.075M damage (~20% more), but the rogue requires only 1.5M of healing compared to the warrior needing 2.4M. It is not a horrible trade (the rogue is more efficient, actually), and I stress this is a rogue not even using the Mana he has, even though both of his attacks strongly depend on it.

The nice thing is that the 6.5:1 rogue requires 135K less Mana to do his damage, but only 140K more Vitality. This can potentially mean more keystrokes (~2 using the sam san heal) for each attack, but a weaker poet can now poet the rogue, since 6 extra heals do not cost 135K Mana.

The only drawback about a rogue going very rich in Vitality is that he will not one-hit with Lethal Strike for a while longer. Other than that, there is no substantial drawback. Consider that warriors already have this drawback on 2/3 of their cycle. Right now the only attack warriors typically can one-hit with in places like Hunter3, Anchorite3, etc. is Whirlwind. To one-hit with Berserk in Hunter3 with Scourge, Dishearten, and Sleep (the best conditions), I believe something like 2.2M Vitality is needed. A rogue of much less stats can one-hit with LS and a full DA there much earlier, and even an empty DA earlier, and can provide his own Sleeps. By the time a warrior can one-hit with Berserk a rogue can already one-hit without Sleep on all of his attacks.

Oh, and Focused Blow? That is based on Vitality, and again converts Vitality into damage better than Siege does (2.0 vs. 1.875) and drains less Vitality (66.67% vs. 75%). So, rogues gain on their big sam san attack.

So yes, Desperate Attack is quite strong and versatile, since one can use it as an improved Berserk, essentially, and allow weaker poets to keep the rogue cycling well. Warriors do not get the luxury of being able to make choices like these.

Anyway, I agree a good route is a Mana damage component on one or both of their attacks (but probably just on one, Berserk, for a couple reasons) without a drain is a fair solution. Rogues already have Lethal Strike which takes this to the extreme. Granted, it is somewhat balanced by Desperate Attack taking all Mana, but before cycling this does not even matter; in early groups where it is more like 2-3 fighters per poet, no one cycles, and poets prefer rogues since they can just LS on aethers and require a few quick heals, whereas a warrior's Whirlwind at that point is often weaker and requires far more maintenance.

I look forward to your results very much. smile.gif

P.S. As bad as the situation is now (and it is quite bad...do not let decade of putting up with it fool you, really), it will not take much to solve it. The problem lies mostly with Berserk, and tweaking it a bit puts almost everything in place. Whirlwind's drain paired with Rage still bothers me a lot, too, but getting rid of the senseless +AC on Rage solves most of that...lowering Whirlwind's drain to 80%-85% does the rest.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tynan
post Feb 7 2007, 10:04 PM
Post #26


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



I have been toying with more formulae. I have been investigating just how much damage we want to siphon off of Whirlwind and give to Berserk. Under my current proposal, Berserk is roughly 3/5 or 60% as strong as Whirlwind, which is still pretty bad (though a lot better than the less than 50% it was).

The thing is, would people want Whirlwind weakened to have Berserk strengthened? If so, how much? I am well aware of the benefits of having a single strong attack, but I am also aware of the benefits of a more narrow damage gap. It is really an iffy situation...I almost wish the difference between the alignments was both Whirlwind and Berserk, so we could each have our own choice - high gap, medium dap, small gap. Of course, that is not realistic, really. tongue.gif

Let's say, for the sake of argument, we agree Berserk should be X% of the power of Whirlwind. How should we tweak the formulae to get this? Clearly Whirlwind must decrease in power while Berserk must increase, but how should be incorporate damage based off Vitality and Mana into this?

One thing I think we should focus on is not making any of the attacks drain a percentage of Mana, if at all possible. We should also consider 2:1 Carnage stats and a more normal ratio, and try to balance damage and maintenance at both steps.

In light of this, I have a new suggestion:

Berserk: 0.8*Vitality + 0.8*Mana, costs 200 Mana, drains 70% Vitality
Whirlwind: 1.4*Vitality + 0.4*Mana, costs 600 Mana, drains 85% Vitality

This is almost exactly like my previous suggestion, and in total damage it is the same (3*Vitality + 2*Mana). All I have done is shifted some Vitality damage from Whirlwind to Berserk, and some Mana damage from Berserk to Whirlwind. This has favorable Carnage implications for 2:1 warriors (slightly ups their Whirlwind damage, which I like, slightly decreases their Berserk damage, maintains the same total).

It also tightens the gap in damage a little bit more, but not much, between Berserk and Whirlwind in standard ratios, something I am a fan of. Also, it maintains what I think is an important hierarchy with the rogue cycle:

Whirlwind > Lethal Strike = Full Desperate Attack > Berserk > Empty Desperate Attack

This is a beautiful state of balance. Warriors hold positions 1 and 4, while rogues hold positions 2, 3, and 5 (rogues can be thought of as having three basic attacks, given the variance of Desperate Attack).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hugen
post Feb 9 2007, 02:08 PM
Post #27


Enchanted
***

Group: Nobles
Posts: 116
Joined: 22-December 06
Member No.: 1,467



Alright, I did another workbook.

http://media3.filewind.com/g.php?filepath=5979

It has the basic Rogue-to-Warrior cycle boxes. I did add in some options for extremely mismatched Poeting, such as the Rogue needing Restores and the Warrior Zerk-WWing to maximize damage against multiple targets when under poeted.

I also put in my sheet that calculates optimal cycle Vita to Mana ratios.

I started thinking about this though with the recent discussions of adding a mana component to Beserk.

If one-hitting with all three attacks is the goal, maybe full cycle damage is not what should be optimized.

Maybe what should be optimized is the weakest attack.

This generates some interesting questions for Rogues, is it better to be a (cunning questions aside):

3:1 build 285.6:95.2 with LS,DA,DA of 380.8, 380.8, 285.6 or a

5:1 build 324.5:64.9 with LS,DA,DA of 324.5, 389.4, 324.5 ?

The first does do more cycle damage, but if it takes a 320k shot to one hit, the second one hits three times while the first only gets two. (If it takes 375k, the results reverse to 2 to 1.)

Putting aside the Rogue questions, the question for Warriors becomes, if we add Mana into the cycle, should we build to optimize the full cycle or build to optimize our Berserks?

I think I would argue for the latter. None of the proposals put forward so far would create a true "mana" Warrior, but looking at just Beserk, we could end up with a 4:1 build.


Another thing to remember when discussing the drain from the attack and the vulnerabilty that leaves the attacker at is the preconceived notion of the early designers that Warriors would have more Vita.

When Berserk and Desparate Attack were first designed, prototypical 99's of the two paths might be a:

45:2.5 Warrrior and a
30:10 Rogue.

The two attacks would have left both at 15k. The Warrior would have been no worse off than the Rogue.

I think we have addressed this with the discussion of AC cap differences or other methods of adding to Warrior durability, but we should remember that in effect, the attacks are supposed to leave the users equally vulnerable, with the difference in the method of support.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tynan
post Feb 12 2007, 01:26 PM
Post #28


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



I apologize for not commenting earlier. I downloaded the workbook the first day but only got a brief moment to look at it, and then was busy the rest of the weekend actually playing Nexus; well, trying to play, but that is another story.

Okay, I think you brought up an important point regarding one-hitting. It pretty much can be taken as a fundamental truth that it is better to one-hit as many times per cycle as possible,rather than just do massive total damage, much of which will be wasted as either overhits (very bad) or underhits (not as bad, but not ideal).

Rogues are lucky, as we have discussed before, in that they are allowed to balance their attacks almost any which way they want, and it just so happens that their ideal total damage ratio matches their more balanced ratio quite closely. The difference between 3:1 and 5:1 is not too vast, really.

What I think the idea usually is for rogues, is to build for total damage until 1 attack starts to one-hit, which will often be Lethal Strike and a full Desperate Attack at almost the same time. At that point, the goal shifts totally from total damage and works towards making the whole cycle one-hit.

For example, say a rogue going 3:1 finally one-hits with LS and a full DA. If he is smart, he will then go pure Vitality until the empty DA hits, at which point he can again go 3:1 if he so wishes (unless he wants to one-hit in a higher cave). This is nice flexibility and makes sense, as it is the most efficient route: Total damage -> one-hit damage -> total damage.

I envision warriors would work somewhat similarly, but not to nearly the same extent (to balance one's attacks in my recent numbers, you'd need to go 1:2!). I will share what I personally would do as a newbie warrior, assuming the changes we have been working on went through.

First of all, I would proceed to 200/150 for R6, without any other changes. At this point, I would likely get 500K Vitality, then 200K Mana (that extra Mana is a nice buffer, believe me). From here on, I would go pure Vitality until I reached the point where buying Mana was again efficient for total damage (I have not worked it out for the purposes of this example, but it would be over 1.5M Vitality) or I one-hit Hunter3 with Whirlwind, which would come first, actually.

It is now that my focus would shift!

From this point on I would not consider at all Whirlwind in my calculations for optimizing my cycle. From here on, I would only think about optimizing Berserk. That is to say, I would buy whichever stat increased Berserk's damage the most, since I would now want that attack to one-hit as soon as possible.

For example, if I were 1400K/200K, Vitality would cost 152M and Mana would cost 52M. My proposed formulae suggest, for total damage, one only buy Mana when it is 1/4 the cost of Vitality or less, so normally I would not buy it here. But wait! Now I am only considering Berserk, so should we buy Mana?

Berserk is 0.8*Vitality + 0.6*Mana, so I should buy Mana when it is 3/8 the cost of Vitality or less. 52/152 = 0.34 < 3/8 = 0.375. Thus, I would buy Mana here.

And so I would go on, with a more Mana heavy ratio until I could finally, in the distant future, one-hit with Berserk, too. What would those stats be? Well, let's assume, purely for the sake of argument, that at 1400K/200K (7:1) I would one-hit with Whirlwind under some conditions (Scourge, Dishearten, Doze, whatever). That is, to 0 AC, 2020K damage. So, we want our Berserk to do 2020K damage with the LEAST spent experience.

This would occur at just a bit before 2250K/380K (3160B XP), which are ~6:1 stats. Note that a rogue could deal 2020K damage with his whole cycle at 2020K/404K (2685B XP), so warriors are still worse off, requiring a bit under 20% more experience to one-hit with every attack. However, considering that right now a warrior needs 2700K Vitality to do 2020K damage with Berserk, which costs 3946B just for the Vitality alone, warriors are a lot better off.

I like this, actually. It is amazing luck that, given I never even considered this before Hugen brought it up, my proposal balances this reasonably well. Warriors suddenly could cut a full 1000B off of the requirements to one-hit with Berserk in higher caves, as I have shown, and it is all done without much Mana at all (6:1 is barely anything, really, as I have said before most warriors run a lot more Mana than this, especially those under 1.5M Vitality).

So, I think we have examined this issue quite thoroughly now, and are getting very close to what is a fair but not overly radically change. I think we have shown that:

1.) The current Whirlwind and Berserk are plain horrible, to be frank
2.) Warriors have a poor cycle, particularly due to Berserk always being less than one-half the power of Whirlwind
3.) This can be fixed fairly and without upsetting balance by introducing a Mana component
4.) This Mana component would not require a drain to be balanced if kept small enough
5.) This Mana component would not in any way force warriors to ever run more Mana than 6:1

Anyway, I am personally pleased with all this, and am quite impressed with all of the changes we made to get here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Siverno
post Feb 12 2007, 10:30 PM
Post #29


Level 5
*

Group: Peasants
Posts: 7
Joined: 12-December 06
Member No.: 1,401
Characters: Siverno



Honestly... the biggest problem with Berserk versus the Desperate attack, is that they were created with pre-99. I think for that reason is why it's very unlikely to see Retribution improve as well.


At pre-99 statistics, Berserk is pretty close to a DA using their full equipment, (not including the new boots). For damage at least they're pretty similar. But a rogue still takes a lot less to heal.

But really Berserk needs some improvements, even with your proposals, the increase in damage for a warrior at pre-99 versus a Rogue is not much, and Rogues outdamage warriors(even hitting 2-3 monsters at once) by a small amount.

Really I think incorporating mana into the earlier warrior attacks might be able to work, but I don't think a change like that would be taken very well.

I think Tynan's second idea is the best.

Problem is though I'm not sure how a .9x Vitality works at a pre-99 setting. (I know pre-99's are rare, but there are some, such as those maxed for Glory 66-85 carnage).

At pre-99 levels a Warriors Vitality is equivalent (with Tiger mail) to more than a Rogues Vita+Mana. I believe a Berserk at those levels does do slightly more damage than a Rogue's Desperate attack, but is a little more costly. Changing it to be a .9x vitality, would increase it's damage by a full 2k damage at those levels almost. Having better AC and a lot more vitality already, they would become quite godly in carnages at pre-99 I would think. (Of course rogues still have the advantage of being invisible and much harder to hit with ambushing)

So a mana ratio would be better, where Warriors have practically no mana at all at those levels, so their damage would hardly improve, in this case.

Or a possible solution would be to change the skill they get at 99, not 80(I think?). Meaning improve Whirlwind... but this just brings up the problem again that a Warrior can 1hit with their WW but no where near with Berserk. While a Rogue can 1hit a lot easier with all three of their attacks.

So maybe what should be done is lower the health drain on Whirlwind slightly, and lower the aethers a bit? Considering everything like that... just incorporating mana into berserk is probably the best solution. But very unlikely to happen.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lepetitchou
post Feb 14 2007, 12:59 PM
Post #30


Level 5
*

Group: Citizens
Posts: 38
Joined: 20-July 06
Member No.: 444



QUOTE(Siverno @ Feb 12 2007, 11:30 PM) [snapback]26109[/snapback]


Problem is though I'm not sure how a .9x Vitality works at a pre-99 setting. (I know pre-99's are rare, but there are some, such as those maxed for Glory 66-85 carnage).

At pre-99 levels a Warriors Vitality is equivalent (with Tiger mail) to more than a Rogues Vita+Mana. I believe a Berserk at those levels does do slightly more damage than a Rogue's Desperate attack, but is a little more costly. Changing it to be a .9x vitality, would increase it's damage by a full 2k damage at those levels almost. Having better AC and a lot more vitality already, they would become quite godly in carnages at pre-99 I would think. (Of course rogues still have the advantage of being invisible and much harder to hit with ambushing)


Warriors in glory have it a lot tougher now that boots were implemented. Zerk doesn't do much anymore unless you're almost perfect. I don't see why the level 50 boots should have appeared at all. Maybe a slight increase in damage that wouldn't make them as godly should be implemented 1-98, and a boost given at 99 through a quest or through an invisible stat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Siverno
post Feb 14 2007, 09:43 PM
Post #31


Level 5
*

Group: Peasants
Posts: 7
Joined: 12-December 06
Member No.: 1,401
Characters: Siverno



I completely forgot about those boots.

The boots stats are more beneficial to a Rogue considering the rogue gets a 1 for 1 with Vita and mana, and the extra vita allows them to survive even longer.

So changing berserk to a .9x Vitality would actually work pretty good even at those levels now.


After considering how the 50 boots have affected everything, I'd say the Berserk change to a .9x vita seems to work pretty well. It's not a drastic change as compared to adding a mana component to Berserk, and it still increases it's damage.


But Im sure I'm forgetting something important in there, I usually do. huh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tynan
post Feb 14 2007, 10:15 PM
Post #32


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



QUOTE
But Im sure I'm forgetting something important in there, I usually do. huh.gif


The only major thing you are forgetting, really, is Carnage viability for warriors, specifically in a 'maxed-stats' scenario.

When a rogue maxes his stats, he makes full use of the Vitality AND Mana, so his 50/25 means a hell of a lot more than a warrior's 50/25 (a warrior may as well be 50/0 unless he is a Barbarian).

This has MAJOR repercussions. For one, a rogue's EMPTY DA will be superior to a FULL Berserk even if the formula is 0.9*Vitality. This is an issue.

Lethal Strike will still be far better than Whirlwind, too - this is an issue as it is, but my hands are tied there.

Another perhaps smaller issue is that, currently, while rogues build their stats to something like 120/120 (or whatever) for C5, they do not lose any damage, really. Sure, the ratio is not ideal, but at least they have one hell of a Lethal Strike. When a warrior goes 200/150, he is crippled, and does not become uncrippled for a very long time (perhaps never, really, though I am not going to go into a long discussion of it here).

An even smaller issue, depending on how far into the game you go, is the cost of Vitality. As warriors get little use from Mana (Siege's Mana component is almost meaningless compared to a cycle, trust me) they have to keep buying expensive Vitality, so warriors actually grow the slowest of all paths. If SuWaN had 3:1 stats like a Rogue, he would be a lot further up the Power List than he is. And no, I do not mention this because the ranking matters, only to show that his total stats would be higher since he could buy cheap Mana like rogues can, since it helps them.

Anyway, yes, anything would help, and if the only 'acceptable' solution is bumping Berserk's damage component up like that, I will take it, because right now it is just plain awful (having 2/3 of your cycle be less damage than the other third of your cycle is atrocious). However, at the same time adding a small Mana component solves that and so much more, bringing warriors up to snuff in:

1.) Damage
2.) PK
3.) Doubling (by a small amount)
4.) Early 99
5.) Longterm efficiency

My pure Vitality tweak only fixes the first one, to an extent.

Anyway, yeah, like I said, I'll take anything, but only fully support as balanced an option that incorporates some Mana.

P.S. I cannot simply add more Vitality damage to fix these things, else I would. Short explanation: increasing the Vitality damage components more would fix some of these things (for instance, Berserk = 1*Vitality might fix some PK issues), but would cause potentially MASSIVE problems down the road, and would likely end up overpowering warriors, which as fun as it sounds, is just as unhealthy as the current situation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Siverno
post Feb 17 2007, 01:51 AM
Post #33


Level 5
*

Group: Peasants
Posts: 7
Joined: 12-December 06
Member No.: 1,401
Characters: Siverno



Well my post had been regarding a pre-99 carnage where Berserk actually keeps up with Desperate attack, since stats are all equipment, level based, and not bought. My main worry had been that in a pre 99 setting with a improved Berserk, it might actually overpower the warriors a little bit.

However lepetitchou reminded me of the boots, which actually would turn the tide in a rogues favor even more, seeing as how the higher the stats go, the bigger the advantage a rogue has.



I referred to the mana component addition to berserk as a drastic change. Because we all know the most likely change to anything at all, is always just going to be the numbers, such as increasing the vitality component to it. I think both the proposals I saw for Berserk were more than reasonable and acceptable, but we need to remember that if they do change it at all they(Kru/mug) would most likely go for the easiest route, that seems most acceptable to everyone. I saw a few people in just this thread alone that thought a 1x mana berserk without any mana cost would be overpowered. Personally I don't think it really would be, but a lot out there probably would. So that's a very unlikely change.



But anyway, the main focus of my posts were to remind of a pre-99 setting. Because all though they are rare, they do exist. Honestly as it is right now, the pre-99 is the most balanced area of the game. Rogues are slightly overpowered in that setting compared to a warrior I think, but not nearly as badly as like... a new99 for example. My point was that in those original settings, berserk was balanced, because at 80-90 a warrior with Earth Tiger mail can have around 10k Vitality, compared to a rogues... 4k I think. But berserk was not a well thought out spell at all, nor was Desperate attack. Really if anything, the proper solution would be to weaken DA a bit. But we all know that will never happen.

You're absolutely right as well, regarding a maxed situation in a 99 carnage (or even the 86-98 I think) a rogue gets so much of an advatange over a warrior, it's just disgusting.


By the way, my character Siverno is a rogue, but I'm in no way going to defend rogues. They are clearly overpowered. I'm honestly trying to think of what sort of fix could realistically be done, and at least close the gap between rogues and warriors a lot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mirado
post Mar 12 2007, 10:32 AM
Post #34


Sa san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 1,289
Joined: 5-July 06
Member No.: 146



Just to get a rogue's opinion in here...

It's also MUCH easier to poet a warrior to his prime potential than a rogue.

Not only can poets not restore rogues, but they have to have a lot more mana and have to conserve mana like a mother to get the rogue the max amount of mana possible.

I'm about 710/180 equipped, and my BB has about 300k mana and still sometimes can't spire me full.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hugen
post Mar 12 2007, 12:23 PM
Post #35


Enchanted
***

Group: Nobles
Posts: 116
Joined: 22-December 06
Member No.: 1,467



QUOTE(Mirado @ Mar 12 2007, 11:32 AM) [snapback]28822[/snapback]

I'm about 710/180 equipped, and my BB has about 300k mana and still sometimes can't spire me full.


Actually, I would be surprised if he ever can if you complete a full cycle.

1/2 of 710 is 355 Vita

Healing 355 Vita with an Ee san heal, which is 20k healed for 2k Mana expended, will take 18 casts.

That is 36k Mana expended per each of your attacks.

If he heals his own Invokes, that is another .4 x 300k = 120k damage. So, another 6 casts and 12k gone.

36 x 3 = 108k + 12k = 120k

So, that is 120k from 300k, leaving him with 180k.

So, if he never needs to Scourge, Harden body, ASv, or Heal any damage taken, he can Inspire you full.


That may seem rather difficult, but look at the cost of your respective stats.

A 710:180 build is about 442.5 billion in spent experience, while a 300:300 build is only 332 billion.

The difference between Rogues and Warriors as far as working with somewhat smaller Poets goes is that it costs Rogues damage sooner than it does Warriors, and the loss is a smooth progressing descent. With Warriors the Poet's workload continually increases, until the Poet can no longer perform it, and then the Warrior's damage crashes to a level far lower than the Rogue's.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mirado
post Mar 13 2007, 08:54 AM
Post #36


Sa san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 1,289
Joined: 5-July 06
Member No.: 146



He's actually around 400/300 if I ... sec, charpages.

400/285 naked, actually. Dunno how he does it, really. Just that he's definitely the most skilled poet I've hunted with. It helps when you duo so often you just know what the other's going to do next, though.

And, you're forgetting 2 attacks in there, Sam san spy.

What I'm saying is, I need a poet who not only has like, 400k+ mana to spire me full, but also has the skill to LS/DA/DA. And, even if the poet was 400/400 (which most at that range aren't seeing as most of them that high love PK and thus have a lot more vita...), that means that that poet has spent 534bil on stats.... Putting him a good 100b ahead of me and...

What strength warrior could a 400/400 poet take on? I'm betting it's a lot higher than 710/160, but I really don't feel like doing the math.

Edit: According to your spreadsheet up top, a poet with the stats 400/285 can handle a warrior with 900k vita and 160k vita with just a little mana left over, ignoring rage costs and such, resulting in about 400k more cycle damage.

Once we take rage costs into consideration, it gives the poet a much harder time, but that wouldn't nessisarily mean the poet couldn't take the warrior, he'd just have to hold back a bit.

Also, this is ignoring any extra attacks the rogue(me) and the warrior would have via subpath or Sam san, which skews it further.

If you were of the mind to it, I'm not good enough with excel when I don't have a bit more time, you could create a spreadsheet with the sole purpose to compare 2 sam fighters.... I'll try to do it later, but uh. If you -want- to, go ahead.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dannicus
post Mar 21 2007, 07:08 PM
Post #37


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 383
Joined: 4-July 06
Member No.: 130



Tynan, have you sent KRU links to these discussions and the proposals yet? If not, do it, especially now that spies and rangers have their cunning equivalent.


--------------------
QUOTE
wish you liked boobies *sighs*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SinJackal
post Mar 22 2007, 07:22 PM
Post #38


Level 99
**

Group: Citizens
Posts: 69
Joined: 26-August 06
Member No.: 714






Seems like a lot of work and programming to add barely 10% damage to Berserk, and give warriors an excuse to buy mana.

I've gone over all the stats, and while it's true that Whirlwind's new formula would not be overpowering, there are are multitude of problems that you need to take into consideration.


For one, it's actually a warrior's greatest strength that he does not need to buy mana. It makes you guys experience go to 100% good use. Poets get what from more mana? Better restore? I mean, that really keeps them alive when they die asv/sc. Mages buy mana? Give them damage. Yep, but they become not quite as durable to damage than if they bought vita. Rogues buy mana: They get a better LS, and slightly improve their DA (aka one of the most useless pk attacks in the game), but their Ka'e suffers, their DA damage suffers vs if they bought vita, their doubles all suffer, and their resiliance to dying is also diminished. Warriors on the other hand, you buy vita; all your attacks are increased in strength, and you are harder to kill in pk.


Not to mention, by balancing your stats, your Karak is weaker than it normally would be, so is your Whirlwind, even with the altered stats here.

You guys are only thinking of bersek on two standpoints. One: very low level pk, and two: one hit hunting. It can't be polearm hunting you're thinking of, because rage outclasses cunning pretty hard. Warriors don't need to "one hit" with berserk in hunts. Sorry guy, even if you are not polearming, kinda what rage is for. Use your scale, spike, or slog's club to kill things that you don't one-zerk. No reason to have your cake and eat it too.


You also fail to take into consideration that warriors can attack 100% of the time with their rage. No need to re-invis, or stop attacking so a mage can finish a set. You end up hitting way more with your polearm hits than a rogue would.


One last thing. Warrior's "cycle" does more damage than a rogue's does. DA vs Berserk is the only instance that a rogue does more damage at any point, with any attack, 1v1. And that attack removes ALL mana. That attack is pretty fair.


Yes, zerk is low damage. So? Your average warrior's Whirlwind is closer to Ka'e in damage than Ka'e is to Karak. That is, karak is usually way better than a Ka'e. Whirlwind is a lot closer to Ka'e in damage than LS is to WW. If you would like proof of that, I will post it.

It would be nicer if you guys had high enough stats, or were even sam san to appreciate all the damage you guys get from warrior attacks. Rage, Karak, and WW are not enough? Please post about mobility spells, or something besides buffer attacks. Buffer attacks, and higher ingresses are the last things warriors, or this game in general needs.


~ S.J.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dannicus
post Mar 28 2007, 06:58 PM
Post #39


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 383
Joined: 4-July 06
Member No.: 130



SinJackal, I completely and utterly fail to see your points. Everything is worked out already up above. The proof is already there, and more, much more, of which you didn't touch base on. I already know Tynan is Sam and I'm fairly sure Hugen is, as well. Did you even read the entire thread?


--------------------
QUOTE
wish you liked boobies *sighs*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tynan
post Mar 30 2007, 12:05 AM
Post #40


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



QUOTE(Dannicus @ Mar 28 2007, 04:58 PM) [snapback]30127[/snapback]

SinJackal, I completely and utterly fail to see your points. Everything is worked out already up above. The proof is already there, and more, much more, of which you didn't touch base on. I already know Tynan is Sam and I'm fairly sure Hugen is, as well. Did you even read the entire thread?


I apologize for my 6-week absence. I had a lot on my plate and have not been around to monitor the various threads I have been posting in. I do plan, Dannicus, to recompile the information and offer it to KRU and let them decide what it is worth.

I am actually not Sam San, though I am Sam San stats (waiting on Wisdom, another 94 days). Therefore, I do not have Siege yet, no.

I think SinJackal is being a little unfair in his assessment, and I want to stress two things to be clear:

1.) I do not think warriors are totally gimped compared to rogues, at least in group hunting. As an Assault, I admit I can bring in good experience, and I have absolutely no complaints about the raw experience I make.

2.) I do think that warriors face far too much risk for what they do, and that they are outclassed in carnages, outclassed in duos and soloing, outclassed in utility. For the amount of extra experience a warrior can bring in at *certain* stat ranges over a rogue, a rogue either has too much or a warrior has too little. I tend to like the latter better. A warrior gives up a hell of a lot for what is perhaps a 10% increase in experience. When a rogue one-hits with an empty DA and a warrior is still 600K+ away, what then?

These issues of risk versus reward need to be examined. Really. No one can look me in the eye and say that for what warriors can do, they deserve all of that risk and all of their limitations, taking rogues as the prototype for balance. As I have said before, I do not want Ambush, I do not want Invisible, I do not want Amnesia, I do not want anything like that - I just want warriors to be fairly balanced in a fashion suiting a warrior.

SinJackal did bring up a good point on Siege. I should factor that into my calculations more. However, Siege is more of a carnage concern, since a warrior will one-hit with that pretty early in hunting no matter what (a 1.5M Siege should rock pretty much everything). I am not TOO worried about it suffering a bit due to a warrior buying a bit of Mana.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th June 2017 - 03:44 PM
Nexus Forums is part of: Nexus Atlas © all rights reserved.