[X] My Assistant

As the game scaled up, monsters can get base mitigations that are quite a bit higher than what was originally intended. This makes stuff that reduces this mitigation much more powerful than most everything else.

Furthermore, proficiency gear is still viewed mostly in terms of how much damage it adds. It would be nice to give it something else instead. Seeing as reducing mitigations outright would restore a certain facerolling aspect, combining this with a mitigation decrease makes sense.


Planned changes:

- Monster PMI/MMI formula changed to use player's formula, meaning it caps at 80% instead of 95%, and get there much later.

- Removed proficiency damage modifier. Today this is a /200 factor increase.

- Removed skill damage bonus for higher than required overcharge.

- Spells now have a required proficiency and player level. They are granted when you meet both conditions.

- Spells get a cost reduction and/or cast time decrease depending on how much higher your proficiency is compared to the spell's required proficiency.

- Having a proficiency higher than a monster's level will grant a counter-resist bonus for spells targeting it.

- Curse Weaving removed.


Assumed effects:

- Reduced reliance on armor piercing and imperil at higher levels: increase in damage output without debuffs, but decreased with armor-piercing debuffs.

- Added value to proficiency-increasing gear.


Discuss. Preferably in more general terms and not in a "this is a net gain/loss for my specific style and setup" kind of way. (And I'm specifically not mentioning the exact numbers and scaling involved.)

I think instead of prof compared to monster's level, it should be prof compared to required prof for the spell instead.

So you can either use low power spells and get high anti-resist, or use high-powered spells and get low resist.

In addition, prof gear pretty much sucks all around compared to phase, so I think people will still go for phase.

As for cost reduction depending on prof, I don't really think it is that necessary tbh. This change is pretty much geared towards mages only, and as a mage I do not think mana consumption is the problem here. The problem is related to the fact that mages' mean of survival is to kill shit before they kill you. The problem stems mostly from resists and to a lesser extent evade, which if lessened will help immensely.

You should consider the impact of removing prof gear's damage on existing and future mages. Prof gear was and still is considered to be a great way to start out maging as it increases your damage relatively quickly and is cheap. If you remove the damage scaling, people are forced to use phase for damage, which may or may not be what you want.

In addition, removing prof damage massively reduces mages' damage output, which probably will kill maging in general. I did a quick test with the HV magescore script. Just removing the 1 + prof/200 reduces my magescore by 36400 points, from 50k magescore to 13.6k magescore. That'll kill any form of maging.

- Spells now have a required proficiency and player level. They are granted when you meet both conditions.

Does this mean we shouldn't spend AP to learn spells anymore ? Or spells still have to be bought with AP but aren't activated until the required prof is reached ?

If spells don't cost AP, mages will have a lot of kind of pointless AP. On the contrary if they still do, it feels like a big nerf to low lvl mages.

This post has been edited by pervdiz: Feb 14 2013, 17:58

In addition, removing prof damage massively reduces mages' damage output, which probably will kill maging in general. I did a quick test with the HV magescore script. Just removing the 1 + prof/200 reduces my magescore by 36400 points, from 50k magescore to 13.6k magescore. That'll kill any form of maging.

MMi will also be reduced.

In addition, prof gear pretty much sucks all around compared to phase, so I think people will still go for phase.

If he is clever he adds a bit of MDB to Gossamer or create a new rare Armor.

Will Poison still receive either its 1/1000 or 1/200 damage boost from Depricating/Dualwield proficiency?

Assumed effects:

- Reduced reliance on armor piercing and imperil at higher levels: increase in damage output without debuffs, but decreased with armor-piercing debuffs.

This sounds like melee will effectively get lower damage output...

If this is true, Power/Shade need buff because they both rely on killing fast enough to survive.

This post has been edited by HTTP/308: Feb 14 2013, 18:53

- Having a proficiency higher than a monster's level will grant a counter-resist bonus for spells targeting it.

will melee fighters gain counter-parry bonus? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

MMi will also be reduced.
If he is clever he adds a bit of MDB to Gossamer or create a new rare Armor.

MMI will be reduced, but you now deal 1/4 your old damage. The MMI reductions will at best give you 50% more damage, so you'll now deal 1.5/4 your old damage.

I mage because I can kill shit fast. But within the last 3 patches I've been slowing down, to the point where I'm almost on par with melees regarding kill speed on high difficulty. What is then the point to maging?

I think you should give some idea,not the result change list

for example:
seens we know
"skill damage will nerf"
and
"monster's mitigation will nerf"

and we still don't know "WHERE'S THE CHANGE" anyway.

I don't think only change the formula/parameter is a good idea.
Add the new essential factor to the stable-already game is much better than this.

and I want to suggest the one of the most important thing as:
Please always don't do pure nerf,you can do everything to make players to play the HV longer time,and this way is the obvly worst.

This post has been edited by moriihidari: Feb 14 2013, 18:28

This sounds like melee will effectively get lower damage output...

Which is negated by the PMI changes I'd think, depending on how he goes about it.

And melees should get a damage nerf IMO, they're way too close to mages in terms of raw damage output.

Which is negated by the PMI changes I'd think, depending on how he goes about it.

And melees should get a damage nerf IMO, they're way too close to mages in terms of raw damage output.

Nope.
There is a large gap even at my level(MMI)

Possible results: All low-levels will be melees/judging from common it is to see level 100s with less than 30 prof.
EDIT:
OC change is pretty significant to melee - it is not at all impossible that this turns more users towards estoc, given how it stuns the advantage skills get over stance.

Prof change seems like it is intended to give MC and anti-resist. I have though time imaging what sort of formula would be needed to make earth-walker competitive at all levels.

This post has been edited by Lement: Feb 14 2013, 18:22

Which is negated by the PMI changes I'd think, depending on how he goes about it.

And melees should get a damage nerf IMO, they're way too close to mages in terms of raw damage output.

Yeah, because killing one enemy at a time isn't slow enough for DW, we need less damage too (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) . Not everyone plays estoc/heavy.

1.I can understand how a few players, with heavily-forged equips, are killing as fast as possible. But to balance the game around them has been shown to hurt those new players or those without forged weapons way too much; not everyone's that focused on HV.

Instead, how about a system which you'll face stronger monsters with forged weapons, but you'll also get better drops? For example, with forged weapons you get a modifier on monster's PABs which makes that grows faster.

2. Removing damage modifier is usually a bad decision for players. It always means a nerf, since damage output is the more important factor for players.

As a mage, it's kinda devastating to remove the prof damage bonus, unless you plan to scale the EDB and MDB so they would get something back. Casting 2 spells with reduced mana is way worse than casting 1 spell with full mana cost. It's because of all those damage you'll receive from monsters.

And even with the proposed change, mages still won't use prof armor; EDB is still way more important in terms of damage output. And melees won't even try prof armor because that's only on clothes.

As for melees, it really depends on how the PMI/MMI goes after the change. There's a point, as suggested by skillchip, that PA is simply way better then bleeding/stun in terms of damage output. I'll prefer giving stun/bleeding some more bonus in order to compensate for the gradual increase in PMI.

3. Removing additional skill damage...I don't know. I mean, people are getting more OC because it can deal more damage. What's the point of getting like 200+ OC when you deal the same damage? Not to mention only DWers may need that much OC, and this move will hurt the 'Frenzied Blows' skill badly, which is the bread and butter for most DWers.

4. Spells now have a required proficiency and player level. I'm not sure...I mean, it's not that different from what we're doing today...except there may be even more prof grinding, which people has been doing all the time.

Instead, how about a system which you'll face stronger monsters with forged weapons, but you'll also get better drops? For example, with forged weapons you get a modifier on monster's PABs which makes that grows faster.

No, people do not expect to get this when they forge.

this game less regulation mechanism but have so much sudden nerf

some player bring a huge resist monster army so mage player suffered

and here now we have a new anti-resist staff to help those mage player

but at first why no Pressure test no prospective research to avoid today's situation ?


and now the phase gear market position will crashed by the new anti-resist gossamer gear ?

i don't understand it

Prof change seems like it is intended to give MC and anti-resist. I have though time imaging what sort of formula would be needed to make earth-walker competitive at all levels.

How much mana would EW gear have to give back for it to compete? Such a build would probably be heavily dependent on soul spells to reap SP while casting supportives gains mana for it.

Though there's the obvious problem for people with lacking profs never being able to catch up.

Casting 2 spells with reduced mana is way worse than casting 1 spell with full mana cost. It's because of all those damage you'll receive from monsters.

Ayup, infinite mana for third of damage is bad trade-off. Though I imagine the aforementioned build would use maces to stun large groups of mobs with the first blow, in an imitation of the style.

This post has been edited by Lement: Feb 14 2013, 18:42

MMI will be reduced, but you now deal 1/4 your old damage. The MMI reductions will at best give you 50% more damage, so you'll now deal 1.5/4 your old damage.

What?

80% reduction vs 95% reduction is four times increase in damage.

What?

80% reduction vs 95% reduction is four times increase in damage.

Is there anyone in the game who has managed to reach 95% MMI on a monster?

This post has been edited by ChosenUno: Feb 14 2013, 18:53

Is there anyone in the game who has managed to reach 95% MMI on a monster?

Assuming we have the correct parameters, monsters should have 92% MMI with 25 WIS, 25 END and at level 400 (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

This post has been edited by varst: Feb 14 2013, 19:09