[X] My Assistant

Accuracy from equipment is capped at 100, so that won't happen.

Finally ran off and actually did the math. The numbers aren't pretty, especially between levels 100 and 300 and for mobs that aren't PL 1000+. I do find it rather amusing that you hit baseline for 501st (assuming she's 25/24 or something) about the time she starts showing up on Normal. This patch will indeed accomplish your assumed goal of trolling Frith. Holy fuck, even Eila's only 22/25? God damn it Frith, grind harder so I can make more lazy assumptions about your Witch of Death!

Each line assumes a balanced monster (12 is 12 END/12 WIS), and assumes proficiency is equal to level. Imbalanced mobs mess with the shape, but not enough to do anything until you hit L400+, and prof=level is a decent approximation (if anything, it's optimistic, effective prof > level for any serious mage). The New Damage % takes into account the gain from new mitigation formula and the loss of proficiency damage bonus.

Whatever Proficiency's bonus becomes, it had better be damn good for midlevel mages to lose about half their damage on standard all mobs.



If anyone wants to see how I got the numbers, PM me for the Excel file.

This post has been edited by PK678353: Feb 27 2013, 13:46

I'm not sure what "midlevel" is, but unless maging was significantly different than melee, before 200, proficiency wasn't even close to level. More like 1/3 creeping to 1/2 at 200. That makes balancing easier since it looks like 200 is where the graphs start turning around for positive gains. On the other hand, this change could be a necessary balance nerf overall? That's a question for more data comparison or an ultimate arbitrator . . .

12 is far too high to consider against levels until 130?
It's a good starter graph tbh, but one should consider differences between monster classes.
Tbh END will be far higher, and WIS generally lower or the opposite(giants and elementals for example)- also, when I generally build monsters I leave WIS to my highest and some that specify in anti-magic, others on the other hand get 0 WIS.

Well, though as graph shows there won't be much difference with another 12 WIS/END difference at those levels.

This post has been edited by Lement: Feb 27 2013, 12:46

I'm not sure what "midlevel" is, but unless maging was significantly different than melee, before 200, proficiency wasn't even close to level. More like 1/3 creeping to 1/2 at 200. That makes balancing easier since it looks like 200 is where the graphs start turning around for positive gains. On the other hand, this change could be a necessary balance nerf overall? That's a question for more data comparison or an ultimate arbitrator . . .

I'm level 223 (midlevel being mid-high 100s to high 200s). My prof is ~200, but my Effective Prof after my Staff is ~250. Admittedly, I have 3 points in Assimilator and a staff with a good prof roll. My numbers actually understate the effects of losing prof damage on mages with natural prof close to level (especially those using prof suffixed staves)

Still, prof WILL catch up somewhere in the low-mid 200s, Assimilator or no. Levels before effective prof starts catching up barely register for balance discussion though, since we race through them so damn fast these days.

That bold 100% line is baseline prepatch damage. 60% to 65% from 200 to 250 is not 'positive gains', it's barely beginning to claw your way out of an enormous fucking hole. Losing 35%-45% damage is close to the losses going from DW (a vibrant playing style) to 1H (moribund despite repeated buffs). Plus, the damage vs. lesser mobs just keeps going down (look at the line for the 16/16, it doesn't start coming up until 400+).

12 is far too high to consider against levels until 130?
It's a good starter graph tbh, but one should consider differences between monster classes.
Tbh END will be far higher, and WIS generally lower or the opposite(giants and elementals for example)- also, when I generally build monsters I leave WIS to my highest and some that specify in anti-magic, others on the other hand get 0 WIS.

Well, though as graph shows there won't be much difference with another 12 WIS/END difference at those levels.

I did make some graphs with unbalanced attributes. Didn't show them just because the search space becomes huge (12-25 is 14 lines, 12-25 with both is 196), and from what I saw it only mattered at very high levels (once you'd hit the cap for either END or WIS and you actually get the intended effect of more damage vs. 501st, less vs generic mobs). They didn't affect the main thing I wanted to show: Level 150-300 mages get screwed hard vs everything, including mobs like 501st. I admit that the graph is pretty much useless from 0-150, but it made for a pretty line. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

This post has been edited by PK678353: Feb 27 2013, 12:52

I could be wrong, but the way I read one of Tenboro's last posts in this thread makes me believe that the proficiency damage modifier will be replaced with something that hasn't been revealed yet. Proficiency itself will serve some other function, like reducing MP cost and/or cast time.

When I think about one of the goals of this revamp -- to reduce reliance on Imperil at higher levels -- I just can't see it happening without some other way to easily reduce specific mitigation. I can look at a monster now with low MMI and high resistance to element X, and compare the damage against a monster with high MMI and high resistance to element X, and the difference isn't great enough to make me believe that a change to the MMI formula alone will persuade me to forgo Imperil on high difficulties.

Graph looks like the one i made

What I'm seeing is entirely intentional. Lower mitigation monsters will see massive gains in survivability, while higher mitigation monsters won't be complete fucking brick walls with the change.

Graph looks like the one i made

Good. Means my numbers are probably right.

What I'm seeing is entirely intentional. Lower mitigation monsters will see massive gains in survivability, while higher mitigation monsters won't be complete fucking brick walls with the change.

Except they still will be brick walls to mages. You see how none of those curves intersect 100 again until L340, and even Eila isn't using that top curve (she's near the 23 curve with 22/25 I believe)? That means that no monster actually gets easier to kill until L340 or higher, and even top mobs probably don't get easier to kill until 370+. Again, whatever Prof becomes had better be good.

This post has been edited by PK678353: Feb 27 2013, 17:57

That's kind of the point. I also take to account that mitigation currently scales ridiculously horribly and that there needs to be a mechanic that replaces the straight-up damage multiplier proficiency gives (a combination of element resistance reduction for debuffs, anti-resist, and mana/cast time reduction would be a good one), though it shouldn't make it a n>2.0 quadratic function like it currently is.

This post has been edited by Bunker Buster: Feb 27 2013, 16:47

Except they still will be brick walls to mages. You see how none of those curves intersect 100 again until L340, and even Eila isn't using that top curve (she's near the 23 curve with 22/24 I believe)? That means that no monster actually gets easier to kill until L340 or higher, and even top mobs probably don't get easier to kill until 370+. Again, whatever Prof becomes had better be good.

Unless there are also tweaks to EDB scaling, spoilerwarning.

That's kind of the point. I also take to account that mitigation currently scales ridiculously horribly and that there needs to be a mechanic that replaces the straight-up damage multiplier proficiency gives (a combination of element resistance reduction for debuffs, anti-resist, and mana/cast time reduction would be a good one), though it shouldn't make it a n>2.0 quadratic function like it currently is.

Cubic damage is indeed batshit insane. Fixing mitigation will make cubic not as needed. What I'm trying to say is that just fixing mitigation and swapping Prof damage for something else may end up being HP Buff 2.0. I really don't want to deal with Elementals that have a couple of difficulty levels worth of extra EHP versus from previous and 75% Cold Resist because it's dirt cheap to max that on Elementals.


More graphs, both use balanced stats and assume prof = level for simplicity's sake. I've also labeled where 501st sits (roughly the 23 curve) to point out that the 24 and 25 curves are basically theoretical at this point. Even Frith and HTTP don't have the resources for that, apparently. They're also from before the Tenboro post directly above.

Damage as a delta from baseline, levels 150-400 (read: I tightened it to the interesting part and moved 0)


Monster EHP delta from baseline relative to a spell, holding other factors (elemental mit, spell used, gear) constant. This isn't true EHP, it's more "Estimated Spells to Kill Delta" than Effective HP.

Unless there are also tweaks to EDB scaling, spoilerwarning.

Kind of figured you had run the numbers on this. Not sure if it'll reduce my reliance on Imperil for all the mobs with stupid Cold resist, but it should at least avoid HP Buff 2.0. Just hoping Elemental doesn't get smacked with another nerfbat aimed at Holy/Dark.

This post has been edited by PK678353: Feb 27 2013, 17:33

25 is FSM just wanted to throw that out there

[10:38] <varst> EDB can probably go even more steeper
[10:38] <~tenboro> EDB will be less steep, actually
[10:38] <bunqa_busta> it only buffed light insofar as heavy armor's high END didn't provide so much anymore
[10:39] <bunqa_busta> and that's not really a buff, it's just an improvement of condition in relative terms
[10:39] <~tenboro> probably pivoted around level 350, thanks to some fancy graphs someone posted
[10:39] <~tenboro> (see? I read that stuff)
[10:43] <varst> But Tenboro, EDB going less steep means you're going to reduce it's power output. You're not going to change the roll's range, right?
[10:44] <bunqa_busta> I think he means *after* the MMIT change
[10:45] <~tenboro> well, equipment stats basically have two factors, a base factor that gives the level 0 stat and a level scaling factor that increases this by a factor of level..
[10:45] <~tenboro> so when I say it'll be less steep, that means the former is increased and the latter is decreased
[10:46] <~tenboro> and of course, the base level factor is multiplied by the raw equipment stat
[10:46] <~tenboro> so no, the raw equipment roll range won't change
[10:48] <varst> So you're going to increase what I and chip called 'base multiplier', keep the roll range fixed, and decrease the level scaling factor, right?
[10:49] <varst> That would be some interesting change
[10:49] <bunqa_busta> EDB more useful for low levels
[10:49] <bunqa_busta> l300+ mages cry about loss of EDB

This post has been edited by skillchip: Mar 5 2013, 03:19