cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: clown1231 on August 19, 2012, 09:06:12 pm

Title: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: clown1231 on August 19, 2012, 09:06:12 pm
Before you flame me or -1 the topic, hear me out.

One of the best things (IMO) about cRPG is that you get to chose what you want to play. You're not stuck with the generic builds of Native, and you get to choose your equipment. This means that most people end up with very different characters. Of course, this does lead to trollable things, such as horse archery and invincible shields, but I believe that the benefits outweigh the few problems.

Today, however, one can simply pump strength and be fine. No need for agility in today's builds. I think that if we change one thing about strength, the spectrum of available builds can increase. The intention here isn't to stop people from playing 39 strength characters, it's to increase the validity of builds that incorporate more agility into their lifestyle.

The idea I have is to put a soft cap on the weight penalty reduction that strength provides. In turn, however, increase the bonuses from ironflesh and powerstrike by 1 damage/HP. This, in a way, will balance itself out.



Feedback is appreciated, as well as how to improve this suggestion.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: XyNox on August 19, 2012, 09:34:54 pm
I agree, str builds are too viable atm. There is a very simple solution that does not need much coding and has been suggested a few times:

Remove free wpf per level and in turn buff wpf gain from WM.

If you wanna hit faster you have to get WM. If you wanna be a str crutcher that wants to oneshot people you should be slow.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Bobthehero on August 19, 2012, 09:41:58 pm
WPF also increases damage, something I play with a longsword on my swashbuckler guy, and I feel like I do less damage witht the 1 WPF I have with my longsword than with the 1h and 135 wpf.

Longsword's not loom either, so that might be it.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: rustyspoon on August 19, 2012, 10:32:59 pm
The balance between strength and agility is fine as is.

Strength makes it faster to kill bad players and lets you make more mistakes.

Agility makes you more flexible and makes it easier to deal with multiple opponents.

Agility builds can easily have damage outputs similar to strength builds with a combination of held attacks, speed bonus and WPF. I was wrecking people with a 6/33 build earlier today.

Each has their benefits and drawbacks, though I still think balanced builds are king: 18/18, 21/18, 18/21, 21/21.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Bulzur on August 20, 2012, 12:21:44 am
Hopefully, the new wpf curve will balance things out.
As it is now, STR build are "tiny-slightly-littlebit" better than AGI, in hands of very good player. Footwork start getting more important than brutal strength, so balanced builds are the preference choice.

In the hands of bad player, STR build are "OP" compared to AGI.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Leshma on August 20, 2012, 12:37:14 am
The balance between strength and agility is fine as is.
Each has their benefits and drawbacks, though I still think balanced builds are king: 18/18, 21/18, 18/21, 21/21.

And that's why NA is full of full STR builds?
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Uumdi on August 20, 2012, 12:42:29 am
Yeah, in regular battle setting, agility has its place, but what I noticed, and not to pick on strat 3.0, but when it came to massive melee situations with heavy armor, str was much more effective.  I was fine with a balanced build, able to duck out of the way of pikes going through the moshpit, but the killing power of strength is effective, because lets be honest, people will always make mistakes. 

Battle server, you're better able to maneuver, support your friends, single targets out, and flank, but in the massive melee engagements, 27/12 is probably the most effective build still, and allows you to function if you plan on sinking with the ship and taking out as many tickets as you possibly can in the process.  36/3 builds are excessive and terrible, and are nothing to be afraid of really, but those 27/12's that are the real dangers right now.  I don't rightly think we should take that away from them though - I played 27/12, and it should still be an outstanding build.  We'll see what the new wpf curve does I imagine.

People can always play smarter though, you know?  Creative flank maneuvers that require a ton more thought and risk might be possible with some organization, but right now strength is not only efficient at dealing damage, but also necessary to make aggressive pushes in large battles.

On the other hand, 18/21, 7 WM builds do outstanding damage, though you lack some ironflesh.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Leshma on August 20, 2012, 12:44:20 am
Speed bonus works both ways, you deal serious damage but if you miss you take epic damage too. Strength builds take normal damage while dealing serious amounts of damage.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Tears of Destiny on August 20, 2012, 12:45:49 am
Tydeus sported that 27/12 build for ages if I remember correctly, with his ever-lasting Miaodao/Litchina Helm/Churburg Cuirass combo. Even in my incompetent hands it is a nasty build.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Leshma on August 20, 2012, 12:49:19 am
From realism standpoint, anything bellow 15 strength is a small boy, weak man at best (not fitting for battle) and anything above 24 strength isn't human being. But this is a game and not very realistic game so it's okay to have more choices.

Same goes for ath, 9 ath is wtf Usain Bolt and 10 ath is Benny Hill Show...
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Vibe on August 20, 2012, 08:17:23 am
Before you flame me or -1 the topic, hear me out.

One of the best things (IMO) about cRPG is that you get to chose what you want to play. You're not stuck with the generic builds of Native, and you get to choose your equipment. This means that most people end up with very different characters. Of course, this does lead to trollable things, such as horse archery and invincible shields, but I believe that the benefits outweigh the few problems.

Today, however, one can simply pump strength and be fine. No need for agility in today's builds. I think that if we change one thing about strength, the spectrum of available builds can increase. The intention here isn't to stop people from playing 39 strength characters, it's to increase the validity of builds that incorporate more agility into their lifestyle.

The idea I have is to put a soft cap on the weight penalty reduction that strength provides. In turn, however, increase the bonuses from ironflesh and powerstrike by 1 damage/HP. This, in a way, will balance itself out.

  • The no AGI builds will be slower, but will do more damage and be harder to take down
  • The moderate builds with 15 AGI or more
  • The AGI builds won't gain anything from this, except that they will continue to be at their same speed, while the stronger ones in medium-heavy armor will be slightly slower.


Feedback is appreciated, as well as how to improve this suggestion.

There is no weight penalty reduction that strength provides.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: [ptx] on August 20, 2012, 08:40:31 am
There is no weight penalty reduction that strength provides.
I think he was referring to armor weight penalty on movement speed or something. Afaik, strength reduces the impact of heavy armour.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Vibe on August 20, 2012, 08:42:23 am
I think he was referring to armor weight penalty on movement speed or something. Afaik, strength reduces the impact of heavy armour.

It doesn't http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-discussion/just-another-test-this-time-strength-and-movement-speed/

The agi part is true; the strength part was false some days/weeks ago, when (on the website) you could read while pointing your cursor on strenght <<reduces the movement speed penalty caused by weight>> in a tooltip. Now this tooltip is gone.

Just because a tooltip says it doesn't mean it's true.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: [ptx] on August 20, 2012, 08:46:18 am
Whoop, okay then.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: OssumPawesome on August 28, 2012, 02:31:39 am
I don't think this change would do very much, and I'm also not sure its in the right direction.  I wouldn't mind agi builds being more powerful.  But people should be sped up rather than slowed down imo.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: GuiKa on August 29, 2012, 10:37:32 pm
I agree, str builds are too viable atm. There is a very simple solution that does not need much coding and has been suggested a few times:

Remove free wpf per level and in turn buff wpf gain from WM.

If you wanna hit faster you have to get WM. If you wanna be a str crutcher that wants to oneshot people you should be slow.

i agree
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: oprah_winfrey on August 29, 2012, 10:59:43 pm
It doesn't http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-discussion/just-another-test-this-time-strength-and-movement-speed/

This is true, however the point that should be made is that heavy armor plays into a strength builds style, and they don't care about the weight penalty. Meanwhile, it is counter productive for an agi build to wear plate armor (if they even have enough str to equip it) because it nullifies their high athletics. Also, although it doesn't effect it as much as WM does, higher strength does allow you to wear more armor without being encumbered.

With all of that being said, I agree with rustyspoons that balanced builds are the best, although having more then 6 ath (maybe 7) is only needed if you want to catch archers.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: justme on September 13, 2012, 09:47:31 pm
only reason why i am str guy is that i dont die from 2 arrows or 3 bumps.. balance them and i will respec
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Konrax on September 13, 2012, 11:59:01 pm
Athletics should be able to reduce movement penalty from armour imo.

With such low hp for agi oriented builds the extra armour still isn't worth as much as it is to a strength build. It would actually be cool to see 12 - 15 strength builds that use the highest armour class for their strength.

STR - Extra hp will yield a greater effect of the armour.
AGI - Slightly faster movement speed with athletics (almost none in plate)
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Leshma on December 05, 2012, 03:55:32 pm
Never been this bad imo. Are you planning to do something about it?
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: San on December 05, 2012, 04:57:37 pm
It would be nice if speed bonus had a slightly more pronounced effect (if possible), help giving you agility-based bulk compared to purely soaking more hits. Negative speed bonus based on the direction of the swing, not just simply moving backwards. If it's impossible to change, adding another layer on top might be possible.

Slow movement already helps you take less damage since it's less likely you'll be hit by a very effective attack. Even when stepping in, it's not that bad.
A larger speed bonus effect would offer extra damage with higher risk, and less when moving away (should be the same with horses proportional to their speed, not riding away and taking much less damage than they should).
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Rhaelys on December 21, 2012, 03:34:07 am
Strength builds are fine; the issue lies with Agility builds not providing the same return on battlefield effectiveness. As has been mentioned previously, I would like to see free WPF from levels removed and the WPF granted per level of Weapon Master increased (accompanied by a free respec) and/or simply WPF granted for each point of AGI put in. This is coming from a 30/12 Strength crutcher, too. Agility builds simply don't provide enough of a benefit, and should be buffed (rather than Strength being nerfed, because let's face it: Strength crutchers won't QQ if Agility builds are buffed - I certainly won't).
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Vibe on December 21, 2012, 09:41:28 am
They did say they are going to change how WPF/WM works.

Quote
3. speed up the gameplay
Apart from the above mentioned speed overhaul, we will also implement a new WPF curve, resulting in higher maximum WPF numbers and buffing those with weapon master skills. You can expect your wpf points to be wiped when this happens.

December 2010
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Phew on January 04, 2013, 07:31:11 pm
It would be nice if speed bonus had a slightly more pronounced effect (if possible),

Speed bonus can get pretty ridiculous. Mala one-shot me with a +3 war spear thrust the other day, I had 53 body armor and 59HP, but we were running toward each other (I have 6 Ath medium gear, Mala has 7ish Ath and light gear). When Gold ran a 12/27ish build with a +3 Awlpike in light armor, he was hitting harder than strength 2h-ers.

Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: rustyspoon on January 05, 2013, 12:16:16 am
Speed bonus can get pretty ridiculous. Mala one-shot me with a +3 war spear thrust the other day, I had 53 body armor and 59HP, but we were running toward each other (I have 6 Ath medium gear, Mala has 7ish Ath and light gear). When Gold ran a 12/27ish build with a +3 Awlpike in light armor, he was hitting harder than strength 2h-ers.

You should try a 6/33 spear build sometime. You can do a hilarious amount of damage with it.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: owens on January 05, 2013, 12:34:00 am
I think the problem is purely due to low NA skill level
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: San on January 05, 2013, 12:37:38 am
True, running at each other gives a lot of damage. I was mostly thinking about the situation where one person is S keying and doesn't really get any negative effects from it. The person moving forward should be benefited more for a higher risk/reward, but instead they just receive more damage if they get hit and don't get much return if they hit back.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Kafein on January 05, 2013, 01:31:19 am
I would suggest removing the free HP from STR instead. The wpf overhaul will come soon (^_^).

A great part of M&B combat lies in how deadly it is, which isn't where cRPG shines. I mean nobody should be able to survive 8 melee hits or a couched lance. Reducing the amount of HP people have is a direct damage buff to all weapons, which will increase the impression of speed in the gameplay.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: justme on January 05, 2013, 01:53:37 am
i suggest to balance agi too
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: In Cauda Venenum on January 05, 2013, 02:05:57 am
I mean nobody should be able to survive 8 melee hits or a couched lance.
don't even get them started
that argument will go on for days.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: NuberT on January 05, 2013, 02:27:22 am
I don't really see a reason to change anything, I don't know any 30+ str player who is topping the score board at all. Maybe buff WM and increase amor penalty slightly so agibuilds get buffed a little.

Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: San on January 05, 2013, 02:36:05 am
I would suggest removing the free HP from STR instead. The wpf overhaul will come soon (^_^).

A great part of M&B combat lies in how deadly it is, which isn't where cRPG shines. I mean nobody should be able to survive 8 melee hits or a couched lance. Reducing the amount of HP people have is a direct damage buff to ranged, which will increase the impression of speed in the gameplay.

Remove free hp, and there won't be enough health to live. I think IF should be made more important. HP +1 for every other strength and +3 HP for IF lowers hp by ~5-10, +4 HP for IF keeps things relatively the same. Surviving melee hits is a design decision by the devs for armor to mitigate more damage instead of high glance chance. At lower armor values, high HP guys still die pretty quickly.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Kafein on January 05, 2013, 04:38:00 pm
Remove free hp, and there won't be enough health to live. I think IF should be made more important. HP +1 for every other strength and +3 HP for IF lowers hp by ~5-10, +4 HP for IF keeps things relatively the same. Surviving melee hits is a design decision by the devs for armor to mitigate more damage instead of high glance chance. At lower armor values, high HP guys still die pretty quickly.

Still, armor or not, most players can make too many errors before going down.

I don't really see a reason to change anything, I don't know any 30+ str player who is topping the score board at all. Maybe buff WM and increase amor penalty slightly so agibuilds get buffed a little.



Maybe not 30+, but 30+ agi players certainly don't (which is good btw). Besides, give a maul, plate and a 30 str build to virtually anyone and that person will do good.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Camaris on January 13, 2013, 08:27:56 pm
Still, armor or not, most players can make too many errors before going down.

Maybe not 30+, but 30+ agi players certainly don't (which is good btw). Besides, give a maul, plate and a 30 str build to virtually anyone and that person will do good.

So true.
Title: Re: A Sensible way to Balance Strength
Post by: Kafein on January 14, 2013, 12:17:57 pm
I can add that me roleplaying a retarded knight (aka blocking like a third of what I should) in heavy armor and a 2h 30/9 build, I top the siege scoreboard.