Potential WPF / WM Changes

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

That formula gives some very low wpfs - only 406 total_wpf @ 18 agi, 6WM, instead of the current 580.

If you like simplified formulas though how about

total_wpf = 15*Agi + 55*WM

With this you get the following total_wpfs
@ level 30, 3 Agility, 1WM = 100 total_wpf (currently 280)
@ level 30, 6 Agility, 2WM = 200 total_wpf (currently 320)
@ level 30, 12 Agility, 4WM = 400 total_wpf (currently 430)
@ level 30, 18 Agility, 6WM = 600 total_wpf (currently 580)
@ level 30, 24 Agility, 8WM = 800 total_wpf (currently 770)
@ level 30, 30 Agility, 10WM = 1000 total_wpf (currently 1000)
@ level 30, 36 Agility, 12WM =  1200 total_wpf (currently 1270)

PROs
- It nerfs low agi or 0WM builds
- It buffs medium -> high agi/WM builds
- It nerfs extreme agi/WM builds a bit and therefore will not break anything ;)
- It still allows medium agi, low WM builds as nicely viable, keeping medium -> high WM as mainly the choice of hybrids
- It is extremely simple to calculate and explain
- It is extremely simple to change

Yeah, those 3-9str guy wm stackers are sure dangerous and overpowered, thank goat I can rest easier knowing that people with 2ps and 12wm won't be as invincible as they are now. 

[Tomas]

Yeah, those 3-9str guy wm stackers are sure dangerous and overpowered, thank goat I can rest easier knowing that people with 2ps and 12wm won't be as invincible as they are now. 

See modified post about that.  You must have started replying almost as soon as i posted since i changed that bit within 2 mins of posting

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

See modified post about that.  You must have started replying almost as soon as i posted since i changed that bit within 2 mins of posting

Well in any case there are enough solutions to the wm issue that picking one which hits people who don't deserve it in any way doesn't make sense.

[Tomas]

Well in any case there are enough solutions to the wm issue that picking one which hits people who don't deserve it in any way doesn't make sense.

OMG you are right!  The loss of 70 total_wpf from 12WM builds will make the game unplayable for 90% of the cRPG community.  I don't know anybody that uses less than 10WM and so how can I expect the entire community to wield their 6 strength requirement weapons with only 202 wpf rather than 205.  I dread to think how many mains will now be useless and unable cope with the drop in combat speed arising from the loss of those 3 vital wpf points!

(click to show/hide)

Just in case you can't detect sarcasm - are you serious???? You are going to complain about a suggestion that does everything people need/want it to because it unintentionally nerfs the least used builds in cRPG by between 1 and 5 actual_wpf points?

As for better solutions - of course there could be better solutions but so far only myself, Paul and Uumdi can be bothered to actually model them and none of those models have been without unintentional side effects.  If you have your own perfect model and equation then by all means post it so we can have a look.

[Uumdi]

Yeah, those 3-9str guy wm stackers are sure dangerous and overpowered, thank goat I can rest easier knowing that people with 2ps and 12wm won't be as invincible as they are now. 

You laugh now.... Just you wait till I get a +3 wakizashi....

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Weewum]

I think they should continue fucking up the mod until WSE2 is the final nail in the coffin.

[Uumdi]

I think they should continue fucking up the mod until WSE2 is the final nail in the coffin.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Paul]

That formula gives some very low wpfs - only 406 total_wpf @ 18 agi, 6WM, instead of the current 580.

If you like simplified formulas though how about

total_wpf =15*agi+55*WM

You can't directly tinker with the total wpf formular. You have to change the deltas instead and the new total will result from that. What can be done is that I parameterize delta wpf WM and in a similar style delta wpf agi.

So then we have:
wpf_0
delta_wpf_WM=a+b*WM       
(currently a=20 and b=10)
delta_wpf_agi=c+d*agi

total_wpf=wpf_0+sum(wpf_WM)+sum(wpf_agi)
total_wpf=wpf_0+a*WM+b*WM*(WM+1)/2+c*agi+d*agi*(agi+1)/2
total_wpf=wpf_0+WM*(a+b*(WM+1)/2)+agi*(c+d*(agi+1)/2)

You can then freely choose wpf_0, a, b,c and d for theorycrafting.

[Uumdi]

You can't directly tinker with the total wpf formular. You have to change the deltas instead and the new total will result from that. What can be done is that I parameterize delta wpf WM and in a similar style delta wpf agi.

So then we have:
wpf_0
delta_wpf_WM=a+b*WM       
(currently a=20 and b=10)
delta_wpf_agi=c+d*agi

total_wpf=wpf_0+sum(wpf_WM)+sum(wpf_agi)
total_wpf=wpf_0+a*WM+b*WM*(WM+1)/2+c*agi+d*agi*(agi+1)/2
total_wpf=wpf_0+WM*(a+b*(WM+1)/2)+agi*(c+d*(agi+1)/2)

You can then freely choose wpf_0, a, b,c and d for theorycrafting.

Its in your hands, Paul.  We have faith.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

You can't directly tinker with the total wpf formular.

To which extent (if any) is it possible to edit the actual wpf (like 2h wpf) formulas?

[Paul]

No idea if that will be changed.

[Tomas]

You can't directly tinker with the total wpf formular. You have to change the deltas instead and the new total will result from that. What can be done is that I parameterize delta wpf WM and in a similar style delta wpf agi.

So then we have:
wpf_0
delta_wpf_WM=a+b*WM       
(currently a=20 and b=10)
delta_wpf_agi=c+d*agi

total_wpf=wpf_0+sum(wpf_WM)+sum(wpf_agi)
total_wpf=wpf_0+a*WM+b*WM*(WM+1)/2+c*agi+d*agi*(agi+1)/2
total_wpf=wpf_0+WM*(a+b*(WM+1)/2)+agi*(c+d*(agi+1)/2)

You can then freely choose wpf_0, a, b,c and d for theorycrafting.

Easy
wpf_0 = 0
a = 55
b = 0
c = 15
d = 0

That gives
total_wpf=0+55*WM+0*WM*(WM+1)/2+15*agi+0*agi*(agi+1)/2

which simplifies to
total_wpf = 55*WM+15*agi

and give the results shown in my previous post using that formula

[Paul]

The problem with a fixed gain per WM is that it seems less rewarding to put a point into WM for higher level guys because of the increased wpf point demand for raising a high weapon skill. So while the total wpf formular is nice and linear, the actual gain seems diminishing for the leveling player. Hence the non-zero b in the current formular and the non-linear total wpf result.

[Kafein]

The problem with a fixed gain per WM is that it seems less rewarding to put a point into WM for higher level guys because of the increased wpf point demand for raising a high weapon skill. So while the total wpf formular is nice and linear, the actual gain seems diminishing for the leveling player. Hence the non-zero b in the current formular and the non-linear total wpf result.

It does make sense to have diminishing results IMO. Not that extreme, of course. Also, for that to be justified, all skill should have diminishing results, which isn't the case, except for PT and PD penalties.

[San]

wpf_0 = 0

a = 1
b = 11

c = 0.1
d = 0.8

People ~5-6 won't notice much difference. 7 and above notice more. No WM would only be tolerable for agi builds.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


I disagree that there should be diminishing returns for WM, since there is only a variation of 2-3 skill points between builds, and I feel those differences should feel important. Linearly increasing seems fine in most cases, but I am not so sure for wpf.

I wanted a more linear end, but because we can only change the deltas, a cap on the maximum wpf might be needed (180-210).