Author Topic: Balancing Strength  (Read 5745 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline San

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Renown: 1456
  • Infamy: 143
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • 1/Sympathy = Divide By Zero
    • View Profile
    • My youtube Brawl videos
  • Faction: Chaos
  • Game nicks: San_of_Chaos
  • IRC nick: San
Balancing Strength
« on: September 20, 2013, 05:15:52 am »
+12
I made a topic like this a year back. I pretty much have the same stance, but things have changed and I want to try to get more to the point/see what people think nowadays (more strength builds in EU, etc). This suggestion is mostly geared with melee's balance in mind, but ranged users would be able to wear a bit more armor and hybridize easier. I am not trying to buff myself since I am planning to make a 0IF character regardless, but the balance issue cannot be ignored. I just feel that agility users get unneeded penalties like a weak WM attribute and losing almost twice as many wpf points as strength builds.

  • Strength is too strong. IF is too weak.
  • WM is weak and wpf is biased towards strength/low wpf builds if you use medium+ armor

With these changes, I feel we'll have a more balanced and faster game. One type of playstyle among melee (strength) won't feel like the dominant choice and both sides will feel closer in viability.

  • Strength attribute is too strong

Reason: ~4-5 points in agility = 1 ath. 2 points in strength = 1 IF and you also get strength/5 extra damage.

What should change: Hp from strength= ceil(strength/2) instead of just strength. IF = +3 hp.

Why: That way, 5-6 strength = 1IF with the small strength/5 damage boost. Penalize low IF builds slightly, make IF more worth it. A 30 strength 0IF build just won't have as much HP as an 18 strength 6 IF build like it does currently. After using an agility melee build, IF is currently pretty useless for it. It's more effective to squeeze an extra point into ATH and just wear more armor so that you move faster and take more hits, which also doesn't make as much sense (ath is very powerful).

Optional (but highly advocated): Increase base HP ~5 so that Max IF builds have around the same HP and 0IF builds aren't penalized too harshly, maybe losing 3-6hp, not much. High strength 0IF loses more hp, but they'll still have higher base hp anyways.


  • wpf reduction is too biased towards strength builds

Reason: %based armor reduction heavily penalizes players with decent wpf levels. Wpf centralizes around 110-130. WM only gives 9wpf on a pure build, where only 5-6 points get used. 1WM essentially being 5-6 points is too weak. Even if the wpf curve is changed, most of the playerbase won't notice much if they use medium-light armor and above.

What should change: Make wpf reduction linear- a straight up subtraction.

A central wpf value needs to be chosen where above that value, armor reduction is better than it is currently. I think that value should be 140-> The equation becomes effective_wpf = base_wpf - (effective_armor_weight * 1.4). At 130, it will be *1.3 instead of 1.4, and is more lenient for lower wpf builds.

Why: This makes it so that wpf reduction from armor is unbiased. This change can also be done without messing with any plans for changing the current wpf curve. Hybrids that evenly split ~120 will be very slightly nerfed by a few points, but hybrids with a primary and secondary weapon can shave off more points on their primary weapon while having more effective wpf than they do currently in both weapons.

Pure builds buffed. 0 WM builds are nerfed, but a pure build can manage with 2-3 WM easily. Movement speed reduction from armor is pretty linear with ath relieving you of an extra ~7 weight for each point, so it's natural to believe that wpf reductoin should be linear. Also, don't fret light armor agility users, you guys will be buffed when the staff implements the new wpf curve.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2013, 05:24:28 am by san. »

Offline Kafein

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 2203
  • Infamy: 808
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2013, 09:57:53 am »
0
IF is too weak ? You are out of your mind.

Remove free HP from STR, give a +2 damage buff to all attacks of all melee weapons and voila STR fixed.

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2013, 10:08:16 am »
+4
Your proposed IF changes are no good.

Problem: Strength builds seem too good.
Your Solution: Make a stat that all Str crutchers already max out better while making str a bit lower...
Example: 33/3 with 11IF... 33+22 = 55 extra hp. Under you idea... 16(or 17)+33 = 49-50 extra hp.
Example2: 18/18 with 6IF... 18+12 = 30. with your method... 9+18 = 27.
Example3: 15/24 with 0IF... 15+0=15. with your method... 7-8+0=7-8.

If you add the extra 5 base hp then the pure str guy comes out even... the balanced build has a slight gain and the agi guy gets shafted anyways.

IF is already an amazing skill for high armour players... leave it alone I say.

The better solution is making wpf matter more or perhaps having AGI buff swing speed a bit. or maybe make athletics better... it is good and all... but it could be so much better.

It is possible that a wpf change would solve everything and chadz has been promising a wpf change for about a year now... so one of these days?

Offline PsychoTwins

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 453
  • Infamy: 162
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: FarmerBob, NinjaBob, 20PingIsHardBob, StrIsHardBob, HaxorBob
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #3 on: September 20, 2013, 10:11:25 am »
0
I really like the idea of a WPF change, would make me have to re-do my builds but I think would actually make me use WPF
Here, dear crpg folk, we have an honest man who doesn't conceal the truth out of the fear of getting nerfed. He surely deserves a round of heartfelt applause.

Offline Paul

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Renown: 1879
  • Infamy: 442
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • ball bounce boss
    • View Profile
  • IRC nick: Urist
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2013, 12:27:19 pm »
0
HP stuff is too hardcoded iirc.

Offline Nightmare798

  • Permanently Banned
  • **
  • Renown: 400
  • Infamy: 502
  • cRPG Player
  • Darksider on redemption
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #5 on: September 20, 2013, 01:35:28 pm »
0
IF is too weak ? You are out of your mind.

Remove free HP from STR, give a +2 damage buff to all attacks of all melee weapons and voila STR fixed.
cool, more insta-kills!
sounds fixed!!!
Tseng: Used to the bitter taste of refusal, this only serves to reinforce his greatest life lession yet.
Cloud: And that is?
Tseng: Bitches, man.

Offline Thomek

  • El Director
  • OKAM Developer
  • ***
  • Renown: 1372
  • Infamy: 481
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
    • Ninja Guide Wiki
  • Faction: Ninja_
  • Game nicks: Ninja_Thomek
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #6 on: September 21, 2013, 12:15:59 am »
-4
HP stuff is too hardcoded iirc.

What about a buff to agi then? Especially athletics or wpm..

Athletics could get a 1.5x that the game sees. Rounded up or down.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


That Thomeck-delay-kicking bussiness is like that asshole-retard dude that fucks your sister sometimes.

Offline Gurnisson

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1750
  • Infamy: 362
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nordmen
  • Game nicks: SeaRaider_Gurnisson
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #7 on: September 21, 2013, 12:28:36 am »
+10
Athletics definitely doesn't need a buff. It's the most powerful infantry skill already. Weapon master buff? Sure, it's below average skill.
I voted Gurnisson cause of his fucking bendy pike, I swear noone can roflcopter stab like he can.

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #8 on: September 21, 2013, 12:29:29 am »
+4
Athletics definitely doesn't need a buff. It's the most powerful infantry skill already.

thats why 13 ath guys totally dominate compared to 13 ps guys.

Offline Gurnisson

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1750
  • Infamy: 362
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nordmen
  • Game nicks: SeaRaider_Gurnisson
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #9 on: September 21, 2013, 12:44:09 am »
0
thats why 13 ath guys totally dominate compared to 13 ps guys.

If strength hadn't given hp, I'd go minimal strength all the time (12/33, 15/30 etc.) Athletics > Power Strike. However, gain from strength attributes is better than agility and Ironflesh is better than Weapon Master. A small weapon master buff would've been nice to balance it out, but I really don't really think there's a significant gap between agility-leaning builds and strength-leaning builds.
I voted Gurnisson cause of his fucking bendy pike, I swear noone can roflcopter stab like he can.

Offline Teeth

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 2550
  • Infamy: 1057
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #10 on: September 21, 2013, 12:50:07 am »
+3
Me and a lot of veteran players I have spoken to consider STR and AGI to be relatively equal and consider balanced builds optimal (when talking about battle). Having tried pretty much every STR - AGI combination in the book I find all of them effective from 9 STR up to 42 STR. More STR means you need to stick with the pack more to avoid being ganked and more AGI allows you to play more independently but makes you more prone to dying to fluke hits, ergo ranged. I'd pick a 21/21 build over any higher STR build any day because it is simply the best of both worlds and it allows for a range of weapon and armour choices while being effective with every single one of them. I tend to find

I agree with Gurnisson that there is a problem with WM and IF balance. PS and Athlethics are equally useful to me, but I'd go 0-3 WM to max my IF no doubt. The only good reason to get high WM is when you use a really slow and/or really high damage weapon, with the percentual speed increases that WM offers they benefit much more noticably. Maxed my WM for the Pike on my main and planning on maxing it on my 2h for the Flamberge, but leaving it at a measely 2-3 for my cav and 1h characters.

Offline Thomek

  • El Director
  • OKAM Developer
  • ***
  • Renown: 1372
  • Infamy: 481
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
    • Ninja Guide Wiki
  • Faction: Ninja_
  • Game nicks: Ninja_Thomek
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #11 on: September 21, 2013, 03:45:02 am »
0
Athletics definitely doesn't need a buff. It's the most powerful infantry skill already. Weapon master buff? Sure, it's below average skill.

We are still awaiting the WM rework right? Idk where Tydeus took that one..

Athletics most powerful after PS, PD and PT (All str based) perhaps.  What I thought was that since STR is too hardcoded, one could balance it out by buffing agi.

And since it should be easily possible to buff basic skills behind the curtain (As in: website says you have 10, in reality you have 15)
i suggested we buff athletics (awaiting WM rework)

But perhaps what one should do is to in stead buff AGI as a raw stat behind the curtain, and let the website limit the skill points according to visible AGI. Then AGI would would affect swing speed and running slightly as well, if I remember right.

This would all of course entail that we introduce these meta-skillpoints, with all the work and possibilities they would offer.. :)
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


That Thomeck-delay-kicking bussiness is like that asshole-retard dude that fucks your sister sometimes.

Offline San

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Renown: 1456
  • Infamy: 143
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • 1/Sympathy = Divide By Zero
    • View Profile
    • My youtube Brawl videos
  • Faction: Chaos
  • Game nicks: San_of_Chaos
  • IRC nick: San
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #12 on: September 21, 2013, 03:59:09 am »
+1
I would like all 0IF builds to be a little less tempting than they are right now. A 0IF agi guy would lose less hp than a 0IF strength guy. Maxing IF would give a few points extra hp all around, but I think that's a small price to pay for having lower average wpf. Sucks that hp can't be changed, and the other change I proposed might also not be feasible. I just assumed most basic formulas in the game could be changed.

I believe agi builds are very good, but that's mostly just the domination of athletics. Right now, I prefer having the minimum strength required to not be crippled (15-18) and just max agi afterwards. There's not too much difference from being moderately faster and much faster. Maxing your wpf also makes your swings slightly more powerful. A 5PS pure build with light armor would hit similar to a mixed 6PS build. When I estimated weapon speeds from WaltF4's graphs, ~15 wpf acts similar to an extra weapon speed. Small wpf differences are more important than one might believe.

Strength builds losing some points and agility builds gaining some points (balanced mostly unchanged) will notice quite a difference. I think any more difference and it will be too much. I also assume that the devs already have some plan for the wpf curve and will leave that to them. The 140-170 area of wpf gets hit so hard by armor, that it's easier to just take a strength/balanced build with even lighter armor so you'll take more hits, stay fast, and have decent wpf. Even so, everyone gets stuck in that 110-140 wpf range with even mid-light armor.

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #13 on: September 21, 2013, 04:40:02 am »
+1
I would like all 0IF builds to be a little less tempting than they are right now.

No! IF doesn't help me kill the enemy... it helps me survive fuck ups or bad situations... I don't want it in my build and I don't want it to be mandatory to every single build... strength already has PS/PD/PT for a mandatory skill... why give them a second?

Offline Huscarlton_Banks

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 404
  • Infamy: 15
  • cRPG Player
  • Blatant nudge spammer
    • View Profile
Re: Balancing Strength
« Reply #14 on: September 21, 2013, 06:02:18 pm »
+2
It is possible to muck around with max HP values in 1.153+ via agent_set_max_hit_points on spawn, and healing them afterward with agent_set_hit_points.

Some sort of rework of the damage system via xenoargh's fancy damage system could also work, with higher wpf causing more favorable simulated soak/reduction rolls.