Balances, or whatever

Discuss general game topics or anything else that doesn't fit in the other forums
Forum rules
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 764
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Arman » 26 Mar 2021 01:47

Kvator wrote:
25 Mar 2021 15:18
Arman wrote:
25 Mar 2021 15:07
Kvator wrote:
25 Mar 2021 14:54
if that's the case (100 CAID in total for occ guild)...
That's the core model. You can go over that 100 caid with equivalent negatives to balance it to 100 caid. For example, the Doomseekers branch of the Neidar can't wear most armours.. so have a big negative caid as they can't mitigate damage. Union and elven archers have disadvantages which give them benefits slightly over the 100 caid cap. And as stated previously, magic users who have the negative of no white damage can have their caid from their occupational guild essentially doubled.
So basically this whole CAID model is like RL-life accounting. With more creative approach a particular wizard can squeeze way more out of it for his beloved guild than the other (more 'idealistic') one while at the end of the day the numbers in 'balance calculation' will match just fine and the guilds will be considered balanced.
Kind of. The CAID model is fine* if CAID benefits are properly defined and align to the same measure. Where specials step outside the 'standardised' and well understood forms they do run the risk of 'creative accounting'. But that sort of benefit would be at the margins... not like the issue we had with the special attack formula, where 1 caid of white damage was being considered equal to 2x or 5x the equivalent caid. That is where the model stopped working as intended, and resulted in a hierarchy of guilds that got more real caid than others.

And guild masters still need to clear any changes to their guild with the AoB and AoD. So there is a sanity check on whether the changes are appropriate not just from a global balance point of view but also a thematic point of view.

*The CAID model is not perfect. It probably needs to better incorporate the benefits of combat skills and guild versatility to truly reach a finer measure of guild balance. That is on the cards for review.

Kvator
Champion
Posts: 686
Joined: 02 Sep 2010 21:25

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Kvator » 26 Mar 2021 15:58

Arman wrote:
26 Mar 2021 01:47
Kvator wrote:
25 Mar 2021 15:18
Arman wrote:
25 Mar 2021 15:07


That's the core model. You can go over that 100 caid with equivalent negatives to balance it to 100 caid. For example, the Doomseekers branch of the Neidar can't wear most armours.. so have a big negative caid as they can't mitigate damage. Union and elven archers have disadvantages which give them benefits slightly over the 100 caid cap. And as stated previously, magic users who have the negative of no white damage can have their caid from their occupational guild essentially doubled.
So basically this whole CAID model is like RL-life accounting. With more creative approach a particular wizard can squeeze way more out of it for his beloved guild than the other (more 'idealistic') one while at the end of the day the numbers in 'balance calculation' will match just fine and the guilds will be considered balanced.
Kind of. The CAID model is fine* if CAID benefits are properly defined and align to the same measure. Where specials step outside the 'standardised' and well understood forms they do run the risk of 'creative accounting'. But that sort of benefit would be at the margins... not like the issue we had with the special attack formula, where 1 caid of white damage was being considered equal to 2x or 5x the equivalent caid. That is where the model stopped working as intended, and resulted in a hierarchy of guilds that got more real caid than others.

And guild masters still need to clear any changes to their guild with the AoB and AoD. So there is a sanity check on whether the changes are appropriate not just from a global balance point of view but also a thematic point of view.

*The CAID model is not perfect. It probably needs to better incorporate the benefits of combat skills and guild versatility to truly reach a finer measure of guild balance. That is on the cards for review.
Thank you for honest answer!

The only part that I am still a bit doubtful about are those sanity checks you've mentioned (to me it seems that these were performed by ppl who know only theoretical/numberic side of the game - like when I read 'disadvantage' and 'SU' in one sentence the only thing I can do is smirk :) ).

Nevertheless recent changes and patching pace seems very promising so hopefully game's heading in the right direction!

User avatar
Taro
Adventurer
Posts: 95
Joined: 03 Mar 2016 14:51

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Taro » 26 Mar 2021 17:01

Kvator wrote:
26 Mar 2021 15:58


when I read 'disadvantage' and 'SU' in one sentence the only thing I can do is smirk :) ).
I can think of one pretty reasonable disadvantage they have compared to any other fighter guild, and I'm not even a member.
“There was this about vampires : they could never look scruffy. Instead, they were... what was the word... deshabille. It meant untidy, but with bags and bags of style.”

Kvator
Champion
Posts: 686
Joined: 02 Sep 2010 21:25

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Kvator » 26 Mar 2021 18:07

Taro wrote:
26 Mar 2021 17:01
Kvator wrote:
26 Mar 2021 15:58


when I read 'disadvantage' and 'SU' in one sentence the only thing I can do is smirk :) ).
I can think of one pretty reasonable disadvantage they have compared to any other fighter guild, and I'm not even a member.
and yet somehow the big part of domain in which SU is located is written around this 'guild-specific' disadvantage (weapons requirements, mob hits etc.) - creative accounting at its finest
ohh and btw - I am putting myself into same disadvantage while being 'tank' class (to keep heal spam going), beacuse it's just worth it (so for SU/Minstrel* - which is pretty popular combo nowadays - this 'disadvantage' is completely nullified)

* i am aware that allowed races/guild combos etc are not part of balance calculation, but it's just wrong imho

Dan
Adventurer
Posts: 88
Joined: 25 Jan 2015 10:38

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Dan » 27 Mar 2021 08:32

Thematically stuff:
It feels just wrong when you get racehate hit for a billion hitpoints with the neidars racehate toward your goblin kin, while their 3 goblin teammates also are bashing your skull in... hypocritic at best, altho a very lethal form of hypocrism.

Add to that, all the extra abilities seems to be good centered : rescue, move behind, block, brawl, racehate (big boost now), knight 18 second charge-trick (rescue someone then horsecharge = two people damage immune while 1 is still hitting back on opponents yay), taunt that seems to work compared to dragonfear that doesnt, evasion etc.

No wonder the agressionpact the rangers knights and neidars made recently while they're in godmode.

Kvator
Champion
Posts: 686
Joined: 02 Sep 2010 21:25

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Kvator » 27 Mar 2021 12:55

Dan wrote:
27 Mar 2021 08:32
Thematically stuff:
It feels just wrong when you get racehate hit for a billion hitpoints with the neidars racehate toward your goblin kin, while their 3 goblin teammates also are bashing your skull in... hypocritic at best, altho a very lethal form of hypocrism.

Add to that, all the extra abilities seems to be good centered : rescue, move behind, block, brawl, racehate (big boost now), knight 18 second charge-trick (rescue someone then horsecharge = two people damage immune while 1 is still hitting back on opponents yay), taunt that seems to work compared to dragonfear that doesnt, evasion etc.

No wonder the agressionpact the rangers knights and neidars made recently while they're in godmode.
well all these 'team-oriented' skills (rescue, move behind) should be global (with mobs having them also!) with appropriate guilds having them skilled to higher extend (tanky guilds rescue, dps guilds move behind) + there should be substantial cdr for both with some global counter skill implemented (like 'break formation' or something) and all 3 should be based on discipline so finally there's use for this stat ;)

and dragonfear works fine (just doesn't stack)

btw - wondering what's the approximate CAID for these skills like rescue and move behind (which is best def skill for dps-oriented guilds)?

Rache
Adventurer
Posts: 83
Joined: 05 Aug 2019 22:31
Location: Kaiserslautern

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Rache » 28 Mar 2021 14:01

Kvator wrote:
27 Mar 2021 12:55
well all these 'team-oriented' skills (rescue, move behind) should be global (with mobs having them also!) with appropriate guilds having them skilled to higher extend (tanky guilds rescue, dps guilds move behind) + there should be substantial cdr for both with some global counter skill implemented (like 'break formation' or something) and all 3 should be based on discipline so finally there's use for this stat ;)

and dragonfear works fine (just doesn't stack)

btw - wondering what's the approximate CAID for these skills like rescue and move behind (which is best def skill for dps-oriented guilds)?
Army of Angmar has move behind. Figure that one out! Perhaps DA's could have rescue, but to order someone to fall back the "rescuer" would have to be a higher rank?

I hear what you're saying, but if suddenly everyone has the same abilities (unless there's a significant failure chance with low skill) then it just feels like everything loses all uniqueness.

Speaking of rescue, though, I think it should be altered in its current form. Tank-splitting is now the new "meta" and it provides a significant advantage in the games' current state and is almost unbalanced. Maybe when you "rescue" someone, you take all the enemies off them?

Kvator
Champion
Posts: 686
Joined: 02 Sep 2010 21:25

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Kvator » 28 Mar 2021 14:24

Rache wrote:
28 Mar 2021 14:01
Kvator wrote:
27 Mar 2021 12:55
well all these 'team-oriented' skills (rescue, move behind) should be global (with mobs having them also!) with appropriate guilds having them skilled to higher extend (tanky guilds rescue, dps guilds move behind) + there should be substantial cdr for both with some global counter skill implemented (like 'break formation' or something) and all 3 should be based on discipline so finally there's use for this stat ;)

and dragonfear works fine (just doesn't stack)

btw - wondering what's the approximate CAID for these skills like rescue and move behind (which is best def skill for dps-oriented guilds)?
Army of Angmar has move behind. Figure that one out! Perhaps DA's could have rescue, but to order someone to fall back the "rescuer" would have to be a higher rank?

I hear what you're saying, but if suddenly everyone has the same abilities (unless there's a significant failure chance with low skill) then it just feels like everything loses all uniqueness.

Speaking of rescue, though, I think it should be altered in its current form. Tank-splitting is now the new "meta" and it provides a significant advantage in the games' current state and is almost unbalanced. Maybe when you "rescue" someone, you take all the enemies off them?
Yup - move behind in tank guild is pretty funny thing.
There should be bigger fail rate / bigger cdr / counterskill to attack dudes through their 'bodyguards'. Basically a full new mechanic of team-oriented skills (both for players and mobs) could make the game more interesting and balanaced actually (when I see that Calians have both best offensive special and best defensive ability from DPS-guild POV and somehow they made it past balance 'sanity-check' then I think something's not working properly in that department)

Nerull
Wizard
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jul 2014 23:24

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Nerull » 28 Mar 2021 15:24

Well, tankrotators are combat multipliers, and the distribution of them is...ehm...way off by...magnitudes.

They dramatically increases the odds of survival in both pvp and pve content, and may negate focusfiring because damage is distrbuted over the whole or part of the team.

The concept is easy. In a 2 vs 2 fight, where one can distribute the damage evently while focusing down on 1 target, they will kill 1 of the enemy team at 50% of the fight, of which that team is reduced from 2 to 1, and loses 50% dps, while the other team keeps 100% dps. Under the premise that dps and tank is the same for both teams, the team with the rotator can never lose. If the dps and the tank is superior, well....it will only get worse, and more players are needed on the team that doesnt have a rotator in order to compensate.

But, I wonder: If I execute a special attack at X, and somebody (new tank Y) rescues him, will my special fire on Y, or X, or is it negated?

I've heard anecdotes that some rotators may results in the latter (which means that a net high caid loss for the enemy, completely for free, and therefore technically not legal and will be a major problem). If the special fires on the point of the team's new tank (y) as normal, then it's fine.

Do we have any data on this though?

Nerull
Wizard
Posts: 303
Joined: 05 Jul 2014 23:24

Re: Balances, or whatever

Post by Nerull » 28 Mar 2021 15:54

Rache wrote:
28 Mar 2021 14:01
Kvator wrote:
27 Mar 2021 12:55
well all these 'team-oriented' skills (rescue, move behind) should be global (with mobs having them also!) with appropriate guilds having them skilled to higher extend (tanky guilds rescue, dps guilds move behind) + there should be substantial cdr for both with some global counter skill implemented (like 'break formation' or something) and all 3 should be based on discipline so finally there's use for this stat ;)

and dragonfear works fine (just doesn't stack)

btw - wondering what's the approximate CAID for these skills like rescue and move behind (which is best def skill for dps-oriented guilds)?
I hear what you're saying, but if suddenly everyone has the same abilities (unless there's a significant failure chance with low skill) then it just feels like everything loses all uniqueness.
Ideally, that would be the best, but some coreabilties will be mirrored nomatter what. An extreme example would be like the concept of healing, or healingspells - to give that to only 1 guild, or alignmentfaction, would be a fatal designflaw in games that require healers to keep tanks alive in pvp and endgame content.

Tankrotators are abundant on the goodie side, but exists only on 1 guild on the evil side, and this is also a critical gamedesign failure, UNLESS, some new mechanism to either counter it, or act/give similar benefits in pve and pvp encounters.

Ideas that springs to my mind: Phalanx/group curses - any damage distributed evenly between a team with a rotator, is seeded back to one member only, regardless of protections, which negates the effect of the phalanx and Evens out the advantage. Would still be abit weird if it was...evil only though? I'm sure players would complain.

Unique ideas or abilities can be conceptually be quite cool, IF there are counters to them. Else, the safest bet is a more symmetrically approach to ensure that neither side complains about them.

Post Reply
http://tworzymyatmosfere.pl/przescieradla-jedwabne-z-gumka/