Doing away with character cps in the current form. Something to ponder.

[Stalkerr]

This wasn't intended to be an end all and be all fix.  It was intended to be a first step in the process of bringing balance to the game.

I just don't understand how this could possibly address balance issues.  What issue is this intended to mitigate?

[Gardner Denver]

I just don't understand how this could possibly address balance issues.  What issue is this intended to mitigate?

Part of the problem stems from being able to make hog <whatever> and dump the bulk of your cps into str/health making him supper fast, light, acc bonuses, and able to absorb big damage from any other char with little chance of dying.  The system I'm suggesting requires you to bump up all of your stats each level rather than focus on just the one or 2 that make you more survivable.  If done right it would also help slow the growth of newer players.

[Stalkerr]

Part of the problem stems from being able to make hog <whatever> and dump the bulk of your cps into str/health making him supper fast, light, acc bonuses, and able to absorb big damage from any other char with little chance of dying.  The system I'm suggesting requires you to bump up all of your stats each level rather than focus on just the one or 2 that make you more survivable.  If done right it would also help slow the growth of newer players.

I find that is more of an issue with a broken combat acc formula, a broken concept for the smash command, and spellcasters not doing enough damage vs low MR targets.

First I Suggest an change in acc formulas

-Agility Based

Public Function CalcAccuracy(ByVal Encumberance As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Combat As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Level As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Agility As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Intellect As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Charm As Integer, _
                                 Optional ByVal ItemAccuracy As Integer = 0) As Integer
        Dim Result As Integer = 0
        Result = ItemAccuracy
        Combat = Combat + 2
        If Result = 0 Then Result = 1
        If Encumberance < 33 Then
            Result = Result + (15 - (Encumberance / 10))
        End If
        Result = (((_FindLevelValue(Level) * (Combat - 1)) + _
                 (((Combat * 2) + (Level / 2) + (Result / 2)) - 2)) * 2) + _
                 ((Agility - 50) / 3) + ((Intellect - 50) / 6)  + ((Charm - 50) / 10)
        Return Result
    End Function
Bash and Smash keep current formula
-Str Based
Public Function CalcAccuracy(ByVal Encumberance As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Combat As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Level As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Agility As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Strength As Integer, _
                                 Optional ByVal ItemAccuracy As Integer = 0) As Integer
        Dim Result As Integer = 0
        Result = ItemAccuracy
        Combat = Combat + 2
        If Result = 0 Then Result = 1
        If Encumberance < 33 Then
            Result = Result + (15 - (Encumberance / 10))
        End If
        Result = (((_FindLevelValue(Level) * (Combat - 1)) + _
                 (((Combat * 2) + (Level / 2) + (Result / 2)) - 2)) * 2) + _
                 ((Strength - 50) / 3) + ((Agility - 50) / 6)
        Return Result
    End Function


This leaves a str only build possible but limits the characters that build that way to using the bash and smash commands.  Meaning that you'll have to give up damage for defense.  I also suggest changing the smash command so that its primary focus is on utility rather than damage.  One version of this idea would make it engage the BASH command, but it would use your first 200 energy to attempt to knockdown(thus lowering the dodge and ac of the target) the enemy with your shield with damage based on a number of factors but namely the Max Damage stat on the shield(spiked shields) and the AC and DR of the shield.


As I believe that characters should be rewarded for balancing their stats and that fast, intelligent characters should do more crit damage I suggest a modifier along these lines.

When Calculating Max Damage for crits include

((int-50)/10)=X
((agi-50)/10)=y
X and Y always at least 0

Add (X+Y)-6 to max damage (before multiplier)
Meaning that If you had 100 Int and 100 agility you would get an additional +4 max damage(before the critical hit multiplier is rolled) and if you had 20 in and 20 agility you would have a -6 max damage(before the critical hit multiplier is rolled)

I believe that spellcasters need to do more damage, and that they should convert spellcasting that exceeds 100% casting rate to an MR reduction on their target.  Something along the lines of SC over 100% coverted to negative MR at 4:1 ratio. Meaning that low willpower characters would be prone to a possibility of massive damage from incoming spells.


I've taken thses idea a bit out of context, as they are from the full rework that I'm working on, but hopefully they are a directed toward the concerns that you have.

[Torque]

This code looks awesome. Vitoc throw up another Realm! There's gotta be a way DC (or someone) can streamline or superscede code without actually viewing source.

I would definitely spend hours hand testing stuff like this. Right now, I don't know what I'd be testing... just waiting around for a reset.

[Gardner Denver]

-Str Based
Public Function CalcAccuracy(ByVal Encumberance As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Combat As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Level As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Agility As Integer, _
                                 ByVal Strength As Integer, _
                                 Optional ByVal ItemAccuracy As Integer = 0) As Integer
        Dim Result As Integer = 0
        Result = ItemAccuracy
        Combat = Combat + 2
        If Result = 0 Then Result = 1
        If Encumberance < 33 Then
            Result = Result + (15 - (Encumberance / 10))
        End If
        Result = (((_FindLevelValue(Level) * (Combat - 1)) + _
                 (((Combat * 2) + (Level / 2) + (Result / 2)) - 2)) * 2) + _
                 ((Strength - 50) / 3) + ((Agility - 50) / 6)
        Return Result
    End Function

This is part of what makes hogs so OP now for silk classes.  They can get huge bonuses from their strength due to a crappy formula and low encumbrance where as a halfling, who should be super fast and accurate has to struggle to stay below 33% enc unless they run naked or almost naked.

Having said that, the change you are suggesting to agility based would make hogs (due to their very low max agility) almost non viable as almost anything.  I think you'd find that the balance might be found by using some combination of both strength and agility.

Current formula uses (Str - 50) / 3  and you proposed (Agi - 50) / 3.  What about (((Str - 50) / 6) + (Agi - 50) / 6)  instead?  This would reduce the over all effectiveness of both stats on acc but not gimp one stat in favor of another stat.

[Stalkerr]

This is part of what makes hogs so OP now for silk classes.  They can get huge bonuses from their strength due to a crappy formula and low encumbrance where as a halfling, who should be super fast and accurate has to struggle to stay below 33% enc unless they run naked or almost naked.

Having said that, the change you are suggesting to agility based would make hogs (due to their very low max agility) almost non viable as almost anything.  I think you'd find that the balance might be found by using some combination of both strength and agility.

Current formula uses (Str - 50) / 3  and you proposed (Agi - 50) / 3.  What about (((Str - 50) / 6) + (Agi - 50) / 6)  instead?  This would reduce the over all effectiveness of both stats on acc but not gimp one stat in favor of another stat.

Well, there is still Result = (((_FindLevelValue(Level) * (Combat - 1)) + _
                 (((Combat * 2) + (Level / 2) + (Result / 2)) - 2)) * 2) +

which accounts for the majority of a character's acc, and I leave the option of bash open for str based characters.  I don't recall exactly what you guys did to bash, but there is something wrong with it right now.  The combat formulas I worked out had an attack type modifer for acc in the VS ac VS dodge formulas and I think you guys were already modifying ACC by some random percentage.  I've no idea if that percentage was removed when we added the new formulas.  I'd guess no because I didnt specifically mention that they should be removed. 


I mean we could go through the number on how that formula works out, but I don't have them infornt of me atm, and the findlevelvalue part almost always trolls my brain when I'm working it out on paper.

Truthfully though, yeah suddenly half ogre thieves are going to be pretty bad.  As will hog missys, gypsies, priests, druids.  I don't think HOG was ever intended to be a viable choice for these classes though.  I think you'll find that the innate combat capabilities of warriors and their kin can overcome the acc disadvantage that Hogs have pretty early in their lives as adventures...even the combat-2's will eventually overcome it if they really have some strong desire to play a HOG.

I think the hog race was designed mostly for the tank role though, which is normally high defense coupled with low damage.

[Torque]

I'm polarizing towards "debuffing" hogs as this discussion continues. It's only a 30% exp chart, and I think having high HPS should come at a high cost. It should be an inverse proportion, really. Gaunts should do high magic damage with low hps. Hogs should do low physical damage with high hit points, but these two are just examples.

Honestly, I think hit point maxes should come down across the board a tiny bit, and health regen should go up +50% from where it is. That's probably another discussion though.

[Stalkerr]

I'm polarizing towards "debuffing" hogs as this discussion continues. It's only a 30% exp chart, and I think having high HPS should come at a high cost. It should be an inverse proportion, really. Gaunts should do high magic damage with low hps. Hogs should do low physical damage with high hit points, but these two are just examples.

Honestly, I think hit point maxes should come down across the board a tiny bit, and health regen should go up +50% from where it is. That's probably another discussion though.

There is a limit to how much your race choice effects your character...you'll eventually be effective no matter what race you choose or how you build your stats, but ultimately your race choice defines what theme your class will take.  Making an adjustment to max hps and hp rgen, to do it right, would take a pretty big overhaul of the monster database..specifically some of the more powerufl spellcasting bosses.  Consider ozzies room, which is trolly enough without reduced hp.

[Vile]

I'm polarizing towards "debuffing" hogs as this discussion continues. It's only a 30% exp chart, and I think having high HPS should come at a high cost. It should be an inverse proportion, really. Gaunts should do high magic damage with low hps. Hogs should do low physical damage with high hit points, but these two are just examples.

Honestly, I think hit point maxes should come down across the board a tiny bit, and health regen should go up +50% from where it is. That's probably another discussion though.

If anything, from a PVP point of view, hps needs to be drastically increased. Rounding someone in pvp is as unskillful as it gets and imo should never happen.

[Zetetic]

Ok, I have a suggestion of several changes made as a combination to improve our current combat system as well as several race/class imbalances that I see. My reasons and predicted results are listed below.

Decrease critical damage multiplier to x3 (from x4, leaving the rest of that damage calculation the same)

Increase min and max HP per level of all classes by 4 or perhaps 5

Impose a 10% HP penalty for any hangup at all times (in pvp or not)

*Increase HP regen when resting (exact amount or calculation yet to be determined - ideas please?)

Remove strength requirements for weapons (optional)

Intended positive effects:
-Decreases the comparative value of high half ogre hps.
-Improves survivability of low health races drastically - they will now be usable and we should see more of them.
-Should stop or drastically reduce rounding from both PVE, boss battles and PVP.
-Makes backstab a more powerful attack, valuable in both PVE and PVP.
-Reduces the average damage of all combat classes, giving an effective buff to spellcasters.
-Stops abuse of hanging up as a solution for escaping bad situations in game. It can still be used, but you only get a few shots at it.
-Does not require content changes and as such can be more easily implemented (and then tested).
-Makes low strength races an option for combat classes, while still not suited to the task (optional).

Resultant negative effects:
-Will reduce exp/hr for most classes, however this will greatly improve the reliability of scripting. *This negative will hopefully be nullified or drastically reduced by the HP regen increase.
-People would need to set a slightly higher hangup HPs, however they have more total HPs so I do not see this as a problem.

After those changes are made, I suspect there would need to be some revisions, tweaking and probably a set of round two changes, such as removing or reducing the accuracy bonus for strength. I would prefer to see how the above played out before making that change however.

*Updated original post with new ideas/modifications.

[Crabster]

Impose a 10% HP penalty for any hangup at all times (in pvp or not)

-Improves survivability of low health races drastically - they will now be usable and we should see more of them.

yep...sounds like u got er figured out cuz....

[Zetetic]

yep...sounds like u got er figured out cuz....

You did note the increase in HP per level that would mean that characters would need to hang up less? The suggestions that I made have to be taken as a whole, each one individually will not do anything useful. If you can give me your reasoning behind what I suggested not working, I'll add it to my post as a negative effect.

Now I did take your post as sarcastic in tone due to previous experience Crabs, if I was mistaken, I apologise.

[Torque]

Don't worry about Crabcakes, his words are always teetering on the 'useless' fence. I think once in awhile he has input, but his ambiguous[ly gay duo] tone is hardly helpful. Ever.

I think this is a good framework if we were to start testing without major overhauls. I htink DC's input is more of an overhaul -- and I would be very excited to help there, but if the mods aren't up to that just yet, then I think this is definitely a good start. It may turn up some other philosophy and get us going on an easier track towards an end goal either way.

The only point I'd have against it is the HP thing. It's my belief that healing is practically essential (so, overpowered), and having a large pool of hps wouldn't make it any less essential. The biggest reason I've brought up HP Regen increase across the board is to positively affect non healers.

So, throw some HP Regen on there and I'd vigorously put some man hours in on this framework.

[Vile]

I agree with Torque and Zetetic.

Player hps should be drastically higher and it should take a very short period of time to rest out of combat back to full hps.

The value of healers should be to keep everyone alive during combat.. combat that lasts for 30-40 rounds on difficult bosses, not 2 or 3. Same with PVP.

Heal spells should be buffed so healers have a chance to keep up with whatever damage is being delt to the party

This would make things very interesting.

[Zetetic]

The only point I'd have against it is the HP thing. It's my belief that healing is practically essential (so, overpowered), and having a large pool of hps wouldn't make it any less essential. The biggest reason I've brought up HP Regen increase across the board is to positively affect non healers.

So, throw some HP Regen on there and I'd vigorously put some man hours in on this framework.

Increasing HPs is currently the only way that I can see to improve low HP class longevity. Since the introduction of the q&d combat system, both player and monster max damage output has increased to ridiculous levels. All of the low hp races and classes are at a severe disadvantage for normal gameplay because of this. Both players and bosses can be killed in a single round, simply from being unlucky. Being rounded is not fun. Dying at the Dark Phoenix because your character class/race can be one rounded by the boss is punishing for no reason other than the random number generator. How many gaunts or halflings do you see in the game? Ogres have been dominant because they are much easier to script and survive. The other thing is, once we reduce the max damage from combat, boss fights will become much harder, and players will need a greater HP pool to last the difference. However I hope that this will mean that people will run and survive and try again, rather than be one rounded, realise how much they hate the game and quit playing.

Player hps should be drastically higher and it should take a very short period of time to rest out of combat back to full hps.

The value of healers should be to keep everyone alive during combat.. combat that lasts for 30-40 rounds on difficult bosses, not 2 or 3. Same with PVP.

Heal spells should be buffed so healers have a chance to keep up with whatever damage is being delt to the party

I initially wasn't sure that I agreed with the buff to HP regen - people pay in their exp table for healing, and while it is incredibly powerful, they generally pay for it in combat ability. I do see where you are coming from though and I like the idea. It would also help reduce the effect my changes have on exp/hr. I wouldn't want to increase it by too much or you tip the balance against the healers. Do you think that a 25% HP regen increase would be about right? I think that one will require a decent amount of testing to come to a final number, so would you agree to 25% as an initial implementation?

Vile: My changes are intended to be simple changes to game mechanics in order to make our fixes easy to implement. I think that with the buff to HPs healing will be more useful, as players are not likely to die from a single or even several rounds of combat. This gives the healer more time to focus their healing powers where it is needed the most before the attacker changes it's target. I do have some ideas on how to improve the scaling of player spells, including healing, buffs, curses and attack spells, but I'd like to see what my current proposal does to the game before making a start on spellcasting. I would leave it for what I would call 'round 2' changes.

I also wanted to note that I really like the ideas going in to majorly changing that combat formula that DC (and Gardners input) are providing. I really like the balance point of both strength and agility providing a bonus in equal measure. Keep up the thinking on that one, and if we could get the ideas in my above post implemented, I'd love to see the final version of your formula put in as a 'round 2' change.