Jump to content

Erik-Dirk

Members
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

About Erik-Dirk

  • Rank
    (2) Evoker
  1. I think a lot of the Tyranny politics kind of fell apart if you chose the "good path" or chose to take the tiers for yourself, I remember a few times being absolutely baffled as to why my character would want to go back to Tunons court.
  2. Why wasn't White March end game content? While the story was quite good, I felt the initial motive for the watcher to put aside the current, far more personal and pressing mission so that they could journey into the mountains on the off chance that they can open the battery, a slight stretch. It probably would have made more sense story wise if it had been end game content.
  3. I think you misunderstood what I was suggesting, think more along the lines of we gain a power level every level. (Abilities are treated as x levels lower not multiclass in general) Empower treats the ability as though it was x levels higher. It seems to me a much easier mechanic to understand and quantify. As Wormerine alluded to, I'm pretty sure must people on this forum will be fine with power levels, however it is likely to be a barrier to understanding for new/casual players. Perhaps i should rephrase to "Empower increases the Effects of an ability by +x levels" so there can be no confusion about accuracy etc.
  4. I think this idea is just as likely to be able to balance the classes as any other idea, my only criticism is that it'll result in a larger power bloat at high levels. I.e. a level 20 single class will receive a +x% on around 21 abilities. I know the previous suggestion was slightly guilty of this as well, however a 1%/level and a multiclass nerf won't result is such a large power jump when you reach the highest power level. p.s. im aware of the diminishing returns from low level abilities but it still adds up.
  5. I know power levels have thus far been inconsistently and poorly implemented, I can see how the system will potentially work. However I can see only see potential issues and no clear benefit to this system; Power level is less clear, if a spell does 5dps + 1dps/3 levels I instantly understand, currently I'd have to look at a table. Character powers will dramatically spike at certain levels. At tier 3 a cipher will gain access to biting whip as well as a boost to many abilities, and potentially existing passives. This jump will be even more obvious with a multiclass character. (If powers scale with level then less abilities will coincide with access to a new tier. The tool tips can't easily tell you how many level until an ability increase as well as the effects of empower. (E.g. Currently it'd have to say something like 2 power levels away from an upgrade, (6 levels). If abilities were affected by level the can scale in a perfectly linear fashion. So in conclusion what does "power level" actually bring to the game as opposed to simply saying that multiclass are considered 2 levels below single class for abilities? The clarity of the system is my main issue.
  6. To achieve a reasonable balance the tier zero passives would need to start at 50% (Given level and power level are the same at level 1). This could be raised later to somewhere between 60-80% depending on how much power level affects abilities, how powerful top tier abilities are, how useful resistances prove to be at high level etc. I think other passives will likely need to be scaled down as well, remember that multi-class gets access to additional points, as well as a much broader selection of passives. Also I don't see that passives need to be linked with power level (With the exception of constant recovery) It could be made very simple. Single class gains 100% Passives, Multi class gets 50% +1%per level Even constant recovery would perhaps be better if it was changed to something along the lines of: Single class: 5Hp/3sec +1/every second level Multiclass: 3Hp/4sec +1/every second level This can be written in the ability tree and new players should easy be able to understand what this means. Just because we have a more complex system available doesn't mean it's the best option.
  7. Actually pets can pretty easily be nerfed without breaking them. Health:100% Damage:50-70% Bonus for attacking the same target:50-70% Bereavement penalty: 50-70% Disengagement attacks do 100% single class damage. Personally I'd think it'd be easier coding wise to reduce multi class passives by a straight 70%, then implement power levels after we get a chance to see how this balances. One exception to this is constant recovery, this ability is powerful at low levels but starts to become obsolete at high level, this is an ability that really should scale with level/power level.
  8. I think your totally missing the point, As a simplified example lets pretend 3 classes receive a different passive but receive the same passive each level. Character 1: 10% increased damage each tier Character 2: 10% Increase attack speed each tier Character 3: 5% increase in speed + 5% increase in damage. The third character will obviously be the most powerful. Therefore level 0 abilities could be nerfed by 50% and at the start of the game a multiclass will still be more powerful. Now at level 20 Single class will have access to 10 tiers of passives Multiclass will have access to 16 (8 if they're halved) So yes multiclass are 20% weaker Lets change the nerf to 62.5% 8*0.625=10 Therefore assuming relatively even value of the strongest class passives multiclass should be 62.5% of a single class. (not that far from 50%) Ideally they should scale for balance; level 0 abilities should be 50%, tier 7 80% but I don't necessarily see this working. We can also completely remove the slightly arbitrary power level penalty for multiclass.
  9. To fix this, the mentioned passives should be toned down (and upscaled later with power levels) to match other classes' low-level abilities. (Mechanically halving multi-class passives might not be enough.) I don't quite follow your logic here; if passives scale with power level wont this mean multiclass passives will always be greater than 50%? Mechanically halving passives for multiclass wont be quite enough by itself, as they will often build better upon each other, however while the higher tiered passives may not be better than lower tiers they are still useful which multiclass either get later or can't get. For this reason the Paladin/Berserker should be slightly more powerful before taking these into account. The issues is that currently they get 100% passive benefits which is obviously going to cause imbalance. A straight 50-60% reduction to multiclass passives is worth exploring and likely easier to implement. While resistances may be harder to implement there are always ways the ability can be modified. E.g. Confuse immunity: Damage to allies is halved Paralyzed Immunity: Action Speed/movement is halved Armour penetration/Armour: Perhaps introduce 75% damage reduction for under penetration less than 1 or ability is applied 50% of the time
  10. @KaineParker, don't be a tool and break up peoples paragraphs to make them look like an idiot, the paragraph was obviously supposed to be read as a whole. Given that the major disadvantage of multiclass characters is not being able to get those abilities, it very much does matter. I regards to your comment that multiclass characters are more complicated to build, therefore they should be more powerful. This is currently false. A cipher multiclass is worthwhile for just the 40% damage boost, there is nothing complicate or clever about this. Just a significant power boost. In regards to higher tier active abilities being more powerful your probably right. However I don't believe it's the synergy between abilities that currently make multiclass characters more powerful; passives are the main problem, especially the over powered low level abilities like carnage which a multiclass will often get between 1.6x to 2x the number of options, as well as the points to spend on them
  11. As I mentioned earlier, Passive abilities definitely need to be included in this and treated separately since multi class will have access to 6 additional tiers as well as points to spend on them. Cipher is not even the best multiclass combo however with biting whip you do 40% extra damage. This means you need to reduce active abilities by 28% just to bring them down to the same level. Given you'll do 140% damage on an auto attack we might find some abilities do a lower DPS. (At this point the Multiclass has access to only 2 additional tiers) I don't think it matters how powerful the 8-9 abilities are. If new players are recommended to play singles class and they are very noticeably weaker for everything but the end game then this is a terrible design to bring in new players. If the access to higher tiers is supposed to improve single class then higher tiers need to be noticeably better throughout the game. However I don't really like this as it means you would rarely, if ever, pick a lower tier ability at a later point in the game (I.e. less versatility)
  12. Nice ideas, although we can't add anything else to Might/strength otherwise it'll be more valuable than dex. (Currently might is more useful for limited abilities, dex is more useful for on hit effects/casting buffs) Although this could balance nicely if Might was an additive effect. In the strength option I'd move concentration under strength too (strength becomes a dump stat for classic casters builds) I also liked your older ideas of constution affecting healing received as well as resolve effecting crits in some way All the hybrid solutions would probably make things a little too complicated though, also I think it's fair that they need to sacrifice versatility if they intend to min/max.
  13. It's not ok for most single classes to be very underpowered for the first 3/4 of the game. Especially since single class is supposedly the simpler build recommended for new players.
  14. Rather than having long cast times could we just make it possible to interrupt DOT/Buff/Affliction effects.
  15. If we further restrict the tiers then maybe we won't require any reduction of power level i.e. Casting that one fireball is exactly half as good as a single class wizard with 2, you can then say autoattack and/or do what your other class is designed to do. Pure casters could potentially be treated differently. A druid/wizard would have access to exactly the same number of spells/potential casts, you can equip items with per encounter abilities, or use self buffing spells to synergize with your other class. This is another solution but for Transcendent suffering i'd say this is an exception, the skill is fine as it is as it just makes a weapon viable, possibly slightly under powered, definitely should scale with level rather than power, (I didn't mean that we blindly have to halve passives) I had already thought of pets but there's a pretty simple solution; Full health/defense, however damage, bonus and penalties are all halved. (Pet healing should probably remain the same too, and perhaps the pet does 100% disengagement damage. (of single class) As I said, no one has, or is likely to come up with a perfect solution for balance. We just need to find one with promise, examine the problems and potential work around. P.s. dunehunter I wasn't specifically talking about you but some of the objections people seem to have are relatively minor problems compared to the current multiclass discrepancy. I think people should be obliged to put forward their preferred solution when objecting, unless the proposed solution is actually worse or too hard to implement. (Even every 3rd or 4th objection was accompanied by, "I think power levels will eventually be sufficient" we'd have an answer)
×
×
  • Create New...