kmbogd

I wonder why hasn't this thread been pinned. The OP does a good job explaining one of the more convoluted mechanics that is nowhere documented (especially for martial abilities). later edit: @thelee I've seen that there has been a change in the system, perhaps during patch 3.0. Now the ability level penetration scaling is (AbilityLevel-1)x2x0.25 Also I wanted to make a suggestion. I've seen that you use the term Power Level to refer to 3 different things, this creates a bit of confusion.Of course if you understand already how the system works it's easy to see to which of the 3 things you are referring when talking about Power Level in a certain context. However, for the people that don't already know the system it will be easier if you differentiate between the 3. The first concept that I would suggest that you rename in your explanation is the principle of Ability Level instead of saying Power Level (in the context of an ability). I think this is a fitting name already used by the game. There is indeed a correlation between Ability Levels and character's Power Levels in that in the general case an ability becomes accessible to a character only when character's Power Level reaches at least the Ability Level. From this stems probably the reason for you naming these 2 concepts with the same name. But like you have very well exemplified with VileThorns, this is not always the case. Another difference is that during the game the PowerLevel (of a character) increases but that of the AbilityLevel always stays the same. The second concept that needs to be made less confusing in my opinion is that of scaling difference (between a character's Power Level and the Ability Level of the spell/martial_ability he/she is trying to use). Calling this concept also Power Level is ambiguous. I would suggest Power Level Difference (PLD) but anythings else that distinguishes it from the character's Power Level works. Other than this, just wanted to thank you for your post. It was very useful and helped me to better understand some of the stuff I was seeing and thought of (erroneously) as bugged.

It might be, but I'm not aware of such a mechanic and it was never referenced by the developers: that the primary or the full attack scales with Power Level. Also in that case a 20 lvl character should influence the ability quite a lot, thus the base dmg should be noticeably higher. But as per my findings the increase is quite low ~8% (true with respect to the max value of the range). edit: actually upon further testing I think you might be right, there seems to be an impact of Power Level (I noticed some huge differences in some other tests). It's true that I did not play this game for a while now so my memory could fail me, but I'm pretty sure I don't remember anything mentioned with respect to Power Level and primary attack/full attack scaling. This is crazy if you think that in a game like this you would like to have the features as documented as possible. Saying this I would still classify this whole situation as a bug since the abilities are obviously not documented properly in the description (they fail to mention which parts of the abilities scale with power level - not everything does - and by how much).

Hi Cdiaz, Any feedback on this, do we have any chance to get the formula unified in regards to penetration for both the normal attack and the lash attack? As of 3.0 nothing has changed.

Hi Cdiaz, As of patch 3.0 nothing has been fixed with respect to the bugs mentioned above. Any update?

Hi Cdiaz, Squid's Grasp seems to be implemented a bit differently than other similar abilities (Feather Light). So maybe it's not a bug even though it looks quite powerful to give +20% action speed for both of the weapons (or any action for that matter). It would be nice to get a confirmation on this from a developer. In any case this still happens in 3.0. Similar abilities (like Feather Light) don't exhibit this behavior.

Hi adragojlovic, Unfortunately it seems that as of patch 3.0 this still hasn't been fixed. Abilities still don't follow the weapon's base damage range. I did not notice this problem for auto-attacks. Here my character is equipped with Whispers of the Endless Path that has a lower base dmg (9-15) but comes with a cone attack. He uses Heart of Furry ability. Notice in one of the attacks the 16.2 dmg roll which exceeds the max value. As a possible cause I'm thinking that maybe the implementer added the +25% dmg increase of the ability in both the base dmg range and also as a dmg modifier (instead of keeping it only as a damage modifier). Here we come back to the case of Confounding Blind as per my initial post. Eder is using a mace (Bardatto's Luxury) which has a base weapon dmg range of 11-15. Notice the 16.3 rolled dmg. Again maybe the implementer added the +25% bonus from the ability to both the base weapon range and as a dmg modifier instead of keeping it solely as a dmg modifier.

As of 3.0 we still don't get the full -20% but still -17% (which is essentially more than 1 stacking less). The way I think this is currently implemented is rounding the - 2% recovery time to some number related to the recovery speed (the game works with speeds under the hood) and then multiply it by the number of stacks. Hence the error from rounding is increased many times. It should be 2% multiplied by the number of stacks first and then transformed into recovery speed. This way when rounding you get a much smaller error. Also I've just observed that the cone attack does not work properly in all situations. There are cases when the yellow zone displays targets as included in the area of attack but when the attack is performed they are not damaged.

As of 3.0 this still happens.Could one of the developers confirm whether this is intended or not?

As of patch 3.0 this feature still does not work. Actually now the "Devious" feature does not have any description anymore. I see that in patch 2.1 you mentioned that the feature was fixed, perhaps 3.0 re-introduced the bug.

There are a number of important bugs which have not been fixed. Also for me the game is working worse than in the 1.X versions (not sure why this happens given the fact that in the patches they said that they further optimized the game). That being said they also fixed some stuff and added some quality of life features. However, my opinion is that this game does not look yet like a polished game. Which is a bit surprising and alarming given that we are in the 3.X version.

As the title says, I decided to disable to bar from the interface menu. The reason has to do with the fact that getting information on the different effects active on characters during battles has its visibility greatly impacted due to the interface (I hope you are aware of these problems). So I wanted to make the interface as small as possible so that I can see as much meaningful game-play information. The problem is that disabling this bar is not actually implemented properly as only the abilities are not depicted, the bar itself remains:

I confirm that also for me the game seems to be working much worse lately. Cannot tell if it started in 2.1 or 3.0 as I did not play the game too much during 2.1. I experience a lot of stuttering and FPS drops. Attached are the dxdiag and output log. output_log.txt DxDiag.txt

Same thing for me, I'm stuck as I cannot end the conversation with her. This should be fixed ASAP as it's game breaking.

I can confirm this as well.

I am in patch 3.0 and I have the same problem (or a similar one) quite frequently. For me it doesn't happen when entering an area but during fights. Saving/loading or just reequipping the armor (both options possible only after the fights) fixes this for me. Here are a few examples of this occurrence from areas part of the SSS DLC: all my party members besides Aloth have become "transparent", don't know what triggered this here is the party after finishing the battle in the arena, this is a new area but the "transparency" issue remains @bartopolis1234 It would be great if you could contact a moderator to remove from the title the part with "[patch 2.1]" as it looks like it's affecting also patch 3.0. I would do it myself but seeing that it's you that started the thread, I figured that you should have the decision on this.

I confirm that as of patch 3.0 the bug where a zealous modal (originally from Pallegina) remains perpetually on the main character is not fixed.

In one of the recent interviews, one of the developers was saying that they were surprised by the large number of people that decided to get to the island without joining any faction. So, not only that it is possible, but also it looks like an important part of the player base has decided to do so.

@Cdiaz Let's consider the following example: As you can see in the top left corner, my target has 2 particularly high AR's: for crush dmg and for burn dmg. Thus, I will use a standard flail to illustrate what I'm referring to. The standard flail does only crush dmg with penetration 7 which is lower than the target's 9 crush AR. Being with 2 levels below the AR, the standard attack will have an average under-penetration dmg modifier (-50%). Now due to a known bug (which is not the point of this particular discussion), the standard flail will inherit a 20% fire lash from Modwyr which is the sword used in the other hand (character is dual wielding). The lash attack will have the same penetration as the standard attack, which in our case is 7. This is lower than the target's 11 fire AR by 4 levels, hence the lash attack will have a severe under-penetration dmg modifier (-75%). Now I will show how one under-penetration modifier is treated in a additive manner (like all the other dmg modifiers) and the other is treated in a multiplicative manner (it its own separate formula component) by looking at the combat log information in the bottom right. 1. First let's see how we can derive the 7.7 crush dmg that results from our standard attack. As depicted in the combat log, we have just 3 dmg modifiers: the one from might (36% bonus), the one from Cruelty and Curious (3% bonus) and the one from under-penetration (50% malus). We need to transform these modifiers into steps. The bonus from might has a simple and intuitive step value which is the actual bonus: Step_Might=0.36. The same can be said for Step_CrueltyAndCurious=0.03. For the malus from under-penetration the step is not so intuitive, the formula is: 1-1/(1-malus). Thus, in our case we have : Step_UnderPenetration=1-1/(1-0.5)=1-1/0.5=1-2=-1. Now, since the sum of all affecting steps is negative, 0.36+0.03+(-1)=-0.61, the standard attack has the following dmg formula: Rolled_Dmg/(1-Step_SUM), where Step_SUM is the sum of all steps (in our case Step_SUM=Step_Might+ Step_CrueltyAndCurious+Step_UnderPenetration). So, we have 12.5/(1-(-0.61))=12.5/1.61=7.76 crush dmg (displayed in the detailed info combat log as 7.7 and in the basic info combat log as 8 ). As can be seen, in the standard attack case all the dmg modifiers are treated equally in an additive way in the same component of the dmg formula. 2. Now let's consider the lash attack. We don't have a graphical representation in the combat log of the modifiers in this secondary attack but they are the 36% bonus from might, 3% bonus from Cruelty and Curious and the 75% malus from severe under-penetration. The problem here is that the under-penetration modifier is not treated like all the other modifiers, as was the case in the standard attack, but it's treated in its own component. Thus our Step_SUM consists of only Step_Might=0.36 and Step_CrueltyAndCurious=0.03. Since this Step_SUM is positive, the formula for lash damage is: Rolled_Dmg*Lash_Percent*(1+Step_SUM)*UnderPenetration_Component. In order to compute the UnderPenetration_Component we have to determine its step first: Step_UnderPenetration=1-1/(1-0.75)=1-1/0.25=1-4=-3. Since this is negative the UnderPenetration_Component=1/(1-Step_UnderPenetration)=1/(1-(-3))=1/4=0.25. Therefore, we have Lash_Dmg=12.5*0.2*(1+0.36+0.03)*0.25=0.87 fire dmg (displayed int the combat log as 0.9). As can be seen, in the lash attack the under-penetration dmg modifier is treated separately from the other dmg modifiers, which is not in line with what happens in the standard attack. Now why do I say this is most likely not intended? We need to look back at the history of the damage formulae. In the earlier BackerBeta versions also the standard attack was having the under penetration dmg modifier treated as a separate independent component. Actually even might itself was treated as separate component together with under penetration modifier and different from the rest of the dmg modifiers. Then, in the last version of the BackerBeta the standard attack formula was changed so that under penetration was moved together with all the other modifiers (only might modifier remained in its own separate component). Then at release version, the standard attack formula was changed yet again and also the might modifier got removed from its own component and moved together with all the other dmg modifiers. Thus, the trend in the standard attack formula was to remove independent components and to move all dmg modifiers together. It looks like the piece of code that implements lash attacks was not updated in accordance with this trend and so we still have that over/under penetration modifier is applied in its own component and not treated like the rest of dmg modifiers.

Yeah but he was asking specifically about sabres not other types of weapons.

For Grave Calling, 15 times stacking is something I don't think you can see inside the 60s interval except in very particular situations. Basically, when dual wielding, attack1+recovery1+attack2+recovery2 should be at most 4s (60/15). So, for each of the weapons you must have attack time + recovery time to be less or equal to 2s. 10 stacks you can reach with not too much difficulty but it will take a long time. With grave calling you should make the average computations considering 5 stacks. For this reason I think that in general Grave Bound enchant is superior to Frozen Edge. Talking about pure DPS and considering a context where the target's deflection is close to your character's accuracy, the best sabres are Tarn's Respite (enchanted with Brittle Frost) and Scordeo's Edge (enchanted with Adaptive and Tempest). Beza's blade is also good against targets with high AR presuming that you can crit them reasonably often (it's not that great against standard enemies with moderate or low AR). Aldris does not seem too good, even St. Dogga's Skull is better as it has a higher percent lash and it has an extra fire attack that can occur occasionally on any hit (not just crit). Not to mention that the extra fire attack can be upgraded to an AoE attack.

Hi Cdiaz, As of 1.1.1 lashes are still not calculated correctly as the formula is implemented in a way that I do not believe is the one intended: the problem stems from the fact that over/under penetration modifier is applied multiplicatively in the lash dmg formula. This is very different from the standard dmg formula where the over/under penetration modifier is applied additively (like all dmg modifiers). If you want I could provide a more technical answer with formulae and so on but it will be quite a long post.

When choosing Silence in Death enchantment it seems that the Quieting enchantment (the weapon comes with it by default) is removed. I don't think this is intended. Current game version 1.1.1.0064

It seems that this feature adds one more +4 accuracy than it is supposed to. In the picture attached there is only one enemy engaged but we get from Unblockable +8 accuracy instead of +4 accuracy. This happens irrespective of the number of engaged targets, it always adds an extra +4 accuracy. Current game version: 1.1.1.064.

@Phenomenum You are right. That being said, I can't think off the top of my had of any feature that affects only the attack speed. Thus, you need something that affects the overall action speed of the character in order to see an impact on the attack speed.

Devious feature of Duskfall does not seem to work (current game version is 1.1.1.0064). Even though 2 of my characters attack the same target, the one equipped with Duskfall does not get the +1 bonus penetration from devious: