Balance Polishing Mod Release 1.0

[Elric Galad]

Various adjustments planned for Fire shield effects :

 

Flame Shield : 8-12 damages -> 16-24

 

Magran's Blessing : 

Fire Shield : 6-10 damages -> 12-20

Greater Fire Shield : 10-14 damages -> 20-28

 

Fire Stag Fire Shield : 10-15 damages -> 20-30

 

Fire Godlike : 3-5 damages, +20%/PL -> 3-5 damages, +50%/PL

I feared this one could have been broken early game if straight doubling damages.

 

Darcozzi LoH (new version of adjustments) :

- Cast/Recovery for LoH/GLoH/HoL set to 0.5s/2s for Darcozzi Paladini as a secondary subclass feature

- 45s fire shield which retaliates on every damage source and stacks 5 times (reapplying LoH will multiply fire shield damages)

- +4 AR vs Cold damages (no changes

- 5-8 base damages 7 base PEN (scaling +5% damages, +5% duration, +2 Acc, +0.5 PEN per Tier). (roughly a third of what Wiz Flame Shield provides)

 

This new Darcozzi version with moderate damages but stacking is meant to address 3 issues :

1) Previous version could have been too strong early on. This one starts lower but cumulating fire shield will be a valid strategy on the endgame.

2) Solves the issue of recast : LoH only lasts 5s compared to the 45s fire shield effect. You may want to recast it quickly, but then the fire shield woud have been wasted.

3) LoH and GLoH/HoL shields did stack because they were from different abilities. This was a bit obscure. I think replacing it with a global 5 Darcozzi Fire Shield stacking in total will be more clear.

Edited July 31 by Elric Galad

[Bosmer]

Hey @Elric Galad, I got the chance to play with your 3.1 changes to cipher whips and soul annihilation. After some thoughts I think that the 1.33 buff on biting whip soul annihilation is a bit too strong. It would be the right value if SA damage would increase linearly with focus spent, but that’s not the case, since the return to focus is decreasing. (Iirc the formular for the base value is 10+1/4*(foc-10) hence the first 10 focus points are four times more valuable than the additional focus.

So especially in early game and when you spam SA with low focus BPM biting whip SA is far superior to draining whip SA. I think there are two easier ways to address this

1) make SA completely linear in focus spent. So instead of the current formula the base value could be something like 0.3*foc. Than the biting whip 1.33 multipler would reflect the differences in focus. A nice side effect would be that spamming SA wouldn’t be the obvious damage maximizing strategy anymore. 

2) decrease the biting whip SA buff. There is no “right value” since the performance difference depends on the average focus spent on SA. Intuitively I would say that a 1.2 or 1.25 multiplier is still strong enough throughout the course of the game and especially early on. 

What’s your opinion? 

Edited August 1 by Bosmer

[lewis_cb]

Hi, it looks to me that Glacierbane's Shattering is bugged and doesn't suspend beneficial effects on crit. Was it known or could someone confirm? I thought of reporting it in case BPM could fix it in the future. Amazing work btw!

[Elric Galad]

9 hours ago, Bosmer said:

Hey @Elric Galad, I got the chance to play with your 3.1 changes to cipher whips and soul annihilation. After some thoughts I think that the 1.33 buff on biting whip soul annihilation is a bit too strong. It would be the right value if SA damage would increase linearly with focus spent, but that’s not the case, since the return to focus is decreasing. (Iirc the formular for the base value is 10+1/4*(foc-10) hence the first 10 focus points are four times more valuable than the additional focus.

[...]

What’s your opinion? 

Okay, that's a matter of simplified description. I corrected in the mod description page (in the ingame ability description, it would be too complicated).

The formula with BPM is 10+1/3*(foc-10), not 1.33x*(10+1/4*(foc-10)). Only the additional damages per focus spent is multiplied. The base damage isn't multiplied.

Since focus generation with biting whip is only ~75% as with draining whip, you are still paying "a little faster" the initial 10 focus ticket with Draining Whip.

Technically, Soul Annihilation isn't as efficient with Biting Whip as with Draining Whip.

 Soul Annihilation is as efficient with Biting Whip as with Draining Whip but with 2.5 less focus (so slightly slightly worse but you get more damage from the weapon part due to raw lash)

8 hours ago, lewis_cb said:

Hi, it looks to me that Glacierbane's Shattering is bugged and doesn't suspend beneficial effects on crit. Was it known or could someone confirm? I thought of reporting it in case BPM could fix it in the future. Amazing work btw!

OK, I'll check.

Edited August 1 by Elric Galad

[Bosmer]

22 minutes ago, Elric Galad said:

The formula with BPM is 10+1/3*(foc-10), not 1.33x*(10+1/4*(foc-10)). Only the additional damages per focus spent is multiplied. The base damage isn't multiplied.

Thanks for the clarification, that’s a really smart solution  

[yorname]

Hi Elric, I want to talk about SC paladin, not for any changes, just trying to figure out the current design goals for it.

I tried a high might hireling for sacred sacrifice, the two reliable and cheap ways to keep the paladin alive are withdraw and healing chain. BDD isn't long enough and the shield kind of get wasted. Withdraw is not good imo, since it basically turns the paladin into a worse freezing pillar.

If the paladin stands with exactly one ally, healing chain can be more than enough to keep him alive. I think it's an interesting way to force a specific party formation. I like the change to healing chain, so that paladin has a way to keep himself alive without spending so much time on LoH, or rely on OP stuff like original BDD.

Also because LoH has a range of 3m, just a little further than the jumping distance, it's safer to just use healing chain for all the healing needs, so that the current chain doesn't jump away. I think it's quite funny and doesn't need to be changed, the dedication of going SC should be rewarded with something more efficient than LoH.

Light of Pure Zeal, I still couldn't figure it out. The new pen seems a bit low, if we go all in on spell damage and use +2 pen food, we probably want SS + HC as well, which is also a zeal drain. All things combined the frequency of using the spell would be pretty low even with brilliant and else, which then punishes using that food. It ends up being a really situational spell that I kind of have to use against fire immune enemies, and still isn't too good for tier 9. Maybe it's actually enough to penetrate those because they all have low frost/lighting AR?

Looking forward to run a SC bleak walker when the next update comes

[lewis_cb]

Hi, I think I found another weird behaviour in case it is a bug and can be fixed by BPM.

Power Strike's primary attack & stun apply as expected the accuracy bonuses from weapons (e.g. Superb) and others (e.g. One-Handed).

However, the 2nd part of Power Strike, applying raw damage & stagger, apply neither them nor any spell-like Ability Level bonus (e.g. 6*2=12) and Power Level accuracy bonus (e.g. 1 for a level20 MC with +1 PL due to Brilliant).

Is this always the case with all weapon-based abilities that have a 2nd part (in the description the bits below where it says "Attack targets:")? or is it a bug perhaps?

Edited August 9 by lewis_cb

[Elric Galad]

12 hours ago, yorname said:

Hi Elric, I want to talk about SC paladin, not for any changes, just trying to figure out the current design goals for it.

I tried a high might hireling for sacred sacrifice, the two reliable and cheap ways to keep the paladin alive are withdraw and healing chain. BDD isn't long enough and the shield kind of get wasted. Withdraw is not good imo, since it basically turns the paladin into a worse freezing pillar.

If the paladin stands with exactly one ally, healing chain can be more than enough to keep him alive. I think it's an interesting way to force a specific party formation. I like the change to healing chain, so that paladin has a way to keep himself alive without spending so much time on LoH, or rely on OP stuff like original BDD.

Also because LoH has a range of 3m, just a little further than the jumping distance, it's safer to just use healing chain for all the healing needs, so that the current chain doesn't jump away. I think it's quite funny and doesn't need to be changed, the dedication of going SC should be rewarded with something more efficient than LoH.

Light of Pure Zeal, I still couldn't figure it out. The new pen seems a bit low, if we go all in on spell damage and use +2 pen food, we probably want SS + HC as well, which is also a zeal drain. All things combined the frequency of using the spell would be pretty low even with brilliant and else, which then punishes using that food. It ends up being a really situational spell that I kind of have to use against fire immune enemies, and still isn't too good for tier 9. Maybe it's actually enough to penetrate those because they all have low frost/lighting AR?

Looking forward to run a SC bleak walker when the next update comes

Yeah that's the point. You might have a hard time using SC paladin as a damage dealer vs fire immune, but most of them have low cold AR and a few (cough cough Dorudugan) have low electricity AR. 

The PEN can't be too high or most encounter would be solved by spamming it. Note the Base 6 dual type (10 due to Tier scaling) is exactly the same as missile salvo.

The PEN issue can somewhat be solved by using food for the few encounter that needs it. 

Anyway, LoPZ isn't a pure offensive ability. It is the strongest AoE spike heal of the game bar none. The goal of the offensive part change is to allow Paladin to somewhat contribute vs fire immune (while keeping everybody alive), not be the primary damage dealer. 

 

As you point Bleak Walker subclass rework would indeed provide an additional tool for this specific case. 

8 hours ago, lewis_cb said:

Hi, I think I found another weird behaviour in case it is a bug and can be fixed by BPM.

Power Strike's primary attack & stun apply as expected the accuracy bonuses from weapons (e.g. Superb) and others (e.g. One-Handed).

However, the 2nd part of Power Strike, applying raw damage & stagger, apply neither them nor any spell-like Ability Level bonus (e.g. 6*2=12) and Power Level accuracy bonus (e.g. 1 for a level20 MC with +1 PL due to Brilliant).

Is this always the case with all weapon-based abilities that have a 2nd part (in the description the bits below where it says "Attack targets:")? or is it a bug perhaps?

It is indeed a common feature for "2nd part" of martial attack. Monk Torment works the same. 

It can't be changed for technical reasons. 

 

But but but BPM addressed it by adding additional accuracy for the secondary part as noted in the patch note! (+15acc for Power Strike, +20acc for Inspiring Strike.) 

So don't worry, endgame efficiency is around the same as it would be with propre scaling. 

Edited August 9 by Elric Galad

[yorname]

I see your point. It's true most fights aren't that long, so burning zeal to cast it 3-4 times would single handedly win the fight.

[lewis_cb]

3 hours ago, Elric Galad said:

It is indeed a common feature for "2nd part" of martial attack. Monk Torment works the same. 

It can't be changed for technical reasons. 

 

But but but BPM addressed it by adding additional accuracy for the secondary part as noted in the patch note! (+15acc for Power Strike, +20acc for Inspiring Strike.) 

So don't worry, endgame efficiency is around the same as it would be with propre scaling. 

You are quite awesome ty!

[yorname]

I have a small request: Adratic Glow gives "+1 Casts with Level 1 Chanter/Cipher spells" to them  , which doesn't seem to do anything. Do you think it should be changed to match other classes, like your Great Soul change but weaker?

[Elric Galad]

On 8/10/2024 at 3:39 PM, yorname said:

I have a small request: Adratic Glow gives "+1 Casts with Level 1 Chanter/Cipher spells" to them  , which doesn't seem to do anything. Do you think it should be changed to match other classes, like your Great Soul change but weaker?

Yup. 

The big difference here is that I seized the opportunity of Great Soul to help Cipher and Chanter to get more ressources as SC. 

There is absolutely no need to boost MC Cipher and Chanter. Yet, getting absolutely nothing from Adra Glow and an idiotic description feels wrong for them. So I want to give them just a little something that doesn't affect balance. 

 

For Cipher, the obvious choice would be Starting Focus BUT this is technically complicated as Adra Glow is a permanent effect, not something activating at the beginning of combat. (that's the reason behind Grest Soul bizarre effect for Cipher). So I'll opt for a +max focus since I want to keep it simple. +15 max focus will do the trick. A little annoying for Ascendant but just don't bath if it annoys you. 

 

For Chanter, I don't want to mess with ressources generation (troubadour balance, MC chanters already top tier), so I will give +33% AoE Auras (similar to PoE1 Voice of the Mountain top). 

Edited August 14 by Elric Galad

[Elric Galad]

Should all the +2PEN +50% recovery modals be changed to +2PEN +25% recovery (make them good even vs 1 missing PEN)? 

Also applicable to mace modal. 

Edited August 15 by Elric Galad

[Elric Galad]

I'm probably going to tweak Avenging Storm cast/recovery time to 3s/0s. I've always felt it takes too much time to cast, which cause a loss of DPS that it has hard time to compensate for a SC druid without attack tricks. 

 

Scrolls use a different cast/reload time anyway. 

Heaven's cacophony will be buffed a bit, but the cast time buff isn't what would make the broken part more broken anyway. 

[Elric Galad]

Unbroken still feels like a very meh subclass. 

Engagement and bonus for disengagement are ok. 

The issue for me is that Shield Mastery interacts super poorly with Fighter as a whole because shield is a rather poor piece of equipment for a fighter. Why caring about your defenses when you have unbending? Shield feels like an overkill. Having a shield is also meh for Clear Out, Power Strike and all Fighter offensive abilities that work better with either 1HS or 2HS.

To be more clear, the idea isn't that Unbroken bonuses are bad (especially because their penalty aren't harsh), but that they don't synergize well with most builds. 

 

I haven't found an idea yet. Either Unbroken should remain the shield wearing fighter (possibly with an offensive bonus while wearing one) or the AR bonus shall be less conditional (work with metal armor too???). 

Edited August 15 by Elric Galad

[lewis_cb]

19 hours ago, Elric Galad said:

Should all the +2PEN +50% recovery modals be changed to +2PEN +25% recovery (make them good even vs 1 missing PEN)? 

Also applicable to mace modal. 

I'll try to do my own math based on this superb Gamefaq to see if people agree, sorry if some of it is already well known. Let's try to compare current modal vs your proposal in the key use cases (I can think of 4).
 

Light under-penetration (PEN-AR=-1):

• The -1 equates to a -25% Dmg Reduction multiplicator (3/4*DPS if alone) which has to be inverted and equates to a +33% Dmg Reduction divisor (DPS/(4/3) if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +33% Dmg Increase multiplicator, e.g. 11 points of STR.
   
• The current modal cancels the penalty above but applies a +50% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(3/2)=2/3*DPS if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +50% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 16 points of DEX. Enabling it seems detrimental in principle: 75% DPS -> 66% DPS if alone.
   
• The proposed modal cancels the penalty above but applies a +25% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(5/4)=4/5*DPS if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +25% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 8 points of DEX. Enabling it seems beneficial in principle: 75% DPS -> 80% DPS if alone.
   

Moderate under-penetration (PEN-AR=-2):

• The -2 equates to a -50% Dmg Reduction multiplicator (1/2*DPS if alone) which has to be inverted and equates to a +100% Dmg Reduction divisor (DPS/2 if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +100% Dmg Increase multiplicator, e.g. 33 points of STR.
   
• The current modal cancels the penalty above but applies a +50% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(3/2)=2/3*DPS if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +50% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 16 points of DEX. Enabling it seems beneficial in principle: 50% DPS -> 66% DPS if alone.
   
• The proposed modal cancels the penalty above but applies a +25% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(5/4)=4/5*DPS if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +25% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 8 points of DEX. Enabling it seems even more beneficial in principle: 50% DPS -> 80% DPS if alone.
   

Severe under-penetration (PEN-AR=-3):

• The -3 equates to a -75% Dmg Reduction multiplicator (1/4*DPS if alone) which has to be inverted and equates to a +300% Dmg Reduction divisor (DPS/4 if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +300% Dmg Increase multiplicator, e.g. 99 points of STR.
   
• The current modal lowers the penalty above to a -25% multiplicator (3/4*DPS if alone) but applies a +50% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(3/2)=2/3*DPS if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +33% Dmg Increase multiplicator, e.g. 11 points of STR, and a +50% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 16 points of DEX. Enabling it seems beneficial in principle: 25% DPS -> 50% DPS if alone.
   
• The proposed modal lowers the penalty above the same way but applies a +25% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(5/4)=4/5*DPS if alone). This would 'cost' or cancel out with a +33% Dmg Increase multiplicator, e.g. 11 points of STR, and a +25% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 8 points of DEX. Enabling it seems even more beneficial in principle: 25% DPS -> 60% DPS if alone.
   

2 PEN away from over-penetration (PEN+2=2*AR or 1.5*PEN+2=2*AR if crit build):

• Here we start with no Dmg Reduction multiplicator.
   
• The current modal gives a +25% Dmg Increase multiplicator (5/4*DPS if alone) but applies a +50% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(3/2)=2/3*DPS if alone). The former would 'provide' or equate to e.g. 8 points of STR, but the latter would 'cost' or cancel out with a +50% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 16 points of DEX. Enabling it seems detrimental in principle: 100% DPS -> 83% DPS if alone.
   
• The proposed modal gives a +25% Dmg Increase multiplicator (5/4*DPS if alone) but applies a +25% Time Increase divisor (DPS/(5/4)=4/5*DPS if alone). The former would 'provide' or equate to e.g. 8 points of STR, but the latter would 'cost' or cancel out with a +25% Speed Increase multiplicator, e.g. 8 points of DEX. Enabling it seems even in principle: 100% DPS -> 100% DPS if alone.
   

Note these are estimations and the exact DPS comparison depends on the final Dmg and Speed multipliers with vs without the modal, which is quite variable depending on items, buffs, etc. Math-wise, I think it is something like Final_DPS = Final_Dmg * Final_Speed = (Dmg_Mult * Dmg) * (Speed_Mult * Speed) = Dmg_Mult * Speed_Mult * DPS, with DPS = Dmg * Speed being the baseline values of the weapon. The above estimations assumed Dmg_Mult = 1 and Speed_Mult = 1 as the starting condition from which to apply the modifiers of each scenario.

For example, in the light under-penetration case, if we had Dmg_Mult = 1 and Speed_Mult = 5/2 due to items, buffs, etc, with the modal off we have Final_DPS = (1-1/3) * 5/2 * DPS = 5/3 * DPS, whereas with the current modal on we have Final_DPS = 1 * (5/2-1/2) * DPS = 2 * DPS. Thus, enabling the modal with these particular multipliers is actually beneficial despite seeming detrimental in principle.

This is because maximising Dmg_Mult * Speed_Mult tends to prefer Dmg_Mult and Speed_Mult of similar size, and because enabling the modal here induces in relative terms a smaller decrease of the big Speed_Mult (5/2 -> 2) than the increase it induces to the small Dmg_Mult (2/3 -> 1). In fact, in the light under-penetration case, enabling the current modal is generally beneficial whenever Dmg_Mult  =< 2/3 * Speed_Mult. Other cases will have different inequalities, I can try to figure them out if you want.



------------------------------------------------------------



Edit: if I got them right these are all the inequalities determining exactly when is better to turn the modal on/off with current vs proposed modal in the 4 cases. Sry for the math madness . Hoping you would like to review & discuss it:

Light under-penetration (PEN-AR=-1):

• Enabling the current modal is better than disabling it whenever (Dmg_Mult - 1/3) * Spd_Mult < Dmg_Mult * (Spd_Mult - 1/2) => ... => Dmg_Mult < 2/3 * Spd_Mult   =>  build dependant (roughly modal on if low-dmg high-spd / off if high-dmg low-spd). 
   
• Enabling the proposed modal is better than disabling it whenever (Dmg_Mult - 1/3) * Spd_Mult < Dmg_Mult * (Spd_Mult - 1/4) => ... => Dmg_Mult < 4/3 * Spd_Mult   =>  build dependant (roughly modal on if low-dmg high-spd / off if high-dmg low-spd). 
   

Moderate under-penetration (PEN-AR=-2):

• Enabling the current modal is better than disabling it whenever (Dmg_Mult - 1) * Spd_Mult < Dmg_Mult * (Spd_Mult - 1/2) => ... => Dmg_Mult < 2 * Spd_Mult   =>  modal on is almost always better.
   
• Enabling the proposed modal is better than disabling it whenever (Dmg_Mult - 1) * Spd_Mult < Dmg_Mult * (Spd_Mult - 1/4) => ... => Dmg_Mult < 4 * Spd_Mult   =>  modal on is always better.
   

Severe under-penetration (PEN-AR=-3):

• Enabling the current modal is better than disabling it whenever (Dmg_Mult - 3) * Spd_Mult < (Dmg_Mult - 1/3) * (Spd_Mult - 1/2) => ... => Dmg_Mult < 16/3 * Spd_Mult + 1/3 = 5.33 * Spd_Mult + 0.33   =>  modal on is always better.
   
• Enabling the proposed modal is better than disabling it whenever (Dmg_Mult - 3) * Spd_Mult < (Dmg_Mult - 1/3) * (Spd_Mult - 1/4) => ... => Dmg_Mult < 32/3 * Spd_Mult + 1/3 = 10.66 * Spd_Mult + 0.33   =>  modal on is always better.
   

2 PEN away from over-penetration (PEN+2=2*AR or 1.5*PEN+2=2*AR if crit build):

• Enabling the current modal is better than disabling it whenever Dmg_Mult * Spd_Mult < (Dmg_Mult + 1/4) * (Spd_Mult - 1/2) => ... => Dmg_Mult < 1/2 * Spd_Mult - 1/4   =>  build dependant (roughly modal on if low-dmg high-spd / off if high-dmg low-spd).
   
• Enabling the proposed modal is better than disabling it whenever Dmg_Mult * Spd_Mult < (Dmg_Mult + 1/4) * (Spd_Mult - 1/4) => ... => Dmg_Mult < Spd_Mult - 1/4   =>  build dependant (roughly modal on if low-dmg high-spd / off if high-dmg low-spd).
   

Roughly for the light underpen & overpen cases:
- Characters with high Dmg_Mult (e.g. 2) and low Spd_Mult (e.g. 1) are better off with the modals disabled, i.e. letting Dmg_Mult suffer a lower value rather than increasing it but lowering Spd_Mult even more.
- Characters with low Dmg_Mult (e.g. 1) and high Spd_Mult (e.g. 2) are better off with the modals enabled.
- Characters with similar Dmg_Mult (e.g. 2) and Spd_Mult (e.g. 2) are chaotic. E.g. for these values:
-- For light underpen, current modal disabled but proposed modal enabled.
-- For overpen, current modal disabled and proposed modal disabled.

Edited August 16 by lewis_cb

[NotDumbEnough]

5 hours ago, Elric Galad said:

Unbroken still feels like a very meh subclass. 

Engagement and bonus for disengagement are ok. 

The issue for me is that Shield Mastery interacts super poorly with Fighter as a whole because shield is a rather poor piece of equipment for a fighter. Why caring about your defenses when you have unbending? Shield feels like an overkill. Having a shield is also meh for Clear Out, Power Strike and all Fighter offensive abilities that work better with either 1HS or 2HS.

To be more clear, the idea isn't that Unbroken bonuses are bad (especially because their penalty aren't harsh), but that they don't synergize well with most builds. 

 

I haven't found an idea yet. Either Unbroken should remain the shield wearing fighter (possibly with an offensive bonus while wearing one) or the AR bonus shall be less conditional (work with metal armor too???). 

Maybe give them an ability similar to Monk's Parting Sorrow while they are using a shield (% chance to restore Discipline if enemy breaks engagement) as a consolation prize if the enemy is a rogue or has some other kind of teleportation ability. I find that the AI almost never breaks engagement intentionally (outside of teleporting), it makes a lot of the bonuses for disengagement attacks not very interesting unless you can terrify the enemy to force them to disengage.

Alternatively, since Unbending and Refreshing Defense incentivize the Fighter to take lots of hits rather than trying to avoid them, maybe give Unbroken some sort of passive ability like +0.5 seconds to positive effect durations when enemies miss an attack against you, as a compensation. Should probably be a small number since it might add up quite quickly and encourage infinite Brilliant etc.

[Elric Galad]

19 hours ago, NotDumbEnough said:

Maybe give them an ability similar to Monk's Parting Sorrow while they are using a shield (% chance to restore Discipline if enemy breaks engagement) as a consolation prize if the enemy is a rogue or has some other kind of teleportation ability. I find that the AI almost never breaks engagement intentionally (outside of teleporting), it makes a lot of the bonuses for disengagement attacks not very interesting unless you can terrify the enemy to force them to disengage.

Not excluded but not sure I want to add advantage to disengagement granted how unreliable it is. 

The good part with parting sorrow is that it also apply to foes killed while engaged, so a bit less conditional. 

19 hours ago, NotDumbEnough said:

Alternatively, since Unbending and Refreshing Defense incentivize the Fighter to take lots of hits rather than trying to avoid them, maybe give Unbroken some sort of passive ability like +0.5 seconds to positive effect durations when enemies miss an attack against you, as a compensation. Should probably be a small number since it might add up quite quickly and encourage infinite Brilliant etc.

Too radical I think. 

 

Other consideractions :

-15 reflex is perfectly fitting. It is part of the - 15 secondary defense tryptic with Fury Shaper and BPM Nalzpaca. 

-10% stride is fitting too. It could be even harsher if I need to en force the subclass identity. There are only a couple of fights (Doru) where minus stride is more than an inconvenience. Even in this case, items could overcome a penalty (-25% stride could still be too bad) 

- Unbroken isn't especially tanky. -15 reflex +1AR leans toward positive side, but only slightly. They are tanks because of engagement and incitative to get a shield. 

- The engagement and disengagement bonus is also perfectly fitted. 

 

That's really the shield bonus that feels i complete. If I want a shield fighter, why not Black Jacket which can instantly swap in and out shield for big Clear Out (akka what I call three handed style) ? 

 

I could also make Unbroken style swapping specialist with a benefit for all styles. But it should en force their grinding grit identity, even when offensive. 

Some Wild ideas :

-2HS could get +~100% reach (akka phalanx mastery, perfectly fitting with engagements to poke who you want) 

-1HS could get 33% miss to graze. (multiplicative with BPM confident aim and 1HS style for a total 60% miss to gracze) 

- DW could get some retaliationish feature. Maybe 100% Full Attack Riposte when missed while Blooded. Maybe too much. 

Just brainstorming ^^

Edited August 16 by Elric Galad

[yorname]

Maybe replace AR bonus with a hostile duration reduce? Either passive percentage reduction or -X sec when something something. Latter is better because not duplicate with Mage Slayer imo.

It would be quite thematic if all fighters didn't already get push pull immunity in BPM.

I feel their identity would be some kind of tank or engage master, but all fighters are eventually unkillable, and they already have several different ways to benefit from engagements. They even already have the ability to pull an enemy close so it's difficult to think of anything to add. It would be cool if a larger engagement distance is possible, but I get the feeling it's not.

I'm thinking might affliction immunity + some penalty when using a shield. Like dex or per weakness or a slower recovery. So you can choose to be extra "engaging" with a shield or just have free engagement with other weapons. Maybe too radical.

Edited August 16 by yorname

[yorname]

Or just some penalty to engaged enemy. Like accuracy or recovery. I feel this is the thing that's not radical but keeps the tank theme. You get benefits when enemies naturally just don't disengage.

[Elric Galad]

42 minutes ago, yorname said:

Or just some penalty to engaged enemy. Like accuracy or recovery. I feel this is the thing that's not radical but keeps the tank theme. You get benefits when enemies naturally just don't disengage.

This. 

This is what genericity fighters don't get (Swashys do get it through persistent distraction).

 

The most thematically fitting would be a heavy Stride penalty, persisting a bit after disengagement of course. 

 

Like -100% Stride. Gluing. Joking (or not). 

Just to show it could be powerful. 

Would be an hilariously bad synergy with disengagement attacks. 

 

Just let me think about the details. How it will work with Shield mastery. 

Edited August 16 by Elric Galad

[Elric Galad]

Ok my proposal for Unbroken :

 

-15 reflex (no change) 

-20% stride (worse than before to balance with new feature, this values is targetted so that fast runner doesn't fully compensate but the result would be a slightly lower than base speed) 

+1 engagement, +10 PEN for disengagement attacks (no change) 

Shield Mastery : when using a shield, +1 AR (players are used to it so I shall keep it) and all engaged targets get -20% action speed (similar fashion as Persistent Distraction) . 

 

Stride penalty on engaged eventually felt like one more gluing feature, which isn't that great if foes don't disengage. 

 

I chose to keep the "fighter with a shield" vibe for Unbroken. 

The new feature is strong, but it is based on the assumption that shields aren't very good for fighters since their defenses are already so high they don't really need it. 

This design offers some flexibility : you might want to play mainly without shield since the maluses aren't that bad and the free engagement does help. And just swap for shield when needed : the new feature is good enough to justify swapping vs bosses or annoying crowd, and Quickswitch does support swapping.

Or you can play mainly with a shield and just enjoy the additional tanking and debuffing. 

Edited August 17 by Elric Galad

[Hoo]

I'd like to say that several Fighter's abilities that fit with the tanky concept, such as Into The Fray(Active), Superior Deflection(Passive), Hold the Line(Passive), and so on, are still relatively weaker than similar abilities of the other classes. That's the main reason the tanky concept of Fighter seems not feeling good imo.

[Elric Galad]

9 hours ago, Hoo said:

I'd like to say that several Fighter's abilities that fit with the tanky concept, such as Into The Fray(Active), Superior Deflection(Passive), Hold the Line(Passive), and so on, are still relatively weaker than similar abilities of the other classes.

Well BPM improved Into the Fray and Hold the Line, so they are fine now, even if not fit for all builds. 

Superior Deflection has always a very averagish talent. No issue, nothing great either. 

9 hours ago, Hoo said:

That's the main reason the tanky concept of Fighter seems not feeling good imo.

Tanky concept of Fighter is perfectly fine, that's not what I said. 

But they rely on Unbending that makes them almost unkillable and +3 engagement modal (no class can get so easily such engagement galore). 

They have other cool talents (+20 vs Per/Int/Con affliction is sweet, armored grace, Refreshing defenses) but these are their selling point. 

That is what makes shield a bit redundant for them : they are much better using their second hand for offensive purpose because they almost never need a shield to begin with. 

[Okkes]

Mr Elric, what do you think about swift flurry/heartbeat drumming doesnt generating focus? Would that be too op?