Try reading the in-game encyclopedia. It mentions exactly which affliction replaces which.

 

It is not a simple case of supression when the penalty to stat X is higher. It has more to do with afflictions being in a "ladder", for example Frightened-->Terrified. Or hobbled->stunned->paralyzed->petrified.

 

^Above examples are out of my head, may not be exactly as in game.

 

 

Yeah, I've read it! Again, wasn't claiming that *flanked* the status effect didn't stack with other afflictions, but that (presuming it follows the stacking rules that everything else does) its effect of -10 deflection wouldn't. (just like if you have two buffs and they both buff Deflection and something else, only one of the Deflection buffs will take effect).

 

I'm pretty sure Flanked is supposed to stack, as it's not really a normal affliction.

 

Yeah, that's possible and maybe that's the logic here. Maybe it's a "passive" effect rather than a "debuff" in the stacking formula, which would make it stack with everything else. 

 

That still doesn't really make phantom foes "good" or worth taking but I guess it's slightly less horrible. Either way this is either a bug or something that needs to be clarified.

Edited March 21, 201510 yr by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

Try reading the in-game encyclopedia. It mentions exactly which affliction replaces which.

 

It is not a simple case of supression when the penalty to stat X is higher. It has more to do with afflictions being in a "ladder", for example Frightened-->Terrified. Or hobbled->stunned->paralyzed->petrified.

 

^Above examples are out of my head, may not be exactly as in game.

 

Yes but the replacement rule is another mechanism besides buff/debuff suppression. So when the character is under Hobbled & Prone afflictions, one of the Dexterity and one of the Reflex debuffs would be suppressed. Though listed under afflictions, Flanked looks like being an exception.

We may need clarification from the devs on this. Can anyone let them know about it. I mean, I would hope you could stack debuffs onto flanked. Not a big fan of the overriding character between afflictions that share similar qualities honestly, makes the affliction system bloated and overly obtuse and unintuitive (constantly checking their tooltip descriptions for example is annoying).

Edited March 21, 201510 yr by TrueMenace

I would like to first take a look at the stacking in the final game and how it will be communicated there. But I guess, you can PM developers and QA in this forum.

 

@TrueMenace, didn't you say that you are thinking about to make a Cipher guide?

 

Depending how much into detail you want to go. In case if commenting on individual abilities, maybe it would be also useful to mention the stacking rule there?

 

Likewise, as other guys were discussing their weapon preferences in the Soul Whip thread, I think it's also interesting that basically any weapon style one likes may work for Focus gathering. I mean it's logical to me now, that game sums all the float weapon damage done under the hood, and after every 4 points of damage accumulated it adds +1 to the Focus. But I'm not sure how clear it's when players are normally playing and seeing integers and rounded down-like bonuses...

(Yeah of course, on the other hand, talent Draining Whip itself is probably only tied to the number of hits)

Edited March 24, 201510 yr by ushas

I'm surprised that flanked stacks with other Deflection debuffs but I suppose it makes sense since unlike any (?) other effect you can achieve it with just positioning. That makes it more like a passive effect, and passive effects stack.

 

With the stacking, I could see the flanking Cipher spell being nice if your primary damage dealer was a rogue (ideally with a weapon or two that gives extra damage to flanked foes). Team synergy is fun.

Edited March 25, 201510 yr by Answermancer

Does anyone know how the rejuvenation of focus is actually calculated?  On the very small amount of testing I've done I don't think it's actually linked to damage but it's if you graze/hit or crit that gives you a more upward trend in the amount of focus, crit being the best misses get nothing.  I also think the level of the opponent you hit might affect things.  If you successfully graze/hit or crit a high level opponent e.g. Ogre you get more focus than you would vs a lower level opponent e.g. lion.

Am I miles off on this?  Anyone know?

You get X focus for Y damage.

To go back to the original point I am absolutely stunned that you regard what is surely the most powerful class in the game right now as needing buffing.

To go back to the original point I am absolutely stunned that you regard what is surely the most powerful class in the game right now as needing buffing.

 

well 

 

a) even if it's the most powerful class in the game, that doesn't mean it should have junk choices on its power tree  

 

b) what on earth makes you think that cipher is "the most powerful class in the game."  Did its single target DPS magically overtake rogue's overnight?  Did the debuffs/CC improve by some order of magnitude?   

Edited March 25, 201510 yr by Urthor

[...]

 

a) even if it's the most powerful class in the game, that doesn't mean it should have junk choices on its power tree  

 

[...]

 

Ignoring which class has the biggest package, this, absolutely this.

 

It's like the argument that because Paladins can tank very well, they don't need balancing and everything is fine.

 

Even if Ciphers were one shotting dragons with one power, doesn't mean that another power should be utterly useless. Quite the opposite. If Ciphers are overpowered for some reason, they should be adjusted, not have junk choices in it's power tree. Just because X is powerful doesn't make Y worthwhile.

To go back to the original point I am absolutely stunned that you regard what is surely the most powerful class in the game right now as needing buffing.

 

You're thinking Druid.

 

[...]

 

a) even if it's the most powerful class in the game, that doesn't mean it should have junk choices on its power tree  

 

[...]

 

Ignoring which class has the biggest package, this, absolutely this.

 

It's like the argument that because Paladins can tank very well, they don't need balancing and everything is fine.

 

Even if Ciphers were one shotting dragons with one power, doesn't mean that another power should be utterly useless. Quite the opposite. If Ciphers are overpowered for some reason, they should be adjusted, not have junk choices in it's power tree. Just because X is powerful doesn't make Y worthwhile.

 

 

While I agree with the sentiment, I would say that as long as there are other classes far far far worse off than the Cipher, the devs should focus on those classes instead. Also, the opening post sounded much like it wanted to express that Ciphers are too weak, which they aren't.

Edited March 25, 201510 yr by wickermoon

LOL Cipher one of the best classes in the game? Not sure if serious. Its pretty worrying that they needed to be adjusted in the day 1 patch....

LOL Cipher one of the best classes in the game? Not sure if serious. Its pretty worrying that they needed to be adjusted in the day 1 patch....

All of the classes will probably be "adjusted" in some way by the Day 1 Patch. This is no surprise whatsoever.

 

To go back to the original point I am absolutely stunned that you regard what is surely the most powerful class in the game right now as needing buffing.

 

You're thinking Druid.

 

 

Druids win battles, Ciphers win wars.

 

Or to phrase it another way...

 

Druids win battles in around 5 seconds, with several party members knocked out and maybe some permadead, Ciphers win the same battles in around 40 seconds, with everyone at nearly full health.

 

I respect Druids, but they are a class that demands a lot of sacrifices - mainly from other members of the team.

 

 

To go back to the original point I am absolutely stunned that you regard what is surely the most powerful class in the game right now as needing buffing.

 

You're thinking Druid.

 

 

Druids win battles, Ciphers win wars.

 

Or to phrase it another way...

 

Druids win battles in around 5 seconds, with several party members knocked out and maybe some permadead, Ciphers win the same battles in around 40 seconds, with everyone at nearly full health.

 

I respect Druids, but they are a class that demands a lot of sacrifices - mainly from other members of the team.

 

 

I have never seen anybody complain about Druids killing their party members, just sounds like bad positioning and unit management. I do see notes about their great damage-dealing and CC abilities, though.

Edited March 25, 201510 yr by View619

Does anyone know how the rejuvenation of focus is actually calculated?  On the very small amount of testing I've done I don't think it's actually linked to damage but it's if you graze/hit or crit that gives you a more upward trend in the amount of focus, crit being the best misses get nothing.  I also think the level of the opponent you hit might affect things.  If you successfully graze/hit or crit a high level opponent e.g. Ogre you get more focus than you would vs a lower level opponent e.g. lion.

Am I miles off on this?  Anyone know?

 

From shoddy empirical testing on several places: It looks to me that after every 4 points of weapon damage in the combat encounter, the game adds 1 point to Focus till it's full.

 

Of course, that may be wrong. However, it may be useful if you can provide some more detailed info, eg. numbers from the combat log, level and talents of Cipher, etc.

 

Having lvl 8 character with Fine War bow at disposal (no Draining Whip) I tried only auto-attack Korgrak. This is what I see:

 

Start with Focus=50.

1. attack  hit: 13.7 dam. (-> Total dam. = 13.7) & Focus=53

2. attack  hit:   9.8 dam. (-> Total dam. = 23.5) & Focus=55

3. attack crit: 21.9 dam. (-> Total dam. = 45.4) & Focus=61

4. attack crit: 21.4 dam. (-> Total dam. = 66.8 ) & Focus=66

5. attack  hit: 18.4 dam. (-> Total dam. = 85.2) &  Focus=71

 

This also looks like 1/4 of damage.

Edited March 26, 201510 yr by ushas

Sounds right, but I do believe it is every 4 points of damage within a single hit, not cumulatively over time.

So, for example if your first hit is 12.7 and your second is a 3.3 graze, you're going to add 3 focus and 0 focus, not 3 and 1.

This is particularly important with a blunderbuss, where you can end up with a big mix of hits and grazes that individually give a couple points of focus each, rather than a big lump sum of focus for the total damage of all the attacks.  (so 3,3,3,3,,7,7,7,7, gives 4 focus, but 40 damage total would give 10).

Sounds right, but I do believe it is every 4 points of damage within a single hit, not cumulatively over time.

So, for example if your first hit is 12.7 and your second is a 3.3 graze, you're going to add 3 focus and 0 focus, not 3 and 1.

This is particularly important with a blunderbuss, where you can end up with a big mix of hits and grazes that individually give a couple points of focus each, rather than a big lump sum of focus for the total damage of all the attacks.  (so 3,3,3,3,,7,7,7,7, gives 4 focus, but 40 damage total would give 10).

 

Do you believe or are those numbers from game?

For me it actually works opposite, at least in BB480. Not saing I'm right. Just few tests were done with a bluderbuss and dual wielding normal daggers at low levels. In both cases Cipher was doing several ~1 dam. hits. According to you he shouldn't get any Focus, but in fact he did. This can also be one of the reasons guys prefer to start combat by bluderbuss. I think every 4 points per single hit would be quiet punishing to low damage weapons...

Edited March 26, 201510 yr by ushas

Well, if you've tested it (and can recreate it), I'd go with those results. 

Wouldn't surprise me at all if there's a minimum of one focus per hit, or if it's 1 per 4 rounded up.

 

It's also possible that the game is tracking  percentages of focus internally but not displaying the numbers until you get a full integer.

Edited March 26, 201510 yr by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

Wouldn't surprise me at all if there's a minimum of one focus per hit, or if it's 1 per 4 rounded up.

 

It's also possible that the game is tracking  percentages of focus internally but not displaying the numbers until you get a full integer.

True. The game has an odd preference for floats, reporting them as integers and carrying on with the math anyway. It tends to feel a bit odd.

Well, if you've tested it (and can recreate it), I'd go with those results.

 

Though behaviour seems to me fairly consistent, exactly same damage numbers aren't probable to reproduce. I can provide you some screenshot or so, but the best would be if you you can try it for yourself, independently;)

 

 

Wouldn't surprise me at all if there's a minimum of one focus per hit, or if it's 1 per 4 rounded up.

So far I didn't see any focus gain, if the first hit was < 4 damage. So perhaps in BB480 it doesn't work like that.

 

It's also possible that the game is tracking percentages of focus internally but not displaying the numbers until you get a full integer.

Yes, that is what I think it does. Focus may be simple float number, rounded down only just for showing it's value in the UI...

 

True. The game has an odd preference for floats, reporting them as integers and carrying on with the math anyway. It tends to feel a bit odd.

Yeah:) I call this oddness Rounding daemon - true antagonist of the game. Many integers are floats. It's not always obvious. Well, in case of Focus people may discuss it. But I don't think many players will find out that there is something fishy with their endurance and health numbers, for example.