[1.05 beta -steam] Cypher rebalancing?

[Cybersquirt]

a level 12 Grieving Mother went from 70 focus to 35.  Is this intentional? 

[Suen]

yes

 

Patch Notes: 1.05 (In Progress)

Balance

• Ciphers now start with 1/4 max Focus instead of 1/2.
• Wizard and Cipher's base endurance has been raised from 30 to 36, and per level from 10 to 12.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Suen

[Cybersquirt]

I saw that but her max was 95... I'll have to confirm if her max went up, I guess...  Still that statement, to me, implies she should only lose 25% not 50%...

[Luckmann]

I saw that but her max was 95... I'll have to confirm if her max went up, I guess...  Still that statement, to me, implies she should only lose 25% not 50%...

 

It's a drop from 1/2 to 1/4.

 

At level 12, in 1.04, Grieving Mother should have 70 base Focus (maximum 140 Focus).

 

In 1.05, this should become 35 base focus.

 

So it appears correct, yes. Personally, I think that's... a bit too huge. I was really hoping for a nerf from 1/2 to 1/3; 1/4 seems.. draconian.

[Cybersquirt]

Whelp, let's see if I can keep her alive long enough to cast more than 2 spells and I'll get back to you. 

[Mark L]

Yeah, I think this change was overdone. It means that in most cases the cypher can only get off 1 of his/her best spells before running out of focus. I think a 50% drop (from 1/2 to 1/4) is too much. About 1/3 or so would be better. Alternatively, maybe increase the gain of focus during combat significantly. Right now, my cypher can cast 1-2 spells, then switches to melee fighting, and the battle is over before the cypher gains enough focus to ever cast anything again.

[Elerond]

. I was really hoping for a nerf from 1/2 to 1/3; 1/4 seems.. draconian.

It is draconian, it is how Obsidian generally does balance patches in their beta versions. They either halve or double the value and see how much that influences the game and then they tune it upward or downward according to results from testing. Sometimes they keep draconian change too if it looks that it works fine. So if result of this beta testing is that Cipher's now have too little base focus then they probably tune it up in final version of 1.05 or in 1.06.

[LeonKowalski]

So the relative balance shifts to Vancian for high difficulty and/or solo play, whoopdedoo. Those are not the players you want to balance the game for, you want to balance it for the intended mode of play ... which is group based without the Vancian casters going nova all the time.

 

PS. it would be nice if the intended mode of play was enforced a little more by the game's structure, especially as far as resting is concerned, but that's a different matter.

[Keneth]

intended mode of play

Considering there's an explicit achievement for triple crown solo playthrough, I'd say your definition of "intended" is a bit lacking. All official modes of play are intended—that includes all difficulties and any number of party members including solo—and all of them deserve balance in all things.

[Elerond]

 

intended mode of play

Considering there's an explicit achievement for triple crown solo playthrough, I'd say your definition of "intended" is a bit lacking. All official modes of play are intended—that includes all difficulties and any number of party members including solo—and all of them deserve balance in all things.

 

 

Achievements don't tell what kind ways to play game is balanced for or intended be played, but to show that player has done something that developers feel is worth to be mentioned. 

[MadDemiurg]

Actually played a bit with solo cipher on 1.05 and it isn't that much different, although a bit weaker overall probably. Weapon choices are also different now. I feel like cipher is going to suffer in a party on difficulties < PotD however in a same way people were complaining about chanters - being too slow to actually cast more than 1-2 spells in most encounters since everything is dead so fast. Being a spammy caster was what people liked about cipher in the first place, so I don't think this was a good design choice, even though it was an "easy" balance fix.

Edited May 2, 2015 by MadDemiurg

[Keneth]

Achievements don't tell what kind ways to play game is balanced for or intended be played, but to show that player has done something that developers feel is worth to be mentioned.

That is almost never the case. In most cases, achievements are goals set by developers and therefore, by definition, a very much intended way of playing the game.

[Elerond]

 

Achievements don't tell what kind ways to play game is balanced for or intended be played, but to show that player has done something that developers feel is worth to be mentioned.

That is almost never the case. In most cases, achievements are goals set by developers and therefore, by definition, a very much intended way of playing the game.

 

 

Actually developers often use achievements keep track how many players have get to what point in the game. But usually they are challenge suggestions for gamers that have bested the game. But by definition limiting oneself by limits (like playing tactical group based game with only single character) that game don't put over one (by changing for example difficulty mode of the game) aren't intended ways to play the game, even if developers give one sticker for doing so. Game is balanced to those intended modes/ways to play, which of course don't mean that it can't be played by limiting oneself, but it becomes harder and more challenging and may need use of glitches/heavy meta knowledge/etc. things to actually be bested because developers have not taken account those limitations when they balanced the game. For example when PoE was released nobody in developing team wasn't succeed to achieve triple crown solo achievement and they weren't sure that if it is even possible because of that fact, which tells us quite clearly that they have not balanced game in taking account that particular way to play the game, even though they put it as achievement, which they did because they know what lengths players of their previous games have gone to challenge themselves.

[Jazou]

I don't have the beta yet, but I'm also feared my cypher build is now kind of useless with that less focus on battle starts.

Of course I build him based on the origin focus amount and after this decrease it could be really hard for him on PotD.

But I'll see... Maybe I'll have just to start over and build him in a different way considering the new changes..

[Dudraug]

I guess it is not "draconian". Cypher was VERY strong class. PoE is COMMAND rpg, I want to have party which contains 6 useful character. I want to have priest, wizard, druid in my party. But cypher was overstrong in <1.05. ANY enemy is not problem on hight cypher level, even on PotD, even with Grieving Mother.

"Solo" is very specific. I guess people who want to play "Solo triple crown" will finish game even with this cypher nerfing. I (and most part of gamer, I guess) am not intresting in solo. 

 

It is right solution. I'm not sure that 1/4 is right. For testing it I have to start new game on PotD with cypher, but I don't want to do it right now (i've finished game 3 times already). 

 

Edited May 3, 2015 by Dudraug

[Dignity]

I guess it is not "draconian". Cypher was VERY strong class. PoE is COMMAND rpg, I want to have party which contains 6 useful character. I want to have priest, wizard, druid in my party. But cypher was overstrong in <1.05. ANY enemy is not problem on hight cypher level, even on PotD, even with Grieving Mother.

"Solo" is very specific. I guess people who want to play "Solo triple crown" will finish game even with this cypher nerfing. I (and most part of gamer, I guess) am not intresting in solo. 

 

It is right solution. I'm not sure that 1/4 is right. For testing it I have to start new game on PotD with cypher, but I don't want to do it right now (i've finished game 3 times already). 

 

 

Pretty much agree with this. Cyphers were head and shoulders above pretty much any other class in terms of utility, power and alpha burst. The changes brought them more in line with the other characters however the 50% nerf was a bit overbearing. I wouldn't go so far as to call it draconian, but the change definitely lacked finesse/sophistication. I think reducing the starting amount of focus is fine, but they should either let them start with a little more (if for nothing else but to give the non-capped levels a bit more opening power) or an approach I'd prefer change their generation model both at baseline and via talents.

 

Right now, especially with the blunderbuss change (which was way more necessary than the starting focus change, especially with the new reload mechanics but I digress) rebuilding focus once it's been expended feels painfully slow. I'd like to see a cycle where you can spend-build (relatively) quickly-spend rather than the old spend-spend-spend-shoot once-spend-spend or the current spend-stick your thumb up your backside as you become a glorified rogue hoping to get focus-spend models Cyphers work with. A middle ground is definitely achievable and would probably be more fun while still being in line with other character classes.

[Slapstick87]

I see games doing this with surprising frequency. "Okay, so we all agree this thing needs a tweak? Fine, we'll do it, even though it's not what we originally had agreed upon internally during game development. HOW DO YOU LIKE THIS?! HUH? NOW IT'S IN THE GROUND! ARE YOU HAPPY YET, PUNK!?"

 

I know that's not how it goes down of course, but I'm just so surprised by the lack of gradual tweaking of damage numbers, focus points, etc. that happens, not only here, but in many games. It makes me question how much math, testing and finesse goes into the design in the first place.

Edited May 4, 2015 by Slapstick87