Beta Speed Mod

[BrettNLowe]

Saying Fireball serves a different purpose by comparing 4 fireballs vs 2 is a little off the mark. If you are firing off 4 fireballs per fight, that means you are resting every fight, too, which is clearly not how the game was designed. As I mentioned in the Vancian thread, POE1 at least felt like it was balanced around 4 fights per rest on average.

 

Is it possible to mod attributes? I know I'm a pariah for preferring Str to Mgt, but I'm interested in seeing if you can add a 2%-per-point Armor recovery modifier to Str.

 

Anyway, back to spells - another thing I mentioned in the Vancian thread is a point system for evaluating spells. There are a lot of variables, and it would take a lot more to evaluate how a debuff compares to damage, but perhaps we could come up with some ideas on damage spells alone. If I'm not too tired after work, I'll circle back, but here are some initial thoughts.

 

First you start with a baseline - say, single target with either pierce, slashing, or crush damage - as X damage.

 

Now we can consider damage types. Is it safe to say Frost and Fire are better? Maybe set them to .9X. Then Shock or Corrode might be slightly better than those, at .8X. Raw is the strongest, so maybe it warrants a .6X. For a mixed damage type, we take at least the lowest type, then subtract a little more based on the other type. Corrode/Crush might be .8-.05=.75X. Or Shock/Burn would be .8-.1=.7X.

 

Then consider upfront vs. duration. I would consider instanced as well (magic missle vs single shot) except I don't think it matters as much now that there is no DR. The more damage is spread out over time, the less valuable it is. 6s DOT would get a minor boost - 1.05X. 12 s =1.1X, etc to 30s =1.25X. Or maybe the boost should be higher - again, this is just a starting point.

 

Then consider shapes/sizes. A small AOE might be able to hit three enemies. But That's the ideal scenario, so just dropping damage to .33X would be too much. My gut says something more like .75X. Is it Foe only? On a small AOE, that is less important, so it makes sense for a smaller penalty - maybe .7x. Medium AOE can hit more targets, but harder to use unless Foe only, so maybe we're looking at .6X vs .5X. Large is even more pronounced - let's try .5X and .35X. Other shapes are trickier. Quick gut picks: Cones are .8X/.7X, beams are .9X/.8X.

 

All of these numbers could be adjusted - this is just a theorycraft starting point. With Vancians, the main concern is balance within each spell level. For Ciphers, it is trickier because all spells have the same pool of resource.

[theBalthazar]

Personnally I have no problem with any design.

 

Problem here (I speak for myself) My two melees kill all the melee ennemies in less than 6s. So you cast your only fireball and...

 

No... you can't retarget to wizards ennemies because your out of range. (happens more often than we think.)

 

So cast only one fireball is not a problem if :

 

- I am sure there is an effect (reach) (But not totally the case with the game system of POE series Kill-Moving forward-Kill etc.)

- Damages are strongs.

 

Idea of "long casting" is good, application is more problematic.

 

You want a revelation ? There was spells of level 14-16 in POE1. Extremely powerful. But... Never used.

 

Why ? Because far too long. Not worth it. When you have a good team glass cannon, this is useless.

 

After that, yes, you can DON'T PICK fireball. It is true. So why not, after all, for slow teams.

Edited February 19, 2018 by theBalthazar

[Wormerine]

No... you can't retarget to wizards ennemies because your out of range. (happens more often than we think.)

 

How does it happen exactly? Does your spellcaster attack enemies from a different side than everyone else? From my experience enemies tend to run toward my team. Shortening a range, rather than extending it. 

 

Maybe single class melee classes are simply bad, but currently with the modded veteran, my wizard does 3x more damage than anyone else. Kalakoth's Minor Blights is really effective with 1.5 cast time - it was effecting even with a default cast time, though I am not a fan of waiting for my weapon to spawn.

[theBalthazar]

I don't speak of MaxQuest's mods in my previous post. More the last Beta.

 

Perhaps I don't understand but you move your wizard to approach it ?

 

indeed in this case you have more range.

 

Edited February 19, 2018 by theBalthazar

[CottonWolf]

Maybe single class melee classes are simply bad, but currently with the modded veteran, my wizard does 3x more damage than anyone else. Kalakoth's Minor Blights is really effective with 1.5 cast time - it was effecting even with a default cast time, though I am not a fan of waiting for my weapon to spawn.

 

I don't know how you're playing your wizard (this is more of a thing for non-conjuration focused wizards), but empowered spells are borderline broken at the moment, they're so powerful. To the extent that I don't know what people are talking about saying casters are underpowered. They utterly destroy melee at group damage and compete (though probably don't match) it at single target damage. Empower is basically limitless, as if you're getting about one character going down per fight (which, considering I'm bad at the game, on veteran I am), you'll be resting about as often than you run out.

[JFutral]

I've only played a couple of combats to check out the Speed mod. Kind of getting burnt out on Deadfire at the moment.

 

What I did notice, I am still not sure is an effect of the mod. By observation so far, though, is before: I couldn't contribute well enough as a wizard before the battle was over. Now: I run out of spell casting before the battle is over!

 

I'll try to do more testing as the mood hits me this week.

 

Joe

[MaxQuest]

Saying Fireball serves a different purpose by comparing 4 fireballs vs 2 is a little off the mark. If you are firing off 4 fireballs per fight, that means you are resting every fight, too, which is clearly not how the game was designed. As I mentioned in the Vancian thread, POE1 at least felt like it was balanced around 4 fights per rest on average.

I am thinking about spells more from a point of view of possible builds and archetypes.

Imagine that some player wants to build a aoe nuker. He take a wizard in PoE1 and happy progresses through the game. Usually 1-2 fireball is enough for his contribution, but if his party stumbles upon a not that numerous, but high-hp monsters, he knows that he will be able to pour 4x35 damage.

 

A similar wizard, in Deadfire, has only 2 spellusages per rank. And we need to make sure that he has enough spell damage to seal the encounter.

35 damage in Deadfire can not be enough; thus we increase the damage, and cast time to compensate for it.

 

Another nice thing is that heavy-hitting but slow fireball, additionally achieves the following:

- it enables a new way to play a spell nuker - alpha-strike nuker. Opening from stealth with a big surprise can be both efficient and fun. Also think of either single-class evoker; or the synergy with assassin/deathblows.

- it also enables speedy-nuker - a wizard that increases his action speed (via dex/frenzy/swift-strikes/bloodlust/potions) and can potentially reduce the 6s cast under 3s, when he really wants to invest all available resources into a fight, tipically a boss fight. And if such a speedy gonzales had only fast spells, he would quickly run out of stuff to cast.

- it makes interrupt a more meaningful part of the game.

 

Is it possible to mod attributes? I know I'm a pariah for preferring Str to Mgt, but I'm interested in seeing if you can add a 2%-per-point Armor recovery modifier to Str.

Can't mod those via editing gamedatabundles. Technically that armor recovery modifier can be added to STR, by injecting custom code into Deadfire's dll. And if IE Framework works for PoE2 it can be done; but it is quite time consuming.

 

 

Problem here (I speak for myself) My two melees kill all the melee ennemies in less than 6s. So you cast your only fireball and...

So can two evokers)

But frankly speaking the situation has been quite ameliorated, my melee dual-wielders no longer stormed through enemy ranks in under 6s, in beta 3.

 

After that, yes, you can DON'T PICK fireball. It is true. So why not, after all, for slow teams.

Exactly) you only take it if matches your playstyle and your party composition.

The task is to make sure that it is efficient enough to be viable; and that there is a way to build your party to support you, and protect from interrupts and hard-cc. And that if you want to play that way - it would be good enough. But if it doesn't match your playstyle - there should be decent alternatives.

[MaxQuest]

Btw, a question regarding weapons base damage balancing.

 

I see two ways:

v1. all weapon groups have same dps: 2H == DW_FAST == DW_SLOW == 1H_FAST == 1H_SLOW. And in this case Primary and Full attacks are adjusted in order to make all options somewhat equal. And ideally you can take anything, but the choice won't matter much.

v2. all weapon groups shine in some of their respective domain. For example fast weapons are best for plain auto-attacking. 2H for Primary Attack. DW_SLOW for Full Attack. But roughly they are ~20-30% atmost apart from each other in efficiency. And it's up to the player to figure out which is better suiting his concrete build.

 

Thoughts?)

[Wormerine]

Perhaps I don't understand but you move your wizard to approach it ?

 

indeed in this case you have more range.

 

Oh ok, now I get ya. Sorry my bad. Enemies you intended to hit are dead by the time fireball goes off and other enemies are too far. Got it. I usually tend to spread my damage (which is probably not the most optimal way to play - better to kill half of enemies quickly than damage most of them through longer period of time without actually killing anywaone) but I tend to target ranged enemies (therefore standing farther) with my ranged units and take on melee attackers last. Meantime I occupy melee enemies with a figher. 

[CottonWolf]

Btw, a question regarding weapons base damage balancing.

 

I see two ways:

v1. all weapon groups have same dps: 2H == DW_FAST == DW_SLOW == 1H_FAST == 1H_SLOW. And in this case Primary and Full attacks are adjusted in order to make all options somewhat equal. And ideally you can take anything, but the choice won't matter much.

v2. all weapon groups shine in some of their respective domain. For example fast weapons are best for plain auto-attacking. 2H for Primary Attack. DW_SLOW for Full Attack. But roughly they are ~20-30% atmost apart from each other in efficiency. And it's up to the player to figure out which is better suiting his concrete build.

 

Thoughts?)

 

Personally I think v2 is more interesting, but conceptually harder to explain to newbies.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Btw, a question regarding weapons base damage balancing.

 

I see two ways:

v1. all weapon groups have same dps: 2H == DW_FAST == DW_SLOW == 1H_FAST == 1H_SLOW. And in this case Primary and Full attacks are adjusted in order to make all options somewhat equal. And ideally you can take anything, but the choice won't matter much.

v2. all weapon groups shine in some of their respective domain. For example fast weapons are best for plain auto-attacking. 2H for Primary Attack. DW_SLOW for Full Attack. But roughly they are ~20-30% atmost apart from each other in efficiency. And it's up to the player to figure out which is better suiting his concrete build.

 

Thoughts?)

I think the best scheme for optimal dps would be something like DW_Fast > SW_Slow > 1H_Fast > 2H = 1H > Shield_Fast > Shield_Slow. HOWEVER, Pen would be adjusted so it works similar to PoE where 2H > Slow > Fast would be better against higher armor. If single handed retains the accuracy boost, we have a situation similar to PoE balance where DW has best dps under optimal conditions, 2H is best against high AR enemies, 1H is best against high defense enemies, and Shield remains best for absorbing damage. A big issue with deadfire beta in terms of weapon balance is the previous opportunity cost for using fast weapons has been removed and they now perform the same against armor as slow and 2H thus leading to an absolute dps advantage instead of a conditional advantage. A remedy I thought of was to have Fast have a base Pen of 4, Slow have a base Pen of 5, and 2H have a base Pen of 7, or effective against naked/light/medium armor respectively.

[Nixl]

I will download this once I get home.  Thanks for the time/effort MaxQuest!  

 

I can understand long cast times for late-game spells, just not for early tier spells.  One example that bothers me in particular is the cast times for Blessing (tier 1 perception buff) and Dire Blessing (tier 3 perception buff, plus hit conversion).  Dire Blessing is definitely an upgraded Blessing, yet Blessing has the same cast time as its upgraded version last time I checked (has it changed, or did I not notice a difference?).  I would expect spells to have a cast time in relation to what the spells do (i.e., the stronger the spell, the longer the cast time).  Instead, every spell appears to have long cast times regardless of the quality of the spell.  

Edited February 19, 2018 by Nixl

[Wormerine]

Do we know if casting time i affected by your powerlevel? It would make sense if low level spells would become quicker to cast if you “overlevel them”, keeping them handy, and somewhat competitive with high level spells.

[dunehunter]

Do we know if casting time i affected by your powerlevel? It would make sense if low level spells would become quicker to cast if you “overlevel them”, keeping them handy, and somewhat competitive with high level spells.

 

No currently it doesn't speed cast time up, but I like the idea. One issue is if cast time is affected by powerlevel, it will make empowered spells even faster. Since empowered spells are already pretty strong, not sure if it is a good idea to do so.

[theBalthazar]

I think the best scheme for optimal dps would be something like DW_Fast > SW_Slow > 1H_Fast > 2H = 1H > Shield_Fast > Shield_Slow. 

 

 

I strongly disagree.

 

For me 2H MUST be the best DPS.

 

2H > 1H Slow > 1H Fast > DW Slow > DW_Fast > > > Shield_Fast > Shield_Slow

 

Speed add 'secret values' of DPS... at equal DPS...

 

Ideally :

 

2H = 4s, with best DPS

1H = 3s

1H Fast = 2s

 

It is logical, if your weapon is heavier, you attack slightly slower. Equal DPS = I choose Dual wielding because fast attack add an additionnal invisible DPS. (bottleneck effect = 50 000 damages on 30s recovery with an ennemy with 1 HP left... Loss of 49 999 damage, and I have to wait 30s)

 

+ Double effect of two weapons > One effect to one weapon. (Unique, Soulbound)

Edited February 20, 2018 by theBalthazar

[dunehunter]

 

I think the best scheme for optimal dps would be something like DW_Fast > SW_Slow > 1H_Fast > 2H = 1H > Shield_Fast > Shield_Slow.

 

I strongly disagree.

 

For me 2H MUST be the best DPS.

 

2H > 1H Slow > 1H Fast > DW Slow > DW_Fast > > > Shield_Fast > Shield_Slow

 

Speed add 'secret values' of DPS... at equal DPS...

 

Ideally :

 

2H = 4s, with best DPS

1H = 3s

1H Fast = 2s

 

It is logical, if your weapon is heavier, you attack slightly slower. Equal DPS = I choose Dual wielding because fast attack add an additionnal invisible DPS. (bottleneck effect = 50 000 damages on 30s recovery with an ennemy with 1 HP left... Loss of 49 999 damage, and I have to wait 30s)

Not only because the bottleneck, but also faster responding time. With 2H u have 4 second that u cannot do anything but recovery. Fast 1h weapon is faster so u can respond to enemy faster.

[MaxQuest]

Equal DPS = I choose Dual wielding because fast attack add an additionnal invisible DPS. (bottleneck effect = 50 000 damages on 30s recovery with an ennemy with 1 HP left... Loss of 49 999 damage, and I have to wait 30s)

You probably wanted to say that weapons with higher base damage have an effectively slightly less dps, because part of the damage is lost due to overkill

 

The thing is: you make a valid point. But there is more to it.

Imagine also such an example:

- enemy has 100 hp

- you have a 2H weapon that deals 50 dmg in 4s (i.e. 12.5 dps)

- and you can DW_FAST that deal 30 dmg in 2.4s (i.e. 12.5 dps)

 

The 2H setup will kill the target in 8s. (2 swings)

The DW_FAST setup will kill the target in 9.6s (4 swings)

 

What I want to say is that besides overkill there is also underkill damage; which partially equals the scales.

 

 

I think the best scheme for optimal dps would be something like DW_Fast > SW_Slow > 1H_Fast > 2H = 1H > Shield_Fast > Shield_Slow.

I strongly disagree.

 

For me 2H MUST be the best DPS.

 

2H > 1H Slow > 1H Fast > DW Slow > DW_Fast > > > Shield_Fast > Shield_Slow

 

Since with my mod, fast_recovery_category is now 1.5s, and thus:

- fast_melee_weapons have: 0.5s attack + 1.5s recovery

- other_melee_weapons have: 0.7s attack + 3.0s recovery

it's understandable that their damage requires adjustment.

 

I've decided to start with the following base values, and see how it goes in order to build a deeper understanding over this topic:

- 2H: 17-22

- 1H_SLOW: 13-17

- 1H_FAST: 8-10

 

Additionally am thinking to:

- buff the innate bonus for single-wielding from +12 to +15 acc

- buff the default bonus of a shield to +15 deflection

 

This way:

- single-wielding increases your dps by ~30%

- dual-wielding increases your dps by ~30% (it's actually bouncing between 40-20% depending on other variables, but on average it's ~30%)

- wielding a shield, reduces attackers dps (vs deflection) by ~30%

 

So far, so good. Now I'm going to examine how those values play in different situations:

 

Auto-attack DPS:

- 2H: (17+22)/2 = 19.5; 19.5/3.7 = ~5.27 dps

- DW_SLOW: (13+17)/2 = 15; 15 / 2.81 = ~5.33 dps

- DW_FAST: (08+10)/2 = 09; 09 / 1.55 = ~5.80 dps

- 1H_SLOW: (13+17)/2 = 15; 15 * 1.3 (from +15 acc) = 19.5; 19.5/3.7 = ~5.27 dps

- 1H_FAST: (08+10)/2 = 09; 09 * 1.3 (from +15 acc) = 11.7; 11.7/2.0 = ~5.85 dps

- SLOW_SHIELD: (13+17)/2 = 15; 15/3.7 = ~4.05 dps

- FAST_SHIELD: (08+10)/2 = 09; 09/2.0 = ~4.50 dps

 

PrimaryAttack DMG (without damage bonuses):

- 2H: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 15.0 dmg in 2.81s

- DW_FAST: 09.0 dmg in 1.55s

- 1H_SLOW: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 11.7 dmg in 2.0s

- SLOW_SHIELD: 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 09 dmg in 2.0s

 

FullAttack DMG (without damage bonuses):

- 2H: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 30.0 dmg in 3.51s

- DW_FAST: 18.0 dmg in 2.05s

- 1H_SLOW: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 11.7 dmg in 2.0s

- SLOW_SHIELD: 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 09 dmg in 2.0s

 

As you can see DW_SLOW results in highest amount of damage from Full Attack. But (!) they inflict it over 3.51s, while faster weapons do it much faster, and there is more time left for auto-attacking.

Let's check how much damage such attacks deal over 3.7s:

 

PrimaryAttack DMG (over 3.7s!)(without damage bonuses):

- 2H: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 21.69 = 15.0 dmg in 2.81s + ~6.69 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.25s remaining)

- DW_FAST: 21.47 = 09.0 dmg in 1.55s + ~12.47 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 2.15s remaining)

- 1H_SLOW: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 21.64 dmg = 11.7 dmg in 2.0s + ~9.94 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

- SLOW_SHIELD: 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 16.65 dmg = 09 dmg in 2.0s + ~7.65 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

 

FullAttack DMG (over 3.7s!) (without damage bonuses):

- 2H: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 31.1 dmg = 30.0 dmg in 3.51s + ~1.01 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 0.19s remaining)

- DW_FAST: 25.25 dmg = 18.0 dmg in 2.05s + ~7.25 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.25s remaining)

- 1H_SLOW: 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 21.64 dmg = 11.7 dmg in 2.0s + ~9.94 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

- SLOW_SHIELD: 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 16.65 dmg = 09 dmg in 2.0s+ ~7.65 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

 

And let's make one more experiment. For example imagine that Primary and Full attacks come with a +30% damage bonus (like FoD):

 

PrimaryAttack DMG (over 3.7s!)(with 30% bonus damage on PA):

- 2H: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 26.19 = 1.3 * 15.0 dmg in 2.81s + ~6.69 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.25s remaining)

- DW_FAST: 24.17 = 1.3 * 09.0 dmg in 1.55s + ~12.47 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 2.15s remaining)

- 1H_SLOW: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 25.05 dmg = 1.3 * 11.7 dmg in 2.0s + ~9.94 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

- SLOW_SHIELD: 19.5 = 1.3 * 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 19.35 = 1.3 * 09 dmg in 2.0s + ~7.65 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

 

FullAttack DMG (over 3.7s!) (with 30% bonus damage on FA):

- 2H: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 40.1 dmg = 1.3 * 30.0 dmg in 3.51s + ~1.01 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 0.19s remaining)

- DW_FAST: 30.65 dmg = 1.3 * 18.0 dmg in 2.05s + ~7.25 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.25s remaining)

- 1H_SLOW: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 25.15 dmg = 1.3 * 11.7 dmg in 2.0s + ~9.94 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

- SLOW_SHIELD: 19.5 = 1.3 * 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 21.64 = 1.3 * 16.65 dmg = 09 dmg in 2.0s+ ~7.65 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

 

 

So what can we tell now that we have these heuristics: that the initially selected values were pretty close, but 2H is asking for a 10% buff; while 1H_FAST for a ~10-11% nerf. Meaning that following minor adjustments:

- 2H: 17-22 -> 18-23

- 1H_SLOW: 13-17 -> 13-17

- 1H_FAST: 8-10 -> 7-9

should be pretty close to a really balanced state.

 

I'll rerun the complete numbers later, but rejoice Balthazar, from a pure auto-attack dps we get:

- 2H: (18+23)/2 = 20.5; 20.5/3.7 = ~5.54 dps

- 1H_SLOW: (13+17)/2 = 15; 15 * 1.3 (from +15 acc) = 19.5; 19.5/3.7 = ~5.27 dps

- 1H_FAST: (07+09)/2 = 8; 8 * 1.3 (from +15 acc) = 10.4; 10.4/2.0 = ~5.20 dps

 

P.S. Gee... didn't expect it will turn into such a wall)

Edited February 24, 2018 by MaxQuest

[Boeroer]

Whooha - lots of data.

 

Give me a prod once you think your balance mod is (kind of) finished and I will do several playthroughs with it and report.

[MaxQuest]

^ Good) but most likely on weekend.

 

Btw, I have noticed yesterday that beta3 actually changed the weapons base damage. It shaked things up a little.

Have updated the respective list.

[Boeroer]

ROFL. Firebrand is even worse than a great sword now.

 

The rest of the damage changes seems to go into the right direction.

 

Why is the sword so good? Even its modal is good.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Boeroer

[dunehunter]

 

Equal DPS = I choose Dual wielding because fast attack add an additionnal invisible DPS. (bottleneck effect = 50 000 damages on 30s recovery with an ennemy with 1 HP left... Loss of 49 999 damage, and I have to wait 30s)

You probably wanted to say that weapons with higher base damage have an effectively slightly less dps, because part of the damage is lost due to overkill

 

The thing is: you make a valid point. But there is more to it.

Imagine also such an example:

- enemy has 100 hp

- you have a 2H weapon that deals 50 dmg in 4s (i.e. 12.5 dps)

- and you can DW_FAST that deal 30 dmg in 2.4s (i.e. 12.5 dps)

 

The 2H setup will kill the target in 8s. (2 swings)

The DW_FAST setup will kill the target in 9.6s (4 swings)

 

What I want to say is that besides overkill there is also underkill damage; which partially equals the scales.

 

From what I understand, this is also overkill isn't it? But the point is 2H weapon cause overkill more easily than fast weapon.

[MaxQuest]

From what I understand, this is also overkill isn't it?

If you make 4 swings with DW_FAST it's overkill by 20 dmg.

If you make 3 swings with DW_FAST it's underkill by 10 dmg.

 

But the point is 2H weapon cause overkill more easily than fast weapon.

It may feel so. But the whole thing depends on: is enemy hp divisible by your weapon damage.

And I don't know yet how to mathematically compute this possible discrepancy.

[dunehunter]

 

And let's make one more experiment. For example imagine that Primary and Full attacks come with a +30% damage bonus (like FoD):

 

PrimaryAttack DMG (over 3.7s!)(with 30% bonus damage on PA):

- 2H: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 26.19 = 1.3 * 15.0 dmg in 2.81s + ~6.69 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.25s remaining)

- DW_FAST: 24.17 = 1.3 * 09.0 dmg in 1.55s + ~12.47 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 2.15s remaining)

- 1H_SLOW: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 25.05 dmg = 1.3 * 11.7 dmg in 2.0s + ~9.94 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

- SLOW_SHIELD: 19.5 = 1.3 * 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 21.64 = 1.3 * 16.65 dmg = 09 dmg in 2.0s + ~7.65 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

 

FullAttack DMG (over 3.7s!) (with 30% bonus damage on FA):

- 2H: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- DW_SLOW: 40.1 dmg = 1.3 * 30.0 dmg in 3.51s + ~1.01 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 0.19s remaining)

- DW_FAST: 30.65 dmg = 1.3 * 18.0 dmg in 2.05s + ~7.25 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.25s remaining)

- 1H_SLOW: 25.35 dmg = 1.3 * 19.5 dmg in 3.7s

- 1H_FAST: 25.15 dmg = 1.3 * 11.7 dmg in 2.0s + ~9.94 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

- SLOW_SHIELD: 19.5 = 1.3 * 15 dmg in 3.7s

- FAST_SHIELD: 21.64 = 1.3 * 16.65 dmg = 09 dmg in 2.0s+ ~7.65 (auto-attack dmg, as there was 1.7s remaining)

 

 

So what can we tell now that we have these heuristics: that the initially selected values were pretty close, but 2H is asking for a 10% buff; while 1H_FAST for a ~5% nerf. Meaning that following minor adjustments:

- 2H: 17-22 -> 18-23

- 1H_SLOW: 13-17 -> 13-17

- 1H_FAST: 8-10 -> 8-9

should be pretty close to a really balanced state.

 

I'll rerun the complete numbers later, but rejoice Balthazar, from a pure auto-attack dps we get:

- 2H: (18+23)/2 = 20.5; 20.5/3.7 = ~5.54 dps

- 1H_SLOW: (13+17)/2 = 15; 15 * 1.3 (from +15 acc) = 19.5; 19.5/3.7 = ~5.27 dps

- 1H_FAST: (08+09)/2 = 8.5; 8.5 * 1.3 (from +15 acc) = 11.05; 11.05/2.0 = ~5.52 dps

 

P.S. Gee... didn't expect it will turn into such a wall)

 

 

Since like for abilities that gives damage modifier, DW is much better because it has close damage to 2H on Primary attack, but is much better on FullAttack ones.

[Boeroer]

Or... we just do some playtesting and look how everything works out. Maybe better than number crunching 'til there's no tomorrow. The game's too complex to solve its problems with theorycrafting alone I guess.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

EDIT: Help! How do I post a gif on these forums?

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by IndiraLightfoot