Shouldn't this be 7.5m instead of 6.1? How is this calculated?

 

I think the explanation is that the area is increased by 50% not the radius. The base area is a circle with radius 5m, which is equal to Pi*5^2=25*Pi sqm. If we increase this area by 50% we would have: 1.5*25*Pi=37.5*Pi sqm. This correspond to a circle with radius approximately equal to 6.1m

Edited April 17, 20187 yr by kmbogd

I think the explanation is that the area is increased by 50% not the radius. The base area is a circle with radius 5m, which is equal to Pi*5^2=25*Pi sqm. If we increase this area by 50% we would have: 1.5*25*Pi=37.5*Pi sqm. This correspond to a circle with radius approximately equal to 6.1m

this means that either their script calculating it's wrong or they should've worded it 'Aura Size/Area', range should only bereferred to radius or diameter

this means that either their script calculating it's wrong or they should've worded it 'Aura Size/Area', range should only bereferred to radius or diameter

 

 

 

it says that intelligence increases AoE (area) by percentage in the stat view. So it is actually worded correctly there.

It can bit confusing in skill view, but it's not that bad.

The devs have confirmed that they changed how int influences AoE.

In PoE1 int changed the radius. This way the area increased to much because the radius enters as square.

In PoE2 int changes the area. But the info "spell x hits 75m² ( 50base + 50%)" is hard to understand for the player.

So they calculate the area but they show the radius because you want to know if your aura hits a target that is 4m away from you.

This leads to the confusing numbers you have shown, but at the moment I do not know how to present it better.

All I am saying is it's reasonable for a person to look at the tool tip and think "hey, 6.1 is not 5+50%" is all. Either the tool tip or the number needs to change, tool tips should make sense. Even if it instead read "5m +1.1m Intellect" would be better.

Yes, that would be better. Or saying something like "+50% AoE from INT = +1.1m range". Maybe too long. For me +1.1m would do.

What if, instead of paladin auras being auras, they affected party members directly, in order of distance from the paladin, with intellect granting discrete bonuses?

 

Example: a 10 intellect pally can affect 1 other party member with their aura.  each point of intellect increases that number by 1.  So a 15 intellect pally can affect 6 allies with his aura.  at 19 intellect, he can affect 10 allies.  Companions are prioritised, after that summons or temporary allies, etc.

 

Well, it was just a thought, maybe it's a bit too complicated, but whatever.  I really dislike this new area system.

Lol 1m...

 

So if I want a great and larger effect. With 50 % I have only 1 m ?

 

In understand why now I stay to 10 contrary to POE1...

 

With 19 in INT. I need +50 % until +100 % of area of effect.

 

Like 7.5m - 10m, min...

Edited April 18, 20187 yr by theBalthazar

Lol 1m...

 

So if I want a great and larger effect. With 50 % I have only 1 m ?

 

In understand why now I stay to 10 contrary to POE1...

 

With 19 in INT. I need +50 % until +100 % of area of effect.

 

Like 7.5m - 10m, min...

 

Yeah it's a complete waste of time boosting INT to get bigger auras or whatever

 

just do it for durations, if you need those, or leave it at 10

No. +50% of area is +50% of area. It's just not +50% of radius. Actually in Deadfire it's mathematically correct. Maybe the gain per point of INT should be a bit higher, but at least the growth is linear, not exponential (which is a balancing nightmare).

 

In PoE there was a problem that with very high INT the AoE sizes got ridicilously big - since an increase in radius has an exponential effect.

 

If you have a radius of 5 meters your area is PI*5² = ~79m² --> *1.5 = 118m²

If you have a radius of 6.1 meters your area is PI*6.1² = ~117m²

 

This is just a matter of tweaking (maybe a few more % per point of INT) and proper UI description.

Edited April 18, 20187 yr by Boeroer

Its a weird problem because they wanted to prevent the exponential gains above 20, but keep the aoe about equal for the 10-20 range iirc. Anything above 10% causes you to zero out at or above 1 int, which I guess they don't want.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RFUG64GdwMtZKAEQ7iRCRscSNptKr2gSBMxNIMhdroM/edit#gid=0

 

^here is a spreadsheet to visualize how changing the numbers would affect the AoE multiplier. Please correct my math if I fudged up

Edited April 18, 20187 yr by George_Truman

Right. I also think that's the main reason. 11 would be possible - but that's an odd number (hehe) for something like that.

Edited April 18, 20187 yr by Boeroer