34 replies to this topic

[Greven79]

The new defense chart is still wrong - why?

Monk - Greenseed Top = 159 defense
Warrior - Greenseed Top = 319 defense

That's more or less exactly +100% defense for the Warrior/Knight-w\o-shield. Since the monk with Steel Body gets 150% 200% defense boost (not 100%), there is no way that he ends up with the same defense rate as the Warrior. I hope you'll correct that.

 

 

another reason why i didn't include damage reduction is because there have been no sufficient research, that i am aware of for that matter, about how damage reduction skills are applied

I'm not totally sure either. Because Gravity has changed the representation of the defense statistics, you don't see anything right now... this might have been different before the change, but I'm not quite sure. All I know is that neither an armor rune nor defensive skill can bring you up to 100% damage reduction... but both reduce the damage if you're below the cap. So unless Gravity has done something strangly, it wouldn't matter if you first apply damage reduction and a defense rate afterwards, or vice versa. Multiplication is cummutative and associative.

 

but the graph for "Defense Rate" will still stay the same

And there is the point. You stated a conclusion that is dependant on the chart. If you skip certain parts, this chart alone can't be the basis to judge whether or not the defensive/protective capabilities of a character has changed. You wrote:  looks similar post-AoV => ergo no issue. But due to the different light/heavy armor calculation, the Monk has suffered significantly... he is now unable to compete.

 

 

Earth Shield is a party buff and is available for every class to use

That's only true if you look at parties or raids. Neither is it true if you're leveling alone, nor in regard of Coloseum or non-raid PvP. Even if you compare the raid ranking (f.e. the Threat-meter), those skill matter. Just because a Wizard's INT buff affects the whole party doesn't mean that you can left this out of the equation... it still raises his DPS output in comparison to non-magical classes.
 

 

Blindness is a different matter since it does not reduce the damage taken or increase the caster's defense but reduces the damage output of the target.

Yes, it's a party buff in a certain way and of course it's not exactly the same thing as damage reduction or defense rate. However, if you want to determine the survivability of a crecentia in comparison to other classes, you have to take this into account.

 

Your charts f.e. send out the wrong signal: => that a DPS-Warrior takes less damage in combat... but that's not the case. A Crecentia using Blindness on an PvE-Boss could have ended up in a better shape... AND granting the bonus on other members as well. Just keep in mind that charts like yours might be delivered to the Community Managers and used by other forum members to vote for certain 'fixes'. But the argumentation behind it might be deluded.
 

 

that phrase only applies if you are not aware with how the statistics was made

No. The phrase tells you that representation and the lack of certain information can lead to wrong impressions. F.e. you stated that the HP difference - and you've used plain numbers here - has started with 4445 HP and gone up significantly.

 

In the same way, a company that produces car tyres could phrase that with their product, a full break would grant you a 5m benefit. That sounds like a huge improvement. But if they would have said that it's 50m vs. 55m... meaning only a ~10% improvement, it's questionable if costumers would be willing to pay twice the cost.

So here is another one:

the overall ranking is almost the same with a bit of reshuffling for the tanks

Here, you're using a ranking instead of a percentual observation.

Let's make an - obious exaggerated - example between two classes:

 

pre-AoV

25% vs. 26%

 

post-AoV

6% to 46%

 

The ranking would have been the same... but the percentual differences changed a lot.

 

Your visual presentation favors a ranking system and leading to a certain impression. Well, there might not be such drastic change as in the example above, that's because you've excluded certain facts (see damage reduction) AND haven't use a plain defense (not defense rate).

pre-AoV
Greenseed Top - Monk = 159 defense
Greenseed Top - Warrior = 319 defense (about twice as high)

 

post-AoV

Osiris Top - Monk = 446 defense
Osiris Top - Warrior = 1784 defense (about four times as high)
 

the overall increase is an issue

I never doubted that. But you made it the primary issue.

 

However, due to the fact that the defense VALUES have changed, the benefits granted by certain skills have a different impact right now. F.e. a monk's Iron Skin is now pretty much useless... as is the Sorcerer's Earth Emblem. In my opinion, THAT change ruined the balance much more than if we could return to a pre-AoV calculation, granting all classes a fixed 10~20% defense rate bonus.

 

@ Blessing chart

You make a mockery of what I've said. If I want to do a certain quest in WoE all by myself and I'm attacked by an enemy priest, do I get the party buff? - of course not. Does that buff make the character better? - of course it does.

 

So if I would have to argue whether or not it's easier for me to fight against a priest or a soulmaker, I would take the blessing into account... as I would with any sort of damage reduction... even the strange Blindness skill.

 

 

@ HP comparison

Well, it seems you haven't understood my point here. There are TWO-PARTS.

• increasing the number of HP per VIT
• different VIT stats on Osiris gear

Gravity altered the stats on Osiris gear before, so it shouldn't be a real issue to twitch them once more.

 

So the question is, whether or nor the increased HP benefit per VIT would have ruined Ragnarok if it would have been the only change in AoV. And my answer is - Probably not.

Yes, the HP difference would have been greater, but a beastmaster would still have 65% more HP, because that's what the skill says.

 

Do I think that the Osiris gear is balanced - Of course not.

You might mistake me here. I honor your efforts and like the charts. BUT - and this is an important BUT - I wish you would have printed a warning about hasty conclusions.

 

See, f.e. taking the defense chart, a developer might think to nerf the Beastmaster DEF bonus to +1 DEF per VIT. Sure, that would be a fix, but in my opinion, it wouldn't remove the cause.

 

What would happen, if Gravity would half the STR and VIT gear boni instead? Suddenly, the Beastmaster would get a lower defense bonus as well... actually the same decrease than with the first idea. The warrior would profit less from +3 PATK per STR and would fall down the 'ranking'. But would that be a better fix? - I doubt so.

 

Why? - Because both ideas are only viewed with the current gear in mind. However, with the next gear that would also get more STR/VIT, the symptoms would come.... getting worse and worse with each additional statpoint (same with honing, better cards, titles, situational boni). Therefore, my advise would be to remove the class-based stat-boosts all together as they are too hard to handle. F.e. it's VERY hard to balance ATK with PARRY and DEF with CRIT.

 

Edit: Changed the monk defense bonus

Edited by Greven79, 03 April 2014 - 09:19 AM.

[Meconopsis]

In conclusion - monk sucks.

[Animalicia]

...since the monk with Steel Body gets 150% defense boost

it's well past midnight here so i can't reply to everything you've written so far since i'm quite tired, but you may want to check this while revising your rebuttal

 

and since i have been kind enough to accept my mistakes that you have pointed out, it would only be fair that you accept your mistakes as well and include them in your reply

Edited by Animalicia, 03 April 2014 - 08:25 AM.

[Greven79]

it's well past midnight here so i can't reply to everything you've written so far since i'm quite tired, but you may want to check this while revising your rebuttal

 

and since i have been kind enough to accept my mistakes that you have pointed out, it would only be fair that you accept your mistakes as well and include them in your reply

 

Well, than we're both are wrong and your pre-AoV chart is incorrect by a greater number. I changed it in my last reply and gonna search for it in my first one as well.
 

Edited by Greven79, 03 April 2014 - 09:08 AM.

[Leinzan]

Awesome thread, compilation and attention, I gotta say.

 

Good job! *gives a cookie*

 

It really makes one think about the balance on gears these days.

Skills, bonuses from runes, titles, cards, potions and food can be pretty tricky, specially taking into account the player itself gaming style.

 

However, a thing like a "Perfect" balance would never exists in games like this. If one were to look for something the closest to it, then everyone should have access to the same skills and gears and dissregard the classes system... but this is no FPS game.

 

 

Yes, your graphs makes clear that there is actually not much thought behind the values designed on the classes on their gears... Tank classes exceling on all DPS, Defense and HP, its like they are screaming that we all should play Beastmasters or Warriors and forget about Soulmakers and whatnot. Then again, this is no FPS.

 

 

Graphs are always a good way to visualize this kind of situations, can't help to feel that something is always missing tho (since I've graphed some stuff myself).

[ZeroTigress]

I'm more interested in the base growths since adding seeds and armor makes the data very subjective (as can be seen in the current debate).

[Greven79]

I'm more interested in the base growths since adding seeds and armor makes the data very subjective (as can be seen in the current debate).

 

Better have multicolored charts >_>

 

All the charts only take the gear boni into account. So if your honing is decent and you get other boni from statpoints, cards, titles, buffs, the 'reality' is a completely different thing.

 

what i'm comparing here is pre-AoV and post-AoV so these graphs are sufficient enough to make a point, skill multipliers are a different issue under Skill Balancing so they should be left out
every skill have been refactored by a factor of 10 with some skills, mostly DOT skills, that are refactored with a lower constant, so it would be fair to say that skills from pre-AoV are the same with post-AoV with the exception of some skills that recieved unfair refactoring

 

Nope, the chart isn't enough because a) you assumed a 'balanced' system before AoV and you missed the new max. skill level of 10 and c) you missed the influence of other modifiers that now have a different quality.

 

Point a - Assuming a balanced system:
 

Let's assume some pre-AoV classes with the same 2000 points PATK/MATK, because that value defined the class ranking in your chart with the same name.

 

DPS-Warrior 25% Bash || 1sec cool down. => 2000 * 0.25 = 500 damage per second

Rogue 25% Double attack || 1sec cooldown => 2000 * 0.25 = 500 damage per second

 

Priest 39% Holy Light || 1sec casting time || rougly 1sec cool down => 780% damage per 2.0sec = 390 damage per second

Ranger 45% Mastery Charge Arrow || 1.4sec casting time || 1sec cool down => 2000 * 0.45 = 900 damage per 2.4sec = 375 damage per second

 

So you could assume that either the DPS-Warrior would be overpowered and do more damage than both the Priest and the Ranger OR that he deserves a lower PATK. But if I look at your patk/matk-chart, even the DPS-Warrior without Aura Blade was  ahead of the other two classes with range attacks. Likewise strange, the Assassin - although he his bread-&-butter skill has the same characteristics as the Warrior skill, he either is far behind all other classes (no other things included) OR even further ahead (with Shadow Cloak). So it seems very unfair....

 

That brings me to the next point - If all these classes would have the same PATK/MATK, what would have been a 'fair' value for their class DoTs? - They should have all shared the same percentage. But it was like:

 

DPS-Warrior 10% HeadCrush DoT => 2000 * 0.10 = 200 damage every 2 seconds

Rogue 15% Poisoning Weapon => 2000 * 0.15 = 300 damage every 2 seconds

 

Priest three different DoT. All about ~12.5% each

Ranger 21% Poison Arrow => 2000 * 0.21 = 420 damage every 2 seconds

 

Now here is the question: What's the average DPS benefit from those DoTs? In other words, if you have a passive skill like Aura Blade or Shadow Cloak - that you were so eager to add into your chart - what would the percentual skill bonus have to be to achieve the same DPS increase?

 

DPS-Warrior HeadCrush = 40% DPS increase

Rogue Poisoning Weapon = 60% DPS increase

 

Priest all three combined would result in more than 100%

Ranger Poison shot = 56% DPS increase

 

If those DoTs did increase the average DPS output in such a high manner, how much worth is a chart that excludes them and any possible value differences? That's not all. The Warrior could add Battle Tactics, the Ranger a Falcon Assault and the Rogue an unstable doping. Does the Rogue deserve to be in the 3rd last ranking with more than 1000pts PATK (or 33%) behind the Beastmaster or Warrior in the top two?

 

I mean, you did the same argumentation with the Soulmaker being too far behind in the HP ranking...

 

So the whole point of 'skill multipliers are a different thing and therefore are left outside is a simple lie if you add some sort of skills already into the chart, forming a ranking AND stating a conclusion of who is overpowered and which class should lead the chart based on subjective class-perceptions.

 

Point b - The max. skill level:

 

Now let's have a look at the Wizard class with 2000 MATK:

 

Ice Bolt 38% damage || 0.5sec CT || 1sec CD. => 2000 * 0.38 = 760 damage per 1.5sec = ~500 damage per second

Fire Bolt 49% damage || 1.0sec CT || 1sec CD => 2000 * 0.49 = 980 damage per 2.0sec = ~490 damage per second

Lightning Bolt 22% damage || 0 CT || 1sec CD => 2000 * 0.22 = 440 damage per 1.0sec = ~440 damage per second

 

As you can see, all those skills more or less dealt the same amount of damage, but gave different boni (slow, pyromaniac points, attack on the run)

 

With the new master-class skill-levels, the DPS output changed quite a bit. So if you decide to do nothing but spamming Firebolts, you could increase the damage output by 40% due to the max. skill level.

 

What's also important is the difference DPS benefit depending on the cooldown of a skill. F.e. if +5 levels result in a 40% damage increase for a skill with 1sec cool down, that causes a much higher DPS increase than a 40% damage increase on a 60sec cool down skill. And this is where the inbalance between classes are quite severe post-AoV. In other words... although the Warrior has the highest skill-effect, the default Bash attack (250%) could deal less damage than a monk's Raging Strike (350%). That's the main reason why Knights are complaining a lot. They can't compete with the skill-effect of a warrior, nor can they have the same skill multiplier than a monk. (BTW: it's still a falsely whining, because a monk does even less overall damage, hence the higher skill-effect and Raging Strike multiplier)

 

So if we would - as you've stated - let the skills completely outside, balancing both parts seperately, that would force the game into a) no-stat adjusting skills at all OR all classes with the same modifiers, because there would be no other place. F.e. an Assassin with a 30% ATK bonus would hardly be balanced, if all the classes would share the same skill-effect value.

 

Point c - impact of other modifiers:

 

That's a bit more difficult to print some numbers here, so just some random equations to eludicate the maths behind it.

 

Who deals the most damage?

 

Class 1 - deals 2000 damage, has a 45% chance to hit a 30% crit. chance and a 30% vigor/cast-speed bonus

Class 2 - deals 1000 damage, has a 60% chance to hit, a 25% crit. chance and also a 30% vigor/cast-speed bonus

Class 3 - deals 1000 damage, has a 50% chance to hit, a 35% crit, chance, but only a 20% vigor/cast-speed bonus

 

It doesn't matter who wins. It's only there to show that wheras the post-AoV PATK chart even has a lower meaning, because hit/dodge highly effects the damage result.

 

So be more 'precise', you would have to calculate crit. chances into the skill-effect ranking and of course the miss-chances due to hit/dodge as well. Because the calculation rules for hit/dodge are still unknown, it's even harder to tell who deals more and who deals less damage. And if you try to solve this by 'user experience', you'll get a completely misguided result, as can be seen with the VCR-reports.

 

Last but not least. Due to the fact that you get other stat boni beside gear boni and the deminiting percentual benefit the higher your critical, parry, etc. value gets, the differences between classes would change significantly, making all assumptions on these charts highly questionable.

Edited by Greven79, 03 April 2014 - 05:23 PM.

[Animalicia]

Steel Body gets 150% 200% defense boost (not 100%)

i see you are right, looking at the tables, seems like i got the multiplier wrong for steel body, you could have just told me from the start that i used a wrong multiplier for steel body, i'll revise the table to generate a new graph


i'm looking to end this argument because honestly we both have the same goals in mind but we differ in how we want to achieve that goal and we are just exhausting too much effort trying to outwit each other when what we want to ahieve is just the same

first of all, the goal of this review is to compare the before and after, pre-AoV(LotS) and post-AoV, to identify what is causing the numerous game imbalances we have now, and i believe that what i've done gives justice to this cause

the graphs and rankings do not in any way dictate "who is the top DPS" or "what is the best class", the graphs are comparisons from the previous balancing to the current one, the "ranking" only serves as a reference to get to the point of the review

to identify what caused the imbalances we are experiencing, i've established that the best place to look at is how the new equipments were implemented and how the new stat system influenced it

what you want to do is for me to look at the end result of these basic components of the game and establish from there who really is on top of who, but that is not the goal i have in mind when i created this review, what i want to achieve is for players to be aware of how the basics of the game were changed and how they influenced the imbalances that came with them and i believe that i did a good job in doing so

you mentioned that the Devs will read this and what i comment may influence their decisions but you are wrong, they won't solely change their game because a random forumer said so, my review is meant to be a guide to players so that they are aware of the basic game changes, the devs will only look at my comments as an idea, which they will have to evaluate with a lot of people before they change something in the game, whatever i say here is not final and are just my own opinions and suggestions that they can refer to

same with the data i present, the devs won't blindly follow my graphs because they will have to check them out themselves before taking any action

while i appreciate you pointing out mistakes in the review, i would also appreciate it if you stop defaming the review in it's entirety just because i didn't delve deeper to what you specifically require

this is only an overview and not an in-depth review, if you wish to make a point by taking every possible scenario into account, then by all means please create your own in-depth review that will focus on such things and the community will support it because our common goal is to voice out changes to make this game better

[Shinyusuke]

Oh i finallu read all and i agree whit your idea to balance gears and stats before skills but i disagree whit the idea to not use party buff because also if every class can have that buff only one can cast it when he want and in pvp and solo quests this make difference. Another important think to consider are the healing skills that add a lot of modifier to the class survivability. Some classes can instant heal without effort all they hp (priests) some other can heal and fealing damage at the same time (Beastmaster) and some other that have to chose if heal a ridicolous amount or cast their powerfull skill (knight).

[Animalicia]

Oh i finallu read all and i agree whit your idea to balance gears and stats before skills but i disagree whit the idea to not use party buff because also if every class can have that buff only one can cast it when he want and in pvp and solo quests this make difference. Another important think to consider are the healing skills that add a lot of modifier to the class survivability. Some classes can instant heal without effort all they hp (priests) some other can heal and fealing damage at the same time (Beastmaster) and some other that have to chose if heal a ridicolous amount or cast their powerfull skill (knight).

thanks for reading

the thing is, like i explained on my previous comments, if i include an entry for party buffs for the original source of the buff, i will still have to include new entries of that party buff for the rest of the classes, and doing that will only double the length of the graph, and since the new elements are just a direct multiples of the original entries, they won't serve any reliable effect to the whole point of the review

survivability is a totally different matter, since the goal of this review is to look at the most basic aspect of the game and to identify their effects to the imbalances that we are seeing