Cabalist's TM. 01/11/2014 05:28 PM CST


Wow the spells these guys can really hit a target, especially their multi-shot Fire Shard...

Just wondering it's really the intention for these guys to be more damaging than moths thanks to their amazingly accurate spells.

This isn't new, just finally getting around to posting about it.

It is a pretty low damage spell, but when you have 4 Cabalists and 2 or 3 of em cast it one after another, and they each do 4-5 fire shards, and almost all of them hit?

Keep in mind as far as my defenses go I'm underhunting by being in Cabalists. I'm actually not even planning on going there for defenses, just for weapons backtraining.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/11/2014 05:35 PM CST
Yeah, when I went to moths finally for the first time the other day, I was surprised to find that the first level ones were less dangerous than cabalists. And that's because of fire shard. As a magic user, I have pretty decent countermeasures though (shear is pretty hilarious with them).
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/11/2014 11:36 PM CST
>> Wow the spells these guys can really hit a target, especially their multi-shot Fire Shard...

It's not Cabalist's TM. It's TM in general. Roots->Tree->Branches.

I don't like the current TM model. Someone the other day posted a 10 mana snap-cast burn that apparently 1-shotted a goblin. I don't think he set it up to get the perfect shot as that would defeat the purpose of gloating over the change.

How does a 10 mana snap cast 1-shot anything?

It's shouldn't even be equatable to Small Edge damage at 10 mana yet it performs like a much heavier weapon. I have trouble 1-shotting kobolds with the a max weight HT kertig throwing hammer, and absolutely cannot with a max weight horseshoe or throwing axe, even if I hit a vital area.

It's something I noticed awhile back when I'd get hit by TM and the max it would ever do was around 11% damage. The maximum allotted damage should be proportional to the mana put into the spell. Is it a fireball or a "FYAAAAAABALL!!!"?

It's very easy to 'set up' a situation to amplify damage in 3.0. Damage caps are as relevant to the discussion of balance as average damage. IMO, TM's problem prior to the 'tweak' was damage capping.

TL;DR: I get the feeling that TM spells are performing like greatswords regardless of mana put into them, with perhaps a slightly lower floor on damage. Any feedback/testing on the matter would be appreciated.



IM: Dannyboy00001111

"Fool proof system do not take into account the ingenuity of fools, nor the power of numbers."
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 03:40 AM CST
Gort, I'm willing to try out some tests like this to see if we can get some more 'apples to apples comparison':


Fully targeted and prepped TM spells, at least 3 different spells at a prone fully unarmored and stanced down PC, counting the number of seconds and recording the physical damage result as well as vitality loss for each strike. Making sure the target is fully healed before each shot.

Equivalent weapon attacks totally the same number of seconds for each spell, mixing the weapons up (SE/LE/2HE for example).

Would that help? Your points raised are jiving with a debate some of my caster friends are having regarding whether any kind of TM focus in the future would be useful anyway so I think we can both scratch our itches.



--

In memory of Lisa/Martee. Passed 6/17/2013. A friend. A sister.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 08:27 AM CST
<<TL;DR: I get the feeling that TM spells are performing like greatswords regardless of mana put into them, with perhaps a slightly lower floor on damage. Any feedback/testing on the matter would be appreciated.>>

It's not, Gort. Barring the broken spells (blufmor garaen, SLS, maybe other cyclics), it's not greatsword DPS. I know, I use a greatsword. If it's not greatsword, it's not even close to special metal Thrown DPS.

I have tested TM vs 2HE extensively in cabalists, elders, and moths. 2HE and a disabler outperforms TM and a disabler, period. When you have the skill or set-up to get through with 2HE, it's not even close. Again, that's 2HE, not even god-DPS, thrown.

Against PCs that I don't wildly outclass, my TM does damage in the range of 3-17% per fully targeted cast (it's actually 3-11% but I had two outliers for 17% and 13% damage occur precisely once each). Again, my 2HE does considerably more damage in the same time frame (remember, it takes time to target). My slurbow with pulzones does more damage per shot. I forget the exact vit damage I was getting with multi-strike "shotgun" spells at melee, but it was not an impressive increase--something like 13% for a much increased target time (it comes with an accuracy bonus too, though I haven't been able to test the strength of that).

In fact, SLS (which I would call broken powerful), is the only TM spell I have seen (other than blufmor garaen, but I haven't seen exact vit tests on) that comes remotely close to the DPS damage you can do with maneuvers and whirl. Considering that you are one of the people that I've hit with TM since the change, and you've seen first-hand the damage of TM, I'm curious as to what got you worried.

<<I don't like the current TM model. Someone the other day posted a 10 mana snap-cast burn that apparently 1-shotted a goblin.>>

As noted above, you are misunderstanding the current TM model, apparently based on a goblin post in which you presumed a certain background. It's unlike you to draw conclusions about systems you don't know. I have always tried to avoid doing that about new barb abilities, including the apparently uncapped disabling potential of roars, because I simply do not know them well enough to judge.

I can't snap cast 10 mana one-shot goblins. I just spent 30 minutes in there playing with different spells, mana, and weapons. Not one 10 mana kill. I can, however, kill them in one 100 mana burn cast. I cannot snap cast 100 mana TM, so in terms of DPS, the 100 mana burn is actually about x3-4 the time it takes to snap cast burn (call the latter 1 second). I also could not one shot goblins with my 112-stone axe, appraisal below. Interestingly enough, the only physical attack that I can one-shot them with is hurl.

A kertig igorat axe trains the two-handed edged skill.

You are certain that it could do:
dismal (1/26) puncture damage
very bone-crushing (20/26) slice damage
mighty (17/26) impact damage
no (0/26) fire damage
no (0/26) cold damage
no (0/26) electric damage

The igorat axe is well (9/17) designed for improving the force of your attacks.

You are certain that the axe is dismally (2/15) balanced and is excellently (10/15) suited to gaining extra attack power from your strength.

<<some of my caster friends are having regarding whether any kind of TM focus in the future would be useful anyway so I think we can both scratch our itches.>>

No offense to your caster friends, but it's baffling to me how anyone could fail to see the utility potential in foci.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 08:29 AM CST
And to the original poster's point and your response, Gort, the TM fix has nothing to do with cabalists' TM strength. I have fought them consistently since Test opening, and their TM attacks have not become noticeably stronger or weaker over that time. I notice no change at all in their casting strength after the TM change. Whether you look at pre-TM-change cabalists or post-TM-change cabalists, they are more dangerous than lower moths.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 09:26 AM CST
>FYAAAAAABALL!!!

L-Lina...?


Regarding "Burn 1-shots", I looked into it and [all] DFA spells seem to ignore the VIT shield. (I tested with Lightning Bolt and was 1-shotting Malchata with it. It can also 1-shot players in PVP, so it's pretty easy to replicate.)

I don't mind that DFA bypasses shield and parry, since they're so inaccurate, but the VIT shield bypass is likely a bug.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 09:47 AM CST


My point wasn't to say that it's damaging, I would expect just about anything to be damaging when its 4 entities doing something at that hits multiple times.

My point was their accuracy with it.

At the point my character is at he almost never gets hit by anything else from Cabalists (Buffed to the gills, at max balance and overwhelming position), or even really the first tier of moths, but these guys have zero problems hitting him with their spells.

Especially (but not exclusively) if I'm attacking or backstabbing.

It's happened just recently in test where I was in the 3 second RT for a backstab and got hit with 10+ fire shards for about 30% of my vitality.

Now whether that is TM in general or Cabalist's TM... I'll leave that for other people to figure out.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 11:00 AM CST
Not all enemies will be hunt able or desirable to hunt by all Guilds. Fire Atik's and sprites and fendryads were the same way in 2.0. I could hunt them in perfect safety with my WM using AC. Other Guilds would lose arms, feet, heads... in this case you do have an alternative so I am not too concerned.

We plan to add experience bonuses to the harder enemies to compensate in many of these cases.




"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 11:03 AM CST
>>Someone the other day posted a 10 mana snap-cast burn that apparently 1-shotted a goblin.

Good grief, ANY Attack can 1-shot an enemy if you have sufficient skill. They failed to post any skill comparison by which to draw conclusions. Being a goblin, I assume they were high level.




"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 11:04 AM CST
>>Fully targeted and prepped TM spells, at least 3 different spells at a prone fully unarmored and stanced down PC,

This will 1-shot kill him due to overkill mechanics. Then you'll run here cursing my name!!!




"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 11:11 AM CST
>>Fully targeted and prepped TM spells, at least 3 different spells at a prone fully unarmored and stanced down PC,

>This will 1-shot kill him due to overkill mechanics. Then you'll run here cursing my name!!!

I thought TM spells no longer overkilled?

Bah. I'm just trying to help.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 11:37 AM CST
>>It's shouldn't even be equatable to Small Edge damage at 10 mana yet it performs like a much heavier weapon. I have trouble 1-shotting kobolds with the a max weight HT kertig throwing hammer, and absolutely cannot with a max weight horseshoe or throwing axe, even if I hit a vital area.

Gort that fellow very likely had several hundred ranks of TM. If this is true he should have oblitereted it even with a min cast. If that was AT level than its an issue pretty sure its not. People have been testing TM dmg on spells very heavily now since the "fix" the only spells that seem to do too much dmg are the Cyclic TM spells particuarly the Multi Target Hit ones.

Lets not strart crying about it and get it RE-nerfed after it has been fixed please.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/12/2014 07:24 PM CST
I spent over 10 hours comparing TM damage numbers. A typical min-prep fully target TM spell hits about as hard as a ME or HE weapon. Considering most HE can be swung in about 4 seconds, and fully-targeting a TM spell takes 10? Not exceptional DPS there.




"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/13/2014 01:37 PM CST
>Not all enemies will be hunt able or desirable to hunt by all Guilds. Fire Atik's and sprites and fendryads were the same way in 2.0. I could hunt them in perfect safety with my WM using AC. Other Guilds would lose arms, feet, heads...

I'm not sure what you're saying here. That I'm out of luck because I don't have any form of magical protection barrier, that I'm out of luck because TM is way more accurate and damaging than anything else or that I'm out of luck because Cabalist's TM is much stronger than their other skills?

Again, I just cant help but think something is off, ONE Cabalist hit me last night with a fire shard that landed 7 out of 8 times for 20% vitality and some scuffing.

I'm not saying I can't hunt there. I certainly have my own tricks to get around being hit. It just feels like something is off, and its gotten much worse with the TM update (or maybe that's just my imagination).

If that really is what you want them to be doing fine... I just had to bring it up again. I'll try to resist from doing it again.

>in this case you do have an alternative so I am not too concerned.

I need boxes.

>We plan to add experience bonuses to the harder enemies to compensate in many of these cases.

That's awesome.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/13/2014 03:33 PM CST
>>a fire shard that landed 7 out of 8 times for 20% vitality and some scuffing.

AFAIK multishot spells are supposed to cap at 5 shards? Are you exaggerating here?

Multishot spells are likely an issue. They get a targeting bonus PLUS a multishot bonus. Does bad things to folks and we'll see what can be done about it.




"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/13/2014 03:43 PM CST



An arthelun cabalist gestures at you.
Several shards of elemental flame fly at you!

The fire shard glances off your shield.
Your nose is singed a bit by the fire shard.
The fire shard glances off your shield.
The fire shard glances off your abdomen, singeing it a little.
The fire shard glances off your shield.
The fire shard glances off your left leg, singeing it a little.
The fire shard glances off your shield.
The fire shard glances off your chest, singeing it a little.
The fire shard glances off your shield.
The fire shard glances off your back, singeing it a little.

Sorry, I was not exaggerating... well ok I only got hit 5 times. My bad. :D

BTW this wasn't an issolated incident. You're right, they are usually 3-5 shards at a time, but I have been hit with 6,7,8 and the above.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/13/2014 03:55 PM CST
> Sorry, I was not exaggerating...

That's only 5 shards. Each shard was partially defended against, hence the message about glancing off your shield, and then went on to hit you.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/13/2014 04:04 PM CST
maybe they hit you with MOA and it flared and doubled the messaging?

_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/13/2014 04:27 PM CST


>That's only 5 shards. Each shard was partially defended against, hence the message about glancing off your shield, and then went on to hit you.

Ah, my bad, I had no idea that's what I was seeing. I'm so used to glancing meaning "no damage".
Reply
Re: Cabalist's TM. 01/13/2014 06:11 PM CST
>>That's only 5 shard

Yeah only 5. But that does mean he failed to completely block every single one heh, which you might consider worse?

Codiax.
Forged Weapons:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Codiax#Codiax-Forged-Weapons
Reply