Not sure if much balancing would be necessary, at least not on the low end. Lower level characters are the ones who have the least points available. At the higher end, the AS bonus would already be heavily in diminishing returns.
Extra A capped wizard who wanted to max spell AS would gain a maximum of +100 AS at the cost of 8/4 per rank past double training. So 100 spell AS for 800/400 training points.
The wizard could also gain 250 AS at cap, but the cost would be extremely high. raising to double in weapons would cost 12/2 per train while 3X would cost 24/4. CM would cost an additional 24/16 and 48/32.
Extra AS gain from being able to 3x in weapons (unrealistic until long after cap)= 200
Total cost from weapon ranks (considering edged weapons, cheapest) 3600/600
Extra AS gain from tripling in CM (unrealistic until very very long after cap)= 100
Total cost from additional CM ranks = 7200/4800
A capped warrior could gain 150 AS (Which some would state that they desperately need anyway, since casters and hybrids can typically swing harder than this combat pure due to self buffs) from the extra 3rd train in weapons as well as the extra train in CM.
Extra AS gain from tripling in weapons= 100
Total additional cost = 8/4 per train = 800/400
Extra AS and DS gain from tripling in CM= 50
Total additional cost = 16/12 per train = 1600/1200
The balance is already in place. The exponential cost penalties will balance characters until long after cap. If anything I would say the only additional that would be needed is possibly a new extreme hard-mode post cap hunting area. I don't really see a 10-20 AS difference early on, at a very high cost being a problem, and the AS/DS bonus for pures such as warriors could be very beneficial in breathing some life and uniqueness back into the profession.
ALLIZAR2012
DOUG
Re: (no subject)
04/24/2012 10:28 PM CDT
Conceptually pretty nifty.
My take: More options prior to cap just means more things left untouched -- the min / max gaming style. More options available after cap work for a number of us -- but a lot of folks want the perceived diversity benefits far before cap.
I, like Robert, appreciate the perspective that one profession isn't going to be nearly as proficient in a skill as another profession (rogue versus mage lockpicking) on a simple skill comparison. I also like that 'magic' allows us to violate those rules to some degree (a wizard with Unlock doesn't burn through picks). I find it uncomfortable to suggest that a rogue with Unlock is more proficient than a mage with Unlock -- but some lines need to be drawn. Unhappy, but not sure of a good path forward.
At cap, dabbling in those interesting things can happen, but there are entire sections of the game that this concept opens up that weren't possible before. Consider, the sorcerer casting Temporal Reversion. For that matter, consider the rogue casting Haste. Or the wizard casting . . . Ironskin.
Make 'em pay through the nose, but something like that should be learnable for those few who want to make that investment.
Then, we have to turn our attention to Redux -- as rogues and in a few cases a warrior or two push the envelop to the degree that it needs to be looked at.
Ultimately, though, if we wanted to preserve the 'rogue is better', we'd have to allow either totally unlimited training (to the maximum extent possible in training points, which after cap could be 1800 / 1800 a rank for the patient player)in all skills, with costs based on a 'profession factor', or we would always have to allow rogues to train N+1. A bit problematic. . .
I think I prefer that 'dual class' approach. Start yourself a rogue, then switch over to wizard, keeping your old skills but not able to use them at that level until such time as your current profession exceeds your prior. So, 99 rogue / 100 wizard.
Or the ultimate dream character 75 sorcerer / 85 empath / 90 cleric / 95 ranger / 98 rogue / 99 paladin / 100 wizard.
W00t!
That's about 20 years in the making, right there.
Sorry for the rambling. Headed back for another. :)
Doug
My take: More options prior to cap just means more things left untouched -- the min / max gaming style. More options available after cap work for a number of us -- but a lot of folks want the perceived diversity benefits far before cap.
I, like Robert, appreciate the perspective that one profession isn't going to be nearly as proficient in a skill as another profession (rogue versus mage lockpicking) on a simple skill comparison. I also like that 'magic' allows us to violate those rules to some degree (a wizard with Unlock doesn't burn through picks). I find it uncomfortable to suggest that a rogue with Unlock is more proficient than a mage with Unlock -- but some lines need to be drawn. Unhappy, but not sure of a good path forward.
At cap, dabbling in those interesting things can happen, but there are entire sections of the game that this concept opens up that weren't possible before. Consider, the sorcerer casting Temporal Reversion. For that matter, consider the rogue casting Haste. Or the wizard casting . . . Ironskin.
Make 'em pay through the nose, but something like that should be learnable for those few who want to make that investment.
Then, we have to turn our attention to Redux -- as rogues and in a few cases a warrior or two push the envelop to the degree that it needs to be looked at.
Ultimately, though, if we wanted to preserve the 'rogue is better', we'd have to allow either totally unlimited training (to the maximum extent possible in training points, which after cap could be 1800 / 1800 a rank for the patient player)in all skills, with costs based on a 'profession factor', or we would always have to allow rogues to train N+1. A bit problematic. . .
I think I prefer that 'dual class' approach. Start yourself a rogue, then switch over to wizard, keeping your old skills but not able to use them at that level until such time as your current profession exceeds your prior. So, 99 rogue / 100 wizard.
Or the ultimate dream character 75 sorcerer / 85 empath / 90 cleric / 95 ranger / 98 rogue / 99 paladin / 100 wizard.
W00t!
That's about 20 years in the making, right there.
Sorry for the rambling. Headed back for another. :)
Doug
ALLIZAR2012
Re: (no subject)
04/24/2012 11:03 PM CDT
I love the ideas, but I get the impression that the amount of coding involved with a system like that would likely exceed the benefits. Increasing the ability to train to 3x is likely contained within one area which would be realistic and easy to adjust.
I don't really see a problem being limited early on, with more and more options becoming available as you train. My main issue is that I'm specifically prevented from training certain ways, regardless of what I am willing to give up in order to do so. This would also allow a feeling of progression and reward long after cap, instead of another rank of climbing that isn't needed 'just cause'. I calculated the cost of CM training from 1x to 3x for wizards at 18,000,000 experience post cap which is extreme, but plausible if that is a goal that you really want. It allows progression almost indefinitely post cap while maintaining limits on each specific skill.
Another problem with the current system is that it empowers hybrids and utility classes who can max everything very early on. More options will correct this. My Paladin, at 40, has 2x CM (using buffs), can swing harder (using zealot, with the DS penalty covered by other buffs) and still wears plate armor and most other benefits of a pure fighter. In fact, he swings significantly harder than what is possible with a pure of the same train, while retaining the full use of spells (he has 40 ranks) and the ability to use area spells or burn targets.
I am not saying there is anything wrong with paladins, I am simply stating that he is a hybrid and is not forced to make any major decisions. He is not forced to choose between high AS or high DS, he is not forced to choose between being good at spells or melee combat, he is a master of it all for his train (with no utility, most of which is impossible due to hard limits like disarm traps). He can swing harder then a warrior and nuke like a wizard (although the spells are costly). If 3x was the cap for all skills then I would have to specialize or be a jack of all trades who is a master of none.
FITZCHIVALRY
Re: (no subject)
04/25/2012 12:02 AM CDT
Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing a system where Squares got to triple weapon skills. CM on the other hand would cause issues where all the CMANs are involved, and such. As tripling in that would make you wildly effective with your maneuvers. As it is being rank 5 in a skill is enough at 1.5x to have almost 100% success rate when uphunting. I do, however, understand the wildly high cost associated with it. I always found my favorite part of being a warrior before I converted was disarming traps, bashing boxes and being able to skin while being able to aim my weapon while hunting. I would have been loathe to give that all up just for some more CM ranks. Post-cap the CM problem would be where we would see it, I would think.
I did like the idea of being able to train outside your profession, though. Since coming back I got a wild hair to master instruments with Falicor, but I cant since I am not a bard (not the same, but the same vein). I can't access any Major Spirit spells, as a Paladin, no matter how hard I try. I feel like if Falicor really wanted to, I should even be able to delve into the cleric circle. Of course, this would all come at a great cost, but I do not see why this cannot be an option. I do wish we would lift some of the dated restrictions we have in the game. A lot of the changes people would FLIP over would require little coding, and you could hype it up as the thing you worked on all year.
-Falicor
I did like the idea of being able to train outside your profession, though. Since coming back I got a wild hair to master instruments with Falicor, but I cant since I am not a bard (not the same, but the same vein). I can't access any Major Spirit spells, as a Paladin, no matter how hard I try. I feel like if Falicor really wanted to, I should even be able to delve into the cleric circle. Of course, this would all come at a great cost, but I do not see why this cannot be an option. I do wish we would lift some of the dated restrictions we have in the game. A lot of the changes people would FLIP over would require little coding, and you could hype it up as the thing you worked on all year.
-Falicor
GS4-AULIS
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 03:46 AM CDT
I just ran the numbers for the warrior portion, and I personally feel the cost is pretty low for the very increased benefit.
To go from 2x to 3x weapon skill for a warrior with your numbers (800/400 TP's) it would cost 1,335,000 experience.
To go from 2x to 3x CM skill for a warrior with your numbers (1600/1200) it would cost 3,335,000 experience.
Now, that may look like a TON of post-cap experience to many people. However, for many people--again in my opinion--that much experience is most likely a drop in the bucket. We have post-cap characters that are easily sitting at 15m to 20m total experience, if not even more. Even in Platinum, which hasn't even been around as long as Prime, there's a character that is 3x cap...if not close to 4x (30.24m experience).
Fixskilling would allow many of these characters to very easily acquire the extra combat prowess with little sacrifice beyond a good portion of their tertiary skill ranks.
I can't say I'm personally fully against the idea, because it would be quite nice if warriors and other squares could compete more so in the AS department, but there would need to be some balancing factor within it all. As it currently stands, a post-cap character that's sitting with 4.67m post-cap experience could just the hit the "easy button" and suddenly have another 150 AS.
~Aulis
Forums Manager
QC'er
To go from 2x to 3x weapon skill for a warrior with your numbers (800/400 TP's) it would cost 1,335,000 experience.
To go from 2x to 3x CM skill for a warrior with your numbers (1600/1200) it would cost 3,335,000 experience.
Now, that may look like a TON of post-cap experience to many people. However, for many people--again in my opinion--that much experience is most likely a drop in the bucket. We have post-cap characters that are easily sitting at 15m to 20m total experience, if not even more. Even in Platinum, which hasn't even been around as long as Prime, there's a character that is 3x cap...if not close to 4x (30.24m experience).
Fixskilling would allow many of these characters to very easily acquire the extra combat prowess with little sacrifice beyond a good portion of their tertiary skill ranks.
I can't say I'm personally fully against the idea, because it would be quite nice if warriors and other squares could compete more so in the AS department, but there would need to be some balancing factor within it all. As it currently stands, a post-cap character that's sitting with 4.67m post-cap experience could just the hit the "easy button" and suddenly have another 150 AS.
~Aulis
Forums Manager
QC'er
DOUG
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 08:46 AM CDT
Isn't this true, irrespective?
I mean, in the case of unlocking additional AS, there are really only a couple of approaches -- and I think those two approaches apply for any skill, but haven't thought it all the way through.
If you allow for a skill to be increased beyond what it can be now (say, triple weapon ranks), there are trade offs while advancing. But anyone with post cap experience is simply going to reallocate if they want that skill. It can't be too expensive or it can't be garnered while advancing in level.
Alternatively, if you're going to make it too expensive to be even remotely possible while advancing, then all you're doing is reducing the number of ranks achievable to some scale. If you double the point cost for AS from 800 / 400 to 1600 / 800, the only thing you've accomplished is reduced the impact of the easy button from 150 to 75.
In this case, in for a penny, in for a pound, I'd say.
I mentioned dual / multi-profession. We've also talked about just allowing cross training in other skill types, which could include alchemy, bard singing, etc. But those are fraught with risk, too.
Something we haven't discussed to much recently, but have batted around years past, was the concept of the 'arch' type character. The concept was to create a set of skills / spell lists / abilities (yep, ever wanted to wink and intrinsically cast ewave?) available post cap (or even at level 75 for those willing to sacrifice). Create categories of things that could be learned, using a similar framework to our training point / skill system of today.
But since there's no cost associated with them, and it's all really targeted to end game, make it a worthwhile goal.
Say, for example, that it would take 120 / 120 points for a sorcerer to learn a spell rank on the Arcane list, and learn to cast the spell natively. This creates the 'profession' Arcist, as an example.
Say, for example, that (after monks are done and there's a capped monk) it would take 250 physical training points for the monk to learn to 'fall' any distance without harm or damage.
Say, for example, that elves of any profession could spend 250 / 125 points, and receive total immunity to 'element effects', like slipping on ice, or getting frostbitten.
Or, my personal favorite, that wizards can spend 500 / 250 points, and be able to 'levitate'.
Working a way for wizards to be able to spit would be nice, too. . . I'm sure a few of us would hold a tribute spitathon.
Anyway -- totally new things that just don't exist, but have been asked for. Use the same concepts as existing training framework, but make the cost 10x and throw on these things.
Doug
I mean, in the case of unlocking additional AS, there are really only a couple of approaches -- and I think those two approaches apply for any skill, but haven't thought it all the way through.
If you allow for a skill to be increased beyond what it can be now (say, triple weapon ranks), there are trade offs while advancing. But anyone with post cap experience is simply going to reallocate if they want that skill. It can't be too expensive or it can't be garnered while advancing in level.
Alternatively, if you're going to make it too expensive to be even remotely possible while advancing, then all you're doing is reducing the number of ranks achievable to some scale. If you double the point cost for AS from 800 / 400 to 1600 / 800, the only thing you've accomplished is reduced the impact of the easy button from 150 to 75.
In this case, in for a penny, in for a pound, I'd say.
I mentioned dual / multi-profession. We've also talked about just allowing cross training in other skill types, which could include alchemy, bard singing, etc. But those are fraught with risk, too.
Something we haven't discussed to much recently, but have batted around years past, was the concept of the 'arch' type character. The concept was to create a set of skills / spell lists / abilities (yep, ever wanted to wink and intrinsically cast ewave?) available post cap (or even at level 75 for those willing to sacrifice). Create categories of things that could be learned, using a similar framework to our training point / skill system of today.
But since there's no cost associated with them, and it's all really targeted to end game, make it a worthwhile goal.
Say, for example, that it would take 120 / 120 points for a sorcerer to learn a spell rank on the Arcane list, and learn to cast the spell natively. This creates the 'profession' Arcist, as an example.
Say, for example, that (after monks are done and there's a capped monk) it would take 250 physical training points for the monk to learn to 'fall' any distance without harm or damage.
Say, for example, that elves of any profession could spend 250 / 125 points, and receive total immunity to 'element effects', like slipping on ice, or getting frostbitten.
Or, my personal favorite, that wizards can spend 500 / 250 points, and be able to 'levitate'.
Working a way for wizards to be able to spit would be nice, too. . . I'm sure a few of us would hold a tribute spitathon.
Anyway -- totally new things that just don't exist, but have been asked for. Use the same concepts as existing training framework, but make the cost 10x and throw on these things.
Doug
FITZCHIVALRY
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 08:54 AM CDT
On the other hand there is the majority of us who between all of our characters don't even have 10 million experience, and none of them a square.
-Falicor
-Falicor
GS4-MARSTREFORN
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 11:40 AM CDT
Alternatively,
All of the other professions don't really seem to have any issues/complaints about AS. Making a game-wide change to training does not seem to be the answer for this.
I tend to agree with some concerns about warriors not having the ability to generate as much AS as other professions.
Warriors CAN, however, bond to a weapon. And that weapon should be the focus of where any extra AS comes from IMO.
Again, this is all theory and speculation. Please read the following with salt...
If Wspec added +10 to AS per rank instead of +2 (for Warriors only), it would yield an extra 40 AS at Rank 5. No changes to CML bonuses.
If a Bonded weapon added +10 AS per rank in instead of +2, it would yield an extra 40 AS at Rank 5. No changes to CML bonuses.
Total AS gain = 80
Question is... is that enough, too much, or lacking in regards the AS disparity concerns?
I do see something like this allowing warriors to be able to generate a lot of AS early on in the earlier Wspec ranks, but I also see that as a way for warriors to be able to hunt in less than offensive stances earlier on due to their lack of defensive spells and not being in heavier armors yet.
Just some thoughts that could yield somewhat similar results without having to rewrite several systems to re-balance things.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
All of the other professions don't really seem to have any issues/complaints about AS. Making a game-wide change to training does not seem to be the answer for this.
I tend to agree with some concerns about warriors not having the ability to generate as much AS as other professions.
Warriors CAN, however, bond to a weapon. And that weapon should be the focus of where any extra AS comes from IMO.
Again, this is all theory and speculation. Please read the following with salt...
If Wspec added +10 to AS per rank instead of +2 (for Warriors only), it would yield an extra 40 AS at Rank 5. No changes to CML bonuses.
If a Bonded weapon added +10 AS per rank in instead of +2, it would yield an extra 40 AS at Rank 5. No changes to CML bonuses.
Total AS gain = 80
Question is... is that enough, too much, or lacking in regards the AS disparity concerns?
I do see something like this allowing warriors to be able to generate a lot of AS early on in the earlier Wspec ranks, but I also see that as a way for warriors to be able to hunt in less than offensive stances earlier on due to their lack of defensive spells and not being in heavier armors yet.
Just some thoughts that could yield somewhat similar results without having to rewrite several systems to re-balance things.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
THROGG
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 12:35 PM CDT
>>Warriors CAN, however, bond to a weapon. And that weapon should be the focus of where any extra AS comes from IMO.<<
So can paladins.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
So can paladins.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
KRAKII
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 01:40 PM CDT
Paladins can, but not through the same (CMan) mechanic; theirs is through a spell, which is written completely differently.
Would the GMs be amenable to looking at adding crit weighting with a CMan Bond? This would again have the effect of making the warrior more deadly with his chosen weapon, but without adding huge numbers. Is AS actually a problem? Or can all the high-level warriors achieve a hit... they just can't kill the darn things (too many hit points, too much crit padding, heal too quickly, whatever).
Would the GMs be amenable to looking at adding crit weighting with a CMan Bond? This would again have the effect of making the warrior more deadly with his chosen weapon, but without adding huge numbers. Is AS actually a problem? Or can all the high-level warriors achieve a hit... they just can't kill the darn things (too many hit points, too much crit padding, heal too quickly, whatever).
THROGG
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 01:53 PM CDT
>>Paladins can, but not through the same (CMan) mechanic; theirs is through a spell, which is written completely differently.<<
The effects are similar, in fact the paladin's weapons gets flares. I suspect your point is that it should be easy to increase the weapon bonding effect for warriors without doint the same for paladins. I was worried that increasing the effect or warrior bonding would also do the same for paladin's weapon, which they really don't need. You may be correct however, if the effects are coded differently. I do think warriors need to get a bit more effective with their weapons.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
The effects are similar, in fact the paladin's weapons gets flares. I suspect your point is that it should be easy to increase the weapon bonding effect for warriors without doint the same for paladins. I was worried that increasing the effect or warrior bonding would also do the same for paladin's weapon, which they really don't need. You may be correct however, if the effects are coded differently. I do think warriors need to get a bit more effective with their weapons.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
RATHBONER
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 02:25 PM CDT
>Question is... is that enough, too much, or lacking in regards the AS disparity concerns?
You'd have to add in the ability to bond to multiple weapons simultaneously. Its far too big a disparity between the main and secondary weapons otherwise.
You'd have to add in the ability to bond to multiple weapons simultaneously. Its far too big a disparity between the main and secondary weapons otherwise.
GS4-MARSTREFORN
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 02:47 PM CDT
>>Would the GMs be amenable to looking at adding crit weighting with a CMan Bond?
I think the AS would be a better trade across the board. There are a lot of creatures immune to criticals.
More AS would mean...
1) Easier to hit things so if you DID have an ability on the weapon already, such as flares or weighting.
2) Higher endrolls - effectively doing more damage AND a higher critical range against applicable foes.
I've always felt warriors are the masters of raw martial combat. Here are some questions that come to mind when I ponder the current discussion...
Warriors have the largest selection of CML skills and have the easiest time obtaining them. Should it be expected for them to use these skills against every equally trained creature they encounter? Or should they be able to just swing away?
Would adding a significant chunk of AS to their attacks take away from the concept of the CML skills and render them obsolete?
Warriors have access to "Mighty Blow". This has a similar effect to Ambush (stance reduction and increased damage). If this became a staple skill for warriors to train in and had a potential lower stamina cost (based on weapon size/speed) would extra AS even be needed?
I'm not sure improving CML skills will provide all the answers, but it does offer something to think about. CML skills are to warriors as spells are to other professions. They are the abilities that the profession uses to make each character more unique and styled to the player's preferences.
IE: two warriors bonded to different style weapons would be a similar comparison to two wizards trained in different elemental lores.
This is obviously a very simple comparison. There are far more factors that can be considered.
Ultimately the line of thought here is that a group of players believe warriors need improvement of some kind. There are a few avenues that are possible for this, but what is actually needed vs wanted to keep a certain "par" amongst professions is something that would require a lot of thought.
I'm not sure making a non-guild CML skill a staple for warriors is the answer either. Perhaps we can look at something like Spin Attack.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
I think the AS would be a better trade across the board. There are a lot of creatures immune to criticals.
More AS would mean...
1) Easier to hit things so if you DID have an ability on the weapon already, such as flares or weighting.
2) Higher endrolls - effectively doing more damage AND a higher critical range against applicable foes.
I've always felt warriors are the masters of raw martial combat. Here are some questions that come to mind when I ponder the current discussion...
Warriors have the largest selection of CML skills and have the easiest time obtaining them. Should it be expected for them to use these skills against every equally trained creature they encounter? Or should they be able to just swing away?
Would adding a significant chunk of AS to their attacks take away from the concept of the CML skills and render them obsolete?
Warriors have access to "Mighty Blow". This has a similar effect to Ambush (stance reduction and increased damage). If this became a staple skill for warriors to train in and had a potential lower stamina cost (based on weapon size/speed) would extra AS even be needed?
I'm not sure improving CML skills will provide all the answers, but it does offer something to think about. CML skills are to warriors as spells are to other professions. They are the abilities that the profession uses to make each character more unique and styled to the player's preferences.
IE: two warriors bonded to different style weapons would be a similar comparison to two wizards trained in different elemental lores.
This is obviously a very simple comparison. There are far more factors that can be considered.
Ultimately the line of thought here is that a group of players believe warriors need improvement of some kind. There are a few avenues that are possible for this, but what is actually needed vs wanted to keep a certain "par" amongst professions is something that would require a lot of thought.
I'm not sure making a non-guild CML skill a staple for warriors is the answer either. Perhaps we can look at something like Spin Attack.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
RATHBONER
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 02:52 PM CDT
>Warriors have access to "Mighty Blow". This has a similar effect to Ambush (stance reduction and increased damage). If this became a staple skill for warriors to train in and had a potential lower stamina cost (based on weapon size/speed) would extra AS even be needed?
If it was aimable (like ambush is).
If it was aimable (like ambush is).
GS4-MARSTREFORN
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 03:10 PM CDT
>>You'd have to add in the ability to bond to multiple weapons simultaneously. Its far too big a disparity between the main and secondary weapons otherwise.
That's just the thing we would need to address.
If warriors were able to 3x in weapons, would we see many of them actually training 3x in multiple weapon styles?
Say Wspec and Bonding DID offer more AS in theory...
Up to 3 different weapon types can be trained with Wspec.
Would it be better to scale an increase in AS with ranks in Wspec instead, and leave Bonding as is?
IE: For warriors only.
Wspec at Rank 1 - +10 to AS with weapon type
Wspec at Rank 2 - additional +10 to AS
Wspec at Rank 3 - additional +15 to AS
Wspec at Rank 4 - additional +15 to AS
Wspec at Rank 5 - additional +20 to AS
Total AS gained at Rank 5 = 70
This would yield 60 more AS than Wspec currently offers for Warriors at Rank 5.
Add +10 AS via Bonding for a total potential of +80 AS with a fully bonded weapon with Wspec at Rank 5.
Some food for thought.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
That's just the thing we would need to address.
If warriors were able to 3x in weapons, would we see many of them actually training 3x in multiple weapon styles?
Say Wspec and Bonding DID offer more AS in theory...
Up to 3 different weapon types can be trained with Wspec.
Would it be better to scale an increase in AS with ranks in Wspec instead, and leave Bonding as is?
IE: For warriors only.
Wspec at Rank 1 - +10 to AS with weapon type
Wspec at Rank 2 - additional +10 to AS
Wspec at Rank 3 - additional +15 to AS
Wspec at Rank 4 - additional +15 to AS
Wspec at Rank 5 - additional +20 to AS
Total AS gained at Rank 5 = 70
This would yield 60 more AS than Wspec currently offers for Warriors at Rank 5.
Add +10 AS via Bonding for a total potential of +80 AS with a fully bonded weapon with Wspec at Rank 5.
Some food for thought.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
GS4-MARSTREFORN
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 03:11 PM CDT
>>If it was aimable (like ambush is).
Good point. That is one of the best parts about Ambush.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
Good point. That is one of the best parts about Ambush.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
THROGG
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 03:51 PM CDT
>>Would adding a significant chunk of AS to their attacks take away from the concept of the CML skills and render them obsolete?<<
Not necessarily; CM and warrior guild skills use up stamina. There is a limit to how often they can be used, while one can swing a weapon indefinitely.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
Not necessarily; CM and warrior guild skills use up stamina. There is a limit to how often they can be used, while one can swing a weapon indefinitely.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
HILLMANM
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 04:44 PM CDT
And just to throw this out there...
One of the things I've long, long said is that the last thing warriors need is more AS. Or training points. Or anything of the sort.
Partly because I don't level much and partly due to being an idiot I just never got around to using training points for a while. Then I just decided to be even more stupid and see how long I could do.
Currently, I haven't used any training points in about 15-20 levels or so. And I'm still just fine. I usually hunt at or above my level.
Recently, along with some small groups I was hunting the capped range invasion critters in the labryinth in River's Rest just fine.
Yes, I'll be highly succeptible to magic but that's not that much different from warriors at any age range.
So to the idea that training might be adjusted to find more AS or find more points is, to me at least, utterly pointless. What we need are totally new ways to USE the AS that we already have.
Here's where I currently stand:
One of the things I've long, long said is that the last thing warriors need is more AS. Or training points. Or anything of the sort.
Partly because I don't level much and partly due to being an idiot I just never got around to using training points for a while. Then I just decided to be even more stupid and see how long I could do.
Currently, I haven't used any training points in about 15-20 levels or so. And I'm still just fine. I usually hunt at or above my level.
Recently, along with some small groups I was hunting the capped range invasion critters in the labryinth in River's Rest just fine.
Yes, I'll be highly succeptible to magic but that's not that much different from warriors at any age range.
So to the idea that training might be adjusted to find more AS or find more points is, to me at least, utterly pointless. What we need are totally new ways to USE the AS that we already have.
Here's where I currently stand:
| >exp | |
| Level: 85 | Deeds: 10 |
| Experience: 6034345 | Death's Sting: None |
| Exp. until next: 8655 | Recent Deaths: 0 |
| Mental TPs: 613 | Fame: 24785776 |
| Physical TPs: 734 | Mana: 2/2 max |
MOONGODDESS
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 04:51 PM CDT
>>>>You'd have to add in the ability to bond to multiple weapons simultaneously. Its far too big a disparity between the main and secondary weapons otherwise.
I think what Rathboner was trying to say with this (and slap me around with a dead fish if I'm wrong with this) is that warrior tends to have at least two weapons that they can/do hunt with: one with weighting/flares and one that's blessable...
Being able to bond to both weapons, so that we can use them in the situations they're each useful in, would definitely help.
I think what Rathboner was trying to say with this (and slap me around with a dead fish if I'm wrong with this) is that warrior tends to have at least two weapons that they can/do hunt with: one with weighting/flares and one that's blessable...
Being able to bond to both weapons, so that we can use them in the situations they're each useful in, would definitely help.
GS4-MARSTREFORN
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 05:17 PM CDT
>Being able to bond to both weapons, so that we can use them in the situations they're each useful in, would definitely help.
I can understand that line of thought.
Going strictly based on an increase in AS, I read this as "do not change bonding" and look for the AS somewhere else.
Hence the idea to pump Wspec skills for warriors.
Has anyone bonded to one of those weapons that can switch between blessable and flaring yet? I see that as a pretty good compromise to get the best of both worlds.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
I can understand that line of thought.
Going strictly based on an increase in AS, I read this as "do not change bonding" and look for the AS somewhere else.
Hence the idea to pump Wspec skills for warriors.
Has anyone bonded to one of those weapons that can switch between blessable and flaring yet? I see that as a pretty good compromise to get the best of both worlds.
-GM Marstreforn-
(just call me Mars if you can't spell it)
ALLIZAR2012
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 05:20 PM CDT
Almost any class could level significantly higher then their skill rank if they hunt carefully, this is not exclusive to warriors. I think we have kind of derailed into a specific issue instead of the concept as a whole. Even if the solution is 2x across the board, should bards be hard limited to a single train in ambush even though the training cost is higher? Why even make it possible for some professions to 2X in climbing and swimming if it is not possible for casters? The intention is obviously not to prevent casters from getting to certain areas.
The problem that I see is that I am being told that I cannot do something, even if I am willing to pay inflated costs, which is redundant and causes imbalances and useless limitations (such as climbing and swimming skill, in the long run these are simply a required toll that everyone must pay with a slight variation in cost). By removing the hard limits to a certain point you can balance skills instead of professions, while leaving the individual character of each profession and allowing personal preference and choices.
The problem that I see is that I am being told that I cannot do something, even if I am willing to pay inflated costs, which is redundant and causes imbalances and useless limitations (such as climbing and swimming skill, in the long run these are simply a required toll that everyone must pay with a slight variation in cost). By removing the hard limits to a certain point you can balance skills instead of professions, while leaving the individual character of each profession and allowing personal preference and choices.
THROGG
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 06:02 PM CDT
>>I think what Rathboner was trying to say with this (and slap me around with a dead fish if I'm wrong with this) is that warrior tends to have at least two weapons that they can/do hunt with: one with weighting/flares and one that's blessable...<<
I wouldn't be in favor of that, really. Pick a favorite weapon and use it; that's my definition of bonding.
UNLESS!
Unless you are trained in TWC, and use the same two weapons all the time. In that case, I'd be in favor of letting a warrior bond to both weapons at once.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
I wouldn't be in favor of that, really. Pick a favorite weapon and use it; that's my definition of bonding.
UNLESS!
Unless you are trained in TWC, and use the same two weapons all the time. In that case, I'd be in favor of letting a warrior bond to both weapons at once.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
GRYPES
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
04/25/2012 07:23 PM CDT
I tend to agree with some concerns about warriors not having the ability to generate as much AS as other professions
Myth. Myth. Myth.
I really wish people would actually run the numbers before accepting the above as fact.
Dgry
Myth. Myth. Myth.
I really wish people would actually run the numbers before accepting the above as fact.
Dgry
SONTARI
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
05/02/2012 01:36 PM CDT
I like the idea of more flexibility via opening up skills to 3x training by all classes.
Maybe leave out combat skills? Suddenly allowing post-cap folks to throw another 100 ranks into AS skills would be pretty unbalancing. Same thing with skills that boost CS / spell AS, though I think those might already be 3xable.
I'm avoiding the warrior AS part of this discussion, since I really haven't played warriors much.
I will say that I'm a little selfishly concerned about opening up skills to 3x. My main is a rogue. I'm not sure I want everyone to become decent smiths by dumping a few million post-cap exp points into smithing.
Maybe leave out combat skills? Suddenly allowing post-cap folks to throw another 100 ranks into AS skills would be pretty unbalancing. Same thing with skills that boost CS / spell AS, though I think those might already be 3xable.
I'm avoiding the warrior AS part of this discussion, since I really haven't played warriors much.
I will say that I'm a little selfishly concerned about opening up skills to 3x. My main is a rogue. I'm not sure I want everyone to become decent smiths by dumping a few million post-cap exp points into smithing.
HIPPO-GRANDE
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
05/05/2012 09:26 PM CDT
I like the idea of a NEW pathway opening up at post-cap experience junctures, such as like, say:
You have just hit XXX Million Experience Points! Say hello to a new set of skills. Type GOALS to train...etc. blah blah
So, you're a Rogue. You get Master Smithing Ranks. Takes -1 per rank off of picking on most boxes every 5 ranks. Master Stalk/Hide which gives you the chance of an automatic spring attack with an ambush boost on every hide where a critter has been targetted with a reduced RT. For the Warrior, you get Master Weapon Training- the ability to temporarily weight weapons to a level of oh, say 'decent' for X number of swings based on Ranks. Master Armor; Master Physical Fitness which gives the chance to cause damage to critters who make contact with your body based on the overt physical toughness. Clerics get something like Master Prayer Ranks- Chance to flare for manaless, RT-less attacks against undead or multiple targets with mana on the living or chance to be instantly rejuvenated after a rez, Master Philosophy Ranks where you can send lifekeep to downed characters within the same realm or aim your fogto locations with 130 with reduced sickness and RT (hallelujah).
Etc. Etc. etc.
I still say :
Warriors get 3x Weapon, 3x CM.
Rogues only get 3x smithing ever, imo.
Lore should be reduced in cost all around by as much as 40-50%!
Post-Cap Skills should include automatic TD boosters like +1 every million. I mean COME on...
You have just hit XXX Million Experience Points! Say hello to a new set of skills. Type GOALS to train...etc. blah blah
So, you're a Rogue. You get Master Smithing Ranks. Takes -1 per rank off of picking on most boxes every 5 ranks. Master Stalk/Hide which gives you the chance of an automatic spring attack with an ambush boost on every hide where a critter has been targetted with a reduced RT. For the Warrior, you get Master Weapon Training- the ability to temporarily weight weapons to a level of oh, say 'decent' for X number of swings based on Ranks. Master Armor; Master Physical Fitness which gives the chance to cause damage to critters who make contact with your body based on the overt physical toughness. Clerics get something like Master Prayer Ranks- Chance to flare for manaless, RT-less attacks against undead or multiple targets with mana on the living or chance to be instantly rejuvenated after a rez, Master Philosophy Ranks where you can send lifekeep to downed characters within the same realm or aim your fogto locations with 130 with reduced sickness and RT (hallelujah).
Etc. Etc. etc.
I still say :
Warriors get 3x Weapon, 3x CM.
Rogues only get 3x smithing ever, imo.
Lore should be reduced in cost all around by as much as 40-50%!
Post-Cap Skills should include automatic TD boosters like +1 every million. I mean COME on...
ARCHIGEEK
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
06/20/2012 02:19 PM CDT
I am not sure it's necessary to be able to 3x weapons. I think the assertion that if you can do it everyone will do it to remain at par with their peers is correct. Just being able to 3x train in CM though, would be a very nice benefit, albeit at a very high cost. +50AS is very significant, and additionally you would get a bunch of added CMAN points that you could apply, so you would end up with 5 ranks in a few skills that you only currently have 3-4, etc. The affect of CM training on success with CMANs could be capped at 2 ranks to maintain some balance. Opening up 3x weapon training is a can of worms that I think should remain closed.
With regards to a bonding boost, it has been pointed out that a bonding boost would apply to just the bonded weapon. It seems like too much of a work around to me, when the core problem should be solved with training points earned and applied.
The WSPEC idea maybe solves that problem, but it still doesn't quite feel right.
I do like the idea of phantom weighting added via warrior bond (and wspec too), and it parallels the flares that paladins get rather nicely. Each rank of bonding could add 2 points of phantom weighting, for the equivalent of heavy weighting at a full 5 ranks of bonding, or 1 point of weighting per rank in both bond AND wspec, for a total of heavy at 5 ranks of each.
Kerl
With regards to a bonding boost, it has been pointed out that a bonding boost would apply to just the bonded weapon. It seems like too much of a work around to me, when the core problem should be solved with training points earned and applied.
The WSPEC idea maybe solves that problem, but it still doesn't quite feel right.
I do like the idea of phantom weighting added via warrior bond (and wspec too), and it parallels the flares that paladins get rather nicely. Each rank of bonding could add 2 points of phantom weighting, for the equivalent of heavy weighting at a full 5 ranks of bonding, or 1 point of weighting per rank in both bond AND wspec, for a total of heavy at 5 ranks of each.
Kerl
PRAT2
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
10/25/2013 05:05 PM CDT
Sorry to go all necromancer and reanimate this thread, but I wanted to point out something that everyone discussing the bonding issues seemed to miss. Not every weapon and warrior play style allows for weapon bonding. Hurlers can't bond.
Also, in Shattered, once you hit high enough level that you fight critters that disarm, weapons don't stay around long enough for you to bond them. You would be on a constant roller coaster of AS as it goes up and then plummets when your weapon is lost, and this would go on over and over in a maddening up and down spiral.
That said I really like the idea of being able to bond multiple weapons, that way I could alternate between weapons and when one is lost I can simply switch to the next and start bonding a new one in place of the lost one. An alternative would be to allow bonding to work much like wspec such that you bond to a type of weapon rather than a specific one. Then hurlers could bond as well, and in shattered where weapons are constantly cycling through your inventory, you could gain the benefits of weapon bond without worrying that the specific weapon would be lost the next day.
SCRAPPERK
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
10/26/2013 10:21 AM CDT
Maybe I am missing basic precept about Shattered. I don't understand the weapon cycling you mention, as droppage is nothing new to the game. Doesn't it sill exist in Plat as well?
~
PRAT2
Re: 3x'ing weapons/CM
10/26/2013 11:25 AM CDT
Unlike Prime where you are at the keyboard all the time and can react to weapon loss, and where there are tons of other people hunting to help you search for and recover weapons, weapons are rarely actually lost as a result.
Shattered on the other hand is 99% AFK hunting and it is 24/7 which means you not only can't react when it happens, it happens way more frequently to you than it would in Prime or Plat, and there are only a handful of people hunting so less likely someone else will recover it for you.
So, the result is weapons are lost and lost permanently, and it happens at a rate such that bonding is nearly pointless. You rarely get a weapon fully bonded before it is gone.
Shattered on the other hand is 99% AFK hunting and it is 24/7 which means you not only can't react when it happens, it happens way more frequently to you than it would in Prime or Plat, and there are only a handful of people hunting so less likely someone else will recover it for you.
So, the result is weapons are lost and lost permanently, and it happens at a rate such that bonding is nearly pointless. You rarely get a weapon fully bonded before it is gone.
DOUG
