[KR TEST] Armor masteries and stat/skill rebalancing

• JoeyDee9 wrote on 2013-04-01 04:26
  With how good heavy armor is I think people will be willing to take the dex penalty,
• Kenero wrote on 2013-04-01 04:31

  Quote from JoeyDee9;1060000:

  With how good heavy armor is I think people will be willing to take the dex penalty,

  
  
  Yea... you can walk past icebolts like nothing, thunderbolt included, and firebolt to a degree.
  
  Thunder won't stun you, ice spear won't freeze you, even fireball won't knock you back.
  
  I attacked Herro on test and he was already to instantly attack me back.
  
  It's like having Morrighan's wings of eclipse on you, though you receive damage, you're pratically almost invulnerable to stun. Combine this with a shield, mana shield, or both... and you're a walking castle.
  
  Though knockbacks induced by skills such as Crossbuster or Smash performs normally... though dunno why firebolt doesn't knock them back much.
• phil11g wrote on 2013-04-01 04:32

  Quote from Perfectio;1059914:

  Light armor: everyone except mages/alchemists that give two shits about dex
  Heavy armor: mages/alchemists (lel i can sit there in my suit of armor and spam my big spells with zero penalty and no stun unlike literally every RPG made because only Devkitty would forget one of the BASIC rpg balance conventions)
  

  
  
  Could you explain a bit more in detail?
• Akutare wrote on 2013-04-01 04:37

  Quote from phil11g;1060008:

  Could you explain a bit more in detail?

  
  
  What I'm assuming Perfectio means is, in most RPG's, mages are usually the ones stuck in clothing to compensate for their ridiculous damage potential which comes to shine at the end game. Here, they can have all the defensiveness that would normally be attributed to melee classes and keep their damage unchecked by Dexterity penalties and the like.
• JoeyDee9 wrote on 2013-04-01 04:38

  Quote from phil11g;1060008:

  Could you explain a bit more in detail?

  
  
  Mages shouldn't wear heavy armor is what they are referring to I believe.
• JoeyDee9 wrote on 2013-04-01 04:38

  Quote from phil11g;1060008:

  Could you explain a bit more in detail?

  
  
  Mages shouldn't wear heavy armor is what they are referring to I believe.
• Eshyn wrote on 2013-04-01 04:44

  Quote from Kenero;1060005:

  Yea... you can walk past icebolts like nothing, thunderbolt included, and firebolt to a degree.
  
  Thunder won't stun you, ice spear won't freeze you, even fireball won't knock you back.
  
  I attacked Herro on test and he was already to instantly attack me back.
  
  It's like having Morrighan's wings of eclipse on you, though you receive damage, you're pratically almost invulnerable to stun. Combine this with a shield, mana shield, or both... and you're a walking castle.
  
  Though knockbacks induced by skills such as Crossbuster or Smash performs normally... though dunno why firebolt doesn't knock them back much.

  
  
  And there goes any chance for a human to come close to a giant melee.
• phil11g wrote on 2013-04-01 04:45

  Quote from JoeyDee9;1060022:

  Mages shouldn't wear heavy armor is what they are referring to I believe.

  
  
  Oh I hope not. Maybe if the player is a Magic Knight, just maybe. But Mages in Heavy armor? They already have Mana Shield, why give them even more defense over players in the front lines, using melee. They should reduce the reliability of magic when wearing heavy armor more so than melee balance.
• phil11g wrote on 2013-04-01 04:45

  Quote from JoeyDee9;1060022:

  Mages shouldn't wear heavy armor is what they are referring to I believe.

  
  
  Oh I hope not. Maybe if the player is a Magic Knight, just maybe. But Mages in Heavy armor? They already have Mana Shield, why give them even more defense over people in the front lines, who only have melee? They should reduce the reliability of magic when wearing heavy armor.
• cheese758 wrote on 2013-04-01 04:50
  I'm not a mage so I don't really know how the formula works. Can someone explain to me how the the new formula is supposed to increase magic damage?
  
  Using my limited and probably inaccurate understanding of magic, using the old formula, r1 thunder with 500 int would have 500 max damage since 500 int = 25 magic attack and 400 base max * 1.25 (since the old formula was based on %s) = 500. With the new formula, the max damage is still 500 with 500 int. You would have 100 mag attack and your max would be 400 + 100 = 500.
• Ketchup wrote on 2013-04-01 05:04

  Quote from JoeyDee9;1060000:

  With how good heavy armor is I think people will be willing to take the dex penalty,

  
  
  I know i'm taking the dex penalty when it comes out
• Yakumo Yukari wrote on 2013-04-01 05:07
  More hate for humans ITT.
• Anwell wrote on 2013-04-01 05:14

  Quote from Akutare;1060021:

  What I'm assuming Perfectio means is, in most RPG's, mages are usually the ones stuck in clothing to compensate for their ridiculous damage potential which comes to shine at the end game. Here, they can have all the defensiveness that would normally be attributed to melee classes and keep their damage unchecked by Dexterity penalties and the like.

  
  
  But in this game warriors can't taunt except if your a giant to pull monsters away from mages, and have you forgotten about how many monsters will start aggroing you if you don't kill them off with a fireball, ice spear, or thunder? It seems like a necessary balance in my opinion.
• Slayerj wrote on 2013-04-01 05:15

  Quote from phil11g;1060039:

  Oh I hope not. Maybe if the player is a Magic Knight, just maybe. But Mages in Heavy armor? They already have Mana Shield, why give them even more defense over players in the front lines, using melee. They should reduce the reliability of magic when wearing heavy armor more so than melee balance.

  
  
  Seeing that EVERYONE can get and use mana shield without needing to be anywhere near a mages int/mp pool for that skill to save your life, I don't see the valid point here.
  
  (Just saying this part in general, not aimed at you)
  I like how everyone was flipping shit a while ago about 'hybriding' and how skill sets would be penalized by heavy armor now and how it wasn't fair, but the moment a mage/alch puts on heavy armor they flip a table saying that's not fair either.
  
  Their original point. Don't penalized for the use of *insert skills and combat stuff here* that needs dex for *insert reason here* You can wear what ever you want, when ever you want, why penalize? :l
  
  Mage/alch then proves that point by putting on said heavy armor.
  
  ERMAGAWD NUUUU NOT FAIR!
  
  Wait...wut? But srsly, I know I'll take the dex penalty on my human and giant without looking back. Dat def/knockback stuff <3
• JoeyDee9 wrote on 2013-04-01 05:17

  Quote from cheese758;1060048:

  I'm not a mage so I don't really know how the formula works. Can someone explain to me how the the new formula is supposed to increase magic damage?
  
  Using my limited and probably inaccurate understanding of magic, using the old formula, r1 thunder with 500 int would have 500 max damage since 500 int = 25 magic attack and 400 base max * 1.25 (since the old formula was based on %s) = 500. With the new formula, the max damage is still 500 with 500 int. You would have 100 mag attack and your max would be 400 + 100 = 500.

  
  
  The new formula didn't buff all magic. I'll just post the new formula and you can dig around wiki for the old one if you want to get technical.
  ((Base_damage*Charge_Multiplier)+(Magic_attack*Constant))*Mastery_Bonus
  
  When you do the math it's a minimal change, to see some of the math in action either look through my old posts for the spread shot screeny or go back a few pages.
  
  If you look at the new formula you will see that for compounded magic damage from int is only added once which is way compounded magic got weaker.