Aelonwy
Well-known member
Is that true^? I don't play Reaper much except when dragged along by a few friends. I didn't know some (not all) imbues were scaled down in higher Reaper. So devs, why the double nerf to these type imbues?
U62 Preview 2 Balance Refresh
- Thread starter Torc
- Start date
- Status
Is that true^? I don't play Reaper much except when dragged along by a few friends. I didn't know some (not all) imbues were scaled down in higher Reaper. So devs, why the double nerf to these type imbues?
I think the tree that needs looked at for high AP cost reductions is warchanter. Currently if you want to get core 5 and 6 and all of tier 5 enhancement it costs 16 action points meaning that you need to spend 46 points in the tree. This is what I believe is the most costly tier 5 of any enhancement tree.
Reducing the cost so you can get all of tier 5 in 10ish points would be much better.
Reducing the cost so you can get all of tier 5 in 10ish points would be much better.
Plz dont nerf Spellpower imbue dices, the playstyle already require a lot of investment to be decent, don't over kill it. I would even think about buffing melee and range power imbue dices because those are in need of some love really.
Specially AA and EK, those two trees are already in the week side ( AA more than EK, but EK suffer a big nerf in its dps a while a go, yes it got a little buff but its still underwhelming.
I still think that these trees need more imbues dices in their lvl 18 and 20 cores to live up to their fantasies.
There is a lot to be said about the imbue system as a playstyle. specially how its covered in ED, considering how hybrid the spellpower imbue dices work, having most of the ED imbue dices in casters trees were you dont get anything else for them besides a little of spell power, is a big loss.
I would like to see draconic and primal avatar have some melee and range support the way Shadowdancer have it.
Hell even a t5 or mantle in one ED that could scale with the numbers of imbue dices.
Specially AA and EK, those two trees are already in the week side ( AA more than EK, but EK suffer a big nerf in its dps a while a go, yes it got a little buff but its still underwhelming.
I still think that these trees need more imbues dices in their lvl 18 and 20 cores to live up to their fantasies.
There is a lot to be said about the imbue system as a playstyle. specially how its covered in ED, considering how hybrid the spellpower imbue dices work, having most of the ED imbue dices in casters trees were you dont get anything else for them besides a little of spell power, is a big loss.
I would like to see draconic and primal avatar have some melee and range support the way Shadowdancer have it.
Hell even a t5 or mantle in one ED that could scale with the numbers of imbue dices.
Ugh, even more reason to avoid this nerf, hell even buff them a little. don't kill the playstyle.
I think the Caster level increase in cores should be Max Caster level instead. Most spell already have a max caster level of ten or is easily reachable but no way to really increase max caster level of spells (excep for spellvial and obliteraion with the epic feat). An increase on caster level doesn't give any real benefits if i'm not mistaken.
BigDeepsJohnson
Member
yes they got hit with the same type of damage reduction as normal spells cast (r7+) but it was never specifically said or even talked about even tho posts have gone up stating the "unintended" nerf. It wasn't like that on the lam before that change happened but happened when it went live
Mand O'Lin
Singer of Songs Drinker of Drinks
I sure enjoyed monk, but the button mashing...
Greiskoradon
Member
How about PDK Shield Mastery AP cost???
Spook
Well-known member
Yeah this was my concern when you started doing these "small" balance changes - they are ok when the changes are minor buffs I am not ok with this method for nerfs - it can take a long time to optimise a character we need more heads up when you are going to nerf something.
Monkey_Archer
Well-known member
Imbues that crit would be insanely overpowered, but I agree with the other point. A 25% scaling nerf on top of the 33% r10 nerf just seems like too much.
I'd like to see the r10 nerf reverted, and just nerf the strongest spells instead (Level 9s, multivial, draconic, etc...)
Woodyrocker
Well-known member
Why Stormsinger enchants will cost more? Was not the balance trying to lower the costs of all trees in general? i dont understand... realy....
About Arcane Archer, why not change the cores level requirement on elf tree to be like on the ranger trees? would be amazing!
and more some more; Why the 25% nerf? it was not so powerfull before, why the nerf?
About Arcane Archer, why not change the cores level requirement on elf tree to be like on the ranger trees? would be amazing!
and more some more; Why the 25% nerf? it was not so powerfull before, why the nerf?
BigDeepsJohnson
Member
That was the point of saying something so exaggerating, it's ridiculous to think about but when they keep nerfing it into the ground they gotta have SOME reason or plan to adjust it so people actually want to play it....RIGHT?
Finngon
Active member
Also Battle Engineer is missing from that.
LouDaCrisp
Active member
Understanding the math of Imbues that are going from 1d6 to 1d8 w/ the 75% Spell Power scaling nerf.
AVERAGE BASE DAMAGE:
For simplicity, we will be using the damage for a single die, but if you would like to figure out how much damage you have, just multiply the average damage by the number of dice you have. Also for simplicity, I used the average damage that these dice generate, which is (Maximum + Minimum)/2.
1d6 Avg = (6+1)/2 = 3.5
1d8 Avg = (8+1)/2 = 4.5
CALCULATIONS:
The general formula is Base Avg Dmg * (1 + (Spell Power/100) * Spell Power Scaling). Because of the one in GREEN, our end charts will not have a linear relationship and I can't give a solid number for how buffed or nerfed the imbues became. Remember that Spell Power Scaling is a percentage, so 100% is equal to 1, and 75% is equal to 0.75. I divide the Spell Power by 100 because each point is a 1% increase of the base damage.
For the old damage, I did 3.5 * (1 + Spell Power/100).
For the new damage, I did 4.5 * (1 + (Spell Power/100) * 0.75)
For the percentage change, I used the standard formula, (Final Value - Initial Value) / Initial Value.
RESULTS:
From this chart, we can see that the changes seem very marginal and that you'd be hard-pressed to be able to see the difference in damage.
If we zoom in on the first 200 spell power we see that the increase was just 1 damage and the increase gets smaller as you progress. But this doesn't quite tell you the whole story, let's look at the percentage change.
On this chart, we can see that these changes are a net positive up until 800 spell power, where we break even. After 800 spell power, you start to lose damage. I'm my opinion, most people weren't using 1d6 imbues and investing heavily in them, such that they would a) add in non-low hanging imbue dice or b) invest over 800 spell power.
If you would like to check out how I did the math or how your particular build will be affected, given your spell power/base damage, check out this spreadsheet:
PS: On the second page, I have the math for the nerf to existing 1d8 die imbues.
AVERAGE BASE DAMAGE:
For simplicity, we will be using the damage for a single die, but if you would like to figure out how much damage you have, just multiply the average damage by the number of dice you have. Also for simplicity, I used the average damage that these dice generate, which is (Maximum + Minimum)/2.
1d6 Avg = (6+1)/2 = 3.5
1d8 Avg = (8+1)/2 = 4.5
CALCULATIONS:
The general formula is Base Avg Dmg * (1 + (Spell Power/100) * Spell Power Scaling). Because of the one in GREEN, our end charts will not have a linear relationship and I can't give a solid number for how buffed or nerfed the imbues became. Remember that Spell Power Scaling is a percentage, so 100% is equal to 1, and 75% is equal to 0.75. I divide the Spell Power by 100 because each point is a 1% increase of the base damage.
For the old damage, I did 3.5 * (1 + Spell Power/100).
For the new damage, I did 4.5 * (1 + (Spell Power/100) * 0.75)
For the percentage change, I used the standard formula, (Final Value - Initial Value) / Initial Value.
RESULTS:
From this chart, we can see that the changes seem very marginal and that you'd be hard-pressed to be able to see the difference in damage.
If we zoom in on the first 200 spell power we see that the increase was just 1 damage and the increase gets smaller as you progress. But this doesn't quite tell you the whole story, let's look at the percentage change.
On this chart, we can see that these changes are a net positive up until 800 spell power, where we break even. After 800 spell power, you start to lose damage. I'm my opinion, most people weren't using 1d6 imbues and investing heavily in them, such that they would a) add in non-low hanging imbue dice or b) invest over 800 spell power.
If you would like to check out how I did the math or how your particular build will be affected, given your spell power/base damage, check out this spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18EPQsAYQoI9w2ywmYNAECv7UIWVWHejS5FSFfP_385A/edit?usp=sharing
PS: On the second page, I have the math for the nerf to existing 1d8 die imbues.
Last edited:
rabidfox
The People's Champion
My arti breaks 800. I'm sure many others that were on 1d6 dice did too. The average casual player probably comes out ahead from this change. But those who spent the time min/maxing to push their stats will be the ones who feel the slight hit (and all the people who were already on d8's that are just straight up taking a big old hit to their imbues).
LouDaCrisp
Active member
I do feel for those that had imbues with existing 1d8 dice that lost somewhere between 20%-25% of their damage, but you will find me HARD pressed to cry about the change to 1d6 imbue. Assuming that you have 1200 spell power, you will lose ~1% of your damage. At that point, call it a wealth tax and move on.
Solarpower
Well-known member
What's the point of spreading between different elements instead of focus on one element, huh ?
Especially, since all of the new SLAs share the same cooldown ?
- Status