Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Before the Tens of Thousands.

Demiurge
You are a Troll
Lisa Stevens
Duffy Swiftshadow
I think it's a far bigger problem and way more confusing that beneficial effects get weaker for better geared characters.

I will let Bob chime in tomorrow, but we have talked about this and he is planning on changing the way that beneficials get less effective as you go up in tiers of gear.

-Lisa

That is….disappointing. Low level spells - buffs and cures too - should be less effective against people in high level armor. That is one of the trade-offs (meaningful choices) you make when donning T3+3 armor.
Exactly. T3 armor is easy to qualify for, but people are wearing it before they (or their party mates) are ready and expecting some sort of endgame awesomeness from putting it on too early. If you and your friends are not really at T3 yet and only have the odd T3 weapon or implement and no access to T3 potions or healing tokens you are simply not really T3 ready. T3 armor is the last T3 to start equipping not the first.

If your building a race car you do not drop a 1000 HP V8 into a stock chassis with stock transmission and suspension and a set of street tyres and expect anything other than a disaster.
Duffy Swiftshadow
Something to keep in mind, due to how spell levels work on implements you can't actually upgrade all your T2 expendables to T3 so you're forced to reduce your hand or use double weakened versions for f the majority of your expendables.

As I said before the armor upgrade should all around be beneficial, but I think theirs some issues with the specifics of how it all shakes out at the moment.

@Demiurge

It's all around better to equip, the penalty to everything else is not enough of a deterrent to wearing it as the only thing it hurts is your self buffs and healing, which is easily surpassed by the EPro, +50 defense boost, and Major Keyword perks. Waiting is pretty stupid, not to mention threading is supposed to prevent equipping all T3 which means we would be using a mix of T2 and T3, maybe even T1. So the whole 'wait til it's all T3' doesn't jive with the plans we were told. I also don't recall anyone making that argument for the T2 jump which had the same effect when the first wave of players hit it.
Edam
Duffy Swiftshadow
Something to keep in mind, due to how spell levels work on implements you can't actually upgrade all your T2 expendables to T3 so you're forced to reduce your hand or use double weakened versions for f the majority of your expendables.

Which is why I think the problem is not EPRO/EPOW per se. The issue is beneficial effects should not take the same degree of hit that attacks and debuffs suffer. Some nerfing for lower level yes, but not quite as much as we have now. It is a balancing issue.

Which brings up another issue. Edam generally runs around with a T2 holy symbol equipped but a cross class feature slotted instead of a domain. His damage expendables still work. Improved Holy Light for example still does about half damage with no keywords. However the heal/buff and debuff components of his spells are useless and have no effect with no keywords. He needs to stop and slot a domain to get his holy symbol buffs and heals (as well as the debuff component of damage spells) functioning.

That is how it should be. I would not like to see changes that allow him to get buffs/debuffs functioning with cross class features that provide no keywords at all.

ALSO … I would sincerely hope that if buffing and healing using lower level items and feats is improved there will be balancing changes to the difficulty of mobs to take into account the substantial boost in party power this will create,
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Ultimately all of this boils down to three main issues imo:

1) The game was built around the passive xp but still has an active xp component. It is essentially trying to have it both ways and it also is the reason why the subscription model is necessary. There is grind but all the grind in the world can't help you catch up to a T3 guy cause of the passive xp. Of course, you can't use that passive xp either if you don't grind either making your passive xp useless. Trying to have it both ways harms both forms of xp rather than creating synergy between them. If somehow that could be fixed the systems would play off of one another rather than hinder each other.

2) Gear imbalance is so crazy that the highest tier gear is low risk, very high reward. Even with threading the same basic problem of lower tiered gear being useless against higher tiers still exist. Maybe eliminating epow and epro are not viable but make adjustments so that it is only a slight boost in protection rather than the obscene amount we see currently. Also, I wholeheartedly agree that beneficial effects should not be subject to this because actual support builds should be viable.

3) Overall combat imbalances is the next problem. Regen is pointless (too much time between ticks for it to be useful), wizard tanks, cleric heal and support builds being pointless (eggplant figured out ways despite the system limitations), bow users always stationary when some of their attacks could be mobile, some items not doing what they should be doing (bloodblock hardly does anything to actually stop bleeding), etc., are all major problems. Every build uses the same two attack combos in PvE (probably cause they are the only useful ones) and PvP balance is even more skewed cause of this.
Paddy Fitzpatrick - Rí Ruírec of Fianna, roaming bands of noble warriors!
Member of Aragon Alliance and home of bandits, privateers, and anyone looking to get away from the shackles of law.
Find us on PFO Discord
Lisa Stevens
You are a Troll
Lisa Stevens
Duffy Swiftshadow
I think it's a far bigger problem and way more confusing that beneficial effects get weaker for better geared characters.

I will let Bob chime in tomorrow, but we have talked about this and he is planning on changing the way that beneficials get less effective as you go up in tiers of gear.

-Lisa

That is….disappointing. Low level spells - buffs and cures too - should be less effective against people in high level armor. That is one of the trade-offs (meaningful choices) you make when donning T3+3 armor.

I am not a designer and Bob and I haven't talked about this, but I think an easier fix would be to give a fixed hit point heal, so lower level heals aren't very useful to high level folks with 2,000+ hit points, but really useful to people with 200 hit points. If a token gives 50 hit points back, then that is 1/4th of the low level person's hp and an imperceptible part of the high level person's without doing anything. I think the key will be to do away with percentage heals and instead do the fixed number of hit points.

But like I said, I am not a designer and we havent' talked about it. It is just my thoughts.

-Lisa
Wolf of Rathglen
@ Lisa- so much THIS. My exact thoughts on solving the healing issues. Proportional weakness instead of mechanics-enforced weakness.

The singular function of Defense rating is to set the bar for an attack roll to have full effect. The effect of adding major keywords on your armor is raising that bar higher and higher (on a few situational defenses and) 50 Total Defense at a time; which is a significant increase since weapon keywords do not add attack rating. If a lower tier attack falls 40% short of that bar then damage, stacks, and durations from it are already reduced 40% by the attack and damage equations, no Epro required.

If the effect of having the keyword is overcome it's entirely unfair to suffer a 40% penalty "just because" for the presence of a keyword whose defensive effect has been neutralized.

"What's the point of playing when the xp-over-time system will let everyone playing longer walk all over me?"

Remember how every third person keeps bringing this up? Ever since the pre-alpha blog days devs have been promising there won't be insurmountable level differences. Someone may be higher level than you but get a friend and now that guy might be in trouble. Remember that? Applying an automatic 40+% damage reduction for the mere presence of keywords attained by spending more xp is literally coding that fear into the game. How will we get the ToT to play when they catch on there's an automatic 40% pvp penalty until they've subscribed for a year?

Defense rating already reduces damage and stacks, it could easily apply to beneficials and heals too

Say a "friendly defense" threshold of 75/140/200 to to get full effect from beneficial skills, from yourself or others. That's making a roll 25 higher than T1 base defense, 40 higher than T2, and 50 higher than T3 base defense after whatever debuffs are on you (potions etc. affixed with their tier-appropriate roll). Cheap tricks like 1k alts or rank 1 skills on a weapon swap won't be effective nor will noticeably underpowered sincere characters because rolling short of the threshold for the target's armor tier applies a proportional percentage reduction.

The caster needs to do real development in BAB and relevant attack bonuses -and all the achievements and xp that goes into building those- in order to attain a total attack roll that meets the bar of friendly defense. But the possibility of attaining or getting close to those thresholds by learning the game and using good strategies is there, instead of automatically denied through mechanics until you give Paizo enough real world money (subscription) to train a particular keyword on every… single… skill.

At the same time the game keeps its promises that every player can be useful and those with more xp present a challenge but not an insurmountable steamroller.

P.S. some of you are going to want to critique certain parts of this post especially how I implied pay-to-win. But that is how a major bloc of outside potential players are going to interpret the presence of subscription-xp-derived keywords that purposely coded into the game they cannot overcome until they spend equal $$$ on subs and decide to play/post/flame about it that way, and you know it.
Hammerfall: Like a waterfall, but tougher.
Duffy Swiftshadow
People can and will complain about anything, whether it's actually good, bad, or something in between. That's hard to use as a valid baseline for anything.

The major issue I think we're all having is that your whole argument boils down to progression systems are bad, but you still talk about building within one. When is the time purchased component not unfair? 1 Month? 2 Months? 3 Months? Etc… I don't know what to tell you though because theirs going to be progression, sure the curve isn't nearly as deep as other games and I do think the numbers and details could use some tweaking. But ultimately there is going to be a curve and it's going to be tied to XP over time versus hours in because it's a common alternative to pure grind systems.

And again, Threading can disrupt a lot of what we're talking about and is probably a major component of how they balanced some of this. You might only be able to wear a single T3 item and mostly T1 with maybe a T2 item for all we know, that has some serious impact in trade offs. My fear is that in that scenario Armor is still the defacto best upgrade choice, but we won't know til that system gets added. If it doesn't make it then the power curve may need a closer inspection.

Believe it or not theirs also plenty of people that feel the opposite regarding XP over time systems, that just because you have tons of free time doesn't mean you should be inherently stronger than me. But either way, we are eventually on an equal playing field whether it's time spent or time purchased.
Stilachio Thrax
Lisa Stevens
You are a Troll
Lisa Stevens
Duffy Swiftshadow
I think it's a far bigger problem and way more confusing that beneficial effects get weaker for better geared characters.

I will let Bob chime in tomorrow, but we have talked about this and he is planning on changing the way that beneficials get less effective as you go up in tiers of gear.

-Lisa

That is….disappointing. Low level spells - buffs and cures too - should be less effective against people in high level armor. That is one of the trade-offs (meaningful choices) you make when donning T3+3 armor.

I am not a designer and Bob and I haven't talked about this, but I think an easier fix would be to give a fixed hit point heal, so lower level heals aren't very useful to high level folks with 2,000+ hit points, but really useful to people with 200 hit points. If a token gives 50 hit points back, then that is 1/4th of the low level person's hp and an imperceptible part of the high level person's without doing anything. I think the key will be to do away with percentage heals and instead do the fixed number of hit points.

But like I said, I am not a designer and we havent' talked about it. It is just my thoughts.

-Lisa

I'd like to see (for Healing expendables/orisions) a fixed heal amount + effectiveness boost per keyword + a bonus per actual cleric level (or Fighter level for fighter healing expendables). A cleric *should* be a better healer than a mage that has sampled just enough cleric to crib healing.
Virtus et Honor

Steward of Ozem's Vigil, Lord Commander of the Argyraspides Iomedais
Wolf of Rathglen
I've been saying the meaningful choices for combat in this PvP game are strategies how and when to spend xp building your attack, defense, base damage, and resistance, and tactics in combat buffing your own or reducing those of your target so their health bar goes down faster than yours to give you the best chance of success every fight.

Epow reduces that to whoever wears the most expensive clothes wins.

In a small group with less access to expensive clothes than this guy who is in a big group? Fuck you, you lose.

A non-rhetorical, sincere question: Between presenting gamers with a challenge where they can learn about the game and derive strategies that allow them to start overcoming that challenge as they train, refine, and improve their strategies, or automatically shutting the player down with coded mechanics and there's not a single in-game action or choice the player can make to overcome that until they've subscribed for a year or more, which of those seems "fun" and gamers might pay a subscription for in 2018?
Hammerfall: Like a waterfall, but tougher.
Duffy Swiftshadow
So again, what you're saying is there should be no progression system? There should be no Tier differences, there should just be single homogenized point where everything is equal because if not the differences discourage play? I mean, yes steep power curves can be annoying, we really aren't there yet though. Even in full T3 you can't take two T2 players, especially if one of them is a hard counter to your build.

Also again your not taking into account some other realities like Threading combined with T3 armor taking most of a month to craft. In a really good evening of fighting you could easily lose a full set of gear, if you're in all T3 that just set back a crafter a month for a few hours of fighting. It's not economical at all for everyday use.

We're seeing a lot of things without complete mechanics and in a very stagnate state, gear churn is borderline non-existent, a lot of the die-hard players sticking around have way more alt accounts than will probably be normal, PvP is mostly worthless endeavor, etc…
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post