+- NEUS Projects (https://neus-projects.net/forums)
+-- Forum: Sigrogana Legend 2 (OOC) (https://neus-projects.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: Balance Fu (https://neus-projects.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Thread: Remember when evade was viable? (/showthread.php?tid=970)
Remember when evade was viable? - Rockabye - 03-27-2015
Pepperidge Farm remembers.
With so many good auto-hits (as well as DEF's recent buff which saw its importance soar over evade), evade has been devalued to a frustrating degree. Evade is pointless when people can just check their hit on you and then hit you with an equally (or more) powerful auto-hit. Fortunately, I think there's a way to fix this without sacrificing reliability on either side. This can be accomplished by causing (non-AOE/non magic) auto-hits to do reduced damage on enemies with higher evade than the attacker's accuracy. A good example:
Attacker has 70% Hit on the enemy, and uses a 60 damage Crescent Rook.
Attacker receives a damage penalty equal to how much evade the opponent has over their hit, divided by 2 (30/2% = 15%).
Crescent Rook loses 9 damage (I'm not sure whether before or after modifiers would be more fair to be honest), bringing its damage down to 51.
Important notes:
• Damage reduction from evade would be capped at 30% reduction.
• Again, this would not affect AOE or magic skills. This is primarily because magic already tends to be heavily resisted, and AOEs are not reasonably dodgeable.
• Having over 100% hit on a target would not grant increased damage when using auto-hits.
This helps ensure that evade can't simply be trampled over by things like Turnover, Kick, etc., and creates a balance between the strength of relying on a chance to hit an enemy, and the reliability of using an auto-hit.
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - MegaBlues - 03-27-2015
This sounds like it's worth a good try.
Theory only does so much, let's put it in and see if it works (And if it does, if it needs to be tweaked).
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Rendar - 03-27-2015
In a tabletop I played in the past, AoEs could miss a target, however in such cases you would take HALF damage of what you would have originally.
However, if you took 1 level in scout, if an AoE attack missed you, you would take no damage.
I think dodging AoEs should definitely cause some DR. A dodger, generally speaking, opts out of heavy resistances to every element > to be able to dodge melee. I'd like to see this implemented at 1/2th the suggested effectiveness for magic, or even 1/4th. With the AoE effect being even lesser than that.
Also if dodging an AoE doesn't sound very 'realistic'... Just remember you can dodge a Jackhamer Rocket flying right at your face and it's a Circle 4 size attack
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Fern - 03-27-2015
I'm up for giving this a shot. It doesn't sound too bad.
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Rockabye - 03-27-2015
A test run is really all I'm hoping for. I'm kind of expecting adjustments to be necessary, but I thought this was a good starting point, and was something that could probably be quickly balanced after trying it in practice.
Also that's a fair point Rendar, so long as we're talking physical AOE's and not magic, since there's so much elemental resist coupled with the fact that mages often (not always, but often) have absolutely terrible accuracy. I would be horrified to see another 30% reduction stamped onto the 30% elemental resists that people already tend to have.
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Soapy - 03-27-2015
Surprisingly good idea.
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Slydria - 03-27-2015
Sounds reasonable, wouldn't mind giving this a go.
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Sarinpa1 - 03-27-2015
I don't agree with this. At all. What you're suggesting gives a chance to those who have celerity for their only defensive stat.
Golly gee, what if I actualy stack dodge AND...have defense? gasp.
Shaitan Monk/MG - 77 Ski, 77 Cel, 60 Def
Stacking dodge isn't that hard on this, especialy if you manage to get somewhat decent luck. SKI for healing. And you'll have decent def. Also if I recall correctly, this build doesn't have too bad Vitality either.
It's not as uncommon as you might think. Especialy with those that use heavy stat modifiers. (Installing, DK)
Edit : But Sarin, who would build around this?
/looks at WG pre-nerf.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Grandpa - 03-27-2015
"Sarinpa1" Wrote:I don't agree with this. At all. What you're suggesting gives a chance to those who have celerity for their only defensive stat.
Golly gee, what if I actually stack dodge AND...have defense? gasp.
While it's true that some people do make builds like that and do have both stats, most players don't. In fact it seems to be that only older plays have somewhat recently been doing that. Give or take a couple of months.
Anyway, I like the idea. But something should be done about the players with both celerity and defense that way they aren't too overpowered. Maybe something to do with being under a certain amount of defense allows a certain percentage but a higher amount of defense only allows for much less of a percentage? I'm not entirely sure. Just throwing out an idea.
Re: Remember when evade was viable? - Sarinpa1 - 03-27-2015
How about a trait?
We have traits avaible at or above certain stats. Why not below? Be below 20 def and you have access to some trait that'd permit this.
Of course, there would have to be some sort of a mechanic that'd remove the trait once you pass the amount of def.
Or something.
I also don't exactly remember what skills would be affected, but res would perhaps be a good thing to treat as well.
That being said, I still think this is a bad idea.