[Ranylyn]

"Hybrid tax" is a term sometimes used to descibe that a Hybrid isn't as good as a specialist. A Hybrid may be able to do 4 things Adequeately well, but will never match someone who can do only two of those four things in their area of expertise.

As things stand now, the only way to be guaranteed your character will actually be good at higher levels is to Min/Max for growths. This, of course, means stacking Like Growths and grinding as that class combo, even if it's not what that character ICly is/does/wants (Example: If you're stacking Cel, you'd want to level as a VA, even if your character has immense IC reasoning for never touching that skillset with a thirty foot pole.) Time and time again, a character with 70% in a stat (Which SHOULD be considered pretty good) ends up with maybe 30-35 by level 60. On the flipside, others can attain a natural 80 by Min/Maxing. IMO, the "pure" setups are perfectly fine as is. But that also leads to less diverse builds since the hybrids aren't nearly as viable overall.

Tactician is the perfect example. Tactician/Hexer could theoretically be an incredible combination, with the FP regen on hit, enhanced attack range, Guard order and Ailments, you get the idea. But a Tactician's pitiful spread growths (10% to most stats, more to some) make it absolutely terrible to level up as. On the flip side, if you levelled as an Evoker, you'd have more Will and Skill to make those tome attacks with, More Cel to dodge, and miss out on relatively little in the way of defenses since the Tact/Hex Defensive growths aren't great anyways.

My proposal is thus: At the moment, all classes have identical TOTAL growths. My suggestion is to give MORE growths to the classes with spread growths. Before you cry about balance, think about this: Would you prefer 50% in a primary stat, or 20% in 3 secondary stats? Now consider that many classes don't even GET that 20% in stats they NEED. As such, a specialized class is perfectly fine as is, while hybrids would just get minor buffs to some of their lesser stats so they suck less. Even if a specialized class only gets 3 stats per level, if it's always the 3 they need most, they'll still be better than a hybrid who gets 4-5 every level but has them way too spread out to amount to much.

All Base Classes:

While they're technically fine as is, I do believe a few tweaks could be made. Many base classes lack the stats they need to support their promotions, leading to having desperately underdeveloped stats at level 20. As such, I'd suggest maybe a 10% Increase to MA Will, Soldier Will, Summoner Strength, Curate Strength, and a 5% boost to Duelist Strength/Cel, Archer Strength/Defense, Rogue Strength and Will, and Mage Will and Skill. Just to set up better for Tacticians using tomes and BK Will-based passives, Verglas/Monks using Will, Summoners having a Physically based skillset in Bonder, Lantern Bearers having spear stuff, Duelists, Rogues, and and Archers not having crap strength when they promote, you get the idea.


Promoted Classes:

Black Knight: They're pretty solid as is. I see no reason to tweak their growths.

Tactician: I propose a +5% growth adjustment to Will/Luck, and a 10% Improvement to Vit/Def/Res. Why should they have absolutely craptastic Will when they need to use tomes, and why should they be more fragile than their base class?

Grand Summoner: Pretty solid as is.

Bonder: The second best Strength class and a fairly solid Will class. I see no real problems with their other stats being low.

Kensei: Pretty Solid overall. No change needed.

Ghost: A 5% Strength increase would help a lot. And maybe 10-15% Will since they get some magic (Ghostwind, Gravestone) as well.

Arbalest: No change needed. They're the prime Strength specialist class in the game at the moment.

Magic Gunner: No change needed. They're the most specialised Skill growth class in the game.

Engineer: They could use a small buff, but I'm not sure where.

Void Assassin: They're fine as is, but seeing that 10% Def moved over to Will instead could be neat.

Monk: They have several Will skills, and 0% Will. I say we give them 20% Will, to match their Strength.

Verglas: Their stats are a little too spread out, and they don't need Skill. Maybe -10% Skill but +5% Str/Wil/Cel?

Evoker: Perfectly fine as is. The ultimate Will specialists.

Hexer: Slightly more skill since they have some stuff for normal attacks. Otherwise decently solid.

Lantern Bearer: Mostly fine as is, but a small Strength bonus to go with their spear stuff could be nice, too.

Priest: Perhaps a minor strength boost since Paladin-types are popular. Also maybe +5 Skill.

[Tsundere]

so what you're saying is fight fire with fire or "balance by COMPLETELY unbalancing"

there's supposed to be a drawback for attempting to go for a wider range of stats; high risk, high reward, right???
i don't see why classes with slightly less specialized growths get to be objectively better than "min/maxed" growth classes by having a higher total growth

believe it or not if you spent as much time working WITH the system as you do AGAINST it (i.e. suggesting unnecessary changes) you might be able to better come to terms with why your ideas continue to sound..silly

why is hexer even considered hybrid?
why do verglas not need skill? EVERY class needs skill, thanks to the evasion changes
engineer's growths do not need a buff
why would you just throw 20% extra growth in one stat on monk? maybe 5% or even 10% but like. What are you doing?? that's adding an entirely different stat to their spread and i????
why would you give an anti-mage class more will?

why do you take the time out to write these things

[Chaos]

A primary reason as to why 'decent' or 'good-ish' stats across the board (see: a jack of trades build) are ditched in favor of specialized builds has to do with defenses. But that's not really the point here.

To be honest, 'mixed' builds are a matter of what growths are on the board, so it's just a matter of time for 'when will dev put in a class that gives great STR/RES or whatever'. Trying to buff class growths that are less specialized isn't going to do anything but potentially allow for super-human characters at best.

[Ranylyn]

Tsundere » Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:51 pm[/url]"]so what you're saying is fight fire with fire or "balance by COMPLETELY unbalancing"

there's supposed to be a drawback for attempting to go for a wider range of stats; high risk, high reward, right???
i don't see why classes with slightly less specialized growths get to be objectively better than "min/maxed" growth classes by having a higher total growth

believe it or not if you spent as much time working WITH the system as you do AGAINST it (i.e. suggesting unnecessary changes) you might be able to better come to terms with why your ideas continue to sound..silly

why is hexer even considered hybrid?
why do verglas not need skill? EVERY class needs skill, thanks to the evasion changes
engineer's growths do not need a buff
why would you just throw 20% extra growth in one stat on monk? maybe 5% or even 10% but like. What are you doing?? that's adding an entirely different stat to their spread and i????
why would you give an anti-mage class more will?

why do you take the time out to write these things

If you actually READ the FULL thing I wrote, the real issue was classes whose growths are spread TOO THIN and prone to getting completely RNG screwed. If you want a COMPLETE imbalance, look no further than EVERYONE grinding with the EXACT SAME CLASS COMBOS BECAUSE GROWTHS. Calling it the Hybrid Tax was simply the most fitting name, since the issue IS that many classes have skills that they simply lack the growths to use.

It is -NOT- a matter of wanting a hybrid character, it is a matter of not wanting to spend eternity grinding Evokers/Arbalests/etc/the same builds over and over and over. Entire classes get underused until 60 simply due to their growths, despite their movesets being the appeal to playing them. It's totally fine for an Evoker to have 80 will. However, when some other mage classes can't even break 45 because of their growths, I fail to see how anyone with even a quarter of a working brain thinks that's completely kosher.

Furthermore, everyone needs to stop accusing me of trying to work against the system. I am an Altaholic. I play EVERYTHING. Optimal and Suboptimal. I'm not going "baaaawww, everyone's better than me." I'm going "Damn, the actual fun characters are getting RNG screwed so bad they can't win in PVE anymore, and this boring shit over here isn't even blinking at PVE." Furthermore, there ARE a lot of builds I've managed to wreck faces with despite being hilariously suboptimal, so I'm not even looking at sheer stats, but overall viability. For example, Hexer/BK? Sure, it's will sucks, but it doesn't need nearly as much will as a dedicated mage.

- Hexer? As I said, it's proposed skill growth was just so it can hit with it's passives based around landing weapon hits. Naturally this wouldn't be a problem for everyone who levelled as an Evoker, but for people leveling as Hexers, it can definitely be an issue. If you don't believe me, I tried levelling an LB/Tactician one time, and got Style Blending at level 35 due to only getting enough Skill (Complete with +3 skill traits) by then. Hexer has a very similar skill growth.
- You'll notice I didn't suggest removing ALL Verglas skill, just a bit. I worded it wrong, is all. Point being, not everyone has Evasion, and all their skills are autohits.
- That's your opinion. I just look at those growths and feel sad, myself.
- People besides Evokers deserve to be able to use Aid or Setting Sun. They have multiple will based skills and 0% Will growth.
- VA has multiple will-based spells as well. Them being anti-mage has nothing to do with their lack of will growths to support their void abilities.

Why do I take the time to write things out? Why do YOU take the time to reply, if you're so determined to keep any suboptimal combo non-viable? Do you even understand the difference between 110% Will vs 70% will? Spoilers: You're looking at 40 Will vs 80 will. "Giving the lower will +5% Str or skill or whatnot makes them objectively better?" Bull. You can't honestly think that. It is humanly impossible to seriously be THAT blind to the issue.


@ Chaos: While that is a good point, it doesn't change that many classes don't see play outside of PVP simply due to their growths. It would be nice to correct that.

[Chaos]

Ranylyn » Thu Jun 18, 2015 6:00 pm[/url]"]@ Chaos: While that is a good point, it doesn't change that many classes don't see play outside of PVP simply due to their growths. It would be nice to correct that.

This is due to another issue: PvE is only truly suitable for AoE Powerhouses. A good chunk of classes simply don't have the kind of gas that, say, Evoker has to actually stand clearing a well-populated floor. (There's also convenience and player skill to take into account) In fact, at least a few would simply end up being forced to run out and rest up at a nearby Inn or get more supplies or something, hoping that the dungeon doesn't vanish by the time they return. Dev is planning on throwing in mercenary NPCs to help aid players through this, but I'll hold my tongue on that until we see it in action.

You do, however, raise a good point with the class growths. Perhaps if there was a way to just set up your own 'Class Growths' to replace whatever the system's classes tried to throw at you, there would be a bit more inclination to use more classes than just Evoker/Hexer/LB outside of max-level adventures. But that's for another topic, since it comes with its own pros and cons.

[Ranylyn]

Chaos » Thu Jun 18, 2015 6:46 pm[/url]"]
This is due to another issue: PvE is only truly suitable for AoE Powerhouses. A good chunk of classes simply don't have the kind of gas that, say, Evoker has to actually stand clearing a well-populated floor. (There's also convenience and player skill to take into account) In fact, at least a few would simply end up being forced to run out and rest up at a nearby Inn or get more supplies or something, hoping that the dungeon doesn't vanish by the time they return. Dev is planning on throwing in mercenary NPCs to help aid players through this, but I'll hold my tongue on that until we see it in action.

You do, however, raise a good point with the class growths. Perhaps if there was a way to just set up your own 'Class Growths' to replace whatever the system's classes tried to throw at you, there would be a bit more inclination to use more classes than just Evoker/Hexer/LB outside of max-level adventures. But that's for another topic, since it comes with its own pros and cons.

1) Indeed. I'll bide my time and see what comes of that system.

2) it's come up before, and naturally everyone is always against it since they're completely convinced it will make everyone the same, because that's totally not what happens already. In the past, I've suggested a trait to replace your growth spread with a preset (Example: More mage-like growths even if playing a VA/Monk) and everyone freaked out on me about it, and Blues suggested a system to assign your own points within restrictions, just for a bit more freedom in making your character your way (Example: A character with a bum leg due to a childhood injury not being cursed with a lot of Cel gains) and once again, everyone freaked out about it. For reference, just look at what Mattie said, above. Everyone wants to be the best, and anything that risks possibly making Min/Maxing not as supremely optimal is a threat.

[Tsundere]

Ranylyn » Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:00 pm[/url]"]
If you actually READ the FULL thing I wrote, the real issue was classes whose growths are spread TOO THIN and prone to getting completely RNG screwed. If you want a COMPLETE imbalance, look no further than EVERYONE grinding with the EXACT SAME CLASS COMBOS BECAUSE GROWTHS. Calling it the Hybrid Tax was simply the most fitting name, since the issue IS that many classes have skills that they simply lack the growths to use.

It is -NOT- a matter of wanting a hybrid character, it is a matter of not wanting to spend eternity grinding Evokers/Arbalests/etc/the same builds over and over and over. Entire classes get underused until 60 simply due to their growths, despite their movesets being the appeal to playing them. It's totally fine for an Evoker to have 80 will. However, when some other mage classes can't even break 45 because of their growths, I fail to see how anyone with even a quarter of a working brain thinks that's completely kosher.

Furthermore, everyone needs to stop accusing me of trying to work against the system. I am an Altaholic. I play EVERYTHING. Optimal and Suboptimal. I'm not going "baaaawww, everyone's better than me." I'm going "Damn, the actual fun characters are getting RNG screwed so bad they can't win in PVE anymore, and this boring shit over here isn't even blinking at PVE." Furthermore, there ARE a lot of builds I've managed to wreck faces with despite being hilariously suboptimal, so I'm not even looking at sheer stats, but overall viability. For example, Hexer/BK? Sure, it's will sucks, but it doesn't need nearly as much will as a dedicated mage.

- Hexer? As I said, it's proposed skill growth was just so it can hit with it's passives based around landing weapon hits. Naturally this wouldn't be a problem for everyone who levelled as an Evoker, but for people leveling as Hexers, it can definitely be an issue. If you don't believe me, I tried levelling an LB/Tactician one time, and got Style Blending at level 35 due to only getting enough Skill (Complete with +3 skill traits) by then. Hexer has a very similar skill growth.
- You'll notice I didn't suggest removing ALL Verglas skill, just a bit. I worded it wrong, is all. Point being, not everyone has Evasion, and all their skills are autohits.
- That's your opinion. I just look at those growths and feel sad, myself.
- People besides Evokers deserve to be able to use Aid or Setting Sun. They have multiple will based skills and 0% Will growth.
- VA has multiple will-based spells as well. Them being anti-mage has nothing to do with their lack of will growths to support their void abilities.

Why do I take the time to write things out? Why do YOU take the time to reply, if you're so determined to keep any suboptimal combo non-viable? Do you even understand the difference between 110% Will vs 70% will? Spoilers: You're looking at 40 Will vs 80 will. "Giving the lower will +5% Str or skill or whatnot makes them objectively better?" Bull. You can't honestly think that. It is humanly impossible to seriously be THAT blind to the issue.


@ Chaos: While that is a good point, it doesn't change that many classes don't see play outside of PVP simply due to their growths. It would be nice to correct that.

crikey, i don't even know where to BEGIN with this. higher growth total = objectively better, because the character has higher chances of gaining more stats per level by using that class. i'll keep my ad-hominem to myself for the time being but really?????

over this entire post i plant a [citation needed] because excuse my french but you have a bad habit of pulling facts and numbers straight outta your rectum: 45 will is completely usable for PVE. what the hell are you talking about? along with that, how many evokers that aren't gimmick characters have 80 will?

you are the only person i've witnessed having problems this bad with the RNG. i am not 'blind' to the issue: i recognize what you are claiming is happening and i disagree with what you are saying to 'fix' it. most builds one could come up with are viable for PVE in some way so long as you put the fucking effort into it. class growths that do not have good synergy together will not end up working as well as you want them to. inversely, using classes that give you reasonable growths in the stats you're looking to use for leveling up is what you ought to do if you want to play something like, say, a monk/hexer, which has 'suboptimal' growths which make it not viable to level with. no that does not mean "WAAH I CAN'T USE MY CLASSES UNTIL LEVEL 60", it means keep an eye on your exp bar and then switch when you're going to level. it shouldn't be a difficult thing to do and if it is, i don't know what to tell you
i promise you that'll solve the stupid boohoo rng hates me problem

people accuse you of working against the system because that is what you do. i know i'm not the first person to give you this solution and yet you're?? still complaining about the same problem.
you can't try to swim against the current and then complain about it pushing back against you

[Prism]

It's probably not the best fix to purposely stick more growths on the more spread out classes. I'm pretty sure Dev made all the class growth totals the same for a reason - so number-wise certain classes wouldn't be objectively better (Base Stat Average is higher with these classes, making them the best to use, etc). Hexer might not have as much Wil as Evoker, but it gives fantastic defense growths as well as Wil (and the Vit of a BK, which is redonk). And 80 wil isn't all it's cracked up to be. The thing about min-maxing is it can really spread your other essential stats thin.

[Neus]

Chaos » Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:46 pm[/url]"]This is due to another issue: PvE is only truly suitable for AoE Powerhouses. A good chunk of classes simply don't have the kind of gas that, say, Evoker has to actually stand clearing a well-populated floor.

Somewhat off topic but if there are any major gripes or issues with PvE for non-Evokers, I would like to see a topic started about it, detailing them. I know Evokers (currently) clear them very quickly, but if a class is outright struggling to complete PvE battles, I'd like to have a discussion on it.

[Ranylyn]

Neus » Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:05 am[/url]"]

Chaos » Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:46 pm[/url]"]This is due to another issue: PvE is only truly suitable for AoE Powerhouses. A good chunk of classes simply don't have the kind of gas that, say, Evoker has to actually stand clearing a well-populated floor.

Somewhat off topic but if there are any major gripes or issues with PvE for non-Evokers, I would like to see a topic started about it, detailing them. I know Evokers (currently) clear them very quickly, but if a class is outright struggling to complete PvE battles, I'd like to have a discussion on it.

I'd be more than happy to outline every class's exact strengths and weaknesses against every PVE enemy type and the synergy between PVE opponents (Example: Restrain + Slider) that causes some classes problems, but people would just accuse me of working against the system like they always do, and say it's my fault for not getting a high level evoker to carry me. Mind if I instead outline everything via PM? Like I said, I AM an Altaholic; I have 11 accounts and play every class extensively (Minus Void Assassin which I largely avoid for RP purposes, so I've only played maybe 2-3 VAs)


Anyways, back to the rest of the topic:

@ Tsundere: First off, thank you for consciously limiting the Ad-hominem. It's actually difficult to do, and I admit I've failed to do so in the past, myself. Some users seem to have extreme difficulties avoiding this, so I really do appreciate it. I just wanted to point this out since I realize I may have appeared hostile in my earlier posts.

Anyways, back on topic:

When it comes to balance threads, EVERYONE pulls numbers out of their rectum. To give a few examples in the past, Ailment chances were changed based on the assumption of 80 will, and a change to Summoners was once proposed based on the premise of all summoners having 50 faith.

When discussing stats, for the record, I did mean 80 MODDED will (Since Sarin always used to curse me out for using base stats.) If you can get over 100% Will (Any race with 25% Will can manage 105% or more with LE bonuses) it's not implausible. 5% averages about 3 growths in 60 levels, and people LE repeatedly until things go really well so stretch this to 6. Add +3 simply for Evoker, bringing you to about 73-75 once you factor in a probable base of 4-6. It's not hard to get 5-7 will elsewhere. Heck, installing does that immediately.

And yes, 45 modded Will -IS- technically within the realms of PVE Viable. If you're an Evoker. If your 45 will is your BEST stat, and you're NOT an evoker, recent changes to PVE enemy resistance can really dick you over. To give you an example, I recently played a lower-level (31) character with 29 total will after installs and such. Using a 5 power earth tome (I had just found it, no time to upgrade. My old tome was "Misplaced" and I died) I smacked a Barghest 4 levels below me (Which is weak to earth) for a whopping one damage. 1. Evokers can basically laugh enemy Res away due to the Charge Mind formula, but any other mage with "normal" stats (Character was Bonder/Hexer, so 35% Will on 2 classes, a decently solid combo) can really struggle.

Another major issue is how the "Minimum 3" system works. Think about it. If you have two classes with like growths, you'll have 80% chances competiing with 20% chances for those growths. You're far more likely to get what you want even if you have imperfect growths. But what about a class like Tactician, which has 25/15/35/10/10/10/0/10? Unless you get REALLY lucky, those growths aren't going anywhere anytime soon. As such, classes with spread growths are, by far, objectively worse, due to lacking the gains to do much of ANYTHING unless they get incredibly lucky. Some promoted classes have 20% in their primary offensive growth. Sure, a monk CAN use Cel to increase Dragon Gale's damage, and they have 30% Cel, but a Ghost has no such benefit.

Furthermore, people won't want to party with you if you repeatedly need to leave to change classes then go back in. Repeatedly leaving the dungeon to change classes just for growths is FAR more "working against the system" than simply playing naturally, which is "working with it." The fact that it is possible does not excuse the fact that growths are an imbalanced mess, and if your answer is just to level with optimal combos, you are offering zero support to the argument that nothing needs to be changed, due to such a work-around being seen as mandatory.