[Gear] State Stabilization

[Tesq]

You guys really don't need to get into the fine details of how it will work. It's the wider concepts that are being proposed, not specific implementation.

then how can we discuss about a wide concept? ye of course you wanna not allow the very large difference between anni and sov for exemple, im ok with that but i can't even decide between option A or B if you don't give me any exemple.

I mean i cannot even post something in this thread then because it will restricted to -> no i wanna see newby suffer throught the grind and if it's a yes then i throw 1 penny and decide .... there are no data to discuss and compare and choose values between option number 1 or number 2. (and this is the balance thread where such topic should not be made). It's basically the same solution implemented in 2 different way, and i'd like to see the differents and how things will scale otherwise it's a bit a big assumption that "x" will generally work like that when we are speaking of change basically all war itiemization progression (which i am not against ) just could not be made more clear? I know you dont care about whine so some exemple would be appreciate and usefull even a lot general.

[Hastykrasty]

You guys really don't need to get into the fine details of how it will work. It's the wider concepts that are being proposed, not specific implementation.

Yeah you're right. But details are like the salt: too much will waste any food, too few and nobody will enjoy that much.

[Penril]

We are not discussing the "how". We are discussing if there should be stabilization between lower sets and Sov, for example. Yay/Nay? If most people agree (you would be surprised how many out there think "I should have a super advantage over lowbies because I spent way more time!!!") THEN we can discuss how to best implement it.

I'm sure Aza has several ideas and he is just waiting to see the outcome of this thread. Hell, maybe one of you guys can come up with an interesting proposal RIGHT NOW.

[Azarael]

To make it perfectly clear:

Ignore the details of implementation for now.

The focus, for the moment, should be: Is my analysis correct? Does inconsistent state cause balance issues? If not, what part of my post is wrong?

[Jaycub]

So if I am understanding correctly (I had to read this quite a few times), the purpose of this is crunch by way of a new game system similar to bolster, the possible power gaps between say a full annihilator character and a full sovereign character.

So you have a game state, that does afford vertical power creep by way of higher tier sets, just not anywhere near what it was on live. So we are moving more towards a Guild Wars philosophy of everyone on the same playing field when it comes to things like passive stat distribution.

And you want to by way of increased customization, diversify how people build and ultimately play their characters. That customization coming from Risk/Reward type tactics/item bonuses.

And finally, not included in this initial proposal, you want to down the line if not addressed by this gear crunch... Fix the problems presented by your examples such as armor stacking, crit dominance, and flat value effects etc...


I guess my first question would be why not just address the creep by crunching the stats on the sets and weapons themselves? I think most of us would rather have the hard numbers, than having an invisible system handle how hard we hit/get hit etc...

Secondly and most importantly imo, How deep will customization be allowed to go? Because I believe if it is done correctly, this could totally negate a lot of the problems brought up in your examples. Will customization come from just gear? Or will we be seeing a lot of new tactics as well?


edit (sorry it took me a bit too long to write the 1st post):

To make it perfectly clear:

Ignore the details of implementation for now.

The focus, for the moment, should be: Is my analysis correct? Does inconsistent state cause balance issues? If not, what part of my post is wrong?

There is no way anyone can debunk the statement "Does inconsistent state cause balance issues? ". It might as well be presented as a fact.

[warislove]

dunno, im fine with it as it is....its not normal to be equal stat wise with r40 rrxx when i enter with my r31 and lowish rr...
i see it as sometimes ill get my ass whooped sometimes i wont...gonna try to get better and eventually will have the same rr and gear as the ones who werent nice to me when i entered t4 and have my revenge possibly

[Dabbart]

Spoiler:

Quick questions/points;

If Gear is set into tiers, using Asa's example of Sov having +2 over everything under Invader, what would be the purpose if even caring about gaining Anni/Warlord vs. staying in Lowbie gear and saving your currency? Maybe I misread, but a player would have little to no difference when fighting an opponent in Sov gear, when equipped with Inv or lower. So why bother gaining said gear at all?

Maybe I misunderstood, but a person entering T4(once all gear is unlocked, input, and gained by players) in full Ruin(anni equivilent or maybe -1?) would have the same fighting efficiency against Sov, warlord, and Invader(if ruin=anni-1), gaining advanced gear wouldn't actually improve their combat against these gear ranks since as you progress in gear, your opponents gear gets "better" as it is allowed to scale higher. So would there be any point in gaining anni/conq gear, or just wait and go straight for Inv?

2nd question, on the Procs "- No item proc or ability which is a straight increase in power is allowed to exist. Any such effect designed to increase a character's power must have a drawback which maintains the character's overall power level while enabling different strategies and means of play." is a little confusing. Epic weapons have procs that this already(increasing crit rate/damage, enemy slow, stat/defensive increase, etc), are we working under the thought that all existing procs will be "rewritten" to match this? I like the idea of drawbacks however

Last point: "- A little more complex: Gear awards points for a secondary type of specialization - for critical hit rate, etc. The number of points allocated in total is compared when two players interact, and this is used to scale the total application of those bonuses from this secondary specialization to that interaction. In this way, a character in Sovereign having allocated x% crit from secondary specialization will receive that bonus in full against a character in lower tier gear, but it will not apply at all against a foe in Sovereign himself."

Maybe I am dumb here. But, is that saying that you get to use all of your crit against people in lower gear, but that in equal gear you lose it? Isn't that the opposite of what you are wanting to do? ie allow players to actually compete against those in higher gear?

TLDR: Personally... I dislike the thought of weakening a toon just cause I happen to be fighting someone in lower gear. Why should My crit rate, damage, healing, defensiveness, etc, be lowered just cause I am fighting a lowbie? I would "prefer" a bolstering system to bring them Up, instead of myself Down. Perhaps a general "baseline" statistics for T4(similar to the rank/stat boost you gain in lower tiers except in regards to crit/damage/heal/etc boosts). This would have to be based upon the current top end gear -1 or so, and would need a scaling factor if you outrank your gear(ie a toon at RR75 shouldn't get the same benefit from wearing anni that a RR39 does). Otherwise, the min/max will just go crazy, and certain points of gear could become worthless, as you can sit in lowbie gear knowing it is irrelevant what your opponent wears, as they can only be X above you.

I would say Yay to a balancing system for all high end gear though. It does get absolutely crazy. And I agree entirely that balancing of classes on current gear is difficult, especially if no one knows what the gear system is even going to be.

[Aurandilaz]

Balance issues will always exist depending on;
-gear
-amount of players
-skill
-difference in renown/rank
-group setup, good synergy over lack of synergy

Whilst gear plays an important role certainly, it does not outright define the outcome of fight unless other player is in full WF and the other arrived to T4 wearing T3 green items.
Yes, one side having +20-30% more crit than the other guy wearing lower armour is nasty, no one doubts that. But a 5-15 percent difference in stats should be acceptable if the other player has fought their way to the highest gear; as long as the other player has some chances by grouping up properly and getting some kind of bolster help.

Instead of "downgrading" stats of people wearing higher rank gear, I think simply having a strong bolster for lower ranked people would be more beneficial. (or maybe I have entirely missed what OP is trying to push for)

suggestion for T4 "bolster";
rr 0-10; 50% increase in various stats
rr 10-20; 40% increase in various stats
rr30-40; 30% increase
rr40-50; 25% increase
rr50-60; 20% increase
rr60-70; 15% increase

meaning the worse your gear is, the more you are buffed upwards, until you finally become "high ranked" enough to compete against people with similar ranks without needing extra support benefits.

[Tesq]

-i think that for base the idea to max the difference in tier to a ex: max -2 is correct (so that you will still have difference into pvp unless x time is spent to have the rigth set but those differences will not punish too much the new players in t4)
-i dont think that the pre 1.4 vertical progression was anyway so much problematic

From this thing i would prefer solution A,a dmg increase/reduction because it make still matter the vertical stats progression but also mitigate it. So that a geared npc green itiem player will get more dmg than an annihilator but it will anyway benefith from the same 25% of dmg reduction /dmg increase that a anni have against a sov (for exemple) and mathwise is lighter for the server to handle.

The solutions are also importat in the regard if new set for exemple will be relased after rr 80/sov. If yes is the answer then due being all in t4 may be problematic then it could be better a deeper solution into stats handle and a base dmg/reduction wont help so i would tend for solution B.

tough i still have the idea that game should be balanced around sov set and alternative should be then give with that gear cap, once you cap the progression you can better balance all the vertical road (which for me include solution A). Because it's either pointless keep increase indefinetly the progression even if ppl will still have a max -2 tier because the time in which ppl will have a -2 in tier will increase esponentially and then you will have to fix that. And i think ppl would like to prefer lv up more toons than keep raise the same char over and over for remain at the same power level to others doing the same


-so either sov/more alternative sov sets as gear limit with solution A (simple dmg reduction/increase to the min -2 tier, for exemple anni get boosted by dmg reduction and dmg increase to be on par with a inv geared character against a sov while it wont receive nothing vs a invader. And there will be not differecnce between inv and conqueror for exemple because the base vertical progression will alredy be in place ).

-want indefinetly keep rise the gear then solution B. tough someone in page2 alredy wrote something about some possible exploit.

[ToXoS]

We are not discussing the "how". We are discussing if there should be stabilization between lower sets and Sov, for example. Yay/Nay? If most people agree (you would be surprised how many out there think "I should have a super advantage over lowbies because I spent way more time!!!") THEN we can discuss how to best implement it.

I'm sure Aza has several ideas and he is just waiting to see the outcome of this thread. Hell, maybe one of you guys can come up with an interesting proposal RIGHT NOW.

I don't think I should have a "super" advantage over lowbies, but a good advantage? of course.
If I spend more time to get better rank 40 gear, I think I deserve to have an advantage over a guy rank 31 in full devastator.
If not, what's the point to have better gear?

Also, this system will make the x-realming issue even nastier.
If this guy rank 31 undergeared can have a GOOD chance to kill a perfectly geared rank 40, just like if he had the perfect gear, then he will not see the point to spend a lot of time on his toon to get this perfect gear. If he doesn't need to have the influence weapons or a full annihilator set to be competitive, then why should he works his ass out to get them?

If he doesn't have to do all of that, then x-realming is not an issue for him, so he will do it without a doubt.