Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 56
  1. #11
    Hardcore Casual Dark Mits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Ship 02, B-005
    Posts
    1,136

    Default

    Then maybe the problem isn't the low enemy hp or the Zondeel mechanic, but the fact that there is no diminishing effect on multi-target hits. Maybe Sega should consider implementing a soft- or hard-cap on multi-target PA/Tech/Autoattacks/whatever and reduce damage per target when it hits those caps. Other games did it.

  2. #12
    PSO2 Trope Curator Altiea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Jet Boots World
    Posts
    3,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Mits View Post
    Then maybe the problem isn't the low enemy hp or the Zondeel mechanic, but the fact that there is no diminishing effect on multi-target hits. Maybe Sega should consider implementing a soft- or hard-cap on multi-target PA/Tech/Autoattacks/whatever and reduce damage per target when it hits those caps. Other games did it.
    The thing is that Wand Tech explosions are the only attack in the game that works like this. It's one of Techer's few saving graces, because they can get astronomically high mobbing damage if you can gather enough targets into a single spot.
    ID: MPBLPure (Ship 2er)
    Akane Tekuro -- Proud Boots main; above average main character. Exploring Omega. Lead Chip: Matoi [S Halloween]
    Rei Sawatori - Hero. Taking a breather. Lead Chip: Darker Busters [Anniversary]
    クロナアルティア (Altiea) -- A Fighter jaded by trauma. Hanging out with the Darker Busters. Lead Chip: Celebrate Heroines [Anniversary]

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Mits View Post
    Then maybe the problem isn't the low enemy hp or the Zondeel mechanic, but the fact that there is no diminishing effect on multi-target hits. Maybe Sega should consider implementing a soft- or hard-cap on multi-target PA/Tech/Autoattacks/whatever and reduce damage per target when it hits those caps. Other games did it.
    Yeah, let's nerf the weakest and least played class in the game. Sounds like a great idea. :/

  4. #14

    Default

    What Mits saying is that in older Phantasy Star games every attack "swing" (I'll use that word, since "attack" can mean anything, PA or otherwise, that can have multiple swings) had a designated limit on how many enemies and hitboxes within an enemy it could hit. Once it hit that cap, it dealt no damage whatsoever to everything else that was in that swing's range.

    PSO2 has a cap of 1 hitbox per enemy for each individual swing (exceptions to that rule are very rare, Penetrating Arrow being one example) and no cap on the amount of enemies it can hit (regardless of whether you line up 1, 20 or 100 enemies under your attack, all of them will always get hit).

    This has almost nothing to do with the nature of how Techer's wand explosions work. Every basic wand attack is a swing that hits everything in its range, every tech explosion that is generated when that attack connects is a separate swing that also hits everything in its range. If you hit 10 Zondeeled enemies with a wand, you generate 1 wand attack and 10 explosions, leading to 10 wand attacks and 100 (!) explosions worth of total damage.

    So, yes, the change he's proposing might affect Techer in a disproportionate way. So fucking what? You're calling it a tragedy like Techer can't possibly be rebalanced in other ways to compensate for it. Wand could simply have a higher hit cap. Wand could have PAs. Techer could have some actually interesting ways to engage with enemies at the melee range instead of a disproportionally relying on enemies being there in large quantities and not dying to other players before it can use a basic attack on them. I don't even necessarily agree with Dark Mits, but have some fucking faith, people.

  5. #15
    Hardcore Casual Dark Mits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Ship 02, B-005
    Posts
    1,136

    Default

    I'll try to clarify my point because I fear there's a misunderstanding.

    First and foremost, my suggestion has no intention of nerfing any class. It has the intentional of nerfing player output regardless of class.

    By diminishing returns I mean the following, which will apply to absolutely every damage source (swing, PA, Tech, Damage-over-time effect like burn, AIS Laser, Compound Tech, flashing boobs, etc)

    if my attack hits 1 enemy, let it deal 10.000
    If it hits 2 enemies, let it deal 10.000 to each (20.000 total)
    If it hits 3 enemies, let it deal 10.000 to each (30.000 total)
    If it hits 4 enemies, let it deal 9.000 to each (36.000 total)
    If it hits 5 enemies, let it deal 8.000 to each (40.000 total)
    If it hits 6 enemies, let it deal 7.000 to each (42.000 total)
    If it hits 7 enemies, let it deal 6.250 to each (43.750 total)
    etc.
    (The numbers above are for demonstration purposes)

    The idea is that at low numbers of enemies hit, total damage increases linearly.
    After a point, damage continues to increase to provide a benefit for successfully hitting more enemies, but the rate at which total damage is increased lowers asymptotically towards a "cap". The number of enemies and diminishing rate is up to the developer.

    The above idea has been implemented in many games exactly to avoid issues of ultra-mega-super damage numbers when stars align and the player hits lots of enemies with one single ability.

    -=prepost note=-
    As isCasted mentioned, TE can be fixed in other ways. By the way, if all the extra damage from a TE's Shifta was counted in TE's output (like Zanverse), I doubt people would be calling TE weak....

  6. #16

    Default

    Well... Got scammed out of 180k for autumn Talis...

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by isCasted View Post
    What Mits saying is that in older Phantasy Star games every attack "swing" (I'll use that word, since "attack" can mean anything, PA or otherwise, that can have multiple swings) had a designated limit on how many enemies and hitboxes within an enemy it could hit. Once it hit that cap, it dealt no damage whatsoever to everything else that was in that swing's range.

    PSO2 has a cap of 1 hitbox per enemy for each individual swing (exceptions to that rule are very rare, Penetrating Arrow being one example) and no cap on the amount of enemies it can hit (regardless of whether you line up 1, 20 or 100 enemies under your attack, all of them will always get hit).

    This has almost nothing to do with the nature of how Techer's wand explosions work. Every basic wand attack is a swing that hits everything in its range, every tech explosion that is generated when that attack connects is a separate swing that also hits everything in its range. If you hit 10 Zondeeled enemies with a wand, you generate 1 wand attack and 10 explosions, leading to 10 wand attacks and 100 (!) explosions worth of total damage.

    So, yes, the change he's proposing might affect Techer in a disproportionate way. So fucking what? You're calling it a tragedy like Techer can't possibly be rebalanced in other ways to compensate for it. Wand could simply have a higher hit cap. Wand could have PAs. Techer could have some actually interesting ways to engage with enemies at the melee range instead of a disproportionally relying on enemies being there in large quantities and not dying to other players before it can use a basic attack on them. I don't even necessarily agree with Dark Mits, but have some fucking faith, people.
    Considering Sega doesn't even know what they want to do with Techer I think it's more then "omg so what?! they'll just change it!" It's a stupid argument of just saying they'll just add whatever and fix whatever when they havn't done anything more with the class then add dmg and a little bit of movement in the step which was actually a stupid idea since now you step further then your attack range. I understand they should do more with the class but taking away the only good feature of the class outside of buffs seems a little stupid just cause it's helpful in random situations.

  8. #18

    Default

    Huuuuuuuh PI thread anybody ? I guess we can call that LQ thread.

    Can kinda agree with not touching wand damage, not because it can't be abused, but because the abuse itself is only valid in a few quests, and mobs also get abused by other classes too (Divine Launcher, and RA in general wrecks this LQ beyond comprehension; a good FI does too, as it used to do in UQ, a.k.a Chaos Riser everything to oblivion). If you're going to "fix" TE then other classes might need the same damage cap system.

    I'd still be more enclined for mobs to be impervious to CC at some point/difficulty/quest (not Status effects or zondeel/Riser suction, but impervious to launch, stun and interruption hitstuns) which would basically make most of the good mobbing PAs harder to use, while also making mobs more threatening (provided they also get a little more HP : we don't need Dark Souls level but to me, boosted UQ HP for mobs sounds about legit now that Atra and SSAs are a thing)

    Also I'm always happy about PI just because I like those raids. Neo JP weaps being in the drop pool is nice, so I'm digging the recycling so far. It's kind of refreshing after seeing nothing but dragon these days

  9. #19

    Default

    Great, now bring back Magatsu EQ on regular schedule and we'll be good SEGA.

  10. #20
    The Lone Gamer of the Apockalypse Zorak000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    hi
    Posts
    1,659

    Default

    they gave it sun got NTs alongside the ray weapon drops, so that's neat

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 18
    Last Post: Jul 19, 2017, 09:40 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: Aug 27, 2013, 12:31 AM
  3. hmmm.... TP boosting?!?!?
    By Ice_ in forum PSO General
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Apr 29, 2001, 02:27 AM
  4. The Gauntlet: A Return to Honor
    By john_galt in forum PSO General
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Mar 14, 2001, 08:23 PM
  5. Can't return to Forest 2?
    By crmanriq in forum PSO General
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Feb 28, 2001, 07:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •