Fencer Archive
Thread: Weapon Speed vs Players Skill
"Huh? What are you talking about? Using my example, and your equation wouldgive a speed OVER 1 second." - Paul2200
Yes, you are absolutely correct. It would. Except that the equation I originally gave is not "my" equation. It was the working equation in Beta... which may have been changed.
"It would result in 1.5 delay, which it's CLEARLY not... So how do you maintain that your equation is correct?" - Paul2200
I do not maintain that "my" equation is correct. This thread fairly old, and was dug back up for some reason. In a more current post this issue was already addressed in detail, and we discovered that the equation that worked very accurately in Beta was no longer in effect, either through design orbug.
"... (Note: I am talking about YOUR equation and YOUR equation only. Regardless of whether mine is correct or not, the one you used has been proven wrong.)" - Paul2200
Again, that was not MY equation, but a previously verified equation. I was not the one to originally state the equation, but through hours of testing foudn it to be accurate at the time.
"And who said anything about special moves??..." - Paul2200
I did. I'm sorry, did you miss that?
The delays associated with special moves have been published in a number of formats, both electronic and paper, by SOE, Prima, and others, and we were even asked to test it in Beta. It's not something snatched out of the air. Once, in Beta, they worked very accurately. Yes, i do realize that several things have changed since Beta, and this could well have changed, tool; but there was no patch message to alert us that the delays associated with specials were being removed, so we had no reason to assume them gone.
That given, I brought up the delays associated with special moves since it was easier to see numbers that should be larger than 1.0 when adjusted by the speed mods. The possibly "broken" part of the speed system I was referring to is mostly directly related to the delay on the specials. This delay was one of the primary disadvantages of using a harder-hitting but slower weapon, and keep the faster lighter weapons and slower heavier weapons about equal.
The combination of changing the mods from a direct delay loss to a percentage, with the obvious removal (intended or not) of the delays on specials means that by the time a Profession reaches their best speed mod, they will be able to use any special they wish with weapon they wishat a 1.0 speed. Since this means that a profession using 500 damage 6.0 delay weapons will attack just as fast as a professionusing 150 damage 1.6 delay weapons, what incentive is there to wield a "faster" weapon that isn't faster?
In fact, as the heavy weaponry users gain more speed, and cap out, they can get even slower weapons to cut down on their HAM costs, and slice up damage to be even more destructive and efficient. Light weaponry users are road-blocked because their weaponry just doesn't go that far down the line. The naturally fast weaponry combined with the 1.0 cap locks them into a fixed damage capabilty.
This would not be a factor if there was not a 1.0 second speed cap, as the faster weapons would continue to get faster, and the damage would remain balanced. But as it is, a Fencer with an average *not top of the line...just average* fencing weapon will max out speed long before the final speed gains are achieved. If going to a percentile speed modifier was intentional, then why would we be given roughly +30 more speed mods then can be used? Why not stop long before then? This is one reason I have my doubts that this is an intentional modification, and that parts of this are broken. Pikemen, Heavy Swordsman, and Fencers all pay the same skill points and experience to reach Mastery, one profession shouldn't end up limited to less than half the functionality of the others. It just doesn't add up. Of course, the devs could have all just been drinking a bit too heavily the day they made a choice like this, but I'd like to give them a little more credit than that. =/
This is why I suggest the current system is FUBAR... intentional or not, we don't know. This will be one of the primary things I wish to put in front of the dev's when we get our new correspondent, as it completely hamstrings Fencers.
As for the apparent "attitude" associated with my last post, it's uncharacteristic. I guess I adopted the feel of your post. I'm used to the Fencers that regularly post here trying to be respectful of each other, and not trying to be so condescending of others when they disagree. For that, I apologize. I should have held to my professionalism regardless. Sorry.
~Lyahpar~
La Femme Fencer
"Thrust if you love Fencers!"
Nice post, Noules000. I'm going to address your post a bit out of order, if I may, to address something you said in the beginning of your post, near the end of mine.
"Finally, while there are plenty of beta information floating around on style multipliers, many of those are incorrect." - Noules000
You're right, there are. The numbers I was going by are the ones given to us by the dev's during beta. I do know that these are constantly changing. (Then again, to be technically accurate, we are still in beta.) Anyone can be correct about the data in this game at any time... but no one will remain correct over time. As the game matures a bit perhaps the data will remain more constant. Here's hoping!
"I was asking if you've done some baseline testing before doing the pike style test (which would indeed show that the speed formula is either broken, or more complicated than expected) or if, more likely, it was a change or a data entry error." - Noules000
Yes, our entire PA did many baseline tests. I guess it's our nature. We're the sort that thrives on figuring out how things work. I guess it's an ingame translation of our RL careers.The first of these tests were in beta, the second about 2 weeks after release, and the lastwas 3 days ago. The first two were as expected, and the numbers matched what we thought they would be, or were very close to it. The last one was completely different, with all the numbers completely out of character. This leads us to suspect either a stealth patch, or a bug. Another possibility, as you suggested, might be that the formulas changed to something far more complex that will take more testing to verify, if they can be verified at all.
"Even if the speeds are roughly comparable, there are a lot of other weapon characteristics that affect performance. For example, HAM cost and accuracy. All the 'heavy' poleamrs have penalties worse than -50 throughout their range. This obviously has a significant impact on the damage those heavy weapons can do." - Noules000
That's a very good point. If this had a chance to make a significant difference, then I could be quite satified with that. As it stands currently, parsing the comparitive results of those to-hit penalties do not seem to had much of an impact. Unless you are fighting very tough creatures whose avoidance modifiers are incredibly high where you really start seeing people miss alot more, the small accuracy modifiers on our weapons don't amount to more than a very minor percentage. The huge damage differences more than make up for one or two missed swings.
For example, against our standard test target, I can hit for a max of approximately 400 damage without using a special. Our Master Pikeman hits for a max of approximately 700 damage without using a special on the same target. If we both did max, it would take me 7 swings to reach 2800 damage whereas he could reach it in 4 swings. He could afford to miss 3 swings and match my damage... that means missing over 40% of the time. There isn't even close to that much of an accuracy difference. If he misses 1 out of those 7 hits (which is still more than his parses show) in 7 swings, he will have done 4900 damage to my 2800, and due to the current speed situation, he did it in the same time frame. That's still 57% more damage in the same time frame. HAM costs have not come into play yet, as normal attacks do not use HAM.
If we add in specials, I can do a max of about 2500 with Hit3 and it costs me approximately 60/100/120 ham. He does a max of approximately 6000 with Hit3 and it costs hit approximately 170/100/40 ham. At first glance that seems like a lot of extra HAM he's using, but in relation to the damage done, let's see it in my detail:
60+100+120 = 280 total ham cost, with 120 coming out of the unhealable Mind pool.
170+100+40 = 310 total ham cost, with only 40 coming out of the unhealable Mind pool.
2500 damage / 280 ham = 9 damage per ham for a Master Fencer
6000 damage / 310 ham = 19 damage per ham for a Master Pikeman
That gives the Pikeman a 111% efficiency boost over the Fencer. For the Fencer to reach the same damage, it would take 2.4 Hit3's for a total ham cost of 672. Of course, in extra time (another 2.4 seconds) the Pikeman could have done more damage to his opponent, if even only using regular attacks. With 2.4 regular attacks, the Pikeman can raise the comparative damage by another (700x2.4) 1680 damage. Looking at it from another point of view, that gives the opponent of the Fencer another 2.4 seconds to attack which also drains the ham pools. The Pikeman will have killed off his foe much sooner, saving that ham. So, yes, they have do have a much a higher ham cost per special... but it is relatively more efficent.
Don't get me wrong. In no way do I want Pikeman nerfed. I like that they are doing as well as they are. But, sheesh... I sure wouldn't mind being in the same ballpark.
"The problem with a straight subtraction is that it favors faster weapons much more than slower ones. A straight subtraction of 1s from the delay of a weapon would double the DPS of a 2.0s weapon, but only increase the DPS of a 9s delay weapon by a factor of 1.25. A multiplicative delay reduction has the same effect on all weapons, barring the speed cap, of course." - Noules000
Yes, the old way wasn't fair to the slower weapons, and needed to be changed. However, it wasn't nearly as gross an injutice as the new method. You mentioned the old method would double the dps of a 2.0 weapon, and only add 25% toa 9 delay weapon, however as you can see above, that was about the differnece need to keep them about on par with each other. With the new method, the faster weapons... and professions that rely on them, are left waaaayy behind. They cannot even use all of the speed mods they are given sinc ethey max out a long time before then.
What I think would have been a better method of setting the speeds, assuming they needed to have the 1.0 second cap for server stability is this:
Take the fastest weapon... whatever that is... and find out what percentile speed mod dropped it to right at the speed cap. Take that speed mod and give it to all the combat classes. That lets the percentile have a base reference of 1.0 rather than a base reference of zero... which cannot be reached.
This would pan out to something this:
The fastest weapon is 1.5, which needs a 33.3% boost to reach 1.0. Make it so all Master's reach a peak of +33 Speed Modifier. This way all weapons increase by the same amounts, everyone advances fairly equally, and no one reaches a hardcap long before they should. This rewards everyone for getting their top speed increase, and encourages everyone to try and get the faster weapons.
I'm sure there are other solutions. I don't want to be better than the other comabt professions, I don't want to be "even" or "identical".... but I would at least like to be competative.
~Lyahpar~
La Femme Fencer
"Thrust if you love Fencers!"
I don't know I agree about the minimal effects of the to-hit bonus. I'm not aware of exactly how the to-hit bonus works, so much of it is speculation. At least in PvP, however, most targets are constantly moving, and you end up with quite a few more penalties than hitting a stationary target without any defense mods. I am a master rifleman/master marksman, which means I receive +112 to hit, and at close ranges while moving (where the -70 to hit from my rifle comes into play) I seem to miss rather frequently, on the order of 50% of the time (this is of course rather anecdotal, but I certainly do miss).
Also (while we're on the subject of pikemen, although this is a more general issue), the maximum any pikeman seems to be able to get in terms of speed is +80 (barring speed tapes, which do not seem to be working - there is a swordsman thread on this subject). This only cap 5s delay weapons, and then only if their style does not add any delay (or they do not style). While the weapons could be sliced for speed, faster weapons (such as those used by fencers) can also be sliced for damage, which is a pure improvement as the speed would remain (effectively) constant and no increase in HAM use rate.
I'm not sure why your styled damage is so disparate compared to your unstyled damages. I was under the impression that styles represented a damage multiplier (as well as a delay multipler) and hence, if the styles were roughly comparable, the damage multipliers should be, also. 700/400 = 1.75, while 6000/2500 = 2.4, which is a rather sizable difference. This seems to indicate a possible issue with the styles rather than speed, necessarily.
In my opinion, a better way to improve fencers than changing how speed works would be to add special, high delay moves with better bonuses. For instance, pistol users get 'stopping shot', which is something like a 2.4x damage multiplier (random pool) and a 4x delay multiplier - this is lower DPS than some of their other attacks, if the cap is not considered (fan shot, for instance, has much better DPS) but when one is capping speed regardless, stopping shot becomes a much better move. Alternatively, adding slower fencer weapons might also work, although that may alter the non-master fencer dynamic too much. As a side note, it seems like fencers get a very large amount of defensive bonuses, second only to the TKA, and having defense modifiers working properly (or just better) might be another good way to distinguish fencers from other combat classes.
Not all professions will cap out using specials. Master rifleman get +90 speed, and special delays are at least 2x. This means they will not cap with any weapon with delay greater than 5s, which are very common among rifles. With master marksman, they get +95, so they do cap with most rifles. Also, master pistoleers only get +74 at master pistol (although they can get more through the BH or master marksman skill lines).
Even if the speeds are roughly comparable, there are a lot of other weapon characteristics that affect performance. For example, HAM cost and accuracy. All the 'heavy' poleamrs have penalties worse than -50 throughout their range. This obviously has a significant impact on the damage those heavy weapons can do.
Finally, while there are plenty of beta information floating around on style multipliers, many of those are incorrect. I was asking if you've done some baseline testing before doing the pike style test (which would indeed show that the speed formula is either broken, or more complicated than expected) or if, more likely, it was a change or a data entry error.
LOL i lost track of wth u guys are talking about like 5 posts back. =p
Very interesting subject though.
I have a 1.5 spd weapon (powered up), but I have adv footwork. Am I past the 1 second cap?
Thanks-
Scorned wrote:
Why don't you just take someone that is obviously capped at 1.0 speed (for instance, a master pistoleer/expert BH) and take your Master Polarm user which you say will also cap out at swinging at 1.0 speed. Have the 2 of them duel without using any specials and watch the combat log. If there is a multiplicative system involved, why is it that the Pistoleer/BountyHunter get to attack more often? Hmm.... odd, isn't it? Wish people would all stop saying they know exactly what the speed modifiers do. Also you can take a master pistoleer/expert BH and have him go against a t21 wielding Rifleman (whom, as you say, would be capped with that percentage-based system) and do the same duel thing and watch the combat logs. Once again, the pistoleer shoots faster. Therefore it would seem that the first guy was likely closest to the correct equation than the percentage believers. Then again I could be wrong, I only have a master pistoleer/expert BH on Eclipse.
Please provide evidence of this. Note that a master pikeman without master brawler (and thus at +75 pike speed) will only cap using a 4.0s or lower delay weapon, and that only with autoattack or no-delay mod specials. Similarly, a master rifleman (with +90 speed mod) will only cap using a weapon with less than 10.0s delay, and again, only when using autoattack. Many pre-nerf T21s are slower than 10s, and most pikes are slower than 4.0s. All recent evidence (including the original poster, if you bother to read the thread) agree with the percentage reduction based on speed.