Fencer Archive

The problem I have with the post is that it comes very close to stating that fencers require a damage increase to be balanced. The issues that I brought up are mostly related to this particular subject. When you do talk about class balance, you do need to consider all the factors. I'd rather not see a future post claiming fencers are gimped because swordsmen do 480% more damage, or whatever, referencing this post.

I thought I did add something constructive to this post. How accuracy works, for example, and why weapon accuracies are important. How HAM usage varies with weapon stats and player focus stat.The benefits of having defense mods. Here's another: there's a known (by players - I don't think devs have yet acknowledged, and their understanding of AR seems different from ours) bug that when you hit a targetwhich is vulnerable to your weapon type, both the target and the weapon are considered to have AR 0. This leads to the curious situation where a high AR weapon can actually do more damage against a target with resists compared to a vulnerable target. This makes the AR comparisons somewhat more complicated.

As for being pedantic, yes, I was somewhat picky. But I'll generally respond toa post made in the academic mode in the same manner, and I'll respond to any misunderstanding to clear up the issue (like the 'you' thing...which was frankly pretty stupid, I'll grant). I probably wouldn't have been as critical if the post had contained any really new information, and if it hadn't touched on class balance, I probably would have ignored it. However, it's too easy for someone who doesn't have a good deal of knowledge of the game system to be impressed by an academic-seeming post and take the results at face value, without understanding the nuances. As it happens, this particular situation has already occurred regarding the speed equation, pistoleers and riflemen, and it was not pretty.I'd rather have my response stated here beforehand and possibly head any of that off.

As a note, I appreciate not getting instantly one-starred. That happens rather frequently whenever a post or a reply is critical of the class in most profession forums.

Noules:

Your labeling of this post as non-academic is misplaced. It clearly labels its limitations, assumptions, etc.

When performing a psychological experiment it will always invariably be the case that the complexities of the problem require certain assumptions and certain restrictions on the data that can be utilized. If all papers that contained assumptions or simplifications of the real data were deemed non-academic, the entire field would be forced out of academia. Instead academic papers often have the form: given X,Y,Z then A,B,C. Given these assumptions, these conclusions hold. On the other side of scientific discourse you will find argumentation that certain assumptions are worth using for certain results. Both types of discourse have their place.

The only hope for your argument is the insinuation that there was an implied judgement outside the scope of the findings. But there isn't. You are simply going too far in looking for something to argue against. The results are clearly labeled as exactly what they are: a survey of data generated from certain assumptions about a certain set of weapons. X-Z => A-C.

If someone misuses this data in some other post then certainly you can argue against them at that point, but until then I just see some misplaced criticism of this thread. I personally think that this is quite useful data, and with some further tweaking could be used as a part of a strong argument for why fencing weapons are in fact very poor damage dealers. You mention several other outstanding variables that are certainly quite relevant. But your argument seems to imply that NO analysis is worthwhile if it is not able to tackle the whole picture or maybe that no partial analysis is valid if it judges classes as unequal within some scope of its analysis. But then how can you mean this when I have seen you write posts that use the very same sorts of assumptions and restriction of the domain of a problem? Again, just read over the number of qualifications listed in the original posting if you have any doubt that this was framed in a limited scope.

You can argue that certain parts of the original post are not that useful. That's fine. I would say that some of the averaging comes under this heading. That has nothing to do with the "academic" validity of the thread however. And as I've said, these have already been pointed out and there's no need to rehash things and look for further contention or get in the last word.

For the record: I'm regularly involved with the writing and review of scientific papers in the field of Computer Science.

--- Flynn McDonnell

I wasn't debating whether or not the post was academic. As I said before, the main reason I brought up the issues is because of the inter-class distinctions made. Virtually all of my objections address this specific concern. And as I said before, there are specific instances in the post where it says something to the effect of, 'in order to balance this situation, change X or Y would be required'. That is certainly a conclusion impacting balance, and as I stated, I feel those conclusions are not justified.

Yes, you do need to make assumptions in an experiment. However, you do need to put some thought into accounting for them or explaining why they won't have a significant effect on the conclusion (or at least, be able to provide such an explanation).As an example, a25% difference in hit rate will have a significant effect on the DPS of a weapon. This is a weapon-specific trait which affects the DPS of the weapon. I don't see why it's wrong to point this out, especially when one of the highest DPS weapons (the LVA) has an enormous accuracy penalty. It certainly needs to be considered before you suggest what needs to be changed to balance things out. There are many other issues similarly unaddressedthatare highly relevant when you are discussing class balance; it's not the fact that assumptions are made which I have an issue with, it's the particular assumptions given the suggested conclusions.

I realize that I do come off sounding contentious (because I am, I concede) but again, this is because I believe posts like these are misleading, especially given the audience. I realize that 'officially', there is no conclusion given, but with entire sections devoted to -how- to balance the situation, I don't know why it seems like I'm reaching here. Perhaps a bit overzealous, and maybe even hysterical, but I don't think my stance is unreasonable.

---

Noules000 wrote:

this is because I believe posts like these are misleading, especially given the audience.

---

LOLOLOL Um... gee - you mean, we aren't as 'sophisticated' as yourself? Or we aren't motivated to make long winded wordy posts that accomplish nothing but assuage our egos?

You've managed to hijack an informative,insightful post that, as the poster herself acknowledged, doeshave limitations, yet stillserves as a platform for baseline comparisons and opens the door to further investigations. Which is a *hell* of a lot more than we've had to date.

Seena

Table II: Weapons vs. AR1

1. (S) Power Hammer 376


2. (D) Long Vibro-Axe 359


3. (D) Power Hammer 350


4. (S) Long Vibro-Axe304


5. (D) 2-H Axe 265


6. (D) 2-H Cleaver 258


7. (D) Vibro-Lance 258


8. (D) 2-H Curved Sword248


9. (D) Vibro-Knuckles 239


10. (S) 2-H Axe 204


11. (S) 2-H Cleaver 199


12. (S) Vibro-Lance 199


13. (D) Vibro-Axe193


14. (S) 2-H Curved Sword 190


15. (S) Vibro-Knuckles 185


16. (S) Vibro-Axe 178


17. (D) Vibroblade (Advanced) 128


18. (D) Vibroblade (Original) 124


19. (D) Gaderiffi Baton 115


20. (S) Vibroblade (Advanced) 98


21. (S) Vibroblade (Original) 95


22. (S) Gaderiffi Baton 88


23. (D) Ryyk Blade79


24. (D) Curved Sword 78


25. (S) Stun Baton 73


26. (S) Ryyk Blade 61


27. (S) Curved Sword60


28. (S) Stun Baton 56

Table III: Weapons vs. AR2

1. (S) Power Hammer301


2. (D) Long Vibro-Axe 287


3. (D) Power Hammer 280


4. (S) Long Vibro-Axe 243


5. (D) 2-H Axe 212


6. (D) 2-H Cleaver 206


7. (D) 2-H Curved Sword 198


8. (S) 2-H Axe 163


9. (S) 2-H Cleaver 159


10. (S) 2-H Curved Sword152


11. (D) Vibro-Lance 129


12. (D) Vibro-Knuckles 120


13. (S) Vibro-Lance 100


14. (D) Vibro-Axe 97


15. (S) Vibro-Knuckles 93


16. (S) Vibro-Axe 89


17. (D) Vibroblade (Advanced) 64


18. (D) Vibroblade (Original) 62


19. (D) Gaderiffi Baton 57


20. (S) Vibroblade (Advanced) 49


21. (S) Vibroblade (Original)48


22. (S) Gaderiffi Baton 44


23. (D) Ryyk Blade 40


24. (D) Curved Sword 39


25. (D) Stun Baton 36


26. (S) Ryyk Blade31


27. (S) Curved Sword 30


28. (S) Stun Baton 28

Table IV: Weapons vs. AR3

1. (S) Power Hammer 151


2. (D) Long Vibro-Axe 144


3. (D) Power Hammer 140


4. (S) Long Vibro-Axe 122


5. (D) 2-H Axe 106


6. (D) 2-H Cleaver103


7. (D) 2-H Curved Sword99


8. (S) 2-H Axe 82


9. (S) 2-H Cleaver 80


10. (S) 2-H Curved Sword76


11. (D) Vibro-Lance 65


12. (D) Vibro-Knuckles 60


13. (S) Vibro-Lance 50


14. (D) Vibro-Axe 48


15. (S) Vibro-Knuckles46


16. (S) Vibro-Axe 45


17. (D) Vibroblade (Advanced)32


18. (D) Vibroblade (Original) 31


19. (D) Gaderiffi Baton 29


20. (S) Vibroblade (Advanced)25


21. (S) Vibroblade (Original)24


22. (S) Gaderiffi Baton 22


23. (D) Curved Sword20


24. (D) Ryyk Blade20


25. (D) Stun Baton 18


26. (S) Curved Sword 15


27. (S) Ryyk Blade 15


28. (S) Stun Baton14

---

There ya go! This will have to do for now, my friends. I still have other things on the list that need attention.

well done Raphayl. I believe you have spent a lot of time on this. good efford. you da man.

*Salute*

Nice job Raphayl. And now it makes me want to use a Vibro Knuckler for my proffesion instead of like.......a lesser vibro knuckler?

Hi, it's great work, but there's one thing that you missed that makes the current analysis INCORRECT.

PLEASE READ THIS AND RECALCULATE ALL YOUR NUMBERS.

EVERYONE USES SPECIALS IN COMBAT, AND SPECIALS HAVE A DELAY MODIFIER, AND THAT MODIFIER IS APPLIED BEFOR THE 1 SECOND SPEED CAP.

In other words, a VK hit is 1.0 second capped at master. That same VK hit using a x2 delay, x2 damagespecial is double the damage but is still capped at 1.0 second because the 1.0 second cap is applied after the delay modifier is appplied, and the DPS is doubled. But the power hammer using a x2 delay never hits the cap, so the x2 delay does not increase the DPS.

CONCLUSION: assuming a x2 delay x2 damage special used, all unarmed and 1-handed weapons do double the damage as listed in your table in a real world situation. And completely reverses your rankings.

---

KaliMirchi wrote:

---

Noules000 wrote:

this is because I believe posts like these are misleading, especially given the audience.

---

LOLOLOL Um... gee - you mean, we aren't as 'sophisticated' as yourself? Or we aren't motivated to make long winded wordy posts that accomplish nothing but assuage our egos?

You've managed to hijack an informative,insightful post that, as the poster herself acknowledged, doeshave limitations, yet stillserves as a platform for baseline comparisons and opens the door to further investigations. Which is a *hell* of a lot more than we've had to date.

Seena

---

Actually, the audience I was referring to were casual players. I'm sure majority of the players in the game and on the forums aren't as interested as I am in knowing the technical details of how the game system works, and I'm sure majority of them aren't interested in spending the time to learn it.

I think I've made the point that these numbers shouldn't be used for purposes of suggesting balance changes. That was the intent.

---

Noules000 wrote:

The problem I have with the post is that it comes very close to stating that fencers require a damage increase to be balanced. The issues that I brought up are mostly related to this particular subject. When you do talk about class balance, you do need to consider all the factors. I'd rather not see a future post claiming fencers are gimped because swordsmen do 480% more damage, or whatever, referencing this post.

---

Um, Noulesy, a conclusion that Fencers get gimped (relative to other classes) by a combination of the speed formula and thespeed cap...that's not a big stretch of the imagination, and I thinka lot of people believe this even without seeing the raw numbers. Hell, I'm not a Fencer, and I think this is a problem for Fencers. It's a similar story with pistol users.

Of course, the comparison is very different if you're discussing things for a novice brawler, or novice marksman.

And of course, accuracy is a concern. However, an accuracy differential of 40 points doesn't mean that the user is going to miss 40% more of the time. It just gets factored in with all the other situational mods of the particular combat, making a comparison exceedingly difficult. That's why accuracy tends to become more of a footnote, rather than an integral part of the comparisons.

---

EasyMcRhinopants wrote:

---

Noules000 wrote:

The problem I have with the post is that it comes very close to stating that fencers require a damage increase to be balanced. The issues that I brought up are mostly related to this particular subject. When you do talk about class balance, you do need to consider all the factors. I'd rather not see a future post claiming fencers are gimped because swordsmen do 480% more damage, or whatever, referencing this post.

---

Um, Noulesy, a conclusion that Fencers get gimped (relative to other classes) by a combination of the speed formula and thespeed cap...that's not a big stretch of the imagination, and I thinka lot of people believe this even without seeing the raw numbers. Hell, I'm not a Fencer, and I think this is a problem for Fencers. It's a similar story with pistol users.

Of course, the comparison is very different if you're discussing things for a novice brawler, or novice marksman.

And of course, accuracy is a concern. However, an accuracy differential of 40 points doesn't mean that the user is going to miss 40% more of the time. It just gets factored in with all the other situational mods of the particular combat, making a comparison exceedingly difficult. That's why accuracy tends to become more of a footnote, rather than an integral part of the comparisons.

---

There are several points here which renders the situation different than from pistoleers:

* Fencers (and TKAs) are the ones that get large amounts of speed mods. Pikemen only get +80. This is reversed of the situation between pistoleers and riflemen. A more apt comparision is pistoleer/BH pistol vs. carbineer.

* Specials aren't considered in this analysis. This is pretty important, too, aka why BH pistol/pistoleers are better than pistoleers, and why last ditch is better than stopping shot.

* Fencers receive more defensive bonus than swordsman or pikemen. Pistoleers receive some of the lowest ranged defense (and defense in general)of any combat class (less than dancer, and on par with carbineers - +5).

* An accuracy difference of 40 means that you WILL do 40% more damage if the base to-hit (before the accuracy is applied) is 50% (70% to-hit vs. 50% to-hit). This is a lot more damage. It's also one of the reasons why BH pistoleers are so powerful with Eyeshot (getting the +50 accuracy mod from specials) and probably why novice pistoleers seem so much better than novice riflemen and carbineers.

It's true that having a faster weapon means that you benefit less from the speed mods on the high end. That does not mean the class is necessarily gimped, without considering the other factors.