GLs thorough test (in General)
:) I did it tonight instead of tomorrow. For now, I'll just post test and results. I leave analysis until we've decided exactly how we're comparing the two damage ranges. :)
The test was with myself, Fireball: 49,050/45,000 (4,862) versus Bloodlust: 14,242/14,836 (0.60) ST: 49,014/42,621 DX: 16/21 (using BoNE: [92x115] (+33)).
I attacked 'The Brak Show' (20 DX, no evasion, AMF, Protection or items) and recorded the damages from the first round of melee twenty times.
18: 49,526 - only round with single hit
I hope this test, and the methods I used are better than my last. :)
July 26 2006 7:10 PM EDT
Still... It's a decent NW BoNE... (I know it's in your NW allowance, but I'm gonna assume non USD spending therefore there would be a trade off in xp and CBD) How much NW is boosting the mage's power? (Not counting w/e item you have that brought it from 45k to 49k fireball)
All this tells me is that I should buy a BoNE...
A pair of +9 AG. NW: 245,717. They increase my PR by 1,850.
My BoNE, NW: 1,883,576 increases my PR by zero.
For a very simple analysis, compare fight number 18. My physical damage is 3.13 times larger than my magical.
are those 20 averages of 20 fights? and are there any fights which your tank lived and mage didnt?
My question is how much trained exp is in the tank, and how much trained exp is in the mage?
July 26 2006 7:46 PM EDT
If the weapon GL is using is average for a tank that size, then I do say it is well overpowered. It wouldn't make sense to ask him to test a Dagger [1x1] (+1).
The mage's hit is smaller than a single hit from the tank. The mage gets one hit while the tank gets two. Imbalance? Probably so.
One factor, GL, that may have thrown off this test is the bloodlust.
July 26 2006 7:52 PM EDT
And obviously there's AMF that makes mages kill itself AND lower damage. And there are more items that increase tank stats than mage stats. AND tanks have a healthy supply of AC to reduce mage damage, while mages get nearly no AC. I'm guessing Jon is aware of this, and may balance some issues in future change... quarters?
I'm still asking for mages to get more mage-enhancing gear =D
"are those 20 averages of 20 fights? and are there any fights which your tank lived and mage didnt?"
Not averages, direct results from 20 fights. I threw out two where the target didn't last until melee.
Both my guys didn't die. This isn't a test of my strat or how well I could kill, so the target was far smaller than I.
"My question is how much trained exp is in the tank, and how much trained exp is in the mage?"
For all intents and purposes, just about the same. This is the same sort of test Jon originally asked for. Equal level Strength to DD. The rest is immaterial.
"One factor, GL, that may have thrown off this test is the bloodlust."
Good point, but I'm not untraining it, and I think it's valuable to see BLs effect as well.
If it's a problem, we can remove the 60% increase to damage BL provides from the physical damage numbers. But then we just ignore what a Tank with BL can do.
Well a few more points of additional data. The mage has PL EC and VA trained and the Tank has EC and Protection trained. So first off we can assume that the EC takes the base ST and DX of the opponent mage to below 0 and as we all know ST is a factor in determining physical damage, but at least to my knowledge not in magical damage.
I will say that besides EC there are no other trained factors other than the stated ones that would affect damage. Irregardless, the amount of exp it takes to get the Fireball to its level and the amount of exp it takes to get the ST and BL are not equal. It has been my experience that at least 20% additional trained exp is required to get a perfect BL score. So the mage has in my estimate only aproximately 20% less trained exp.
You might say then, well mitigate 20% still looks over powered, but you cannot just mitigate 20%. If it was a base character, the difference of 20% would be perfectly linear, but as the character gains exp the amount of exp it takes to gain one point in a stat is exponentially more difficult. For instance, if you train 1mil into your FB and 1.2mil into your tank to get ST and BL in order, that is a difference of 200K exp. Lets assume for ease and absurdity, that he earns 200 exp per minion per fight. Thats 1000 more fights worth of exp trained into the tank vs the mage. If you 4 sets of BA everyday, it would take you 3 days + to amass that amount of exp.
All that said, when you consider the EC putting ST into the negative, the additional amount of exp trained into the tank, I so not see the overwhelming evidence of over powering that might be seen at first glance.
July 26 2006 8:19 PM EDT
GL: You could also just add 15k to FB. But I still see that tanks would have much more firepower.
Sefton: Forgive me if I'm missing something as I didn't take the time to read through your fatty post, but I don't see any EEET teams out there with EC being their main enchantment. Sure, EC can put str in the negatives, but I don't think that happens often, or even gets near that. However, compare that to AMF. With AMF, not only is damage lessened, but damage is reflected! But the point GL is making is that generic damage caused by tanks is much greater than that of mages.
of course tanks do more dmg, but then the st their dmg is based on is constrained by requiring dexterity too, and with bl, there is more exp doing damage than the fb. DD under 100k also gets the damage reduction, and he also used the biggest weapon in the game.
Pixel it is a mage as target with ST=20. Presumably any EC slightly above base will put his ST into the negative.
Just for fun I ran the test again with CBs smalest weapon, a Base Dagger. :)
Sef, I did worry about EC, but not for Strength reduction. I'm hopeing Str will be negative, that way, there is nothing reducing physical damage, just the same as magical. with possitive Str, there is a tiny physical damage reduction. I was more worried about multiple hits, but I've not idea how stats at zero (I don't think CB recognises negative stats) work, and we've no idea what size of base wepaon or number of hits Jon has based physical to magical damage on.
What I will do tomorrow is untrain BL and run the test again. Another 20 fights.
July 26 2006 8:28 PM EDT
Ah, I see Sefton. Guess I got the wrong gist from your post =D
July 26 2006 8:29 PM EDT
No I would say congrats on a much more accurate set of results Gent!
Although the tank is overpowering the mage, I think slight is the proper descripition of that overpower. You can assume that the majority of the double strikes are do solely to your EC dropping the opponents dex, as you stated that your dex is base, and the PTH of the weapon is relatively low. Subtract 60% for BL and that leaves you at an average of somewhere around 30,000 dmg per round. 30,000 x .6 = 18,000 or 48k total dmg which looks pretty close to your average.
As others have stated the Strength reduction of AC is inflating that damage some as well so it is tough to give an exact number.... Anyway, 18k looks to be about your average DD, and if we call your melee dmg 25k I think it is almost perfect for what Jon was attempting to do taking into acount that DD spells don't reach full str for a few thousand more exp.....
I would still state that the fact that your mage is doing more dmg in ranged than your tank (assumably) gives the mage a slight overall advantage, but all in all it looks like we are on the right track.
Thanks for the thorough data, and I hope Jon gets a chance to eyeball his handywork :)
Also Pixel, I am speaking only of this data he presented here. He would like this data to represent ALL mage vs. tanks fights (as in because this data shows "overpowering" all tanks are over powered), and if that is the case then this data is affected by EC and the extra trained exp. No idea where the EEET or AMF came from, but it is not relevent to this data.
July 26 2006 8:32 PM EDT
although in retrospect, your AG's are giving a slight bump to DD, so it would bring your average from 18k to somewhere around 16.5k.... so maybe there is a tiny bit more tweaking required.
"of course tanks do more dmg, but then the st their dmg is based on is constrained by requiring dexterity too,"
No, not constrained by dexterity. That;s why I'm running this at 20 Dex. Well, 16. ;)
"and with bl, there is more exp doing damage than the fb."
Fine! I'll untrain BL...
"DD under 100k also gets the damage reduction, and he also used the biggest weapon in the game."
Why the damage reduction, that one of my points.
The other is why is the largest (base type of) weapon in the game giving me massive damage, but not increasing my PR at all.
I want to figure out if either;
A) Everything is OK, mages and Tanks do equivalent damage.
B) Tanks do more damage because the new formula still needs a little adjusting.
C) Tanks do more damage because their power is being misrepresented by thier weapon, and in fact the test is wrong as the DD should be a lot higher to match the tanks actual power rating.
D) Mages still do mroe damage than Tanks.
I'm leaning toward B/C myself. ;)
July 26 2006 8:34 PM EDT
GL, you may get more accurate results by balancing exp trained in your tank. I think the total amount trained into Str, Dex, and BL should be the same as that trained into FB. I think that more or less Str and Dex are relatively close with most tank teams.
As Sefton kind of pointed out, maybe try attacking another character that has some Str trained. If you want, I can mess around with one of my characters (probably Hyren Master or Imperitus) so you can attack.
VP if I drop my AG, I have to drop my TG as my Str to FB level would be out of wack.
I wanted negative Str, so the minisucle (and unkown) reduction wouldn't happen, as DD isn't getting reduced by this, so physical shouldn't either...
Thanks Pix, but I'm keeping to the same set up as the tests for Jon. Dex isn't a factor then and it sohuldn't be now. As we have no idea of the amount of hits per round Jon is balancing things on. But you could always asume 1/2 my EC level as Dex on my Tank... :P
Also GL unless you really want to, do not untrain BL. Simply take the amount of of total exp trained into FB and the sum of the exp trained into the ST and BL and make the FB total equal the ST + BL total and then reduce the tank damage by 60%
I might be incorrect, but since a base character has base stats of 20, I would assume that all calculation for ST adjustments for damage reduction are based on 20 = no reduction. I would then take that assumption further and say less than 20 might actually increase the damage taken slightly. I am pretty sure yoiu are correct that CB might take any value less than zero to equal to zero.
Lets say for arguments sake, the EC is adding 1% to the damage the minion whose ST is equal to 0 takes. At 18K damage that is additional 180 points fairly negligible.
It's gonna be easier to untrain BL. :) I don't mind doing it.
I shouldn't lose too much, I've been saving xp tonight, so as not to increase my FB or Str any. )
Thats cool with me, just make trained exp into FB and ST as equal as possible.
Also I would have to wade through the math, but you are better off taking the TG's and AG's off. I mean even if they are the same NW and same +, I do not know if TG's have a greater or lesser effect than AG's or vice versa at equal level.
Again I only want this parity IF you are going to say these 20 fights against this opponent prove that ALL fights between mages and tanks will follow the same pattern.
July 26 2006 8:56 PM EDT
GL I was cool with the results you stated, I did the rough math and subtracted 9% from your FB, and 60% from your melee....
Everything looked good to me and pretty equal, what I was saying about the AG's was that maybe DD was underpowered by the 9% the gloves were adding as it looked pretty equal with them on.
I think Jon wanted DD to be less powerful at lower levels to help new players. You have to figure they start with 0 money, 0 friends, and maybe a dagger? Of course it is going to take them a while to build up some cash for weaps vs training a DD right out of the gate to do some dmg.... It really only seems fair that NCB's might have to suffer a little to make the game fair and entertaining for new players....
yes, physical dmg is constrained by dx, otherwise you wont hit anythind with eva or other tanks with dx, you wouldnt get very high with that tank, dx is a must for tanks
unlearn your ec and then see how much dx affects it
July 26 2006 9:38 PM EDT
I'm saying that you have TGs on the tank and AGs on the mage... The weapon has a NW (yes, I know it doesn't increase your pr) and there is no weapon on the mage. So I'm saying that you have more NW on your tank than your mage. Also, the weapon choice (and spell choice CoC hurts!!! and since it doesn't cast til melee I think it is more comparable to a melee weapon) is probably biggest factor, since a base dagger brings your damage to nothing. As for what weapon you should use.. heh I don't have an answer for that, but how is using the highest base damage weapon in the game representative?
July 26 2006 9:45 PM EDT
I think it is a fair represntaion of what tanks his lvl could be using.... it might be a tad big, but I wouldn't split hairs over it...
"Fireball: 49,050/45,000 (4,862)"
I think this throws your whole test off. Low level DD was recently given a reduced effect. Try this test again when your FB is around 100k (I think that was the magic number in the post) and we can see then what the difference is.
unlearn ec, and do 20 more fights, i bet your average phys dmg drops by half, if not more
im sorry, i thought you were still doing total DI not first round of melee
July 26 2006 10:02 PM EDT
Fine, I concede the weapon argument. (Yet I continue arguing relentlessly hah... I dunno why either) Definitely need to wait til 100k DD since that is when Jon said that it would be almost full damage. I still think CoC is a better comparison with melee, but don't really wanna make you unlearn your spell since it would waste xp. The extra three rounds can skew the results either way depending on how long the battle lasts. Anyways, it's a good idea to do this test.
can i point out in this test that fb has also fired 3 times already? which is an advantage of fb...
July 26 2006 10:26 PM EDT
But my point is that FB is weaker than CoC and in long battles FB is worse and CoC is stronger (unless I'm wrong on that last statement). In short battles FB is of course better because of the extra rounds. Anyways this means that CoC can be compared to melee better because the damage is correspondingly greater since it takes place only during melee rounds.
agreed, i was just pointing that out because he said phys was 3x greater, though he wasn't counting the 3 previous times fb had fired
July 26 2006 10:35 PM EDT
Ahh thats what you mean, yeah definitely agreed pretty much the same point I'm making.
I would rather see the test done with a higher level FB (Above the level at which they are penalized much anyway, I think Jon used a word to describe the way it worked which I didn't understand the first time he lowered DD for small mages so I have no idea where that level might be). Also wouldn't having equal xp to the FB trained to give equal ST and DX with max BL make more sense, tanks really have to fight other tanks (unless you are going quite specialized).
Incidentally the tank V tank DX fight is one of the auto balancing mechanisms in CB, if tanks are beating mages easily some concentrate on DX forcing other tanks to follow or abandon competing with them, another is switching between AMF/EC (AMF having been far more prevalent to date, giving a strong indication of the powers of mages previously) Already up top Jayuu had gone big EC before the latest NCB and so has Bartjan.
Perhaps equal xp in FB/BL, ST, DX and then add AG and CoI/ST and DX boosters with NW to give equal boost in PR would be best.
After that if you could just get me the moon on a stick :)
July 26 2006 11:49 PM EDT
borderline.... maybe all that can be done, but I am only going to speak on GL's behalf an promise a new moon or waxing quarter....
July 26 2006 11:52 PM EDT
In all seriousness though, I think the most acurate test would be FB trained equal to ST/DX with no bonus or penalty items equipped.
I know you have stated that you don't think DX is important for a tank, but without your EC (and even with your EC once you hit the higher ranks) you will quickly find that base dx = hitting a LOT of air.
I stated before it is easy enough to calculate your dmg - .6 BL, EC is the biggest unknown in my opinion.
July 27 2006 12:34 AM EDT
hey as I was laying down to go to sleep it hit me.... (yeah yeah yeah I am a junkie)
EC is the biggest unknown in your results right now, so rent or borrow an the lowest lvl MGS you can get a hold of for an hour and rerun your test with MgS equipped on the EC minion. I know it will mean running the test twice, and possibly some lost fights, but only do 10 this time if it is too much to ask. If you have to rent the MgS let me know what the rental fee is and I will reimburse you (for the cheapest rental available :) )
As I have said repeatedly , BL is easy math to calculate the pre BL damage, so there would be no retraining required.
July 27 2006 12:44 AM EDT
Things are further imbalanced when you compare the potential power-boosting armor for tanks versus mages. Mages can get maybe 30% DD increase max. Tanks can get upwards of 160% strength increase.
July 27 2006 1:05 AM EDT
Yeah, thats how much the stat increases.. But does that translate to a 160% increase in damage?
A 30% boost to spell level doesn't increase damage output by 30%, either. Remember, a DD spell effect is a percentage of the DD spell level.
July 27 2006 3:19 AM EDT
"DD spell effect is a percentage of the DD spell level."
If that statement is true then a 30% increase in level would result in a 30% increase in damage since they are in proportion...
I *could* untrain EC. But I'm not going to. I will, and test with a base 20 Dex, if you can tell me how many hits per round Jon has balanced physical to magic damage against.
I will untrain BL, and run this again, not every tank trains BL. ;) Then, I'll train BL again, and pump my FB to be equal in level to Str + BL and run it again. :)
I'm not going to uneuip any armour, guys, they don't matter, their NW is irrelevant, as long as both stats are equal, it doesn't matter *how* I've got there. My FB could be un modifies, and my strength boosted up to it by TG, TSA and HoE. It doesn't matter. :)
If someone with the higher levels decided to do a test like this, and both come out equal, and mines doesn't, I then have to ask why? Do we want CB2 to be "Make a Tank at the start, don't even bother using a Mage until you get to 100K, they're rubish until then..."
Well, when I get to work I'll start. :)
This thread is closed to new posts.
However, you are welcome to reference it
from a new thread; link this with the html
<a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001rjP">GLs thorough test</a>