Quick Change to VB (in General)


Godpanda September 26 2007 12:29 PM EDT

It occurs to me that with the boost of ELS and BoNE damage (much needed, btw, and thank you), the VB needs a boost in base damage. I'm not saying put it back in the 70s. But bring it back to old point, relation wise. Seems to me that now the AC would have to be over 300 to make it useful compared to other rares. So, at least put it back where it was (however low that is).

Thanks.

QBOddBird September 26 2007 1:17 PM EDT

Wny? Try comparing it to the BoTH sometime. It *IS* useful compared to other rares. Just certain other rares have a hidden lower damage curve, if you'd check out other threads.

Thanks.

Godpanda September 26 2007 1:37 PM EDT

Hidden for a reason.

I'm saying put it BACK where it was. This is -another- reason not to use VB, and it doesn't need it. Whether or NOT the morg does less damage than Exec, it's still better than VB. This change would only keep it where it was in relation to the BoNE and ELS, which the VB can't stand to lose.

QBOddBird September 26 2007 1:43 PM EDT

The VB does, against a 200 AC opponent (I believe from an older post I read), more damage than the pre-Changelog BoNE. It's not like it is all that weak - it is simply a more specialized weapon.

And it is a 1H weapon, so you don't compare its damage to the MH, you compare it to the BoTH - against whom it is VERY comparable. BoTH doesn't beat it out by that much.

The *only* reason complaints pop out like this is the aesthetic - the obvious base - that looks so low compared to the rest. If you could see how much less damage the BoTH actually does - 15% less than a Katana at 1.145M ST - and that was reflected in the base damage of the weapon, fewer people would buy it.

Perhaps your request is for the Vorpal Blade to have the same kind of boosted base, but special damage curve that is hidden in a similar fashion? Still doing the same damage, but looking nicer so more people will buy it? The fact is, the way it was, it was the BEST choice because it was GOING to eat through walls and do comparable damage to other weapons. That's just way better than sucking in some extra health or doing a little better damage against the odd unarmored opponent/enchanter - i.e., overpowered.

Godpanda September 26 2007 2:03 PM EDT

No. Comparable. Defense V.S. Offense. Personally, I do NOT feel the VB deserved the nerf in the first place. It was the ONLY, and I repeat, ONLY, way for lower NW teams to beat higher NW teams via tank. But I really didn't complain about it. What I am asking for it to make sure that it's relationship with the ELS (Not BoTh.) doesn't change.

BASICALLY, now that the ELS deals damage, I don't want to see the popularity of VB die even more. Because, when compared to ELS, where does it really stand?

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] September 26 2007 2:08 PM EDT

The VB slices through prot, AC and a ToE. I don't understand where the discrepancy lies, since I doubt an ELS of equal NW will do comparable damage to a VB when facing teams like Oxcha/The Lega/Koy, etc

Godpanda September 26 2007 2:10 PM EDT

So, if you're in the top 50, you can beat those 3.... but no one else because a THF would be outhitting you?

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] September 26 2007 3:29 PM EDT

I am in the top 50.

I can beat a decent amount of teams. My VB lands about 250k a blow, which is not massive damage, but throw in multiple strikes and it gets the job done. Against heavy AC/ToE, it will get the job done even better.

Godpanda September 26 2007 3:37 PM EDT

Heh, you are also the only true tank in the top 50 that takes more than one round to kill one of my minions. And I run ACed mage.

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] September 26 2007 3:42 PM EDT

So I beat you in 7 rounds instead of 4? A win is a win in my books :D

Godpanda September 26 2007 3:50 PM EDT

True. But the point is, the VB is too weak in comparison with other weapons. I'm not saying UBER BUFF THE WEAK VB!!!!!!111!!!oneone!one!!!. I'm asking it be put at the level it was at before ELS damage was fixed.

QBOddBird September 26 2007 7:17 PM EDT

GW, it doesn't hit all that much weaker than a BoTh, yet people still use those. That is my point. If they are still good enough for people - even while hitting opponents wearing armor! - then the VB is good enough.

And yes, the VB is weaker against some opponents than other weapons. But it is STRONGER against some opponents than other weapons. Are you forgetting this obvious fact? Toss 250 AC on an opponent and your VB is hitting harder than any other (melee) weapon would against him.

QBOddBird September 26 2007 7:19 PM EDT

And by the way - what the heck does this mean?

"Hidden for a reason."

It had nothing to do with the comparison I put forth. An explanation would be nice before you continue blasting forth with your argument as though nothing was said...

Godpanda September 26 2007 7:40 PM EDT

No. I said it because Jon had programmed it so the "true" base was hidden. It's not really right to add that in to the relationship. Or so I thought.

And, no OB. You're wrong. It -used- to be 250 AC. Now it's much higher. Because the BoNE does more damage. I'm asking the VB be brought BACK UP to usefulness against 250 and greater.

QBOddBird September 26 2007 7:46 PM EDT

"The VB does, against a 200 AC opponent (I believe from an older post I read), more damage than the pre-Changelog BoNE."

I said 250 to adjust.

And why wouldn't you take that into account when it deals with the actual damage dealt? It'd be like the VB having a base damage of 75 and dealing the same damage it does now. Except without any complaints, and it leeches and doesn't bypass AC/Prot/Endurance. And we rename it the BoTH. Catch my drift? We already have, and have HAD, a weapon that does far less damage than the other rares, and it is and has been widely used *quite* successfully. Jon knew what he was doing when he made the nerf.

QBOddBird September 26 2007 7:48 PM EDT

Note - if you can find that older post, it might've been higher than 200 AC. That's just my old memory. If someone wishes to go forum digging, please do be my guest - but I'm not in the mood for it now myself, as I've got a migraine and am both ornery and in pain.

Zoglog[T] [big bucks] September 26 2007 7:59 PM EDT

Increased VB base to 63. This brings the AC level for "VB better than ELS" to 246.

(Before March, this AC level was 110.) .

So with the increase to ELS we're now looking at a minimum of 275AC or so?
I'm thinking the VB does need another minor rebuff just to give it a chance.

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] September 26 2007 8:06 PM EDT

Just looking at AC is much too narrow of a view. Don't forget about the ToE/prot, which is often coupled with high AC minions.

O think the VB is fine as is right now.

Dark Dreky September 26 2007 8:12 PM EDT

I agree with the minor buff. SLIGHT... but definitely necessary.

sooka September 26 2007 8:42 PM EDT

I agree with a little boost as well.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] September 26 2007 8:43 PM EDT

umm no

Godpanda September 26 2007 9:15 PM EDT

I'm going with a -slight- rebuff. Maybe I didn't make it clear. I'm truly not asking for it to be brought bak to where it was. I'm talking one or two base. Just to bring it back up to a proper proportion with the new ELS and BoNE damage.

QBOddBird September 26 2007 9:22 PM EDT

I understand what you are saying, but why should you boost this rare which was OK in comparison to 2 rares that were underpowered when they are brought up to par?

QBOddBird September 26 2007 9:25 PM EDT

I.E. - we just made BoNE and ELS more viable choices, and by bringing the VB further into the picture as a pure damage force (not just an AC/Endurance/Prot eating force) you lower their viability respectively.

Though I don't see how 1 or 2 base damage could hurt, but I don't know how much it would help either. I'm not sure how much exactly each point of base damage affects damage, especially since each individual damage formula seems to get tweaked to be different...(special lowered damage curve for MH and BoTH, BoNE and ELS damage curve just recently raised by 20%)

Godpanda September 26 2007 9:28 PM EDT

The VB usage is no better than the ELS' anymore. It won't boost it's popularity. Indeed, I think both the ELS and BoNE will be a-lot more popular now. I just want to keep the original formula correct, not worsen it for VB. The Morg will remain most popular, then BoTh. Is there any real harm in just keeping it the same?

Dark Dreky September 27 2007 2:19 PM EDT

I think that the pure fact it is a supporter item should make it AT least as powerful (if not better) than non-supporter items in its class.

QBJohnnywas September 27 2007 2:30 PM EDT

Lift it's damage up a bit and then give it a built in ability to negate EC. That would be good.....

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] September 27 2007 3:45 PM EDT

VB already halves the power of a massive number of items in game...it doesn't need any help.

Godpanda September 27 2007 3:50 PM EDT

Obviously, it does, judging by what weapons are used.

Dark Dreky September 27 2007 3:54 PM EDT

"VB already halves the power of a massive number of items in game."

I don't really agree here. Sure there are a lot of items that contribute to AC, but its damage has been reduced to the point where total AC needs to be around 275 or so (too lazy to look it up)... As I see it now, its one of the worst melee weapons unless you're facing a few million dollars of NW specifically allocated to AC.

Godpanda September 27 2007 4:20 PM EDT

And, see, there's the kicker. The only way to make th VB to fight well is to fight huge NW. At that point, you need tons of NW in the VB to make it worth it. But it doesn't matter, because it lacks the base damage to be good against the other high PR teams. It can't do enough natural damage against everyone else to be worth it.

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] September 27 2007 4:28 PM EDT

and I repeat...

Looking at AC is far too narrow a view. The VB slices through much more then *just* AC. Not to mention when you get into the higher PR ranges there are a good chunk of teams that are using various forms of damage reduction.

The VB may not kill enchanters as fast as an ELS/BoTH, but when it can actually kill that heavy AC minion, with a prot of 20 and an aura from a ToE, then it really shines.

As it is now it is a niche weapon, that carves into the NW of a lot of teams. It is far from underpowered, and if I was offered an ELS at the same NW as my VB, I would stick with my VB for that reason.

Godpanda September 27 2007 4:32 PM EDT

-_-


Other than ToE teams, other tanks, mages, meatshields, evasion minions, RoBF teams, enchanters, PL teams, GA teams, AS teams.


VB is worse against all of them. Unless they use a wall. Or a ToE. And even then, it still is -barely- better.

QBOddBird September 27 2007 10:28 PM EDT

"Other than ToE teams, other tanks, mages, meatshields, evasion minions, RoBF teams, enchanters, PL teams, GA teams, AS teams.


VB is worse against all of them. Unless they use a wall. Or a ToE. And even then, it still is -barely- better."

Against ToE teams, it is better. PL, AS, meatshields...these are generally used in combination with other forms of damage reduction. The *ONLY* times large numbers of HP are simply flat put up there without a lot of reduction are:

1) Expect to Evade
2) Expect to Retaliate

GA, RoBF, Evasion.

Otherwise, the VB has the advantage by cutting through all these different forms of damage reduction at once...choosing to focus on AC, IGNORING the fact that there are weapons with a hidden lower base damage that is closer to the VB's, pointing out the number of people using the weapon (aesthetic reasons, to be honest) - these are just born of either ignorance or stubborness...

I agree with your point that you could raise it slightly to bring it up to par with where other weapons were, and that's a reasonable enough request - though I still don't see the logic in raising a decent weapon because you raised underpowered ones, I still see the reason behind the request - but saying it is underpowered itself is just SILLY. It is the only weapon that can cut through 477 AC, half a ToE, half a full (33) Protection...jeez - regardless of whether or not anyone has attained that AC size YET, how is that an underpowered capability?

Silly VB haters.

Godpanda September 27 2007 10:42 PM EDT

It's not underpowered. It's just not powerful enough to be considered a rare item or supporter item.

QBOddBird September 27 2007 11:16 PM EDT

"It is the only weapon that can cut through 477 AC, half a ToE, half a full (33) Protection...jeez - regardless of whether or not anyone has attained that AC size YET, how is that an underpowered capability?"

--- this is not enough to be rare or supporter? This is just average?

Godpanda September 28 2007 12:27 AM EDT

Correct. Considering morg can add 200,000 thousand hit points PER hit.

QBOddBird September 28 2007 1:31 AM EDT

Um. So can the VB with the ED Vampiric Aura? Consider them both against an opponent with 300 AC and a ToE. All of a sudden that Morg isn't so great and the VB is shining like a STAR.

And you'll notice that Morg is leeching NOTHING on enchanters.

Puh-lease. If you don't think the ability to eat through half the AC, Endurance, and Protection of an opponent is one of the most powerful abilities of the game, your understanding of how INCREDIBLY strong damage reduction has become is dull.

Godpanda September 28 2007 1:36 AM EDT

FINE. OB, assuming you're right. The new ratio would give the VB, what? 1% more damage against 300 AC than morg? And still no life gain!? Factor the ToE in. 2% Holy cow! It doesn't have the base to make up for it, Vorpal or no.

Nerevas September 28 2007 1:44 AM EDT

1-2%? Try 400-500% difference when facing a high AC + ToE combo. When I ran my 350AC+ToE mage, fighting a VB was the difference between being hit for 50k and 250k damage.
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=002EIp">Quick Change to VB</a>