Discussion: Unarmed Combat (in Debates)


AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] May 20 2009 6:21 AM EDT

Now that everything with UC is working more or less properly, what do you think about it the way it is right now?

Do you think it is fine the way it is right now? Or do you think it should be changed, and if so what should be done with it?

Right now UC is the only damage type that does not have a linear growth. Though Hal might also be on the same nonlinear increase for his ELB.

QBRanger May 20 2009 8:15 AM EDT

The damage of the JKF is very low. I have no data on the damage done by minions using UC. Perhaps posting some data points, including UC level, strength of minion and number of hits a round is in order.

I can only type about the JKF from here on:

IE when Dudemus and I get into melee combat, it typically takes him at least 15 melee rounds to win, sometimes even longer.

That is about 12M HP total.

I do not use DB and he hits 4-5 times a round.

I can certainly see a boost to the damage ability of UC, at least 50% more.

I would not, however, increase the evasion of the JKF, but perhaps restore some of its endurance if its damage is not increased.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] May 20 2009 8:19 AM EDT

UC in general does run into the same problem, though not to the same extent because they can forgo training dex to gain more str.

The main thing is the UC is using exp to gain a weapon. A weapon is not all that good, has no special abilities, and does not have a linear increase in damage the larger it becomes.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 8:28 AM EDT

i was thinking of making this same post. with the fixes (they were definitely needed, but seem to exacerbate a weak skill and tat based on said skill) i lost 30 percent of my uc, which equates to a large loss of evasion and bonus to hit.

i think the damage needs to be addressed along with evasion. my inherent evasion on a 7.1 m jkf is now about 116. the ranged bonus to hit on a 7.3 m hal is 241(my melee bonus to hit is about 213 btw). i am not saying my jiggy needs to keep up, but i do believe that evasion-wise it needs to stay closer to the weapons up here.

later i want to make a spreadsheet showing the growth of the hal vs. the jkf at each 1m level to 10m or so. i want to compare side-by-side their stats. i think this will exemplify how the jiggy just doesn't keep up. i plan on doing this later today and will link it in this discussion.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] May 20 2009 8:33 AM EDT

your inherent evasion is more than 116. I get from my UC on the JKF 128 and my total pth is 204. Your evasion should be around 130, then start adding in the evasion granted from the evasion skill trained on your minion.

QBRanger May 20 2009 8:37 AM EDT

The problem with keeping the JKFs evasion near that of the HF occurs when you can train more evasion on the JKF via the minion and junction, when there is no way to increase the PTH on the HF.

With the dex of each similar and boostable via elven gear, the HF would then almost never hit. At least not in the early missile rounds with their penalties.

And when one gets to melee, the HF can never hit the JKF.

It is a fine line between too little and too much evasion on the Jiggy.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 8:42 AM EDT

"your inherent evasion is more than 116."

refigure yours nem! my tat is almost 7.2. that means uc is 3.6m. evasion is trained to 1/3 level of uc so 1.2m evasion. look at the table in the wiki, that puts mine at 116 which is also what i get in post when i remove my aoj.

ranger, i do agree that it doesn't need to match the hal. but there is a bit of room to play between less than 50 percent and 100 percent!

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 8:44 AM EDT

by inherent i mean just the jiggy, no increase through junctioned gear at all. taking off your aoj will show you yours.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] May 20 2009 8:44 AM EDT

Dude, we fixed the JKF, so that the evasion is now based off of the modified UC instead of the base. So you indeed have 116 evasion if you take off everything, but when you junction on EB or HG or EG they now increase the innate evasion on the JKF.

Just so you know if I took everything off of my JKF he would only have 73 evasion as opposed to getting 128 from UC.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 8:46 AM EDT

right! i was comparing the jiggy inherent evasion growth to hal inherent bonus to hit growth as well as jiggy inherent bonus to hit growth.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] May 20 2009 8:48 AM EDT

You need to factor in the fact that the Hal cannot have his Pth modified whereas the JKF can gain an increase to his Pth/evasion through junction of items.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 8:54 AM EDT

if you start adding gear, where do you stop for comparisons?

the hal also gets inherent 100bth. are tattoos balanced in game based on what can be equipped with them or should they be balanced on inherent stats / abilities?

all the testing i have been part of it is encouraged to strip things down to their most base level to weed out other influences. why should this be different again?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] May 20 2009 8:57 AM EDT

First, UC damage needs to be seperated from it's Effect. It is currently the only type of Damage dealer in CB that isn't linear becuase of this.

While you can super boost a low level UC damage due to HG and Gi, it scales very badly compared to everything else, that is a linear return for investment.

Make UC damage based off of its level, and leave it's PTH based on it's effect.

From there, I'd like to sugest a thematic change. UC inbuilt with Evasion gives a build only designed to avoid damage and not mitigate it. I'd like to see two types of UC. One with Evasion (a Ninja like Build) and one with Endurance (a Brawler type). This would help with the choice of using a SoC with UC, as you don't want to avoid hits using a SoC, but take smaller ones to build up your charge.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] May 20 2009 9:00 AM EDT

Heh, that looks like you copied and pasted from some earlier threads.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] May 20 2009 9:02 AM EDT

Yeah! I'm sure I've wrote all this before! ;)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 9:39 AM EDT

if you were asking what my boosted bonus to hit is though, it is at 213. ; )

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 9:52 AM EDT

the inherent melee bonus to hit on my tat is 177.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 10:14 AM EDT

ok, here is my table:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=r4js7vxIJezjynKti9tVwyA

is there a formula for figuring hal's ranged bonus to hit? if not i need data points for tats inherent bth around each million tat level...1m, 2m, 3m, etc.

i feel uc may need a more lenient evasion curve and the jiggy may need more strength or as gl states make it non linear.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] May 20 2009 10:21 AM EDT

Would it be useful to include the 50% BCTH of UC and the 100% BCTH of Archery, for PTH comparisons?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 10:22 AM EDT

that definitely is a difference that is worth noting, i just didn't put it in the table as it is a fixed number. the table was really done to see how things scale that do scale.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 10:24 AM EDT

i did add the base to hit onto the column headers in my table, thanks gl!

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 11:09 AM EDT

another thing that i am seeing as i put in the bonus to hit numbers is that jiggy pth gets harder to raise while it seems the hal's gets an easier curve over time.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 11:18 AM EDT

^ i don't think i expressed that well. what i actually meant was that the gap is wider between jiggy and hal bonus to hit as they grow.

QBOddBird May 20 2009 12:36 PM EDT

I like that idea, GL!

Unarmed Ninja
Unarmed Brawler


And in a way, it's fine to me. You spend EXP instead of using a weapon, and you gain a weaker weapon + evasion...a decent tradeoff. Its damage should never be comparable to that of other tanks.

At the same time, on the non-linear curve that UC has, it's going to become even more and more difficult to use a jiggy/run a UC strat as time passes. Perhaps the curve needs adjustment?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 20 2009 12:58 PM EDT

i am beginning to think that even if the uc cost curve was halved it would still be underwhelming, maybe not with the item boosts though.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] May 21 2009 2:05 AM EDT

I have been looking at UC and the best fix that is not incredibly ground changing would be to make the x modifier based directly on the level of UC. Somewhere in the range of 1k levels to 1 x modifier increase or else 1 exp adding the equivalent of 1 CB$ into the x modifier would be best. The 1 exp 1 CB$ would make it so that around 700 levels of UC would add 1 x modifier.

This would make UC a linearly increasing damage for one thing and help it out quite a bit in the higher levels.

Colonel Custard May 21 2009 10:39 AM EDT

Because of the way UC scales, a change to, say, 730 levels of UC per x would level it out significantly. For exaple, a UC of (10) currently gives 200 xs, but is only about 92,000 levels of UC. At 730 points per x, (10) UC would only give in the 127 range for xs. Similarly, a UC of (15) currently gives 300 xs, but would give about 195 xs with the new formula. A UC of (1) would be x12, rather than x20. (25) would be x345 instead of x500.

My current UC (66) would drop from 1320 to 1239. At around (75), the new x would become higher than the old. At (250), the multiplier will have tripled; the ~11mil levels required would give x15000, rather than the 5000 currently given.

While (250) is very high, it is achievable. x15000 sounds rather Freedian to me, but then again, you'd likely have to put in at least 8mil raw levels, so it may end up being a similar XP commitment to the cash people need to invest in their weapons. Otherwise, maybe it can be adjusted to 800 or 820 or 850 levels per x, so that it catches up with the current rate closer to (100) or (125), and is closer to 12500-13000 at (250).

Using a jiggy as an example, though, a lvl 7.2 mil jiggy would have x4931 at 730 per x or x4235 at 850 per x. Pre-boost, of course.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 21 2009 10:52 AM EDT

how is the hal damage mod figured, that does seem to scale better than jiggy as well as its bonus to hit?

QBRanger May 21 2009 10:58 AM EDT

Hal shot Chaos [693310]
Hal hit Chaos [750341]
Hal hit Chaos [620252]

Using +14 named BGs.

8.1M level named HF.

I would like to see an equivalent JKF with BL trained.

Or possibly Dudes JKF with BL trained.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 21 2009 11:27 AM EDT

"Hal shot Chaos [693310]
Hal hit Chaos [750341]
Hal hit Chaos [620252]

Using +14 named BGs.

8.1M level named HF.

I would like to see an equivalent JKF with BL trained.

Or possibly Dudes JKF with BL trained."

you'll have to pick a different target then as i do not live past ranged against that one to give ya any numbers. i used fasunaus ii for my testing.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 27 2009 12:20 PM EDT

even with bloodlust working, the damage and bonus to hit just cannot keep up with the hal.

i still feel very strongly that uc needs to scale in a linear fashion as well as the damage mod.

i also feel that the hal's linear bonus to hit scale might be too much. perhaps we should take a lesson from weapons and have both jiggy and hal's damage mod scale linearly while the bonus to hit is on a curve.

either way, there is no reason for the hal to work in such a different manner from the jiggy. i do understand the fact that the hal needs to kill faster, but that can be accomplished through a damage modifier to the hal itself rather than a different mechanic completely.

AdminTitan May 27 2009 12:30 PM EDT

A small increase to damage is all that I see needed. As it stands the jiggy is an amazing defensive tat. Also, maybe that makes UC as effective as a jiggy, that'd be nice too.

AdminShade May 27 2009 12:34 PM EDT

dudemus and others: while you are making a comparison in between the Jiggy and the Halidon, why don't you also look at the mage based Familiars while you're at it?

None of those get DX or ST or Evasion based on their level so just comparing these 2 will get a biased judgement in my opinion.



While UC does need Experience, it does not need money. Instead it needs money to be put into the armor you are wearing in order to upgrade it. I'm not sure how these 2 would relate to each other but I wouldn't know of many UC users not using HG's and a Gi or any of those 2 for the inherent bonuses to UC.


Perhaps UC does need a (small) boosts. Though I don't know if Jonathan ever meant UC to be one of the big 6 or 7 ;)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 27 2009 12:40 PM EDT

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=r4js7vxIJezjynKti9tVwyA

as you can see in that table, the hal is pulling ahead of the jiggy by leaps and bounds. as tats continue to grow in the game, the difference between a linear growth vs. curve based growth will only become more pronounced. a small damage boost will not keep up, unless you mean to keep adding those small damage boosts over time.

as for a comparison with other familiars, i used the hal and jiggy because of their different growth models and felt that would best show the problems with uc's growth curve model. it would really be the same comparison since dd growth is now linear no?

QBOddBird May 27 2009 12:45 PM EDT

Jiggy should never be as strong as Hal. It gets inherent Evasion and the Bloodlust option.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 27 2009 12:48 PM EDT

being on the same damage growth model does not imply equality in anything more than growth patterns. one needs to finish battles quickly while the other needs to last longer.

QBOddBird May 27 2009 12:54 PM EDT

How can they be unequal if they are on the same damage growth model? They both have to start at the same point, so where does the curve separate?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] May 27 2009 12:59 PM EDT

a linear growth model will get better by the same amount for every 1m levels of growth for the tattoo. that is what the hal is on.

jiggy is based on uc skill, which is on a curve. this means that the first 1m tat levels will be better than the second and so on. all that i am saying is that they both need to grow in the same fashion.

in the table you can see it with the bonus to hit, hal is pulling away from jiggy more and more as they grow. damage is based on the same growth factors so that is happening as well.

you can have them both growing linearly and have a different base weapon damage mod, just like we do with the weapons now. a dagger and a morgul hammer do not do equal damage event though they both have a linear growth model on the damage mod.

i hope that is clearer.

QBOddBird May 27 2009 1:01 PM EDT

OK, I gotcha now. (I cannot view those spreadsheets for whatever reason.)
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=002laB">Discussion: Unarmed Combat</a>