Starsman

Long story and knowledge that has been spread and purges and spread again, not sure where to find it on the forums but here is the damage formula:

=1+(0.75*(Radius/5))-(((0.011*(Radius/6))*(360-Arc)))/5))

Pure AoE (not cones) have an arc of 360.

You basically divide calculated damage by that formula to get the final AoE damage.

Damage formula is:
=(0.2*((0.8*Recharge)+1.8))

Arcanaville MAY have an official link or something, I know she tends to archive that stuff.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If only recharge was touched, to meet the rules to the key, it would have to be changed to a 56 second recharge, this would lower dps drastically.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looking for a little clarification on this point. Was that a typo, or did he really mean 56 seconds? What's the recharge set to now?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is no typo - following the power formula to the letter, PSW should have a ~55.9s recharge and an end cost of ~48.4. (I did the math myself last night because I was curious.) It currently has a 10s recharge and an end cost of 10.192.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sarrate notes something i made an whoopsy on: it would not be increased endurance or recharge, it would be both. for the end discount to hold... the thing may have... i don't be an actual nuke with a 300 second recharge? At that point, special rules start to take over, though, rules that govern powers like rain of arrows and Full Auto, witch would allow the power to exists in its current form with it's endurance but at 60 second recharge.

These rules are not so written down and are more in the "we want the set to feel this way" realm.

[ QUOTE ]
Primaries aside, the AOE situation is more risky for a dom than a blaster. Blasters have 20% more hp. Also, blaster version is on 16 targets, and could get aim and concentration boosts.

[/ QUOTE ]

My blaster can't AoE stun or AoE hold or AoE immob or AoE knockdown.

They also don't get ranged holds to deal with extremely problematic foes before they get there.

And once you jump into build options, although not part of the base design, the defense and resist modifiers of Doms is higher even than Scrappers meaning they get higher benefit from Tough and Weave (plus resist/defense PPPs) than anyone but Tankers.

As some one that has played blasters and doms: those holds add a LOOOOOOT of survivability, even the ST ones.

That 20% extra hp means they can take just 16% more damage, thats means that that 7 minions kill a blaster as fast as 6 minions kill a dom that just crosses his arms.

[ QUOTE ]
Heeey. I already said that!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you did! I been replying as I go.

[ QUOTE ]
Except that there's a standard now (endurance to damage scalar), you just don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's only a standard if no one has ways to do more damage for free (beyond modifiers) effectively increasing the ratio.

As it stands only two ATs dont have those means, and one actually does but only if the team is dying.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If only recharge was touched, to meet the rules to the key, it would have to be changed to a 56 second recharge, this would lower dps drastically.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looking for a little clarification on this point. Was that a typo, or did he really mean 56 seconds? What's the recharge set to now?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's currently 10. The next 'most balanced' version is 20.

If Starsman's cruising through... How far off is the Blaster version from the baseline?

[/ QUOTE ]

The blaster version matches the rule to the key by reducing damage, reducing radius and increasing recharge.

I was very literal with the 56 second point, too. Applying the full formula to a 56 second recharge power with the radius and of dom's PSW would do the damage that PSW does now for doms.

[ QUOTE ]
If there is a rule that is never followed it is not really a rule then is it?

[/ QUOTE ]

A rule that is not always followed is a guideline you should stay close to.

[ QUOTE ]
70.8 to 39.7

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly. Remember the inherent damage buff.

Now it does: -138.15
Blaster Version would do: -125.25

Both account 3 SOs.

Dom version would be feel the heat harder, though, hey used to do -191.29

Additionally is the fact that the Blaster version has double the recharge.

And as I noted on C: specific build options are endless.

But I noted how much more efficient the scrapper is even if's running an additional 42% Toggle Endurance Budget, that is likely what you are asking about. Only now you rephraced it to turning toggles off.

But lets assume the tanker can turn off half of his toggles to get an endurance advantage:

The Scrapper kills 1.09 EBs in 32.47 seconds.
The Tanker chips away 80% of the EB's HP before running out of end after 37.18 seconds. Turning half the toggles off only bought him 4.7 seconds of activity.

The tanker would have to kill all his toggles off (at witch point the tanker is easier to kill than the toggled up scrapper) and still not kill that EB, he would be stuck at 93% after 43.48 seconds. All this while the scrapper running all toggles killed the EB with a bit of endurance to spare and all his toggles up.


... I am loving this calculator btw, will see if i can share the toy somehow, perhaps make a Javascript version or something.

A: Most tankers actually take Tough and run it all the time, if I was to add the end cost to one i'd add it to both.
B: Most scrappers kill so fast they don't need it to survive.
C: Lets no go into side builds because IOs bring for free levels of defense that Tough can never match, for no endurance cost.

D: I humored you:
With tough running ONLY on the scrapper:

The Scrapper kills 2.1 bosses in 29.33 seconds (the new time to drain his end)
The tanker kills 1.54 bosses in 32.47 seconds (the time to drain his end)

The Scrapper takes the EB down to 96% of his HP, no kill.
The tanker takes the EB down to 71% of his HP, no kill.

Actually just realized something.... i averaged scrapper damage low, i'm dealing with bosses and EBs and still using a lower average of 2 minnions 1lt to calculate the benefit of criticals.

Fixing that error takes the EB to 99% to for the scrapper, using BU even once during the fight will make him finish without needing a single end redux enhancement or blue insp. The tanker, he still drains his blue with an EB that is still at 30% hp.

We are dealing with a menace...

Wanted to add: two days ago (yesterday was busy to post) I made a calculator that would tell me exactly how far endurance takes each AT.

BillZBubba's example is actually nice for this, yea im inclining now to it because it is convenient for my case, sue me.

Here is the thing: his example notes that both racers will finish the race consuming the same 2 mile trip consuming the same calories (humanity's endurance.) The key here is: they both finish without additional calories influx.

Here is my case: The tanker will not finish the race the scrapper starts, he wont have enough endurance.

Example:

<ul type="square">[*]Parameters: Stamina 3 slotted.[*]Damage Per second: .92 ds per second (not arbitrary, this is the average of all melee sets)[*]Toggle Use: .78 (the lowest consumption a set has other than Willpower)[/list]
With these parameters both ATs will run out of endurance in 32.47 seconds.
<ul type="square">[*]The scrapper will kill 2 bosses and chip away 30% of a third. [*]The tanker will kill one boss and chip away 54% of the second.[*]The scrapper will kill 1 EB and chip away 6% of a second.[*]The tanker will just chip away 71% of the EB's hp.[/list]
AT this point both ATs need more endurance influx, unlike the racer example, the tanker can't finish the race the scrapper can.

A fun thing about my calculator is how it shows ME wrong, the 40% endurance buff I noted indeed was too high. 25% is the proper amount. Rerunning the same example but this time with the tanker having 25 extra base endurance:

<ul type="square">[*]The scrapper will kill 2 bosses and chip away 32% of a third. [*]The tanker will kill 2 bosses and chip away 33% % of the second.[*]The scrapper will kill 1 EB and chip away 6% of a second.[*]The tanker will kill 1 EB and chip away 7% of a second.[/list]
How long does the tanker takes to do this, though? 50.84 seconds. The scrapper still gets it done at 32.47 seconds. That's 57% slower. With THIS amount, both racers end the race. The tanker though, went so slowly he does not get to puke at the end of the fight.

This is not accounting how Build Up is much stronger for the scrapper and will provide one huge advantage to kill faster and be more endurance efficient. If the race included this (the equivalent of sprinting to gain advantage) the scrapper may finish a race that will become impossible for the tanker to finish, he will puke even without finishing (toggles crash, mob stuns/hold/whatever, tanker dead)

Final note: Higher end heavy secondaries, even if available for both ATs, are worse for the tanker because he fights longer.

[ QUOTE ]
Had a thought about this thread last night that I figured I should share. I haven't read the thread in its entirety so this may have been brought up.

Take a couch potato and a marathon runner. Have them both run 2 miles. If they weigh the same and run at the same speed, they will burn the same number of calories.

Only one of them will be puking at the end of it.

Same goes for the game.

A blaster is a blaster because he is more efficient at turning energy into damage than a defender is.

A scrapper is more efficient at turning energy into damage than a tank is.

A tank is more efficient at using his energy to mitigate damage than a scrapper is.

This is why we have AT modifiers.

This is why a blast should have the same base damage, the same base end cost and the same base recharge.

DM Smite:
1.32 damage
6.864 end
6 second recharge

I just double checked and those values are constant amongst brute, scrapper and tank.

This is as it should be.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a huge difference here, though, specially about tankers: they are no couch potatoes, they are meant to actually be able to fight longer by virtue of surviving for longer periods of time. This is the only virtue they have coming to them in solo play and it's meaningless due to not having the endurance to back it up.

Doubt it.

Zone PvP in this game just does not work, the recent changes actually were aimed to Arena PvP and implemented to all PvP as a base to build upon.

Castle noted that zone PvP would need some other stuff and he is right.

Can't tell if this is still in his priority list, though.

Due to travel powers, open zone PvP in this game is an extremely difficult challenge.

The best thing the devs could do right now to invigorate PvP would be to make the Arena cross server. Who knows, perhaps the same for PvP zones would work.

I think i wrote the answer BUT it may had been on the long post I scratched. Anyways, Arcanaville said exactly the reason above your post.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Things aren't much better with their epics, either:
Mental Blast - scale 1 damage, 6.5 end (25% high)
Power Blast - scale 1 damage, 10.66 end (105% high)
Ice Blast - scale 1 damage, 10.66 end (105% high)
Fire Blast - scale 1.1 damage (no dot), 6.5 end (13.6% high)
Hurl Boulder - scale 1.64 damage, 11.7 end (37.2% high)
Seismic Smash - scale 2.6 damage, 18.511999 end (36.9% high)
(Not sure if those are bugs, or intentional because of Containment; somewhat dubious though since their higher costs are inconsistent.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting... not in the sense that you intended though... all Epics are meant to have end penalties but those two powers in bold are over the edge... they are likely a bug from when they used to do inherent double damage, they got all nerfed but they most have missed fixing the end cost for all of them... If i'm not wrong all should have a 25% end penalty (with the exception of fire due to the bonus DoT that should make that penalty look smaller)

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't aware there was an end penalty, but when I compared Fire Blast/Fire Ball to Pyre/Fire Ball, there was indeed a 25% end penalty. I thought recharge was the only one applied. Good to know!

[/ QUOTE ]

Hurl Boulder may also have an implementation issue: all ranged attacks within melee sets that have a melee modifier also suffer of a small penalty. There are not many that can be analyzed properly, but both Hurl Boulder and Hurl from tanker and brute sets show this. The penalty is of 9.75%.

Now, if you copy and paste this power to the controller epics, and then you add a 25% penalty on top of the baked in previous penalty you end with a 37.2% endurance penalty, exactly what you have there...

I think I have a PM to send to Castle.

[ QUOTE ]
The system you propose is suggesting that, given the same endurance, that a Tanker should be able to deal the same damage as a Scrapper, ignoring time.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the AT can not ignore time. All sets have cast times that bottle neck the damage output. You can't do more damage than what the power set allows you. At that point only way to do more damage is the AT modifier and, off course, damage buffs and enhancements and so on.

That's why no matter how much end you give a tanker, even if you made him never run out of endurance (that i do think would be unbalanced for other reasons) he would still, kill slower.

Just as a note: The average set can't dish out more than .92 ds of damage, there are some that do a bit more others a bit less and off course the ball goes off the park with AoE, this is ST.

This means, without endurance reduction, you can in average spend 4.78 end per second if you stick to single target attacks. It will take anyone 32.1 seconds to run out of endurance during this time, provided no toggles running.

If the buff I propose was implemented (40% extra end) the tanker would take 45 seconds to run out of endurance (yes i am factoring recovery on both cases.)

During this time period, doing .92 ds per second, the scrapper would do 34.89 scale damage while the tanker would have taken 40% more time to dish out 33.08 ds. This is 5% less damage in a 40% bigger window.


Now, I'll give you this: this is before stamina. Lets check it all with stamina 3 slotted:

At this point the scrapper will take 43.5 seconds to entirely drain out of endurance. The tanker will take 60.9 seconds to drain out of endurance. During this time window the tanker will do 44.8 DS of damgae and the scrapper 47.2 DS, again, within a 40% larger time frame.

All this is not accounting for the scrapper having a stronger damage buff modifier (stronger buildup) and that the scrapper may only be fighting minions (5% crit chance anything else is 10%)

[ QUOTE ]
Things aren't much better with their epics, either:
Mental Blast - scale 1 damage, 6.5 end (25% high)
Power Blast - scale 1 damage, 10.66 end (105% high)
Ice Blast - scale 1 damage, 10.66 end (105% high)
Fire Blast - scale 1.1 damage (no dot), 6.5 end (13.6% high)
Hurl Boulder - scale 1.64 damage, 11.7 end (37.2% high)
Seismic Smash - scale 2.6 damage, 18.511999 end (36.9% high)
(Not sure if those are bugs, or intentional because of Containment; somewhat dubious though since their higher costs are inconsistent.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting... not in the sense that you intended though... all Epics are meant to have end penalties but those two powers in bold are over the edge... they are likely a bug from when they used to do inherent double damage, they got all nerfed but they most have missed fixing the end cost for all of them... If i'm not wrong all should have a 25% end penalty (with the exception of fire due to the bonus DoT that should make that penalty look smaller)

[ QUOTE ]
If DPE were "balanced" as you think it should be, the only difference would be time, which is pointless, because that simply means that Tankers are just as good at dealing damage as Scrappers given enough time , whereas no one else is as good at survival as a Tanker given enough time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had a big point by point reply but after reading this i realized there is no point. If you truly think that being as good dealing damage can even be on the same sentence as given enough time then there is nothing else to say, you have no clue what damage ATs are balanced around in this game.

[ QUOTE ]

Except that you're forgetting something very important: recovery is a percent recovery. By increasing base endurance, you'd also be increasing end/sec recovery significantly to such a point that every Tanker on the planet would have end recovery better a */Regen Scrapper as soon as he/she gets Stamina (1+.25+.30 &lt; 1.4*1.25). That's more than a bit borked.

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's not, not when the stuff you are using costs more endurance than anyone else's. It's just like comparing regeneration and +HP, the most reliable way to do it to not think at all as HP as a number but as a bar that goes from zero to 100, at that point hp buffs equate resistance to all damage types, including healing.

An increase to endurance would do the same, it would be a resistance to endurance cost AND also resistance to click endurance regain tools, like energy absorption or blue pills. That's right: if the end bar of a tanker was increased blue insps would do even less for them than for anyone else, where everyone usually gets 25% of their endurance back with a blue, a tanker would get 17.8%

Additionally, true analysis of the impact of this change would be much more complex than stating how much end per second you recover. You also have to check how much longer the at must fight and how much endurance is wasted due to lower modifiers and quite a few other aspects. I did a partial study on this a long time ago, but not something in presentable form. I may actually pull that stuff up and clean it up for presentation sometime in the near future.


[ QUOTE ]
Stars, something else you're either ignoring or ignorant of is that the DPE numbers are determined for attacks before AT scalars are applied to the damage. This works quite well because it doesn't unduly penalize the endurance of high damage ATs, which isn't balanced, especially since everyone has essentially the same endurance capabilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

First: you should assume everyone having the same endurance capabilities while talking about balance.

Second: the way multiple ATs are designed you can't modify endurance cost after it's scaled for many issues. Best example are brutes. How do you manage them? Such a change would actually lower their endurance cost, not increase it, yet they do much more damage than many other ATs if you play Fury smartly.

All ATs except tankers and defenders get tools that make their endurance cost relative to damage gravitate towards 1 modifiers.



[ QUOTE ]
If DPE were calculated after AT scalars were applied, you'd also need to do the same to defensive toggles and powers (although this would be much less devastating thanks to the lower proportion of endurance that goes to toggles). Thankfully, it isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seen this implied before and I tend to slam the desk with my head every time i do, mostly because not only is it wrong but because it's so half baked. IF you were going to go that way you would also start to charge endurance for secondary effects and make sure this endurance was higher for stronger secondary effects, you would also make defender powers cost more endurance for stronger buffs, etc etc.

However, there are no rules anywhere in the game that dictate a power must cost more endurance based on any attribute other than damage. Other than that it's all up to the devs whim and pursue of desired balance to give any defensive power whatever endurance cost they want. Should they choose to compensate damage to endurance ratio issues of any AT they are not forced to change at all to deal with defensive tools.

[ QUOTE ]
It's pretty easy to see if you actually start comparing power sets to power sets across ATs. Slug costs as much for a Blaster as it does for a Corrupter. Swipe costs as much to Scrapper as it does for a Stalker. Thanks for trying to make the argument though. It looked decent but doesn't follow through with the actual information.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are ignoring the inherent abilities of these ATs that make their average end cost go down.

In average, Scourge accounts for a 20% damage buff, this takes the base damage from .75 to about .9, still not full 1 but much less of an endurance penalty than it looks like at first.

The stalker critical rate is also high enough to make them match scrapper damage + criticals.

In the end, looking at base damage is not even trying to compare, it's just pretending you did.

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree on your guys points about tankers. You seem to be leaving out the point that most tankers I see can walk into a spawn and stand there holding agro with the taunt in thier aura and never die. I saw an Invuln sitting there with 5 master illusionists and only need a heal once every maybe 5 minutes.

Tanker survivability is so extreme that I sometimes wonder if the devs over did it.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I noted on my previous post and I will redundantly state here:

The tanker was designed to take longer to fight, by virtue of having the luxury to survive that long. He, however, burns endurance at the same speed as everyone else, and regains it at the same speed everyone else. The result is that the tanker must kill with the same endurance budget so he looses the luxury of perpetuity and is forced to look into additional endurance regain tools and even more blue insps to be able to do that (this may change with IOs but the game can't be balanced around IOs, specially since many just can't afford IOing until the high end game and it's the low end that these issues are the most obvious.)

Let's pretend it takes 15 swings of normal attacks for a scrapper to kill a boss.
The tanker would take 21 swings to kill the same boss provided he does not regenerate first.

Now, imagining a fake world where every attack does exactly 1ds of damage, you can only swing 19 times before you run out of endurance, and thats not counting that your toggles are also consuming endurance.


Compensating the endurance consumption of the tank (via more endurance recovery like fortunatas, or via endurance discounts, or via increased base endurance) would finally give the thing they were missing to do what they were intended to do: stand there and kill slowly without requiring backup* or to fall back.

With my proposal the tanker still would have to swing those 21 blows, but he would actually have the endurance to do so.

[ QUOTE ]
An interesting analysis, Starsman, I have to agree. It would be a significant task to make this whole thing work.

As for Defenders and Tankers, how do you like these ideas (I think I've posted them elsewhere before):

Gauntlet would generate an endurance discount for each foe affected by the punchvoke effect. Thus, he'd have a larger benefit in larger groups.

Vigilance currently generates a discount based on the state of the Defender's team. I wonder if allowing it to work based on the Defender's (as a team of one) own state. That is, as he gets in hotter water, he gets a bigger discount.

[/ QUOTE ]


The problem with those two ideas is that teams is usually the last point you need endurance at (unless you extremely lowbie trying to run all toggles and tank for a full team but hp is also an issue there) so making the endurance discounts better when herding/teaming leaves the people that are in the most need of a boost in the cold.

I would simply say for tankers that they were designed around the idea that they would take longer to kill things because they CAN stand there longer to take the damage, but this is true due to high mitigation and higher hp than anyone else. However, how can you do this if your endurance is burnt at the same speed as everyone else even if you kill slower? In the end, you run out of endurance before you can kill the same target a more endurance efficient at would. By boosting the base endurance you are actually giving the tanker the one tool they need to be able to stand there longer and fight longer but slower.

Many would think I'm insane by looking at the number but should you ever want to truly make the tanker match endurance efficiency of a scrapper without critical, you would need to increase his base endurance from 100 to 140. Due to critical the tanker would still be 10% behind in endurance efficiency.

As for defenders: making the vigilance kick in on his own demise is not going to help them much. How much good is an end discount going to help them if they are close to dying already? An endurance discount would be much better for them. Now, the defender has other issues, soon they will be the lowest damage AT in the entire game (doms without domination where about there too.) IF you wanted him to have the same endurance efficiency as a 1 Scale Damage AT, you would have to give him a 54% endurance discount. But that's not going to do much to his effectiveness as the defender does not have the tanker's luxury to fight for a long period of time, therefore defenders need a more in dept look than just endurance, specially given that they were the only AT exclusively designed to be team ATs.

What about Paragon Universe Online?

Claws "secondary effect" is an endurance discount on all powers.

It also has a recharge discount, meaning it does more damage per recharge second.

It also has a third effect designed precisely to make sure the game does not get to do too much dps, it's a more recent addition, but it tries to make sure no attack does more than 1 scale damage per activation second.

All it rounds to an extremely fun low level experience (you run out of endurance less therefore you can attack longer and kill things you may not be able due to endurance issues in other toons) but you wont be killing faster than anyone else in a team or after endurance stops being an issue.


[ QUOTE ]
To me, that's unbalanced. The Defender's power should cost less endurance.

The same basic idea should be applied to all ATs and all damage sources.

[/ QUOTE ]

At one point I would had agreed but not today. These days there are only two ATs you can safely mess with their endurance costs: tankers and defenders.

Other ATs may do "less damage" but have inherent abilities that push the average damage up.


<ul type="square">[*]Scrappers, Blasters, Stalkers and Brutes already do higher than standard damage per endurance by definition, they were meant to be THE damage ATs. Brutes actually do this by a damage buff, their base is rather low but it gains in damage without increasing in end cost.[*]Corruptors get scourge that in avrage can take their damage from .75 to .90[*]Dominators (for now) get Domination that takes their damage from .65 to around 1[*]Controllers do double damage with containment taking them to about 1 damage mod.[*]Masterminds are nearly impossible to quantify and actually their own attacks and powers are intentionally magnified in endurance cost to compensate that their pets are doing almost everything for them.[*]Soldiers get increased endurance recovery[*]Kheledian's forms give them increased end recovery[/list]
Tankers and defenders get hosed though. IF these two ATs got looked at for endurance efficiency, I would not just lower endurance cost. Instead, since all other ATs already go around end consumption in interesting ways, I would modify their inherents to benefit their endurance issues. I like the idea of making the tanker endurance bar much higher while expanding the defender's Vigilance endurance discount to always work even if no team mate is harmed, only make it get stronger if allies get harmed.

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard a tell or two that the old 'perma' in the 'perma' is going to vanish. I hate to even break open a can of forum spittle on this one, but I've finally gotten my dom half way to 50 and my stupid little plan could drop into an even stupider puddle of crud water if this is true.

Anyone else hearing this or were the seven or so badflies on Pinnacle kinda losing focus?

[/ QUOTE ]

In a way it is, it may be a matter of semantics. The old Perma damage in Perma dom is going away, and in exchange you are getting a base damage buff that nets to an overall buff and the equivalent* of a Damage Buff cap increase.

I love teassing people in game.

Me: Did you see the changes Castle is proposing for dominators?
Others: What is he nerfing?
Me: He is removing the damage buff from Domination.
Others: @#$@!$%
Me: And increasing the base damage to make them have that same damage 24/7
Others: (o.O)? WOW