U57 Preview 2: Imbue Overhaul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynnabel

2 quick points:

point 1 is that the dice that are being adjusted for Inq are concentrated in cores 18 and 20 so saying this is about heroics isn't quite accurate. You are indeed down 1 dice from levels 12 to 17 but that's more than made up for with the ranged power scaling and point 2, which is as follows:

point 2 is that due in part to the passionate feedback in this thread we're going to nudge the dice scaling for Inq a bit (moving up from 1d8 to 1d10) so you'll actually be a little stronger in heroics.

Should be a nice boost :) As a reminder plz keep feedback civil or we can't really have a fun discussion :P

---

Great, now I get to update the math thread with that. JK, that is fantastic news, and hopefully eases quite a bit of concern.

Thank you, as always, for the constant communication!

EDIT: Thinking about it, Lynn, if the damage dice is a d10 now, is the unaligned damage still a d4, or has it been bumped up to a d6 to match?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xezom

I'm going to echo in here.


1) Either build the same as you currently are on live and take a loss.

---

The more I crunch the numbers here the bigger the loss gets. The only double filigree that works for a ranger/inquis is the wreath of flame/manticore. Pre-update I have 16d6 from the proc alone but because that filigree set gives spellpower (does nothing for me) it isn't getting additional imbue dice, so I just get to eat that loss of 16d6... Max imbue dice I can get with deepwood/inquis/arcane archer is 14 imbue dice... so damage drops to 14d8 total from imbues and to get that 14d8 I have to give up 20% doubleshot....

So Pre update I have 27d8 imbue damage....
Post update I will have 14d8 but the imbue is scaled up to 2.0 instead of 1.5.....

If you didn't take into account that minimum damage is reduced 50% because of a single roll vs a double roll...it might make sense. As is, it is delete account and move on to a new game update for me...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynnabel

2 quick points:

point 1 is that the dice that are being adjusted for Inq are concentrated in cores 18 and 20 so saying this is about heroics isn't quite accurate. You are indeed down 1 dice from levels 12 to 17 but that's more than made up for with the ranged power scaling and point 2, which is as follows:

point 2 is that due in part to the passionate feedback in this thread we're going to nudge the dice scaling for Inq a bit (moving up from 1d8 to 1d10) so you'll actually be a little stronger in heroics.

Should be a nice boost :) As a reminder plz keep feedback civil or we can't really have a fun discussion :P

---

Second part is interesting.

I'll just repost my initial math using generous Ranged Power numbers.

At level 12, I expect a character will have 30 ranged power or less (not counting temporary boosts)

Currently, they get to deal 7d8.
31.5x(1+0.3x1.5)=45.675
Now, they do 6d10 with better scaling.
33x(1+0.3x2)=52.8

That's certainly better than it was before, but it does require a very generous ranged power total.
Without any scaling, we'd have 7d8 (31.5) vs 6d10 (33). So even with low amounts of ranged power, this is actually a buff for level 12 Inquis. Interesting.

Level 18 now:
Again, using a VERY high 45 ranged power.

Before, at 10d8:
45x(1+0.45x1.5) = 75.735
Now, at 7d10:
38.5x(1+0.45x2) = 73.15

So, at levels 18-20, still a slight nerf, but nowhere near what it was before, and within the acceptable range given there's a buff for 6 levels before it.
Now, the baseline would be 45 vs 38.5 is notable, but that's a level where Inquis get a bit more ranged power to compensate for the loss.

The actual loss should be greater than the one I displayed above, but so would the actual gains for levels 12-17. So long as those appear to even out, I'll be a lot more satisfied than I was minutes ago.

To add, I like that now trying to get extra Imbue dice isn't an attempt at getting back what was lost, but an option you have to change your build to something different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xgya

The actual loss should be greater than the one I displayed above, but so would the actual gains for levels 12-17. So long as those appear to even out, I'll be a lot more satisfied than I was minutes ago.

---

This entire situation is compounded severely by the actual splits people are using for Inq. For example, if they have Battle Engineer as a secondary tree, they've gotten 3 imbue dice from their doubleshot enhancement in t4, so are way ahead from then on. So we're trying to account for a huge various range of bonus dice... its tricky stuff :P

Glad you're feeling a little more satisfied :P You and everyone here are of course more than welcome to continue to provide feedback :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynnabel

This entire situation is compounded severely by the actual splits people are using for Inq. For example, if they have Battle Engineer as a secondary tree, they've gotten 3 imbue dice from their doubleshot enhancement in t4, so are way ahead from then on. So we're trying to account for a huge various range of bonus dice... its tricky stuff :P

Glad you're feeling a little more satisfied :P You and everyone here are of course more than welcome to continue to provide feedback :)

---

My favorite Inqui build to date was one with a deep Deepwood splash.
Because the ranged damage sets all gave sneak attack bonuses, I mostly solo, and Sniper's Shot solves part of that puzzle.

Having to switch over or try to take points away from Sniper towards Arcane Archer which would have been the only readily-available source of Imbue Dice my build had would have lost me a lot of the defensive benefits I gained by going up Deepwood Sniper, as well as the sheer amount of FUN Sniper's Shot just is to me, even though the build is AP-starved to the point of not gaining it until level 15.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynnabel

That's why we're worried about setting Inq to the exact same numbers as they were before - because now, a ton of other stuff can feed into that particular section. For an overhaul that ties a bunch of disparate stuff together we need to be extra sure that individual parts are not too strong since it all interacts together. This is kind of compounded by the ranged power increase - no matter what your current ranged power is, ranged power matters 33% more than it did before by changing the scaling from 1.5 to 2.0, so gaining bonus dice means more than it did before this change.

---

Two quick things

1) Can you confirm the 33% assertion with 100% certainty? Posts put forth from other devs in the past (linked in the Imbue Pass #1 thread) indicate this is not the case and that for ranged powers between 0 RP and 200 RP we should see 0% to 25% increase in damage switching from 150% scaling to 200% scaling.

2) Can you give an idea of the scenario where you would be concerned about this being overpowered? Back of the envelope we are talking about ~28d of imbue damage that I can see. At 200 Ranged power my calculations show that should be averaging around 630 damage per hit. Increasing that to 32d of imbue damage this only increases by 90 damage to 720 average damage. Granted this would be on top of weapon damage, but I simply do not see this damage scaling at anything remotely approaching a game-breaking rate. I see sorcs spamming AE's for 15-20k, bow builds crit'ing without hunt's end for 40-50k, and melee builds doing similar amounts of damage. Meanwhile my Inquisitor at cap is lucky to hunt's end for 20-30k. Put simply, I think your fears are completely and totally unwarranted. I'm open to see where I'm wrong on that but I don't see it right now even a little.

edit: NOTE: I went ahead and tested this in post #200 and confirmed that the formula Lynn and others are using is not correct.

Nevermind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DonTheGreatOne

I have to be honest I am not seeing how this works the way you say it does.
I presently play a 2arti/18 wizard build.
I have both law on your side and spellsword with the following dice
law on side 13d8 scaled at 150% of ranged power (177) 13*4.5*2.65 = 155
Spellsword 6d10 scaled on spellpower (503 electric) 6*5.5*5 165
combuined average = 320

After this change I will have 14d8 of damage basically 1d8 of damage higher than I had from law on your side before the change.
average damage before ranged or spell power adjustment 14*4.5 = 67.5

law on you side 63 * 3.54 = 223
spellsword 63 * 5 = 315

So no matter which toggle I turn on I lose average damage.

---

Your math is slightly off
Law(Old) = 13*4.5*(1+1.5*1.77) = 213.82
SpellSword(Old) = 6*5.5*(1+5.03) = 198.99

Total(Old) = 412.81

Law(New) = 14*5.5*(1+2*1.77) = 349.58
Spellsowrd(new) = 14*4.5*(1+5.03) = 379.89

Better(New) = 379.89

Relative Imbue Damage (New/Old) = 92%, aka an 8% nerf to your overall imbue damage, but the option to scale via sets (very limited), filigrees (new neutral, for the most part), feats, etc.

Overall, not a terrible showing, but def a decrease, and some low hanging fruit should be available to builds like yours to make that a breakeven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sqrlmonger

Two quick things

for ranged powers between 0 RP and 200 RP we should see 0% to 25% increase in damage switching from 150% scaling to 200% scaling.

---

Maybe the imbue dice from AA aren't working with the inquisitor law dice on lamania all I can say is my minimum damage from imbues was 50% less than on Live. That is with range power of 277......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aelonwy

this^!

And you are ignoring how much you are affecting HEROICS especially where we do NOT have massive amounts of ranged power, access to filigree or epic feats with extra dice. Look, bringing up my paladin10/rog10 Inq again, the one I mentioned in the first preview. I had already spent her AP to get the most I could from Inq, and KotC so she had law damage and extra light damage. Now? the light damage is lost and those dice may or may not just barely make up for the losses to Inq with the RP scaling change but doubtful in heroic. The trade-offs for spending the AP in Inq & Kotc had already been chosen... now? now what? look at turning my ranged Law and Order paladin in to some quasi-multi-mutt eating the cost of a heart to make up for your nerfs? Even if I just respec my enhancements to attempt to make up dice elsewhere I WOULD ABSOLUTELY HAVE to give up enhancements I liked and enjoyed to get back lost damage. This isn't about min-maxing to improve my character...I like her just the way she is on live, this is about being forced to change my character to get her back to this stage while you nerf Inq AGAIN.

---

This is a perfect example of what I have been continuously saying here. In heroics, you would end up with more dice, just use the +3 from the assassin tree for 8ap. Think about how much more powerful your build could be at level 4, with 2 rogue levels. It might change the way you distribute your points while leveling but would provide far more potential. KOTC will give you more dice too. The builds that used to rely on multiple small procs to deal damage in easy content like Elite are getting a huge buff in this update because those small procs used to get rendered useless in any somewhat difficult content. Now, they will scale higher and be forced into relative viability for low to mid reaper content. The reason these changes have to be made the way they are being made is, as was said before, due to the opportunistic potential of having them be far too powerful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynnabel

Both of these have been fixed!

---

Would it possible to get "Radiant flourish" to work with spell power instead of Melee/Ranged Power. Now that "Fires of Fury" is spell power based it would be nice if the cores helped this one as well.

Lynn, quick question.

What are your thought on Dark Apostate at the moment? I know most people find it a little lacking, with one major flaw being (what most would consider) it's signature ability, the Dark Apostate Imbue, being on the weaker side when compared to the other two major spellpower imbues in arcane archer and EK due to the die sizing being smaller (among other things).

Would it be possible to test Dark Apostate at a d8 to mirror EK and AA as a tree defining imbue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by droid327

4d6 at 20 to 2d8, you need 55 spell power to break even. So it'slikely a buff there

16d6 at 32, you need 522 spell power...which is a tougher mark to hit if you aren't a caster class

---

2d8, mmm? And where does it come from? Currently, at lvl20 my pure fighter have 4d6 almost universal sonic damage from reverberation 2pc set, upgraded to 16d6 at lvl32. After U57, my fighter just lose 4d6-16d6 damage. So, where i can take this 2d8 imbue and how i can gain 522 spell power... as pure fighter? Or as pure shuri-Monk (and don't say about useless poison imbue, please)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lynnabel

2 quick points:

point 1 is that the dice that are being adjusted for Inq are concentrated in cores 18 and 20 so saying this is about heroics isn't quite accurate. You are indeed down 1 dice from levels 12 to 17 but that's more than made up for with the ranged power scaling and point 2, which is as follows:

point 2 is that due in part to the passionate feedback in this thread we're going to nudge the dice scaling for Inq a bit (moving up from 1d8 to 1d10) so you'll actually be a little stronger in heroics.

Should be a nice boost :) As a reminder plz keep feedback civil or we can't really have a fun discussion :P

---

I personally like that method of upscaling the inquis. It doesn't allow for poaching for other toggles (which adding more imbue dice would), while still giving some extra oomph to the dedicated Inquis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xgya

(Math time snipped for cleanness)

To add, I like that now trying to get extra Imbue dice isn't an attempt at getting back what was lost, but an option you have to change your build to something different.

---

I'm on board with you here too. I think that this (and the supporting math) are the sentiment I was shooting for too. The overhaul shouldn't feel like you need to invest to get back what was lost, but give you options and trade offs should you want to double down. I think having a higher imbue at 1d10 vs d8 will definitely help as it's less of a penalty to existing builds.


I hope my response didn't come off as uncivilized or rude. It's well documented that I hold Lynn in high regards for being willing to engage, listen to, respond to, and implement forum feedback. I meant no disrespect, just voicing my opinion on what I feel an overhaul should and shouldn't do. I'm definitely with Xyga in that after hearing that the dice size will be increased I'm far less bothered by the potential hit to inquis than I was a few moments ago. I think we're pretty close to where it should be with those adjustments. Not exactly the same, but close enough I don't think it'll be THAT impactful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ivorycoaster

Think about how much more powerful your build could be at level 4, with 2 rogue levels.

---

To have a stat to damage at level 4, you have to have 1 Universal AP to manage to get a stat to damage, dual crossbows AND Law.
And that's how much AP you have. That's where it stops.

Can it be a decent way to spend 8 AP later on? Definitely. In fact, you make a good point for that specific Enhancement being TOO good for what it does, given how low in the tree it is.

That point is made so strongly I'd suggest changing the wording of Venomed Blades to say "Gain +1 Imbue Die for each Poison Strike you know" instead of altering Toxin Affinity. (just please make those only cost 1 AP per strike. That cost was already prohibitive)
Both require you to put points into seldom-used Enhancements, but my suggestion requires you to use 11 points into the Assassin tree, which is more in line with the other sources of extra dice.
Tying the extra die to Venomed Blades ensures nobody just places 2 points into Assassin to gain 1 die and calls it a day.

Still, early on, crossbow users in general are AP-starved, mostly because of their lack of a stat to damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisto_Mk_I

2d8, mmm? And where does it come from? Currently, at lvl20 my pure fighter have 4d6 almost universal sonic damage from reverberation 2pc set, upgraded to 16d6 at lvl32. After U57, my fighter just lose 4d6-16d6 damage. So, where i can take this 2d8 imbue and how i can gain 522 spell power... as pure fighter? Or as pure shuri-Monk (and don't say about useless poison imbue, please)?

---

Fighter is not a good example. 16d6 is 16-96 non scaling damage.
I've seen fighters hit for 200k. Your imbues and procs are not and never will be a major source of dps. Fighter has the highest potential melee power, as far as I know. These little tiny procs are pretty much nothing. You would get so much more damage from 15 melee power or if you don't have rares, 11 melee power from a huge variety of 2 piece filigree sets.. Maybe it's a little less pretty on the numbers, but WAY more powerful..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xgya

To have a stat to damage at level 4, you have to have 1 Universal AP to manage to get a stat to damage, dual crossbows AND Law.
And that's how much AP you have. That's where it stops.

Can it be a decent way to spend 8 AP later on? Definitely. In fact, you make a good point for that specific Enhancement being TOO good for what it does, given how low in the tree it is.

That point is made so strongly I'd suggest changing the wording of Venomed Blades to say "Gain +1 Imbue Die for each Poison Strike you know" instead of altering Toxin Affinity. (just please make those only cost 1 AP per strike. That cost was already prohibitive)
Both require you to put points into seldom-used Enhancements, but my suggestion requires you to use 11 points into the Assassin tree, which is more in line with the other sources of extra dice.
Tying the extra die to Venomed Blades ensures nobody just places 2 points into Assassin to gain 1 die and calls it a day.

Still, early on, crossbow users in general are AP-starved, mostly because of their lack of a stat to damage.

---

Well, it requires 8 points, or 9 if you want to get it along with tier 1 sneak dice. So you can't spend 2 in assassin and get 1 die, as far as I know.. But at any rate, don't ask for a nerf for such an easy way for an inquis to get more dice. They're already taking over the thread :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ivorycoaster

This is a perfect example of what I have been continuously saying here. In heroics, you would end up with more dice, just use the +3 from the assassin tree for 8ap. Think about how much more powerful your build could be at level 4, with 2 rogue levels. It might change the way you distribute your points while leveling but would provide far more potential. KOTC will give you more dice too. The builds that used to rely on multiple small procs to deal damage in easy content like Elite are getting a huge buff in this update because those small procs used to get rendered useless in any somewhat difficult content. Now, they will scale higher and be forced into relative viability for low to mid reaper content. The reason these changes have to be made the way they are being made is, as was said before, due to the opportunistic potential of having them be far too powerful.

---

Dude.

I already spend in KotC to have 2d6 extra light damage on top of my 14die of law damage currently from Inq.

In the new paradigm I LOOSE those light damage die to regain some of the law die LOST from the Inq nerf.

YOU are telling me I NEED to respec 8 AP, not free AP, 8 AP from something I was ALREADY using and enjoying to recoup MORE of what I LOST. Either way I have lost something due to these nerfs. And I don't run reaper so I personally do NOT give a capybara butt about content above elite. So do we balance for Reaper or NOT? because your argument would suggest yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aelonwy

Dude.

I already spend in KotC to have 2d6 extra light damage on top of my 14die of law damage currently from Inq.

In the new paradigm I LOOSE those light damage die to regain some of the law die LOST from the Inq nerf.

YOU are telling me I NEED to respec 8 AP, not free AP, 8 AP from something I was ALREADY using and enjoying to recoup MORE of what I LOST. Either way I have lost something due to these nerfs. And I don't run reaper so I personally do NOT give a capybara butt about content above elite. So do we balance for Reaper or NOT? because your argument would suggest yes.

---

Well, balance has to take all game modes and builds into consideration. I was pretty upset when RDA got nerfed to proc 1/4 as often, because my main was a handwraps monk. Broke my heart that a class that already has bottom tier DPS got a nerf because other builds stood to gain more from that item. But it is what it is. Still the best game ever. Some people will just never want their exact set up to change. But the silent majority will relish in the new improved potential that the universal enhancement tree will gain from these changes.

OK I went ahead and did some testing.

Test Procedure:
1) I used Khyber's Fury which adds 1d4 Fire (200% Scaling with the better of RP and MP) added to melee/ranged attacks (this gives us only 4 possible rolled base damage values) and ensured I had no other fire damage on the attack.
2) Fire at Magefire Cannon on ship with EDF on and with EDF off (Cannon damage report did not indicate any resistances possessed by the cannon) while confirming shots recorded DO NOT proc doubleshot.
3) Compare results to 2 formulas put forth.

Test Setup:
Melee Power: 49
Ranged Power: 116

Formulas To Test
https://i.imgur.com/gXd2BAl.png

According to Formula 1 we should see:
EDF OFF: 4.32, 8.64, 12.96, & 17.28 as predicted damage values
EDF ON: 2.96, 5.92, 8.88, & 11.84 as predicted damage values

According to Formula 2 we should see:
EDF OFF: 3.32, 6.64, 9.96, & 13.28 as predicted damage values
EDF ON: 1.96, 3.92, 5.88, & 7.84 as predicted damage values

Actual In-Game Reported Values
With EDF OFF: Reported Damage values were 3, 6, 9, and 13
With EDF ON: Reported Damage values were 1, 3, 5, 7

Conclusion
Formula 1 is soundly rejected by testing, formula 2 we can only say is consistent with the data gathered if rounding is always down. But we can also say that such rounding occurs after doubleshot (and presumably doublestrike as well) because we saw doubleshot fire damage values of 15 which would only be possible if rounding occurred after doubleshot rather than before.