Ember Online

List is real linear. I feel like it's missing some nuances of certain classes.

Of course I make weird character combinations, sometimes...

Miach wrote:One thing I want to add:

So the focus isn't on AGI, so what? +1 that strength and move on.

I'm tired of people thinking 23-24 agility gonna make them a god, it ain't gonna save you! 2% one way or the other is meaningless.

Max out your race's natural agility and move on! Not all races are going to be equal, everything has its niche.

you want something well-rounded go human

Its not about be a god, agi just should be as important as any other stat, and currently its not.

Its an important part of the core, its cool to have niches, but with no agi, the game makes low end characters worthless.

And make gnomes and lings have more endurance or str is not a good solution imo.

They should be weaker phisically as they are, but they should be harder to hit as well. That is what to make them unique, that is their strong point.

That would make them worth both in 1v1 as in group fights, bc they should live enough to do their part.

And not less imporantly, make sense in the lore.

JadeFalcon wrote:Trying to sort this out. Its a bit of a draft, so if anyone points out anything, ill change

Enchanters:
Strong points:
Natural AGI

Death Mages:
Strong points:
Natural AGI

Slayers (High MR races)
Natural AGI

Cavaliers (High MR races)
Weak Points:
Lower natural AGI

Brigands (High MR races)
Weak Points:
Inferior to Low MR Races in comparable rogue/fighter classes
Lower natural AGI

What are you talking about with this natural agi stuff?

So the focus isn't on AGI, so what? +1 that strength and move on.

I'm tired of people thinking 23-24 agility gonna make them a god, it ain't gonna save you! 2% one way or the other is meaningless.

Max out your race's natural agility and move on! Not all races are going to be equal, everything has its niche

If agi is meaningless then why even bother maxing it . Oh, because it's by definition not meaningless...

You can argue its underwhelming compared to points in str or end (mathematically it isn't) but that seems to be the general consensus no matter the math. As Folder mentioned the real problem is that lower end classes (ling, gnome, elf, drow) have trouble surviving in group fights. You can help this with a slight buff to Agi (2 --> 2.5 seems very reasonable and has been proposed). However the easy way to balance this is to simply buff/nerf the natural bonuses of the races without touching the stats unless needed. You could give the least popular classes reasonable buffs- for example (just spitballing) giving lings and gnomes a 4% dodge buff (just like monks get but less than their 7.5%) You could throw +4 ac to Gobby's and remove the +4 ac from dwarves.

You can't really balance races by tweaking stats and I'd imagine the community would be much less happy about tweaking the races stats rather than adding or removing racial mods.

Edit: Folder why would you say Elder's are bad in group fights? They usually have solid hp (except gnomes/elf), incredible MR, high dodge and hitrates, and strong damage. Sure Zerkers, Ninjas, and Slayers will have more deeps but they all have major weaknesses that makes them easy targets to focus down first.

Tucker, i was under the impression (mind you, unconfirmed) that because certain classes require more exp to lvl, they have a better dodge rate.

JF where did you come up with that lol. No such thing as "naturai AGI" .

@Tucker - I think I outlined it but in case I didn't...

REAL group fight optimization leaves no room for a druid. 1) They won't be hasting as there are no group buffs. 2) Ninjas/slayers do more damage (and more importantly higher BURST damage). 3) Most of the time they will not be FFing as this leaves them vulnerable and doing zero damage.

Basically ninjas/slayers/chanters/priests are all you need to be the best in group fights. Everything else is niche / could be done better by one of these classes.

What do you guys mena? Agi certainly makes a difference right now. Lings already get a ton more agi potential than most other races.

I don't understand the argument now. Are you just talking to talk?

Maybe the thread is too large at this point to really understand the entirety of the conversation and its ultimate goal.

Agility is a thing, you get more dodge and hitrate per point. The races are already setup that way.

You're saying it's not enough? When will it be enough? I can predict most of the fights right now in KoTH and JrKoTH and agility is one of the factors along with class comparison.

Bottom line, agility does currently matter, saying it doesn't make much difference is silly. A lot of people who comment on the matter (including myself sometimes, sorry Chris ) do not have a big enough sample size to consider their facts accurate.

Why a Ling will NEVER beat an Orc in melee: Strength matters, HP matters, Agility does not compensate for this because even with a 15% extra dodge, the Strength and Endurance alone will overwhelm the Ling a majority of the time. RNG tho, anything CAN happen, but in large scale comparisons one stat will never outweigh two.

Why a Ling will NEVER beat an Orc in melee:

If it's never thats' an issue. Lings should be able to kill Orcs, but orcs will have a higher chance of winning. It's not gonna be 90%/10%. I'm thinking more like 60/40, or 70/30 max. Same when it comes to magic vs ho

Well they're gimped on two of the main stats that matter, so balance the HP or balance the Strength.

Agility is seemingly fine as is.

No one is saying AGI is broken or doesn't do anything. It's just not as good as other stats.

For group fight situations there's no reason to purposefully use a low END character over a high END character. Balancing it is not easy though because it skews 1v1, unless we come up a better solution than a flat AGI buff.

Folder wrote:JF where did you come up with that lol. No such thing as "naturai AGI" .

I honestly thought that classes that demanded a higher experience to lvl to 25 had a sort of bonus versus other classes. If not, what is the point of having different exp requirements?

Folder wrote:Basically ninjas/slayers/chanters/priests are all you need to be the best in group fights. Everything else is niche / could be done better by one of these classes.

Well i think this replies partially my reply to your comment above, i think you are right. However i think then its legitimate to suggest (you do it >P) that all classes should have similar exp requirements, and should be balanced to usefulness.