Race Stat Changes

[daedroth]

... I had suggested before but maybe taking away 1 end point from saurian and drakeblood instead of adding end to half the classes.
...
The HP landscape would look like this with suggested changes:
17: 950 - Gnome
18: 1000 - Elf, Halfling (+1 added), Saurian (-1)
19: 1050 - HElf, DElf (+1), Drake (-1)
20: 1100 - Human, Goblin, Elemental
21
22: 1200 - hOrc, Dwarf (-1)
...

+1[up vote]
Dwarf keeps MR though.
Gobby 20 or 15% MR.

[NiteHawk]

I can see what you're saying that changing it to the proposed amount would benefit saurians, but is there not some clever trickery we could do with the formula to make sure 19+ end races dont get a boost, but 17-18 end races do?

You cannot simply do a END buff as saurians not only will get this, but also the AGI update. They need to stay lower HP. I don't want a formula that changes based on END and it needs to be a linear equation. If you make it not scale properly, no ones gonna have a bloody clue what END they will be with and then they're gonna be weird things like 17 End gives you 40HP, 18 end gives you 45HP, 19 end gives you 47HP, 20end gives you 48HP , etc.

The HP landscape would look like this with suggested changes:
17: 950 - Gnome
18: 1000 - Elf, Halfling (+1 added), Saurian (-1)
19: 1050 - HElf, DElf (+1), Drake (-1)
20: 1100 - Human, Goblin, Elemental
21
22: 1200 - hOrc, Dwarf (-1)

That is a possibility too. I added your proposal to the sheet as #9 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0 but I think it might get backlash even though not much is effecting. I will say this though, with your proposal, you are literally doing the same amount of END modification I am doing, however, you're doing it using negative effects and HP balancing. I'm not saying it's wrong, it's another option. It makes END less impactful by 10HP (which might be a good thing?) I'm wondering about elementals with that small HP bonus if it's good or not but eh. I would probably go with 2.25% per agi this way too. This way might be good though cause it solves some issue with for example saurians getting more dodge too. -20 HP less for the higher AGI is probably a fair trade IMO. We'll see though. I don't see everyone being on board with it. But everyone needs to see that -1 END doesn't effect races as it does now too as the impact is less for the most case. HP will have a higher base, but will have a -10 HP lower scaling too which seems OK.


I want to point out guys that just because it is the last proposal doesn't mean it is the current proposal. We are throwing ideas it and trying to spark ideas.

I'm also finding it interesting that Folder noted 2.5% per agi point was tried before and it didnt work, is 2.25% not a better fit?

Yeah we did on paper examples and 2.5% might of been too high but I'm not so sure anymore. We can start off with 2.25% probably though but I was testing this out with lings vs HO's but this didn't actually test using backstabs or special attacks. I'm still deciding and might run some proper tests with backstab/etc later and give my final verdict.

About dwarves, shit. The problem here is they are already the tankiest race, they just don't need buffs to that. I do think a -1 end hit is fair (and I play a dwarf cav before any of you say I'm not being fair here). My opinion here is that they are already strong enough and even with the -1 end they will still be the tankiest, well, anything. Nothing competes with natural AC, high WIS, and high HP. Their only downside is 19 AGI, but to be honest I don't think that offsets everything else too badly.

Honestly, that's true. I forgot about a few things, but yeah they do have extra AC, MR, Damage reduction, etc.

Proposal 7 is good.

I would change:

- remove the 2 allocation from all races but human, just 1 is enough.

- Take away +1 end from humans and give them 2 alloc points. That would make them interesting.

- 10% mr for gobs should be enough.

- Dont take all mr bonus from dwarves.

Taking away one end from humans to me makes them useless HE's. It's probably a bad idea balance wise. Humans and HEs are very similar, you gain one and lose something else. Modifying humans almost ensure you need to modify HEs at minimum, and probably Elves.

I agree, 1 is probably enough though.

Depends on dwarves and what they get. I think they are fairly good, probably not the best slayer choice but even with the -1 end they are literally good. I wouldn't remove MR probably if we just lowered END and didn't touch STR. I also agree with Folder here though, -2 STR for superior MR, extra AC, extra spell damage negation, is quite a good trade-off and probably is a bad idea.

It depends with the MR on goblins. If we aren't touching goblins but are boosting DE's, then 15% is probably OK. Otherwise I'd go with 10%. You got to remember allocation points benefit the DEs here.

--------------

I added proposal #9 and #10. #9 based on lats ideas and some changes, and #10 being proposal #8 with some changes. To me #9 makes better sense with AGI changes but we'll see.

[Styx]

Just balance the numbers and give each race it's own special talent , if it's possible for each to have onr, so the race has its own extra resistances.

Just figure medium agi and medium str, then place other races accordingly so it's a mixture and pick and choose lol

[Dan]

I like proposal 10, but take away 1 END from dwarves and leave HO with 24 STR seems unfair.

I would -1 STR on HO.

[Lateralus]

Yea I understand that 8 and 9 prob do the same thing and people don't wanna see something losing stats but it keeps the races a bit more diverse instead of stacking everyone up which I think is important because it means more combos which means more people leveling diff things and more replayabiliy.

Small other notes: dwarfs are basically unkillable by any type of sorc/necro with top hp mr and an added extra 10 spell absorbing they are invincible on that front I'm not sure if that's intended but that's what it is.

As for elemental I'm not sure they need another end they are already the highest end option for casters. If you keep everyone's end down by just decreasing saurian and drake there's no reason to need to raise them. However if you raise everyone it's a chain reaction and yea you prob gotta raise them too which puts elemental druids even in a higher tier.

[Snyper]

option 9 looks like a good one. races maintain diversity. definitely best possible choice imo.

[NiteHawk]

I like proposal 10, but take away 1 END from dwarves and leave HO with 24 STR seems unfair.

I would -1 STR on HO.

I dunno about that yet.

Dwarves get racial MR bonus, 4 armor, 10 damage reduction per hit with any spells, and 2HP per tick. They also get 20 wisdom and 17 int which makes them fair for spell users such as Paladins. The trade-off is mainly 3 str. It's a tank race still that fairs well against spell casters vs a race that pretty much only has str/end as it's main lot. Still, it's something I'll look at to see.

As for elemental I'm not sure they need another end they are already the highest end option for casters. If you keep everyone's end down by just decreasing saurian and drake there's no reason to need to raise them. However if you raise everyone it's a chain reaction and yea you prob gotta raise them too which puts elemental druids even in a higher tier.

I meant lowering elementals to 19 so they lose 30HP instead of gaining 20HP but maybe thats a bad idea.

[Lateralus]

As for elemental I'm not sure they need another end they are already the highest end option for casters. If you keep everyone's end down by just decreasing saurian and drake there's no reason to need to raise them. However if you raise everyone it's a chain reaction and yea you prob gotta raise them too which puts elemental druids even in a higher tier.

I meant lowering elementals to 19 so they lose 30HP instead of gaining 20HP but maybe thats a bad idea.

Hmm elemental is already losing a bit of power on agi mattering more I think they will be fine. Elemental are not that crazy besides as druids where wis really matters.


Another note: Now that Dwarfs and more so Halforcs are getting 4hp per refresh tick I hope you factor that into your calculations. 4hp per tick over a long fight because they have top hp will make a diff in 1v1 and group.

[Lateralus]

I just wanted to post some numbers for comparison for the two options (9 and 10)

These are the suggested changes btw: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0

This is option 9 - HP landscape.
17: 950 - Gnome (+50)
18: 1000 - Elf (+40), Halfling (+100), Saurian (-20)
19: 1050 - HElf(+30), DElf (+90), Drake (-30)
20: 1100 - Human(+20), Goblin(+20), Elemental(+20)
21
22: 1200 - hOrc, Dwarf (-60)

There is a bit more of a range in hps here halfling and dark elf benefit the most while dwarf and to a lesser extent drake/lizard lose a bit of hp. I think with the slight nerf to drake and saurian the power classes it would be ok to have a 2.5% agi change (benefitting halfling goblin elf and darkelf more so)



This is option 10 - HP landscape.
18: 960 - Gnome(+60), Halfling (+60)
19: 1020- Elf(+60) DElf (+60), Saurian(0)
20: 1080 - HElf(+60), Goblin(0), Elemental(0), Drake(0)
21: 1140 - Human (+60)
22: 1200 - hOrc (0), Dwarf (-60)

The range here is a bit smaller and because of that dwarf and half orc take more of a nerf on top of their already agi nerf that is incoming. Saurian and Drake may look like they are gaining HP here and getting a buff but all the balance races (human halfling gnome elf half elf are all getting a huge boost negating any boost saurian or drake get).

Here I think you would have to keep the agi boost at 2.25 otherwise Halforc and dwarf are really getting screwed there really isnt even a bit diff in hp anymore making them somewhat of a nonfactor.


Again both options sound good to me and accomplish what the race balance change was set out to do (boost some of the lesser races). However I feel option 10 clutters the races a bit too much and takes away from the power races (orc dwarf saurian and drake). These changes are not huge but again I feel like option 10 is the biggest change and because of that will cause the biggest rift.

I feel option 9 accomplishes what we wanna do without a giant rift of a change.

[Rael]

Im a fan of option 9. I like that it still leaves abit of hp gap between the races.