• Welcome to Final Fantasy Hacktics. Please login or sign up.
 
March 28, 2024, 09:15:11 am

News:

Please use .png instead of .bmp when uploading unfinished sprites to the forum!


FFT Arena: Balance Discussion Thread

Started by FFMaster, July 13, 2010, 07:56:57 pm

Malroth


Gaignun

August 02, 2013, 04:54:46 am #1401 Last Edit: August 02, 2013, 12:22:58 pm by Gaignun
Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 01, 2013, 01:52:42 pm
I've noted two problems with how a lot of people reason on here about items (myself included).  It often leads to unnecessarily extreme changes.
1) Direct comparisons with other items rather than a holistic evaluation of the metagame, especially other items of the same equipment type.


Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 01, 2013, 01:52:42 pm
Hence, I would consider the effect of Ignore: M-EV on my mages to be way less useful than Initial:Reflect, Strengthen: All, Absorb: Element X, or Always: Shell.


I assume the second quote is an example of the first point.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 01, 2013, 01:52:42 pm
2) If no one is using it, it needs a buff.  If it makes some choices irrelevant on some classes or too many people are using it, it needs a nerf.


There's a difference between "not used" and "not worth using."  There's a lot of crap that's not used that we aren't buffing, either.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 01, 2013, 01:52:42 pm
This one is addressed more towards you, Gaignun (and the Damned / Malroth, too, I think).
3) We clearly have a different idea of what is balanced.  Given FFT's base mechanics and how the AI thinks, I think FFT Arena is most balanced when
Optimized Offense < Defensive Hard-Counter < Offensive Anti-Counter < Defensive Soft Counter or Marginal Tricks


Bear in mind that I am only managing the proposal thread.  I am not arbitrating all the documented changes.  Anyway:

Your third point essentially describes what a meta-game is.  Yeah, there should be counters and anti-counters.  That's meta.  What there shouldn't be are strategies that dominate 90% of all others.  I don't care which of the four groups it falls under.  These include spellguns and Hidden Knife setups.  Before 1.38 it was Stone Gun, Berserk, Holy, and Ninjutsu.  The reasons why we are enjoying respite from Stone Guns now is because we now have weapons that are even more ridiculous: Mythril/Ultimus Bows (especially with 100% Hawk's Eye) and spellguns with Pilgrimage.

Don't take my word for it: we have 22 archers distributed among 35 entrants in S2, a higher ratio than ever before.  All but 3 are using a spellgun, Stone Gun, or Mythril/Ultimus bow.  When you play to win, you pick the gear that gives the most benefit.  If you invest in niche, hoping to counter something specific, you will likely lose in the first round without even encountering what you anticipated.  That's why I don't agree with niche gear like "anti-mediator headbands."  If the gear's intrinsic worth is only countering something specific, and if this "something specific" is not currently a dominating strategy, it's not going to be worth using compared to its alternatives.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 01, 2013, 01:52:42 pm
6) Under my direction, game balance will typically involve not power escalation as much as increasing the types of roughly equivalent serious threats until they exceed the maximum capacity of a team to block them all while still being able to attack. 


That's what we're trying to do, too, so, uh, maybe you could join the team rather than overthrow us.

As for power escalations, a common theme among the listed changes is lifting up the bottom and hammering down the top.  The bottom doesn't even need to be lifted too high if the most egregious offenders are hammered down well enough.  That's why crossbows are nearly unchanged: spellguns and Stone Gun are being reigned in so that crossbows no longer live in their shadow.  I don't consider this a power escalation at all.

Of course, we can discuss which buffs you think are unnecessary on a case-by-case basis.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 01, 2013, 01:52:42 pm
A broken threat is a unit or combination that kills or incapacitates most things without fail while retaining a competent level of defense, and requires bad setups to counter.  A serious threat is not broken until it reaches that 1-hit level.


Wait a minute.  I assume by "broken" you mean "bad."  So how do you defend spellguns and your magic-concentrate accessory?

Spellguns hit at 100% from 6 range (or 4 in your case, which is still as good as crossbows), 1HKO most mages without Shell, and pass right through elemental defense with the aid of oil.  Oil is applied:

1. using Short Edge, with the assistance of 100% accuracy from Hidden Knife, on nimble melee classes.  Even if oil doesn't proc, the two swords deal reliable damage and the target ends up having to get healed anyway.
2. using wide-AoE Black Magick Fire, which will also have 100% accuracy with your version of Genji Gauntlet

The only reliable counter is Projectile Guard: 300+250 JP for a reaction ability that coincidentally counters Crossbows, which are already a joke compared to these spellguns.

I don't know how closely you've been following FFTA over the past several months, but it appears that many people are tired of forcing their units to run White Robe or Projectile Guard to avoid eating 200+ damage Glacier Gun shots from 10+ SP archers.  Having to counter-build against spellguns all the time is stifling the opportunity to equip other gear, many of which are unused and which we're trying to encourage the use of.  The idea is to add enjoyment to FFTA by adding variety, not leave it a game of "Block Spellgun or Die."

Similarly, Magic Concentrate + Faith Rod + Short Charge is going to Frog, Paralyze, Sleep, etc. everything without resistance 70~100% of the time.  (That's 100% against all mages; as if they didn't have it bad enough.)  Magic Concentrate + MA Gear + Magic Attack UP is going to deal 216 damage AoE Chirijiraden 100% of the time.  What is the counter to this?  Setiemson and Magic Defend UP.  Two counters which are overburdened, given that they are already counters to all magic damage already.

In brief, you're taking a card out of hand that has little to begin with (M-EV) and putting it in a hand that already has more than enough (perfumes).
   
Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 01, 2013, 01:52:42 pm
Hence, deeply polarizing items or items / skills / effects that break existing limits are a good thing, because the idea is to eventually have a game where the perfect defense cannot exist, but the optimal offense will ultimately be a test of skill, luck, and psychology.


If by breaking limits you mean makes the majority of other things not worth using, then I disagree.   Anyway, yes, there shouldn't be a perfect defense.  Nothing in the proposal summary (except for the Save the Queen/Ragnarok changes) hints toward such.

By the same token, there shouldn't be a perfect, or perfectly reliable, offense, either.  The biggest culprits are 100% accuracy weapons and skills.  You can explain what an ideal metagame is all you like, and I'll agree with you.  But FFTA's metagame isn't as sophisticated as you think.  These are AI battles.  Computers are deterministic.  Battles are nearly decided before they begin.  In tournaments, you choose a single team, then spend the next month watching where the chips fall.  The only variation is provided by the fickle RNG.  Investing in 100% accuracy attacks removes this variation in your favour.  This provides an overwhelming advantage.  To counterbalance this, no unevadable weapon or ability should require specific setups (e.g. Projectile Guard, elemental+Oil resistance) to counter.  For every universal advantage there should be a universal counter.  In this case, the counter is achieved by keeping unevadable damage low so that it is easily healed.  Otherwise, the balance is tipped and I cry myself to sleep every night.

reinoe

Regarding Genji Helm.  I do not like it with stregnthen AIR&EARTH.  It steps on the toes of Chirijiraden too much.  Also it facilitates female samurai using QUAKE/TORNADO

If the purpose is to boost the much maligned Heaven's Cloud then I have an idea.  First remove slow from Heaven's cloud and make it water elemental.  Then allow it to ignore M-EVADE.  Lastly make Genji Helm boost water.  It's guarantee to heal any allies who need to be healed.  So no accidental evade.  It's in line with water being the element that ignore evasion.
My dreams can come true!

Dokurider

The reason Genji Helm boosts Air isn't just for Heaven's Cloud's sake. It is supposed to boost the Wind Elemental completely by being a Head Ele Boost, which is half the reason why Holy/Dark is so strong. It exists on a Helmet so that it wouldn't make Air Knife OP, but since Air Knife is getting neutered (predictably), that point is now moot, but it's a decent idea for a helmet nonetheless. Earth is just there for the hell of it. I don't see too much point to it except to boost Kiku Katana. Samurai can use Quaknado right now with no problems.

I will comment that I understand everyone's desire for a Water drawout. It really is a pressing issue...

AeroGP

Quote from: Gaignun on August 02, 2013, 04:54:46 amI don't know how closely you've been following FFTA over the past several months, but it appears that many people are tired of forcing their units to run White Robe or Projectile Guard to avoid eating 200+ damage Glacier Gun shots from 10+ SP archers.  Having to counter-build against spellguns all the time is stifling the opportunity to equip other gear, many of which are unused and which we're trying to encourage the use of.  The idea is to add enjoyment to FFTA by adding variety, not leave it a game of "Block Spellgun or Die."


Making compromises and adjusting against dominant strategies is what makes team-building interesting in the first place. I'm sorry that there are players that just want to use the best available and nothing more, and that having to deal with them bores you, but this is how competition works?

Are AI battles competition or just exhibition?
Quote from: Tycho"There are a number of different factors impacting server connectivity on Xbox 360," the spokesperson said. "It is a particularly complex server architecture and we continue to work with Microsoft to improve connectivity."

I don't want to bolster any "violent gamer" tropes, but that statement makes me want to improve the connectivity of my front two knuckles with their esophagus.  I wonder how Brenna would respond if I told her that "fidelity" was complicated.

Gaignun

August 03, 2013, 06:48:48 am #1405 Last Edit: August 03, 2013, 07:03:38 am by Gaignun
Quote from: AeroGP on August 03, 2013, 05:53:41 am
Making compromises and adjusting against dominant strategies is what makes team-building interesting in the first place.  I'm sorry that there are players that just want to use the best available and nothing more, and that having to deal with them bores you, but this is how competition works?


I agree with you on what makes team-building interesting, but we seem to disagree on the concept of dominant strategies.

Allow me to discuss what my idea of a meta-game is:

Short version: Equal distribution of power > Dominant strategies vs counter-strategies

Long version:

To me, a healthy meta-game is akin to rock-paper-scissors.  You have three options. All are equally usable because each has as many strengths as weaknesses.  (i.e. each option defeats one, loses to another, and ties the third.)  Simple example.

Games with many more options are, naturally, harder to balance.  Due to human fallibility, there will always be strategies that have more strengths than weaknesses.  Options with many more strengths than weaknesses are often called broken.  The fact that these options have weaknesses doesn't enter into the picture.  It is the balance of strengths and weaknesses, and not the existence of each, that assesses the option's worth.

(Sorry to those who don't follow fighting games, but I'm going to invoke some fighting game history here.)

This is especially true for competitive games.  Street Fighter 3 Third Strike is a much-loved competitive game, but it is terribly unbalanced.  It has 19 characters, but only three (Chun-Li, Yun, and Ken) are regularly used.  In tournaments, the meta-game involves picking characters and developing strategies to counter solely these three.  (Often, these strategies involve picking these very characters yourself.  After all, Chun-Li's only weakness is Chun-Li herself.)  This harms variety.  After all, there are 19 characters to choose from, and most are never chosen because they require you to work so much harder to achieve the same performance.

Balancing out this uneven distribution of power is the whole point of balance patches.  Capcom has been attempting to round out the cast of Street Fighter 4 for over four years.  When it was understood that rush-down characters Yun and Fei Long were god-tier, they nerfed them.  It didn't matter that they were weak to fireballs.  Only Sagat and Ryu could use fireballs competently against Yun and Fei Long, so the meta-game was basically about picking from 4 characters (Yun, Fei Long, Sagat, or Ryu), or preparing yourself to fight against overwhelming odds.  Furthermore, Yun's and Fei Long's strengths totally eclipsed other rush-down characters such as Rufus.  Rufus had dropped off the radar, and variety in SF4 had suffered for it.  The balance patch nerfed Yun and Fei Long so that characters like Rufus are worth using again.  Variety was restored.

In our case, spellguns/Stone Gun/Hidden Knife is Yun/Fei Long, Projectile Guard/White Robe/Perfumes is Sagat/Ryu, and Rufus is crossbows.  The current meta-game is about watching Yun and Fei Long dominate, watching Sagat and Ryu being picked to counter Yun, and lamenting over how ineffective the remaining 35 members of the cast are.  If this is your idea of a healthy meta-game, then there is nothing more I can say.

formerdeathcorps

August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am #1406 Last Edit: August 03, 2013, 09:46:15 am by formerdeathcorps
It seems without actual numbers, this won't go down very well.  From my experience, a general outline of Arena's balance is as thus:

Optimized here means damage optimized, i.e. a skill or attack that is solely based on dealing damage to one target and can be blocked by defensive hard-counters like evasion, elemental null / halve / absorb, reflect, etc.  With magic, something has to be both non-reflectable and non-MEVable to be considered an anti-counter.

If an optimized ranged attack has user HP > 252 at CT < 3 averaging damage > 400 * enemy faith / fury, it is broken.  I say 400 because that's the HP of a PA setup lancer.  CT < 3 because if CT > 3, midcharging by units with at least 12 effective SP (which is readily attainable) is a solid counter.  252 HP is another common benchmark for a lot of spells.
A corollary is that if an optimized ranged attack with user HP > 252 and CT < 3 averages damage > 305 despite hindering faith / fury on either the target or the caster, it is broken.  I say 305 because that's the HP of a PA / MA setup squire.

Melee attacks follow slightly different rules.

If an optimized melee attack with CT < 3 averages damage > 400 * enemy faith / fury AND can squeeze in
1) 40 fury and HP > 336 (the HP damage of many common 2S / 2H max damage setups before target fury)
2) passive defense + 70 fury and HP > 305
3) HP > 380 (above the HP of a grand cross excalibur knight)
OR
4) Move > 4, base SP > 10 with HP > 305, he is broken.
A corollary is that if a melee attack purely dealing optimized damage with CT < 3 averages damage > 305 despite hindering fury on the target and satisfies one of the above conditions, it is broken.

An anti-counter is one that will deal less damage than optimum (i.e. 200-300) but will be blocked by few, if any defensive hard-counters.  Hence, I do not find it broken that two consecutive anti-counters, if they have synergy, can KO any unit that does not run DEFUP / Protect / unyielding / Shell / MADEF.  That is normal.  I did not build my S5 or S6 teams to deal 1 KO every time any one of my units got a turn...that would be too easy to block.  The ideal was 2.5 KOs per 4 consecutive turns, which on the whole, was achieved. 

Due to the variety of anti-counters, it's helpful to establish a point system of their abilities.  In this tier are attacks that circumvent defensive hard-counters, attacks with Unit Move > 3 + AoE > 1 (Draw Out radius), Damage Skill range > 4 + AoE / Vert > 0 (all magic), Unit Move > 3 + Southern Cross radius attacks, damaging attacks designed to heal the user (Grand Cross, Blood Harp).  Single target Damage + 100% Status is only in this tier if the statii proc works against the general opponent (i.e. Add: Blind is irrelevant, but Add: Blind OR Silence becomes useful); AoE Damage + Status is only worthy of consideration if AoE > 1 and the rate of a general incapacitation is at least 20% (where hitting 3 targets means ~50% chance of inflicting status on one).  Note that reflect only counts against a defensive hard-counter against magic, i.e. something a CT, MP cost that is blocked by Shell.
Point losses would be having any penalty a normal weapon or spell of the expected user's class (which may not be the class the skill is in) would not have, i.e. 0 Vert, higher CT Cost to similar skills, uses up at least 1/4 of user's MP total on optimal damage setup per cast, higher JP cost to similar skills, less range than similar skills.  Point losses occur on effects that harm team synergy.
Every time a skill satisfies one of these requirements, it gains a point.  Every time a skill satisfies one of the negative requirements, it loses a point.

Example:
Repeating Fist
Non-Elemental +1 Offense, -1 Team synergy
Non-Evade +1 Offense
0 Vert -1 Offense

Hawk's Eye
Non-Evade +1 Offense
Weapon Elemental -1 Offense OR Team Synergy (Running an elemental weapon is riskier)
Statii +1.5 Offense (Oil + Poison are both added)
MP Cost -1 User (I set it to 18 because I'm keeping the old version of oil, so the hindrance is even larger than before)
CT Cost -1 User

Flare
Non-Reflect: +1 Offense
Non-Evade: +1 Offense
Non-Elemental +1 Offense, -1 Team synergy
MP Cost: -1 User
CT Cost: -1 User

Stone Gun
Non-Evade: +1 Offense
Non-Elemental +1 Offense, -1 Team synergy
Early Game Weakness + AI Stupidity with Cancel: Petrify: -1 Team Synergy OR Risk

Spell Gun (in S7)
Non-Evade: +1 Offense
Non-Reflect: +1 Offense (relevant because of the type of damage)
Weapon Elemental: -1 Offense, +1 Team Synergy
(In short, this would be balanced if pilgrimage didn't exist.)

-ton (in S6)
Non-Evade: +1 Offense
Reflect: -0.5 Offense (relevant because of the type of damage, but not fully due to the type of units who typically run 40 faith)
Synergy: +1 Team OR Self
(On the edge of being imbalanced...)

Kagesougi (in S7)
Add Statii: +0.7 Offense, x2 2S Bonus (Notice that it's not dealing damage twice that counts, since the trade between range and damage is worthwhile, but the right to inflict status twice.  This bonus is not given to Greased Bolt because of 100% inflict.)
Weapon Elemental -1 Offense OR Team Synergy (Running an elemental weapon is riskier)

If a ranged anti-counter has user HP > 252 at CT < 3 and averages damage > (305 - (Point Sum) * 20) * enemy faith / fury, it is broken.
If a melee anti-counter with CT < 3 averages damage > (305 - (Point Sum) * 20) * enemy faith / fury AND can squeeze in
1) 40 fury and HP > 336
2) passive defense + 70 fury and HP > 305
3) HP > 380
OR
4) Move > 4, base SP > 10 with HP > 305, he is broken.

Units with Faith and Innocent deserve special attention, and those with warpath / pilgrimage.  We typically add a precondition to the damage considerations.
If Warpath / Pilgrimage, can the unit survive the early game?  Of course, this is dependent on the enemy team as well, but if a strategy in general has non-enemy dependent uncertainty (like stone gun [or my spellgun changes will] do with maps), the full damage boost will not be considered.
If Innocent, can the unit survive optimized damage -ton?  If not, the unit is not broken as long as his SPD < 10.
If Faith and no Shell or MADEF (since all faith attacks are ranged spells), increase the HP requirement in the ranged unit condition to 340.

In short, Gaignun, when one evaluates the anti-counters, we must consider the whole picture, as no one would use an attack that does less than optimal damage, even if it was unevadable, if it made it harder on the rest of the team.  This is why seen in this light, none of the current nerf proposals make sense except for five (cursed ring, kagesougi, spellgun, bizen boat, and things related to holy spam).  Your oil example was pretty telling; all you did was tell me that two units with synergy will kill any given non-tank (i.e. running DEFUP or unyielding) around 75% of the time, which to me seems pretty normal.

I did some calculations last night and holy would equal flare only if the average MEV per unit is 30% or if the average MA of a mage with MATKUP was 12.  Since both are clearly false, holy could stand to have Y = 15.  After that, as long as we use my changes to spellgun and cursed ring, there should be no problems, even with golden hairpin (which is only usable in its niche).

Outside the Niche
+10 HP, +50 MP =?= +1 MA or +2 PA...and I'd say 35-65 it goes towards the latter.  I say that because only MP deficient classes (read: bard, archer, ninja, thief, often with MMPUP) who use MP-dependent skills really favor the first over the second.  Most mages have enough after their robe that they're fine.

Inside the Niche
Holy: Holy maxes at short charged 3 CT, 318 damage (vs. 40 faith) off short charge on a 241 HP Wi or Sc / Pr with faith rod.  (MATKUP versions with 6 CT are way too easy to midcharge, and Cursed Ring setups [as long as CR continues to block holy] will keep them down).  If this was 2 CT + Gaignun's cursed ring changes, I'd be more worried, but at 3CT + the glaring weaknesses of that setup are enough to make me think otherwise (as even projectile guard is going to get you killed against a spellgun [my changes] + 108 gems + thief hat archer with maximum spellgun damage and haste due to midcharge).  Even without the faith rod, the unit is in 1HKO range of a spellgunner without pilgrimage (which remains true as long as we don't nerf damage).
What's actually more likely to be devastating is Sc / ?? with 256 HP and faith rod / holy miter / earth clothes / magic gauntlet with MATKUP spamming quake with 2 CT, AoE + Self-Heal, same damage vs. 40 faith, but being able to only use her spells three times should count against the setup.
Dark: Dark attacks are not a reliable primary attack element because of how popular dark absorb is between cursed ring and black costume, and the fact oil has no effect on it.  Boosted koutetsu healing + damage is annoying, but it's actually no worse than Grand Cross.

What this demonstrates is that you cannot compare niche items to general use items directly.  Niche items are intended to be better within their niche than anything else; that is normal.  They are also supposed to be outclassed outside their niche.
With that, I think there's enough balance on the silver bow that 13 WP, +2 MA, 33-40% holy would be fine.
While we're on the subject, Excalibur could use a +1 WP boost.  Sq / Pl with ice brand is a bit fragile, but his damage differential nearly equals the HP differential between him and paladin, so that could definitely be improved upon.
Instead of making a Genji Helm that will end up cause people to use tornado + kiku over heaven's cloud or Kiku as the new damage katana (to the point where I'd have a hard time saying the damage isn't broken), why not make it 100 HP, +1 Move?  I know this breaks tradition about how armored classes should be immobile, but that's still a helm that helps samurai over all other armor users because of their higher melee / draw out damage.
The destruction of the will is the rape of the mind.
The dogmas of every era are nothing but the fantasies of those in power; their dreams are our waking nightmares.

Gaignun

August 03, 2013, 01:01:58 pm #1407 Last Edit: August 03, 2013, 01:48:08 pm by Gaignun
I'll quote myself before I begin to show you how I'm viewing your post.  You might not have caught it before posting, so:

Quote from: Gaignun on August 03, 2013, 06:48:48 am
Options with many more strengths than weaknesses are often called broken.  The fact that these options have weaknesses doesn't enter into the picture.  It is the balance of strengths and weaknesses, and not the existence of each, that assesses the option's worth.


Now, I'm trying to digest your criteria on what constitutes balance, but it's not very clear.  Help me out here:

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
If an optimized ranged attack has user HP > 252 at CT < 3 averaging damage > 400 * enemy faith / fury, it is broken.  I say 400 because that's the HP of a PA setup lancer.


So it's not broken as long as it deals fewer than 315~441 damage?  That's a little high.  Units that value something more than maximum HP (i.e. almost every unit) are going to be 1HKOd without perfume or (Magic) Defend UP.

Instead of running through the rest of your criteria one by one, I'll say this: your assessment of balance is quite binary. The message I'm receiving is either it exceeds a damage limit with the odd stipulation or two and is broken, or it is fine.  However, observing which attacks exceed an arbitrary number is not telling of balance.  If one attack averages 300 damage and another 150, these two attacks are unbalanced.  I'm not saying that observing damage limits is fruitless.  Indeed, it's good for keeping offense in check with defense.  But the issue here is the distribution of power between FFTA's many options, not the breaking of arbitrary limits.

Thus, my issue of spellguns and Stone Gun versus crossbows still stands.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Due to the variety of anti-counters, it's helpful to establish a point system of their abilities.


I must voice caution toward the use of point systems.  The prescription of numbers to attributes flattens contextual differences which separate skills.  This makes comparisons deceiving.  Furthermore, the prescription of numbers can be quite arbitrary.  This is going to be a little pedantic, but let me explain by example:

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Example:
Repeating Fist
Non-Elemental +1 Offense, -1 Team synergy
Non-Evade +1 Offense
0 Vert -1 Offense


The team synergy point means nothing if you don't intend to run an absorption strategy to begin with.  Similarly, non-elemental offense isn't necessarily an advantage, since you cannot boost the damage with elemental strengthening, so its damage is limited.  Also, having non-elemental offense means little if you intend to make use of Oil or break/steal equipment, a strategy which is useful in its own right.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Hawk's Eye
Non-Evade +1 Offense
Weapon Elemental -1 Offense OR Team Synergy (Running an elemental weapon is riskier)
Statii +1.5 Offense (Oil + Poison are both added)
MP Cost -1 User (I set it to 18 because I'm keeping the old version of oil, so the hindrance is even larger than before)
CT Cost -1 User


This ties in with the Repeating Fist example.  I'd say the 100% accuracy of Hawk's Eye is better than the 100% accuracy of Repeating Fist.  First of all, Hawk's Eye can be used at a range, so it is much more usable.  Second, it inflicts Poison and Oil, but only if it hits.  Thus, the combination of these two attributes is greater than the sum.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Stone Gun
Non-Evade: +1 Offense
Non-Elemental +1 Offense, -1 Team synergy
Early Game Weakness + AI Stupidity with Cancel: Petrify: -1 Team Synergy OR Risk


I said this only a few posts ago, but Stone Gun's early game weakness is irrelevant on all but the smallest maps.  In fact, spending a turn cleansing petrify keeps your archer at the back of the party, where he should be.  This also helps keeps your party from running into mid-field at the same time and getting blasted by AoE.

Now to explain the point system's weakness: In these three examples, you prescribed Repeating Fist and Stone Gun 0 points and Hawk's Eye -0.5 points.  Stone Gun aside, this point system tells us that that Hawk's Eye is weaker than Repeating Fist.  I assure you that this is not the case.  Hawk's Eye's is gnarly.  First, it can be used from virtually anywhere, as it takes on its user's weapon's range.  Second, it deals solid HP damage (e.g. with Mythril Bow).  Mix in the fact that its damage is optimised by boosting SP, which further boosts its DPS.  Third, it adds poison and oil.  If the victim subsequently dies from elemental-amplified damage or what have you, the poison proc lingers, so Hawk's Eyes effect lasts even beyond death.  Furthermore, poison and oil cannot be healed at the same time.  If, by some chance, the victim survives, its party must spend three turns on damage control: healing the lost HP, cleansing poison, then cleansing oil.

Repeating Fist is actually weaker by comparison.  First, it has 1 range and 0 vert, so there are fewer opportunities to use it.  Second, it does not add ailments which last beyond death, so it costs the victim's party only one turn of damage control (i.e. healing the lost HP).  However, by following the results of the points system, we must conclude that Repeating Fist is stronger.

This is what I mean by flattening contextual differences.

In the end, the prescription of numbers is quite arbitrary.  For example, I disagree with your assessment of Stone Gun.  Stone Gun does not deserve to lose an equal amount for Init:Petrify as Repeating Fist does for 0 vert.  Similarly, is Repeating Fist's non-elemental offense and 100% accuracy equally deserving of 1 point?  Non-elemental offense is relevant only if your opponent is running elemental defense, whereas 100% accuracy is relevant in general.  In fact, if players throw out elemental defense in favour of mantles or perfumes due to threat of 1.38 Oil, then non-elemental offense is entirely irrelevant.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Spell Gun (in S7)
...
(In short, this would be balanced if pilgrimage didn't exist.)


I'm glad you observed this on your own.  Pilgrimage is the spark which led to the shifting of spellguns to the nether formula.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Your oil example was pretty telling; all you did was tell me that two units with synergy will kill any given non-tank (i.e. running DEFUP or unyielding) around 75% of the time, which to me seems pretty normal.


It kills the target 75% of the time on the assumption that the target is equipped to block the spellgun's element.  75% odds of having your counter neutralised (i.e. elemental defense) is a slap in the face to the idea of a counter.  Two-swords + spellgun is enough to kill all other units 100% of the time.  That's not normal at all.

You might want to check your math, but this combination is enough to kill even tanks.  Optimised Glacier Gun deals 224~314 damage (pre-Pilgrimage) to oiled units with Magic Defend UP.  Two concentrated Short Edges will do around 172~242 more.  That's enough for a 2HKO.

Now, concerning Golden Hairpin:

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Outside the Niche
+10 HP, +50 MP =?= +1 MA or +2 PA...and I'd say 35-65 it goes towards the latter.  I say that because only MP deficient classes (read: bard, archer, ninja, thief, often with MMPUP) who use MP-dependent skills really favor the first over the second.  Most mages have enough after their robe that they're fine.


Data from S2 says its 25-75 in favour of Golden Hairpin.  Of the 21 units with Golden Hairpin, only 7 are using it to boost Holy/Dark damage.  Accounting for this makes it 33-66 in favour of Golden Hairpin.  You just explained that rounding out your party is better than maximising damage, right?  Well, many players enjoy the added security of 10 HP and 50 MP.  10 HP can mean a great deal to mages.  With HP in the mid-to-high 200s, +10 HP can mean the difference between a 1HKO and a 2HKO.

The remaining points are pretty minor, but:

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 amIf this was 2 CT + Gaignun's cursed ring changes,...


The Cursed Ring change isn't mine.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
What's actually more likely to be devastating is Sc / ?? with 256 HP and faith rod / holy miter / earth clothes / magic gauntlet with MATKUP spamming quake with 2 CT, AoE + Self-Heal, same damage vs. 40 faith, but being able to only use her spells three times should count against the setup.


Scholars are being replaced by Druids.  Their MA is taking a hit.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Dark: Dark attacks are not a reliable primary attack element because of how popular dark absorb is between cursed ring and black costume, and the fact oil has no effect on it.


We're trying to change this, first with the Cursed Ring SP nerf, and second by shifting Thief Hat's water elemental resistance to Green Beret so that Thief Hat + Black Costume ceases to be the single trusty hat+armor combination.  This is done precisely to make the Dark element more reliable.

Quote from: formerdeathcorps on August 03, 2013, 08:25:12 am
Niche items are intended to be better within their niche than anything else; that is normal.  They are also supposed to be outclassed outside their niche.With that, I think there's enough balance on the silver bow that 13 WP, +2 MA, 33-40% holy would be fine.


Silver Bow with +2 MA doesn't outclass things just outside its niche, it outclasses everything.

Let's be reasonable.  The reason why you want Silver Bow to have +2 MA is because you want mages to use it well.  Unfortunately, mages aren't designed to use PA-based weapons.  It's not a good idea to break the entire weapon balance for the sake of going against this.  If you want to equalise the tradeoff between Equip X and (Magic) Attack UP, boost mages' PA.

Anyway, Bards (which will likely be the designated users of this new Silver Bow, MA bonus or not), can deal solid damage (328~460 at 40%) without MA bonus.  With the MA bonus (on Silver Bow and Golden Hairpin), that's 379~531.

AeroGP

Quote from: Gaignun on August 03, 2013, 06:48:48 amTo me, a healthy meta-game is akin to rock-paper-scissors.  You have three options. All are equally usable because each has as many strengths as weaknesses.  (i.e. each option defeats one, loses to another, and ties the third.)


Rock-paper-scissors without different (read: inequal) rewards is uninteresting. You can't incorporate what you're opponent is doing into your strategy, because there's nothing predictable influencing decision making, so team-design becomes almost entirely a single-minded activity. That's boring.

Quote from: Gaignun on August 03, 2013, 06:48:48 amGames with many more options are, naturally, harder to balance.  Due to human fallibility, there will always be strategies that have more strengths than weaknesses.  Options with many more strengths than weaknesses are often called broken.  The fact that these options have weaknesses doesn't enter into the picture.  It is the balance of strengths and weaknesses, and not the existence of each, that assesses the option's worth.


Only when the rewards of picking the counter-strategy compared to the dominant one are slim-to-none, and/or the dominant strategy hits a plateau that makes even designing counters in the game an impossibility, is it a problem. Otherwise, it's fine.

Quote from: Gaignun on August 03, 2013, 06:48:48 amThis is especially true for competitive games.  Street Fighter 3 Third Strike is a much-loved competitive game, but it is terribly unbalanced.  It has 19 characters, but only three (Chun-Li, Yun, and Ken) are regularly used.  In tournaments, the meta-game involves picking characters and developing strategies to counter solely these three.  (Often, these strategies involve picking these very characters yourself.  After all, Chun-Li's only weakness is Chun-Li herself.)  This harms variety.  After all, there are 19 characters to choose from, and most are never chosen because they require you to work so much harder to achieve the same performance.

Balancing out this uneven distribution of power is the whole point of balance patches.  Capcom has been attempting to round out the cast of Street Fighter 4 for over four years.  When it was understood that rush-down characters Yun and Fei Long were god-tier, they nerfed them.  It didn't matter that they were weak to fireballs.  Only Sagat and Ryu could use fireballs competently against Yun and Fei Long, so the meta-game was basically about picking from 4 characters (Yun, Fei Long, Sagat, or Ryu), or preparing yourself to fight against overwhelming odds.  Furthermore, Yun's and Fei Long's strengths totally eclipsed other rush-down characters such as Rufus.  Rufus had dropped off the radar, and variety in SF4 had suffered for it.  The balance patch nerfed Yun and Fei Long so that characters like Rufus are worth using again.  Variety was restored.

In our case, spellguns/Stone Gun/Hidden Knife is Yun/Fei Long, Projectile Guard/White Robe/Perfumes is Sagat/Ryu, and Rufus is crossbows.  The current meta-game is about watching Yun and Fei Long dominate, watching Sagat and Ryu being picked to counter Yun, and lamenting over how ineffective the remaining 35 members of the cast are.  If this is your idea of a healthy meta-game, then there is nothing more I can say.


The issue is that you're more focused on bringing the power level down when it's not even THAT high. This isn't Yun/Fei-long, this is C.Viper/Dhalsim. The solution is to bring everyone else up. Unless you're suggesting there's no reasonable way to do so, in which case prove it!
Quote from: Tycho"There are a number of different factors impacting server connectivity on Xbox 360," the spokesperson said. "It is a particularly complex server architecture and we continue to work with Microsoft to improve connectivity."

I don't want to bolster any "violent gamer" tropes, but that statement makes me want to improve the connectivity of my front two knuckles with their esophagus.  I wonder how Brenna would respond if I told her that "fidelity" was complicated.

Gaignun

Quote from: AeroGP on August 03, 2013, 01:23:19 pm
Rock-paper-scissors without different (read: inequal) rewards is uninteresting. You can't incorporate what you're opponent is doing into your strategy, because there's nothing predictable influencing decision making, so team-design becomes almost entirely a single-minded activity. That's boring.

Only when the rewards of picking the counter-strategy compared to the dominant one are slim-to-none, and/or the dominant strategy hits a plateau that makes even designing counters in the game an impossibility, is it a problem. Otherwise, it's fine.


That's what SF4's producer, Ono-san, said about Yun and Yang in SSF4:AE.  His statement wasn't very popular with the fighting game community.

Quote from: AeroGP on August 03, 2013, 01:23:19 pm
The issue is that you're more focused on bringing the power level down when it's not even THAT high. This isn't Yun/Fei-long, this is C.Viper/Dhalsim. The solution is to bring everyone else up. Unless you're suggesting there's no reasonable way to do so, in which case prove it!


Ignoring the futility of proving a negative, you'll be pleased to find that most of the proposed changes for 1.39 are buffs.  The only substantial nerfs are spellguns, Kagesougi, and oil.  I'd say spellguns, Kagesougi, and oil are indeed that high.  Stone Gun's nerf is minor and is being done proactively upon observation of 1.37's metagame.

reinoe

August 03, 2013, 02:11:11 pm #1410 Last Edit: August 03, 2013, 02:17:41 pm by reinoe
Quote from: Gaignun on August 03, 2013, 06:48:48 am
I agree with you on what makes team-building interesting, but we seem to disagree on the concept of dominant strategies.

Allow me to discuss what my idea of a meta-game is:

Short version: Equal distribution of power > Dominant strategies vs counter-strategies

In our case, spellguns/Stone Gun/Hidden Knife is Yun/Fei Long, Projectile Guard/White Robe/Perfumes is Sagat/Ryu, and Rufus is crossbows. 

Regarding the damage being dealt by Hidden Knife, isn't the actual probem kagesougi?  I mean the damage coming from regular attack Hidden Knife is not going to bring the world to it's knees.  Especially when you consider that Ultimus bow+Kagesougi is similarly problematic.  Although I'm fine with Hidden Knife losing the +1 speed as long as it still grants transparent.

I don't agree with the change for Hawk's Eye.  It's going to cost more MP because it procs oil and allows a second unit to kill it.  Isn't that precisely what oil is supposed to do?  As for poison proc, well I've already mentioned that the number of matches where it has actually mattered has doubled to 2.

Lastly I don't think Stone Gun should be getting a nerf based on being theoretically unbalanced.  While I think CT5Holy's recommendation of a blanket buff of +2WP to Crossbows is a little bit too much, a blanket buff of +1WP is fine.
My dreams can come true!

Gaignun

August 06, 2013, 07:53:02 am #1411 Last Edit: August 11, 2013, 11:43:49 am by Gaignun
Quote from: reinoe on August 03, 2013, 02:11:11 pm
Regarding the damage being dealt by Hidden Knife, isn't the actual probem kagesougi?  I mean the damage coming from regular attack Hidden Knife is not going to bring the world to it's knees.  Especially when you consider that Ultimus bow+Kagesougi is similarly problematic.  Although I'm fine with Hidden Knife losing the +1 speed as long as it still grants transparent.


It's listed to lose 1 SP, but it's keeping its WP and Always: Transparent, so it will still do its job.  Its 5 W-EV has also been removed, but I don't mind whether or not its W-EV is actually removed, personally.

Quote from: reinoe on August 03, 2013, 02:11:11 pm
I don't agree with the change for Hawk's Eye.  It's going to cost more MP because it procs oil and allows a second unit to kill it.  Isn't that precisely what oil is supposed to do?


The MP cost increase will hardly be felt if clothes get their listed MP boosts.  Personally, I would rather have it lose its 100% accuracy, but I'm not sure how popular this motion is.

Quote from: reinoe on August 03, 2013, 02:11:11 pm
Lastly I don't think Stone Gun should be getting a nerf based on being theoretically unbalanced.  While I think CT5Holy's recommendation of a blanket buff of +2WP to Crossbows is a little bit too much, a blanket buff of +1WP is fine.


Making Stone Gun force-2H nerfs only archers.  Mediators and Chemists are unaffected.  This change will make crossbows the designated weapons for P/MEV-stacked archers.  Personally, I feel that this falls in line with crossbows' 4 range: archers move themselves closer to harm to attack, so they get to use a shield in compensation.  Recognising that crossbows also proc a status effect, crossbow archers will be the tanky saboteurs.

Edit:  Here is a rough summary of recent proposals that are not yet in the proposal summary.  Many of these changes have not been debated by more than two or three people, so if anyone else wants to chime in, please feel free to do so!


Phoenix Blade: Remove from game
Platinum Sword: 11 WP, 20 W-EV, 2H, 2S
Parry Edge: Remove from game
Moonlight: Remove from game.  Effect is given to Spear.
Ultima Weapon: 10 WP, 10 W-EV, 33% Cast: Ultima, 2H, 2S

============================
We can replace the three removed swords with three new ones.  Here are a few ideas, each with a brief assessment:

Balmung: 9 WP, 10 W-EV, Dark Element, 50% Cast: Stop, 2H, 2S
Unique in that it will be the first easily accessible Dark weapon and the only weapon to inflict Stop.  Stop will be inflicted at a rate of around 19%~37% (40v40 Fa, 70v70 Fa), and that's before considering M-EV.

Phoenix Blade: 14 WP, 10 W-EV, Fire Element, 25% Cast: Fire 2
The Fire-equivalent of Ice Brand.  This will essentially be another weapon for Squires and Geomancers to use Grand Cross with.  This might not be a good thing, since Ice-Brand Grand Cross is already quite effective. (e.g. It deals 220~308 AoE damage at 12 PA with a Kaiser Plate and Attack UP; the damage differential is twice that.)  This will require defending teams to protect themselves from another element (then Ice, now Fire and Ice).

Kazekiri: 10 WP, 10 W-EV, Wind Element, +1 Range, 2S
Can be dual-wielded to add +1 Range to the second weapon.

Sword of Storms: 9 WP, 10 W-EV, Lightning Element, 33% Add: DM or DA, 2H, 2S
Will be the only Lightning elemental melee weapon (aside from Thunder Rod and Mace of Zeus).  Its proc overlaps with Ninja Edge's and Lightning Bow's, so it isn't exactly unique.  Still, it is worth considering.
============================

Crossbow: Remove from the game

============================
So far, only Malroth has suggested a replacement for Crossbow:

Stunner: 8 WP, 5 W-EV, 4 Range, 50% Set CT to 0
============================

Silver Bow: 13 WP, 10 W-EV, Holy element, 40% Cast: Holy

Save the Queen: 15 WP, 25 W-EV, Init: Reraise
Ragnarok: 16 WP, 25 W-EV, Init: Protect and Shell

Necronomicon: 15 WP, 10 W-EV, 33% Add: Zombie
Madlemgen: 14 WP, 10 W-EV, Boost: Ice, 33% Add: Stop
Monster Dict Book of Sealing: 11 WP, 10 W-EV, 50% Cast: Bizen Boat
Papyrus Plate: 8 WP, 10 W-EV, 50% Cast: Flare

Asura Knife: 9 WP, 15 W-EV, Fire element, Strengthen: Fire, Ice, Lightning, 2H, 2S
Koutetsu Knife: 10 WP, 15 W-EV, Dark element, Strengthen: Dark, 2H, 2S
Bizen Boat: 9 WP, 15 W-EV, 100% Cast: Sinkhole, 2H, 2S
Murasame: 12 WP, 15 W-EV, +1 MA, Heals on Hit, Immune: Berserk, 2H, 2S
Kiyomori: 10 WP, 15 W-EV, 50% Cast: Bio, 2H, 2S (+2 MA removed)
Kikuichimonji: 10 WP, 15 W-EV, Earth element, 25% Cast: Quake, 2H, 2S
Chirijiraden: 10 WP, 15 W-EV, +1 PA, Strengthen: Wind, Water, Earth, 2H, 2S

Giant Axe: 10 WP, 30 W-EV, +1 PA, +1 MA, Earth element (Strengthen: Wind, Water, Earth removed)

Romanda Gun: 10 WP, 0 W-EV, 6 Range, +2 MA
Mythril Gun Vectra Gun: 10 WP, 0 W-EV, 6 Range, Heals on Hit, 33% Add: Reflect (If adding a status and healing on hit at the same time is impossible, then this gun will need to be redesigned)

Spear Moonlight: 9 WP, 10 W-EV, +1 SP, 50% Cast: Blade Beam
Mythril Spear Blood Spear: 11 WP, 10 W-EV, +1 SP, Drains HP
Partisan Odin's Lance: 11 WP, 10 W-EV, +1 SP, 20% Add: Dead
Holy Lance: 10 WP, 10 W-EV, +1 SP, Holy Element, 50% Cast: Holy Breath (Dmg_(MA*8))

Persia: 12 WP, 10 W-EV, Init: Reraise
Cashmere: 12 WP, 10 W-EV, Init: Protect and Shell


Genji Helm: 120 HP, Strengthen: Wind, Earth (Init: Berserk removed)
= OR=
Genji Helm: 100 HP, +1 Move (Init: Berserk removed)


Salty Rage: Init: Berserk, Reraise


Protect: 4 Range, 1 AoE, 0 Vert, 3 CT, 20 MP, Heal_F(MA*6), 100% Add: Protect, 200 JP
Shell: 4 Range, 1 AoE, 0 Vert, 3 CT, 20 MP, Heal_F(MA*6), 100% Add: Shell, 200 JP

Asura: 0 Range, 2 AoE, 2 Vert, 0 CT, 0 MP, Dmg_(PA*9) (Ignores allies removed)
Bizen Boat: Southern Cross Range OR always deals 0 HP damage on top of MP damage (so that it breaks certain status ailments and triggers HP reactions)

Fuuton: 5 Range, 0 AoE, 0 CT, 20 MP, Wind element, Dmg_UF(PA*11)
Meiton: 5 Range, 0 AoE, 0 CT, 14 MP, Dark element, Dmg_UF(PA*10), Uncounterable
Suiton: 5 Range, 0 AoE, 0 CT, 12 MP, Water element, Dmg_UF(PA*9), Unevadable, Unreflectable

============================
If Suiton receives the listed buff, then Coral Sword's WP will drop by 1 to compensate.
============================


Other things, such as leaving spellgun damage alone, but lowering spellgun range to 4, are also on the table.

Topics that were not summarised (or that I forgot) are not displayed here.  For example, there was a discussion about changing MP-damage abilities other than Bizen Boat that are not displayed.  That doesn't mean these topics cannot be discussed!

CT5Holy

20 MP for Fuuton seems a bit steep. Suiton, at 60% of the MP cost, does slightly less damage (actually, on optimized builds that's like 50 less damage, which is decently relevant), but is unevadable. 16 MP for Fuuton would be more reasonable.

I would prefer Bizen Boat (Katana) to keep its stronger 100% Silence proc. The Sinkhole proc is not guaranteed to hit, since melee Katana users will typically have 40 Faith. Less units are affected by Sinkhole, as well. Recall the discussion of how Talk Skill users are vulnerable to Silence, especially since these units usually do not have Silence immunity. Sinkhole does let the Bizen Boat wielder get around Silence protection, but you have to hope they are in position to midcharge a unit. Also, isn't Silence getting a finite duration? That also makes the 100% Silence more manageable.

Genji Helmet... I dunno, both will be useful. I have no preference.

I like the 50% CT 00 proc Crossbow.

Everything else I'm fine with.
Winner of the 1st FFT 1.3 AI Tourney

The Damned

(Damn it. I knew I'd fall behind, but it seems like formerdeaethcorps has picked up my "slack" when it comes to make really wordy posts.)

Given everything I have to do still right now and given that I want to respond to things after not just skipping them, I'll spare you guys (and gals) from one such reply for now.

Not that I'd quote *everything* that's gone on in the past couple of weeks here in one post. Probably. I mean, as masochistic as I am, I don't exactly want to get into debating metagame semantics, as least in the same post I'm replying to changes about mechanics.

So, for now, I'll just say four to six things:


1. It's nice to "see" you back, formerdeathcorps. How did you get punished by being sent to China?

2. As I was originally going to response to Dokurider's post about Knives/Daggers before I got "distracted" by other things for the past couple of weeks: I don't think all Daggers need to lose Move +1, but the Knives that are capable of being used with Two Hands definitely do (if we're letting those remain Two Hand-capable at all). At the very least, Throwing Knife would be fine keeping Move +1.

3. Also as I was going to reply to Dokurider awhile ago: Yes, you currently cannot add statuses or cancel statuses while healing on hit (with a weapon). That should be "easy", relatively speak at least, to change/"fix" though, especially compared to some of the other stuff that people like FFMaster, formerdeathcorps and Pride have done. So Vectra Gun (or whatever we're calling it) should be "easily" doable with ASM'ing.

4. I actually might be okay with "Freezing Fist", if only because Ice is implicitly taking a moderate hit in usability anyway with the necessary change to Defense Ring and it's already one of the lesser used elements. I'll have to think on it more though, especially since I just skimmed over this and am only replying since Gaignun mentioned I might have a problem.

5. From just skimming things, I have to say that I'm...kinda uncomfortable with all the talk about adding Initial: Reraise do more things even with Phoenix Blade biting it, especially since the A.I. is often so dumb about ignoring units that will get back up.

6. Related to that, yes, I think that making it so Cursed Ring revival is only 50/50 even with the immunity to Crystal and Treasure would be fair even with it probably still needing to lose Speed +1. I still don't understand why it isn't already that because I could have sworn, having tested the exact same things years given that I was among those who suggested the buff, that even with immunities, revival isn't guaranteed. And this wouldn't be the Reraise on Undead units things that's addressed in Battle Mechanics Guide where my utterly atrocious luck meant that those units never revived on me. Shrug.

Anyway, that would make Cursed Ring still usable but not stupid like it is now.


I'll punish you all over the weekend. Probably.
"Sorrow cannot be abolished. It is meaningless to try." - FFX's Yunalesca

"Good and evil are relative, but being a dick cannot be allowed." - Oglaf's Thaumaturge in "The Abyss"

"Well, see, the real magic isn't believing in yourself. The real magic is manipulating people by telling them to believe in themselves. The more you believe, the less you check facts."  - Oglaf's Vanka in "Conviction"

Dokurider

Quote
Ifrit: 4 Range, 2 AoE, 2 Vert, 3 CT, 12 MP, Fire Elemental, F_MA*8, Unevadable, Enemy Only, No Reflect, CM, CF, 100 JP

Quote
Salamander: 4 Range, 2 AoE, 2 Vert, 5 CT, 20 MP, Fire Elemental, F_MA*8, M-Ev, Enemy Only, 20% Oil, No Reflect, CM, CF, 100 JP


Hey guys, what's wrong with this picture?

Dynablade

oooh ooh I wanna try!

Salamander costs more, at a higher CT, is evadeable, and still only does MA*8 damage?

CT5Holy

I'm sure that's a typo - Salamander should still be at 3 AoE?
Winner of the 1st FFT 1.3 AI Tourney

FFMaster

  • Modding version: Other/Unknown
☢ CAUTION CAUTION ☢ CAUTION CAUTION ☢

AeroGP

That's still not a good trade-off. 2 effect is good enough to hit an entire party in most cases, and 20% Oil is only helpful on repeated usage, which is undermined by the higher mp cost.

Why does summoner even need 2 fire-elemental spells, anyways?
Quote from: Tycho"There are a number of different factors impacting server connectivity on Xbox 360," the spokesperson said. "It is a particularly complex server architecture and we continue to work with Microsoft to improve connectivity."

I don't want to bolster any "violent gamer" tropes, but that statement makes me want to improve the connectivity of my front two knuckles with their esophagus.  I wonder how Brenna would respond if I told her that "fidelity" was complicated.

Dokurider

Quote from: AeroGP on August 18, 2013, 01:27:18 pm
That's still not a good trade-off. 2 effect is good enough to hit an entire party in most cases, and 20% Oil is only helpful on repeated usage, which is undermined by the higher mp cost.

Why does summoner even need 2 fire-elemental spells, anyways?


Yeah Summon Magic never needed two fire spells, but it's not like you make it a different element or anything and removal is only an option if the skill itself is hopelessly overpowered.