|
Thread: Luck and Morale - a discussion | This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · NEXT» |
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
posted March 20, 2007 06:00 PM |
|
|
Luck and Morale - a discussion
There has been a lot of discussion of Luck and Morale, their respective skills Luck and Leadership, and a couple of other related features lately, and since the topic has invaded several unrelated threads, I think it would be proper to give the discussion a thread of it's own, where it can be covered completely. I will try to give an outline of some of the points from other threads - please fill me in, what I'm missing.
Luck
As most are familiar by now, the Luck system of Heroes 5 works so that you can have a Luck modifier from -5 to +5, and for each point of Luck, you will have a 10 % chance to do double damage (if positive) or half damage (if negative). Notice that the added damage by good luck corresponds to 100 % of normal damage, whereas the subtracted damage by bad luck is only 50 %.
Taken on average, maximum Luck corresponds to 50 % extra damage. This seems very powerfull compared to other Attack-increasing abilities like Attack (+20 % melee damage), Archery (+20 % ranged damage), and Retribution (+25 % damage at maximum morale). Notice, however, that since each point of Attack > Defence corresponds to +5 % damage, Expert Light Magic and Master of Wrath will give you mass Righteous Might for +12 Attack, corresponding to +60 % damage.
The catch with such a comparison is, of course, that the skills are not directly comparable. Attack works on all (melee) attacks, and is therefore dependable. Retribution requires high morale (and therefore works best with Leadership), but is also reliable. Righteous Might is a spell, and will only take action after your Hero spends a turn casting it. Luck is independable, it might shine on your 100 Black Dragons, or it might shine on your lone peasant - in the latter case, it would be wasted. Finally, the Luck skill itself only provides 3 points of Luck (corresponding to 30 % of damage); to get the maximum +5 Luck, you need to have artifacts to boost Luck.
The question is, then, whether Luck is overpowered or not. It is true, that it adds more damage than Attack and Retribution, when it is at its maximum, but on the other hand, it sufferes from the fact that it's independable.
Morale
The case with Morale is not less complicated than Luck. Morale like Luck has a 10 % chance per modifier to trigger, and will add 0.5 to the ATB value of the attacker (meaning that he will act again in half the normal time). Bad morale will make creature loose 0.5 ATB value before action. Notice that the bonus at Good morale is the same as the penalty at Bad morale.
Morale and Luck seems to be the mirror of each other, but there are a couple of catches. First of all, the army Morale is affected by which creatures you have in the army - thus, if you only creatures and hero from one faction, you will be have a +2 Morale bonus, whereas Luck always starts at 0. This makes it fairly eay to reach high Morale values (+3, +4, +5) without Leadership, as long as your army isn't mixed, if you just get a couple of artifacts.
Furthermore, a unit cannot have good morale until it has made its first action. This means, the units effectively only will be affected by Morale from second action and onwards - notice that the defence action in this case won't count as an action. This means that the effective bonus to possible damage from Morale will be lower than that of Luck. This is, however, compensated by the fact that Morale adds not only damage, but also Movement, Retaliations, etc. A unit will not be able to have good Morale on performing a retaliation, but will be able to get good Luck in that case.
The question is then, whether Leadership and Morale is less good than Luck. Morale proves lower potential for damage, but adds other benefits to compensate for this. And the Leadership is less essential than the Luck skill, because you can have high Morale without this skill, but only rarely will get high Luck modifier without the Luck skill.
Possible changes
A number of suggestions have been put forward as to how one might improve the system. Some of these include:
- Reducing trigger chance of Luck and Morale to somewhere between 5 % and 10 % for each modifier. Pros: Will make Luck less powerfull. Thus, with a 5 % trigger chance, +5 Luck will correspond to +25 % potential damage, like Retribution. Cons: Will make the skills even less dependable, which is annoying during gameplay. Heroes with only +1 or +2 Luck will very rarely have Luck triggering, which will make these skills lose importance. Reducing triggering chance will not eliminate the gap between Luck and Leadership.
- Extending the modifier range from -5 to +5 to -10 to +10. Pros: Will work great with lower triggering chances to retain high triggering possibilities. Extending the range will make the Leadership skill more usefull, because you will not hit the morale "roof" (currently +5) so easily, which makes the skill useless. Will work well with introduction of new spells like Mirth and Fortune for the same reasons. Cons: Will make the difference between low modifier (+1, +2) and high modifier (+9, +10) very large, emphasizing the unreliability problem. Will make the Luck and Leadership relatively less good, because the only provide 30 % instead of 60 % of possible modifier.
- Reduce damage bonus from Luck from +100 % damage to +50 % damage or something in between. Pros: Will make bonus and penalty at good and back Luck similar. Will eliminate the difference in strength of Luck and Morale. Will make Luck more comparable to skills like Attack and Retribution. Cons: Will make Luck less usefull, which if combined with too many other nerfings will risk making the skill worthless.
- Roll Morale at the beginning of each combat, so creatures can start with good Morale, and thus act sooner. Pros: Will eliminate the difference in strength of Luck and Morale. Will make effect of random starting ATB values less important for Heroes with high Morale modifier. Cons: ?
- Introduce global Luck modifier like the one that works for Morale depending on the creatures in the army. Pros: Will eliminate difference between Luck and Morale. Will work well with extended range of modifiers, because it will help reach the maximum modifier if this one is very high, like +10. Cons: Seems less intuitive than the Morale modifier, because there should be no reason creatures were more or less lucky depending on who they were fighting. An alternative scheme has so far not been suggested.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted March 20, 2007 06:11 PM |
|
|
Quote: - Reducing trigger chance of Luck and Morale to somewhere between 5 % and 10 % for each modifier. Pros: Will make Luck less powerfull. Thus, with a 5 % trigger chance, +5 Luck will correspond to +25 % potential damage, like Retribution. Cons: Will make the skills even less dependable, which is annoying during gameplay. Heroes with only +1 or +2 Luck will very rarely have Luck triggering, which will make these skills lose importance. Reducing triggering chance will not eliminate the gap between Luck and Leadership.
Here is why I do NOT agree with this idea:
Suppose you have a creature, "randomly" based (i.e gambling) and solely base much damage on random. I will take it to the extreme, so as to say that a Black Dragon with 45-70 damage (average 57.5) will do equally on average with 1-115 damage (aproximately same average, same with luck).
If we take the average into consideration, like the luck triggering chance, then of course BOTH versions of the Black dragon are balanced, right? But now I ask you people, which version do you prefer?
1) The black dragon is reliable in it's power -- i.e it is always a tough creature, but never too tough (like 115 damage)
2) The black dragon is NOT reliable in it's power -- i.e it can either be an Imp (1 damage) or a very powerful creature (115 damage). However such a thing is extremely random dependant and therefore cannot EVER be balanced.
Now back to luck. It is the same thing here. If we reduce the chances too low and add a very high bonus (let's assume chances are 1% per skill, and bonus is 1000%), then IT WILL NEVER BE BALANCED.
Even at luck 5, in this extreme example, you would have only a mere 5% chance of triggering. Therefore whoever gets a trigger is VERY lucky, doing 10 times as more damage (1000% bonus, in our example).
That is why the bonus should be kept as low as possible and the chances high -- calculating with the average is not a solution. It is important to reduce the gap between a lucky strike and a non-lucky strike. Otherwise you could as well have a low luck and trigger almost the same as the enemy with high luck -- with a small damage bonus, the difference won't be that big. IMO it should be more reliable, and less powerful.
|
|
ZombieLord
Promising
Famous Hero
that wants your brainz...
|
posted March 20, 2007 06:13 PM |
|
|
First of all I don't like the idea about improving morale (at the start of combat). Morale is too good even now and making it better would ruin it like Luck.
Second, I disagree about the 'independable' thing of Luck. The only thing I find a weakness is when it triggers on a stack that already kills the enemy stack without luck. Otherwise, I posted why luck is not bad to be independable in another thread (I'm too lazy to explain again)
Quote: For the following info, I assume Luck is as good as attack, i.e. it gives +20% average damage (much like +20% chances to trigger at Expert Luck)
BEST SITUATION (having Luck, triggering on 100 Black Dragons)
+100% damage to 100 Black Dragons
+0% damage to 1 Peasant and other stacks...
MEDIUM SITUATION (having Attack)
+20% damage to 100 Black Dragons
+20% damage to 1 Peasant and other stacks...
WORST SITUATION (having Luck, triggering on 1 Peasant)
+0% damage to 100 Black Dragons
+100% damage to 1 Peasant and other stacks
So you see? Luck is unreliable but this makes it either better or weaker than Attack. It DOES NOT MEAN IT'S ALWAYS WEAKER, as Luck triggering on 100 Black Dragons and not on your other stacks (20%) will clearly be MUCH BETTER than +20% damage on all of your stacks. Luck is unreliable, but this does not make it weaker nor stronger
So I think Luck being independable is just a minor weakness that can be compensated by the fact that Luck works on all attacks and not only on melee. So I think Luck should do 20% average damage (Expert Luck -- 3) that means 66% bonus damage (and this won't turn the game into a gamble one like reducing the chances)
Quote: I don't like the idea of reducing the chances... In some games it will still trigger all the time and you'd say: "I was lucky". You were lucky indeed, but was it fun? Come on, no need to introduce a risk in this game like: "I hope I'm not very lucky, it will destroy the fun"
And I think Morale's bonus should be reduced a little... say 40% (these skills are too god damn powerful)
|
|
Destro23
Promising
Famous Hero
Keeper of GrongGrong
|
posted March 20, 2007 06:44 PM |
|
|
Luck and Morale are very good skills there is no doubt. The bonus at luck 5 seems way more than it should trigger, But way less under certain circumstances hehe.
For me Luck is a skill that every hero regardless of class/faction/other skills will inevitably have. It just adds far to much "over-damage" to an even (otherwise) battle. Now luck itself I do not find to be so overpowering that one cannot beat a hero with 5 luck if you yourself have none. However what I do find to be unbelievable is the negative luck penalty. I had a game not so long ago were my hero took a utopia in week 4, I took out of the utopia the ring of " " (-2 luck) and the Cloak of " " -2 luck/morale. Now bear in mind I was already packing the horseshoe of luck +2 luck and had exp luck. The effective result was that my opponent (no luck skill) was sitting at -4 while my inferno army (+gated creatures) was sitting at +5. This may be an extreme example but its not that difficult to accomodate either (3 artifacts and 3 skill ups).
This was probably the single most 1 sided battle I have ever witnessed. I had lost the vast majority of my troops breaking through lots of titans, and clearing out a middle, my opponent had a full necro army. I believe in the end I had my Arch Devils, Pit Lords, and horned Overseers. these + gated versions was enough to crush the opposing army.
When faced with such odds I would suggest that luck is a skill I would never pass on, and would never expect my opponent to be without.
Morale is for me at least not quite so overpowering. Perhaps I just have not been massacred by it yet, and I have not developed it to a state that it seems to really effect me a great deal.
One thing I would add however is that as of ?? last patch morale will trigger on defensive action, but not on the "wait" command.
|
|
dschingi
Famous Hero
the guy with the dragon golem
|
posted March 20, 2007 07:33 PM |
|
Edited by dschingi at 19:36, 20 Mar 2007.
|
Luck
Quote: So I think Luck should do 20% average damage (Expert Luck -- 3) that means 66% bonus damage
I agree. This way the average damage bonus of Attack and Luck was the same, nonetheless the skills were still different.
what favors luck:
-it only needs 3 skill points to get the bonus for melee and ranged attacks, Attack needs 4
-it also increases the damage of war machines
-it increases the effect of some special skills (Swarming Gate, Warlocks Luck)
what favors attack:
-it is easier to plan your attacks. If you rely on luck you can never be sure if your attacking blade dancers will kill those zombies or if the zombies will retaliate and finish your dancers off afterwards. If that happens you just wished that you had never even moved your dancers near those zombies...
Morale
No changes here, please. Morale is strong, but I don't think that the skill Leadership is imbalanced.
Quote: - Extending the modifier range from -5 to +5 to -10 to +10.
Sure, why not. In H4 there was no cap and I didn't have any problems with that. Actually it was fun, especially with spells influencing luck and morale.
Quote: Cons: Will make the difference between low modifier (+1, +2) and high modifier (+9, +10) very large, emphasizing the unreliability problem. Will make the Luck and Leadership relatively less good, because the only provide 30 % instead of 60 % of possible modifier.
The (un)reliability stays the same, only the chances of triggering change. If you have 1 morale it's very unlikely to trigger, whereas with 9 morale it's very unlikely not to trigger. What is the difference in terms of reliability?
____________
open source for an open mind
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
posted March 20, 2007 09:15 PM |
|
|
Yes, luck is a bit more powerful than it should but I can only agree about 2 things: Reduce the chance to 7-8% or the damage bonus to 75-85%. It's not a game-breaking nerf and sylvan that practically depends on luck remains still competitive with the elven luck becoming more useful. However in this case I'd ask for a little compensation.
Below this amount of damage/chance the leadership skill would go way beyond it and luck would be too seriously nerfed. What might also help is change the cap to +4 instead of reducing the chances. Still 40% but it's not 50-50 and you still have to get expert luck for it, artifacts can only get you so far.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
posted March 20, 2007 10:13 PM |
|
Edited by executor at 22:15, 20 Mar 2007.
|
Nonononono. Further capping will definetely work against both these skills and game balance.
IMHO cap could (and should) be increased, but ONLY with nerfing the skills. Otherwise they won't get less worthy, rather more(for further increase in morale and luck, which now is not possible).
Luck: I think chance should be reduced here, not the bonus. It's LUCK. It MUST be random. Otherwise it's not luck. 7% per +1 luck would do nicely(70 % at +10).
Leathership: here it will make more sense (IMO) to drop the bonus, not the chance(you should be able to rely on morale more than on luck). To about 33%ATB, what do you say?
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
posted March 20, 2007 11:00 PM |
|
|
Hey guys, thanx for your input once again, even though I can see opinions still blow in every direction. If I should try to give my suggestion at how things best be solved, it would be something like this:
- Scale is extended to +/- 10.
- Each step corresponds to 5 % trigger chance.
- Luck and Leadership skills now give +2 / +4 / +6 bonus at Basic / Advanced / Expert level.
- Lucky attacks deal +67 % damage.
- Good Morale provides a +0.4 bonus to ATB value.
- Morale is calculated at beginning of combat, to possibly let units start with good Morale.
- A global Luck modifier is introduced based not on Good/Evil relationships, but rather on Law/Chaos relationships between factions.
Well yes, it’s a far stretch to see all of that, but it could be interesting.
Each of the points, and why they are necessary, are explained below.
Extending the Luck and Morale scale from 5 to 10 units.
This is necessary in order to make Leadership a viable choice. As it is now, it is my impression that Leadership is often discarded – not because it’s a bad skill, it’s very nice to have high chance for morale – but since you only have 6 skill slots, you have to eliminate something; and right now, most factions except Knight will work up sufficient Morale bonus from unit combinations and artefacts. (Knight will go for Leadership to get Divine Guidance and Aura of Glory.)
Changing steps to 5 % chance.
Extending the scale should be done so that each step corresponds to a 5 % trigger chance. Notice, that Luck and Morale skills should be modified to match this change – this change should not necessarily mean that Expert Luck gives you only 15 % of trigger – but many of the other modifiers should remain as they are now. This goes for the luck/morale Artifacts, that currently are underprized – thus, a +2 Luck Artifact costs only 6000 Gold, but corresponds to +20 % damage (when taken as a grand average!) or +4 Attack. Compare this to the Axe Of The Mountain Lords, that provides a similar +4 Attack bonus, and costs 16.000 Gold!
Modification of Luck and Leadership modifier bonuses.
Bonuses from the two skills should be scaled to match the new steps. It is important that the skill provides a fairly high chance of triggering, otherwise they are too unreliable. My suggestion would be either +1 / +3 / +5 for basic / advanced / expert, or +2 / +4 / +6. The latter would correspond to the current bonuses provided by the skills, the former would be a slight reduction (25 % trigger chance on Expert, which is still pretty good). I think the current bonuses are powerfull, but good, because they make the skills compatible.
Modification of Luck and Morale effects.
Compared to the other Skills, Luck seems to add a lot of extra damage. All talk about unpredictability aside, I think it’s fair to say that Luck is extremely powerful, maybe even the best skill, in it’s current form. This would justify some sort of reduction, and though I’m not particularly font of the number, changing the damage bonus to 67 % would probably work out pretty well (that would change the Luck damage addition to 20 % in average, if one retained the current skill modifiers). I would have like to see a nicer number – 50 %, 75 %, or maybe even 77 % - but the number 67 % works out nicely for a reason I will explain below. Elven Luck could add another 33 % for a total of 100 %.
Personally, for the sake of symmetry, I would like the damage potential of Luck and Morale to be the same. I know that Morale has its advantages because it will grant you extra morale, but I think Luck has its own advantages to even this out. A damage potential of 1,67 with good Luck would correspond to the unit having 1,67 attacks on 1 turn with good Morale – or, would mean that Morale should add 0.4 to the ATB value of the unit when triggering. This is a nice even number, and is a slight nerfing like was suggested above. I therefore think these numbers would be a good place to start.
Morale at beginning of combat.
I know that someone thought this feature would make Morale overpowered, but with the above nerfing, I don’t think that would be the case. Furthermore, like I said, I would like to have symmetry between the two concepts, and for that reason, Morale should be able to trigger on first attack – i.e. activate at beginning of combat. I also think this would be an extremely nice way to work around the annoying fact that the random start ATB value means that sometimes, slower units will go before yours. With high Morale, that would be less likely to happen.
Global Luck modifier.
This is a tricky concept, but again, I would like to have symmetry between the two concepts. Furthermore, I think I found a way to introduce this concept in a very nice way.
Currently, units get Morale bonus when they are only with themselves, Neutral when they are with allies, and penalty when they are with opposed factions. The allies seem to be determined by good and evil which somehow seems to be fair in the light of the whole concept of Morale.
Now, Luck always works in fickle ways, and is the reflection of Chaos. Therefore, the global modifier for Luck should work like the one for Morale, but should be determined not by Good/Bad relationship, but by Law and Chaos. I know that there has been a lot of discussion about this, and that people are very divided on how to (and whether to) introduce the concept of alignment to Heroes. Personally, I think it makes sense, and will here use it for fun as a tool to explain this. Each faction will be given an alignment based on their relationship to Good vs. Evil and to Law vs. Chaos. These alignments, as I see them, could be like this (but the exact placing of the factions is secondary, as long as you accept one solution!):
Here, we have Good and Evil on the vertical axis, and factions on the same line is aligned w. respect to Morale. On the horizontal axis, we have Law and Chaos, and factions in the same column are aligned with respect to Luck. Thus, Haven would be aligned with Fortress and Dungeon with respect to Luck. Notice, that the concept of aligned factions would have moved from a political alignment to a philosophical / religious aspect.
In this was, one could calculate a Luck modifier for individual creatures based on your army composition. The modifier would be calculated as with Morale:
1 faction only: +1 Luck Bonus.
2 aligned factions: No modifier.
3 aligned factions: -1 Luck Penalty.
2 opposed factions: -1 Luck Penalty.
Any other combo: -2 Luck Penalty.
Furthermore, relations to Hero would also play in:
+1 Luck if Hero is of same faction.
No modifier if Hero is from allied faction.
-1 Luck if Hero is of same faction.
All this was perhaps a bit of a sidetrack, but was an experiment in how one could get equality between the two skills.
And sorry for another excrutiatingly long post.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
posted March 20, 2007 11:13 PM |
|
|
A +2/3/5 per luck skill level at 5% and reduced damage might just work. Btw just for the harmony of things 75% luck + 25% elven luck would look better However I hate the idea of morale starting at the beginning, imagine paladins and archangels playing first and scoring 1 hit kills before the battle has begun... About the global luck modifier, it seems a creative idea but I'm undecided yet. That would mean that friendly units would start with luck right away and a 5% chance while low could make a battle outcome completely different...
Nice topic, I like this brainstorming!
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Darkeye
Promising
Famous Hero
of the Deep
|
posted March 20, 2007 11:30 PM |
|
|
This is great work guys
I thought luck and morale wa a bit underpowered in Heroes III, but now I agree there is room for change. Luck is too powerful compared to other factors. I always pick luck for my heroes for that reason.
|
|
dschingi
Famous Hero
the guy with the dragon golem
|
posted March 20, 2007 11:43 PM |
|
|
Wow you really put a lot of effort into this
Quote: - Each step corresponds to 5 % trigger chance.
- Luck and Leadership skills now give +2 / +4 / +6 bonus at Basic / Advanced / Expert level.
Well, if you reduce the trigger chance by half and double the bonuses from the skill + the maximum value, it's the same as before... except artifacts have less impact. Am I missing something here?
Quote: - A global Luck modifier is introduced based not on Good/Evil relationships, but rather on Law/Chaos relationships between factions.
I don't like the idea. It doesn't feel natural to have luck just out of nothing...or do you have better luck if you go out with people who share your "alignment"?
I guess you are just a little too into symmetry...
Quote: - Morale is calculated at beginning of combat, to possibly let units start with good Morale.
I don't know if that is necessary. Yes, you don't have benefits of morale at the very first turn butyou can have a 1.5th turn with good morale
____________
open source for an open mind
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
posted March 21, 2007 12:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote: - Each step corresponds to 5 % trigger chance.
- Luck and Leadership skills now give +2 / +4 / +6 bonus at Basic / Advanced / Expert level.
Well, if you reduce the trigger chance by half and double the bonuses from the skill + the maximum value, it's the same as before... except artifacts have less impact. Am I missing something here?
No, it is true that the triggering chance would be the same. That is part of the evil plan. No, the reason I want to make this change is because I want to push the maximum boundary so that you will not be able to reach it without Luck / Leadership - in other words, make sure that Artifacts + various will not make Leadership obsolete. The Luck potential will be modified not through it's triggering chance, which will remain the same (high chance gives more fun in game) but through lower damage bonus (only 67 % instead of 100 %).
Quote: I don't like the idea. It doesn't feel natural to have luck just out of nothing...or do you have better luck if you go out with people who share your "alignment"?
I guess you are just a little too into symmetry...
For sure, I am very focused on the symmetry between the features, but I do believe that is a key to create ballance between the different features (if one is the mirror of the other, they will be equally potent). And of course, this was just a thought experiment, the idea with a global Luck modifier would venture way of what's "logic" and would go into a very mythological aspect of the game - and that specific part stands very unrelated to the rest, in the sense that I don't think something like that would ever be introduced to the game - it's simply too different. I do like that kind of stuff, though.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Homer171
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
posted March 21, 2007 12:07 AM |
|
|
I think Leadership and Luck skill are good now. The fun part of Sylvan is their high luck. Whit Golden Horseshoe you can get easily that +5 luck and then adding Elven Luck (+25% luck damage). That seems like overpowered but thats why Sylvan is great otherwise it would not be that great fantion.
Knights enjoys the high morale whit skills like Retribution and that is great. But still Enlightenment is more powerfull than Luck or Leadership. All skills in the game are pretty good how they are now. War Machines is probably the only skill what is good only for specialist who benefits best from it.
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
posted March 21, 2007 12:49 AM |
|
Edited by executor at 00:54, 21 Mar 2007.
|
When you change the bonuses to +2/4/6 and reduce chance by half, you do not nerf the skills. And they need it (Unless you drop the bonus, but for luck, dropping bonus is just not it). And you make artifacts less relevant, rather than luck/leadership more, indeed.
Global luck modifier... hmmm... that may be but in your square I woeld suggest swapping dungeon with necropolis. Necropolis is far more lawful than Dungeon.
And still I think that it is better to leave no global luck modifier and no initial morale ups in battle. That seems much more natural. And balances these skills between each other. They should not (IMO) be mirror skills.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
posted March 21, 2007 01:46 AM |
|
|
Quote: hmmm... that may be but in your square I would suggest swapping dungeon with necropolis. Necropolis is far more lawful than Dungeon.
That's why they have a Keeper of the Law Whereas necros follow their whim. The whole matriarch idea IS lawful as it represents strict hierarchy.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
TemjinGold
Known Hero
|
posted March 21, 2007 03:44 AM |
|
|
Quote: - Lucky attacks deal +67 damage.
My one lucky peasant hits your blackie for 68 damage. Hell yeah!
|
|
pomo
Famous Hero
The lone peasant
|
posted March 21, 2007 04:08 AM |
|
Edited by pomo at 04:12, 21 Mar 2007.
|
LOL, necklace of the bloody claw on steroids - legion of lucky skeleton archers hits for +67000 damage.
Alc I like your proposal - just a thought though, why not allow luck/morale to range to +/- 20 if you're going to change it to 5% per point - would allow room for the new spells to be useful and so on. I doubt it would be possible to reach 20, but if you were quite lucky with artifacts/map locations you might still get to 15 or something.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
posted March 21, 2007 08:42 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote: - Lucky attacks deal +67 damage.
My one lucky peasant hits your blackie for 68 damage. Hell yeah!
Quote: LOL, necklace of the bloody claw on steroids - legion of lucky skeleton archers hits for +67000 damage.
Duh! Whoever read this, and actually thought I meant +67 Damage and not +67 % damage?
Quote: And still I think that it is better to leave no global luck modifier and no initial morale ups in battle. That seems much more natural. And balances these skills between each other. They should not (IMO) be mirror skills.
Yes, I guess I can go for that argument. It still think it would be fun to see it implemented, but in the great light of realistics, those where probably the parts one should leave out.
Quote: Alc I like your proposal - just a thought though, why not allow luck/morale to range to +/- 20 if you're going to change it to 5% per point - would allow room for the new spells to be useful and so on. I doubt it would be possible to reach 20, but if you were quite lucky with artifacts/map locations you might still get to 15 or something.
Yes, there is of course one thing there I had not taken into consideration. The new spells currently go from +1 to +4, and if one wanted to scale them, they should go from +2 to +8.
Well, personally, I think Luck or Morale chances beyond 50 % is a bit uber powerfull, but still, I might not rule out the possibility. One can always ask whether the spells have to be useful in all situations - after all, if you have no benefit from it in the case where you have expert Luck/Leadership, it's not that you are losing out on anything, that will just mean that your Hero can use his turn casting something else - but yes, one might do it.
There are yet unknown things to take into consideration, however. I don't know whether the new skills will come with mass effect (probably not ), but in case they do, they combination Expert Luck + Expert Fortune (if there is such a spell) will provide +14 Luck, or 70 % trigger chance. That's pretty potent. Of course, so is Mass Righteous Might ...
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
ZombieLord
Promising
Famous Hero
that wants your brainz...
|
posted March 21, 2007 12:58 PM |
|
|
Quote: If I should try to give my suggestion at how things best be solved, it would be something like this:
- Scale is extended to +/- 10.
- Each step corresponds to 5 % trigger chance.
- Luck and Leadership skills now give +2 / +4 / +6 bonus at Basic / Advanced / Expert level.
- Lucky attacks deal +67 damage.
- Good Morale provides a +0.4 bonus to ATB value.
- Morale is calculated at beginning of combat, to possibly let units start with good Morale.
- A global Luck modifier is introduced based not on Good/Evil relationships, but rather on Law/Chaos relationships between factions.
Well yes, it’s a far stretch to see all of that, but it could be interesting.
Each of the points, and why they are necessary, are explained below.
__________________________________
Extending the Luck and Morale scale from 5 to 10 units.
This is necessary in order to make Leadership a viable choice. As it is now, it is my impression that Leadership is often discarded – not because it’s a bad skill, it’s very nice to have high chance for morale – but since you only have 6 skill slots, you have to eliminate something; and right now, most factions except Knight will work up sufficient Morale bonus from unit combinations and artefacts. (Knight will go for Leadership to get Divine Guidance and Aura of Glory.)
Changing steps to 5 % chance.
Extending the scale should be done so that each step corresponds to a 5 % trigger chance. Notice, that Luck and Morale skills should be modified to match this change – this change should not necessarily mean that Expert Luck gives you only 15 % of trigger – but many of the other modifiers should remain as they are now. This goes for the luck/morale Artifacts, that currently are underprized – thus, a +2 Luck Artifact costs only 6000 Gold, but corresponds to +20 % damage (when taken as a grand average!) or +4 Attack. Compare this to the Axe Of The Mountain Lords, that provides a similar +4 Attack bonus, and costs 16.000 Gold!
Modification of Luck and Leadership modifier bonuses.
Bonuses from the two skills should be scaled to match the new steps. It is important that the skill provides a fairly high chance of triggering, otherwise they are too unreliable. My suggestion would be either +1 / +3 / +5 for basic / advanced / expert, or +2 / +4 / +6. The latter would correspond to the current bonuses provided by the skills, the former would be a slight reduction (25 % trigger chance on Expert, which is still pretty good). I think the current bonuses are powerfull, but good, because they make the skills compatible.
Modification of Luck and Morale effects.
Compared to the other Skills, Luck seems to add a lot of extra damage. All talk about unpredictability aside, I think it’s fair to say that Luck is extremely powerful, maybe even the best skill, in it’s current form. This would justify some sort of reduction, and though I’m not particularly font of the number, changing the damage bonus to 67 % would probably work out pretty well (that would change the Luck damage addition to 20 % in average, if one retained the current skill modifiers). I would have like to see a nicer number – 50 %, 75 %, or maybe even 77 % - but the number 67 % works out nicely for a reason I will explain below. Elven Luck could add another 33 % for a total of 100 %.
Personally, for the sake of symmetry, I would like the damage potential of Luck and Morale to be the same. I know that Morale has its advantages because it will grant you extra morale, but I think Luck has its own advantages to even this out. A damage potential of 1,67 with good Luck would correspond to the unit having 1,67 attacks on 1 turn with good Morale – or, would mean that Morale should add 0.4 to the ATB value of the unit when triggering. This is a nice even number, and is a slight nerfing like was suggested above. I therefore think these numbers would be a good place to start.
Morale at beginning of combat.
I know that someone thought this feature would make Morale overpowered, but with the above nerfing, I don’t think that would be the case. Furthermore, like I said, I would like to have symmetry between the two concepts, and for that reason, Morale should be able to trigger on first attack – i.e. activate at beginning of combat. I also think this would be an extremely nice way to work around the annoying fact that the random start ATB value means that sometimes, slower units will go before yours. With high Morale, that would be less likely to happen.
Global Luck modifier.
This is a tricky concept, but again, I would like to have symmetry between the two concepts. Furthermore, I think I found a way to introduce this concept in a very nice way.
Currently, units get Morale bonus when they are only with themselves, Neutral when they are with allies, and penalty when they are with opposed factions. The allies seem to be determined by good and evil which somehow seems to be fair in the light of the whole concept of Morale.
Now, Luck always works in fickle ways, and is the reflection of Chaos. Therefore, the global modifier for Luck should work like the one for Morale, but should be determined not by Good/Bad relationship, but by Law and Chaos. I know that there has been a lot of discussion about this, and that people are very divided on how to (and whether to) introduce the concept of alignment to Heroes. Personally, I think it makes sense, and will here use it for fun as a tool to explain this. Each faction will be given an alignment based on their relationship to Good vs. Evil and to Law vs. Chaos. These alignments, as I see them, could be like this (but the exact placing of the factions is secondary, as long as you accept one solution!):
Here, we have Good and Evil on the vertical axis, and factions on the same line is aligned w. respect to Morale. On the horizontal axis, we have Law and Chaos, and factions in the same column are aligned with respect to Luck. Thus, Haven would be aligned with Fortress and Dungeon with respect to Luck. Notice, that the concept of aligned factions would have moved from a political alignment to a philosophical / religious aspect.
In this was, one could calculate a Luck modifier for individual creatures based on your army composition. The modifier would be calculated as with Morale:
1 faction only: +1 Luck Bonus.
2 aligned factions: No modifier.
3 aligned factions: -1 Luck Penalty.
2 opposed factions: -1 Luck Penalty.
Any other combo: -2 Luck Penalty.
Furthermore, relations to Hero would also play in:
+1 Luck if Hero is of same faction.
No modifier if Hero is from allied faction.
-1 Luck if Hero is of same faction.
All this was perhaps a bit of a sidetrack, but was an experiment in how one could get equality between the two skills.
Great ideas Alc
Though I'd change some alingments:
Neutral Good means 'Kind'. There's no way Academy is kind with those arrogant mages. I'd place Sylvan in this position.
Academy should be Lawful Neutral, and Fortress Chaotic Good
just my 2 cents
I like ALL your ideas The one that Leadership will have a higher impact than a artifact/map object is really good. But I also have thought of something else to make Leadership a worthy skill (not gaining 5 Morale like now without it easily)
How about Leadership, rather than giving morale, increasing the bonus of the Morale? I mean, look here:
None: reset to 0.2 ATB when Morale triggers
Basic: reset to 0.27 ATB when Morale triggers
Advanced: reset to 0.33 ATB when Morale triggers
Expert: reset to 0.4 ATB when Morale triggers
... or something like this. I know this way Leadership would have a minor effect but those values can be tweakened or one can come with something else to consider (one is to increase the maximum Morale you can have with this skill)
Quote: Luck: I think chance should be reduced here, not the bonus. It's LUCK. It MUST be random.
50% (max) is still RANDOM. VERY random. Just that nerfind the chances would result sometimes in the SAME circumstances. How fun is to say: "Man, I completely devastated you because I was lucky". This is NO FUN at all.
Besides, reducing chances -> too unreliable -> imbalanced
See Death's post to clarify something:
Quote: Here is why I do NOT agree with this idea:
Suppose you have a creature, "randomly" based (i.e gambling) and solely base much damage on random. I will take it to the extreme, so as to say that a Black Dragon with 45-70 damage (average 57.5) will do equally on average with 1-115 damage (aproximately same average, same with luck).
If we take the average into consideration, like the luck triggering chance, then of course BOTH versions of the Black dragon are balanced, right? But now I ask you people, which version do you prefer?
1) The black dragon is reliable in it's power -- i.e it is always a tough creature, but never too tough (like 115 damage)
2) The black dragon is NOT reliable in it's power -- i.e it can either be an Imp (1 damage) or a very powerful creature (115 damage). However such a thing is extremely random dependant and therefore cannot EVER be balanced.
Now back to luck. It is the same thing here. If we reduce the chances too low and add a very high bonus (let's assume chances are 1% per skill, and bonus is 1000%), then IT WILL NEVER BE BALANCED.
Even at luck 5, in this extreme example, you would have only a mere 5% chance of triggering. Therefore whoever gets a trigger is VERY lucky, doing 10 times as more damage (1000% bonus, in our example).
That is why the bonus should be kept as low as possible and the chances high -- calculating with the average is not a solution. It is important to reduce the gap between a lucky strike and a non-lucky strike. Otherwise you could as well have a low luck and trigger almost the same as the enemy with high luck -- with a small damage bonus, the difference won't be that big. IMO it should be more reliable, and less powerful.
Making the Black Dragon damage 1-115 would NOT nerf the creature, nor make it stronger. BUT it WILL make it too random and there's only a word for this... IMBALANCED
|
|
Pomo
Famous Hero
The lone peasant
|
posted March 21, 2007 01:05 PM |
|
|
Quote: Duh! Whoever read this, and actually thought I meant +67 Damage and not +67 % damage?
Well we did understand that, we're just messing around lol.
Quote: Yes, there is of course one thing there I had not taken into consideration. The new spells currently go from +1 to +4, and if one wanted to scale them, they should go from +2 to +8.
Well, personally, I think Luck or Morale chances beyond 50 % is a bit uber powerfull, but still, I might not rule out the possibility. One can always ask whether the spells have to be useful in all situations - after all, if you have no benefit from it in the case where you have expert Luck/Leadership, it's not that you are losing out on anything, that will just mean that your Hero can use his turn casting something else - but yes, one might do it.
There are yet unknown things to take into consideration, however. I don't know whether the new skills will come with mass effect (probably not ), but in case they do, they combination Expert Luck + Expert Fortune (if there is such a spell) will provide +14 Luck, or 70 % trigger chance. That's pretty potent. Of course, so is Mass Righteous Might ...
Well given that luck bonus would be 66% I don't think it becomes THAT powerful, a 100% chance to trigger would just mean +66% damage, roughly on par with expert righteous might as you've mentioned, while your attack can still be boosted in other ways. Your luck/morale would max out there. 100% morale might be a bit silly I suppose - I can't be bothered to work out the effective bonus to initiative that would equate to for .4 ATB like you suggested, but at .5 it would be like a +100% bonus to initiative.
The short response is I'm not sure what it should look like.
____________
linkTouched by His Noodly Appendage
|
|
|
|