MM6 skill emphasis mod (#74)

[tnevolin]

Somebody has already said this and I will gladly reiterate.

Don't code. Design an experience. Anything could be implemented as long as there is a clear indication how it should look like. So start with this part. Ask yourself if there is a problem in the game. If there is - ask yourself how game without this problem should look like. And then goes prioritization: is it so critical problem that you don't want to play the game because of this or you can easily live with it or something in between.

That was said in figurative way. I meant not to jump on implementation. Instead try to understand the desired state. What do you want and how will it look like. Then anything can be implemented.

[Malekitsu]

Somebody has already said this and I will gladly reiterate.

Don't code. Design an experience. Anything could be implemented as long as there is a clear indication how it should look like. So start with this part. Ask yourself if there is a problem in the game. If there is - ask yourself how game without this problem should look like. And then goes prioritization: is it so critical problem that you don't want to play the game because of this or you can easily live with it or something in between.

Don't worry, I can barely code anything

Updated sheet to reflect current values and added might bonus:
https://1drv.ms/x/s!AhWIp78etkxRiTEpvKC ... _?e=uVXa7a

I am thinking now whether I did the right thing tying anything to promotion? Different classes have different promotion complexity and different location/timing. Maybe we should just give flat bonuses to knight and 2h weapons?

Another thing to you and others expressing same idea. I tried to diminish skill rank influence on effect. That is why you see skill progressions like 4-5-6. That leaves some bonus to rank upgrade but not that big one. I don't think rank should be any significant because it is essentially a skill level. I.e. you need skill level 4 to become an expert. Advancing to skill level 4 is much-much more difficult task then buy expert rank. Why would we value that tiny effort with such big difference?

It would be more interesting if rank would be independent of skill level and be granted for some tasks or something more challenging than just paying money. Similar to earning axe master quest. This way player could pursue either absorbing XP to convert them to skill level or chasing these rank quests (or both). That would certainly give game a new angle. And then it would be fair to give so much value to rank.

I think that having promotion adding extra power feels satisfying and make you desire so hard completing that promotion quest, so I'm ok having some extra bonuses.
This also avoid early game knight to be too powerful.

It would be more interesting if rank would be independent of skill level and be granted for some tasks or something more challenging than just paying money. Similar to earning axe master quest. This way player could pursue either absorbing XP to convert them to skill level or chasing these rank quests (or both). That would certainly give game a new angle. And then it would be fair to give so much value to rank.

that is the case in mm8, having skills tied to promotion quests. I really like the idea.
I agree that getting this masters should be harder.

[RawSugar]

I think the way to conceptualize balance between the classes is this:

Knights
early game melee: Damage 50 ( 72w hit chance 2/3)
Late game melee: damage 350
Early game ranged: damage 10
Late game ranged: damage 50
Perk: double hitpoint

Sorcerers
early game melee: Damage 50 at 4 mana (if rebalanced, currently 72) // 10 at 0 mana
Late game melee: damage 400 at 4 mana // 75 at 0 mana
Early game ranged: damage 10
Late game ranged: damage 100 at 4 mana // 50
Perk: access to elemental and mirror

In my estimation at all points sorcerers and knights are fairly balanced in the mod, knights have an attack that is comparable to sparks cast for 0 mana, they are slightly favored early game, although sorcerers can deal 1000s with AOE spells, even early game, late game sorcerers get access to spells dealing 2 or 3 times as much damage - at a highmanacost.
Knight bow skill is comparable to a 2 mana spell they cast for 0 - and archers have a 4 mana ranged attack and a 2 mana melee attack, the opposite, but balanced, of knights.

So IF we start nerfing knights then i'd argue we'd also need to start nerfing sorcerers and of course the other classses as well.

And I've still yet to see any actual justification for why ppl are looking into that in the first place.

[Malekitsu]

In my estimation at all points sorcerers and knights are fairly balanced in the mod, knights have an attack that is comparable to sparks cast for 0 mana, they are slightly favored early game, although sorcerers can deal 1000s with AOE spells, even early game, late game sorcerers get access to spells dealing 2 or 3 times as much damage - at a highmanacost.
Knight bow skill is comparable to a 2 mana spell they cast for 0 - and archers have a 4 mana ranged attack and a 2 mana melee attack, the opposite, but balanced, of knights.

So IF we start nerfing knights then i'd argue we'd also need to start nerfing sorcerers and of course the other classses as well.

And I've still yet to see any actual justification for why ppl are looking into that in the first place.

Early game I wouldn't go further 30.
I also wouldn't compare to sparks, which is overtuned at the moment.
Early game sorcerers have big mana issues, they should do more damage than the knight with spells.
They also have lower hp, which justifies even more having them doing more damage than knights.

The justification is that I want the game challenging, not even easier than vanilla.

PULL RANGE PROBLEM:
the pull range problem is that once you engage you pull everything around you.
I've tried attacking paesants in the fountain in the middle of the city, apprendice mages and goblins came into me.

[RawSugar]

In my estimation at all points sorcerers and knights are fairly balanced in the mod, knights have an attack that is comparable to sparks cast for 0 mana, they are slightly favored early game, although sorcerers can deal 1000s with AOE spells, even early game, late game sorcerers get access to spells dealing 2 or 3 times as much damage - at a highmanacost.
Knight bow skill is comparable to a 2 mana spell they cast for 0 - and archers have a 4 mana ranged attack and a 2 mana melee attack, the opposite, but balanced, of knights.

So IF we start nerfing knights then i'd argue we'd also need to start nerfing sorcerers and of course the other classses as well.

And I've still yet to see any actual justification for why ppl are looking into that in the first place.

Early game I wouldn't go further 30.
I also wouldn't compare to sparks, which is overtuned at the moment.
Early game sorcerers have big mana issues, they should do more damage than the knight with spells.
They also have lower hp, which justifies even more having them doing more damage than knights.

The justification is that I want the game challenging, not even easier than vanilla.

PULL RANGE PROBLEM:
the pull range problem is that once you engage you pull everything around you.
I've tried attacking paesants in the fountain in the middle of the city, apprendice mages and goblins came into me.

ok, so its only early game we are talking about, right? we are not changing endgame damage?

sparks i used the adjusted damage which is calculated with th formula we arrived at a few pages back, which puts sparks at 50.
I would encourage you to try the game with casters having a manaregen item. im currently playing a DDDC game, only doing ironfist quest before starting, and at level 8 they all have manaregen from shops. most of the time they are at full mana. (i suggested earlier that all starting rings should be manaregen and all starting armor hp regen - dont know if possible but it sure makes for asmoother start.) if they run out of mana i retreat and wait 2-3 hour till they are at full again , takes 20 secs and im back to killing. They are far stronger than the knight heavy party was.

as for knight hitpoint, thats their thing. sorcerers get access to AOE which when applicable makes them MUCH more dangerous than knights and to out of combat spells like fly, jump, town portal. It even gets them healing spells like stone to flesh and protection spells like shield and day of protection. thats the tradeoff. if knights should be punished in combat for high hp then they should get some other benefits to balance out the slew of benefits casters get.

Also, lategame i would say sorcerers get really strong in combat, so its fine and balanced if knights have a slight edge early on.

pull range; thats not a problem its a feature. you deal with it by running using walls and rivers to block etc. It makes it feel like you're constantly in danger rather than methodically destroyng enemies a few at a time

[tnevolin]

Don't worry, I can barely code anything

That was a figure of speech. I meant - don't start with implementation, start with the desired state picture.

[tnevolin]

So IF we start nerfing knights then i'd argue we'd also need to start nerfing sorcerers and of course the other classses as well.

I agree that current knight is about on par with casters. We may try to review how it progress throughout the game. Maybe make its progression smoother or something. However, I personally didn't feel it is OP even early game. Quite adequate to current monster level.

As for paladin/archer I think they are fine as is. However, I don't mind experimenting and giving them some special abilities like those proposed already: simultaneous magic advancement, some stronger spells, extra shooting or the like.

[tnevolin]

I also wouldn't compare to sparks, which is overtuned at the moment.
Early game sorcerers have big mana issues, they should do more damage than the knight with spells.
They also have lower hp, which justifies even more having them doing more damage than knights.

I agree that multi-shot and AOE spells are special and should be compared to other spells but they should not be used as a benchmark. Regular direct damage spells should be used as a benchmark for the knight. And even not that but the general feeling on how knight and other non casters do. That is very compounded feeling that is hard to put in numbers.

PULL RANGE PROBLEM:
the pull range problem is that once you engage you pull everything around you.
I've tried attacking paesants in the fountain in the middle of the city, apprendice mages and goblins came into me.

Is that a game problem?

[raekuul]

I am thinking now whether I did the right thing tying anything to promotion? Different classes have different promotion complexity and different location/timing. Maybe we should just give flat bonuses to knight and 2h weapons?

Now that I know how it works, I like promotions getting perks like extra damage. In vanilla you just got more HP/SP and a burst of EXP in exchange for more expensive level-ups. My only real issue is that the Knight progression should be 0-2-4 instead of 2-3-4, in order to actually encourage doing the promotions. The Cavalier promotion is less free than it was in vanilla due to the amplified pull range (the archers outside of the Temple of the Moon get pulled, which that's not a fun fight at level 5), but it's still minimal effort if you don't mind eating a TPK in the process.

Another thing to you and others expressing same idea. I tried to diminish skill rank influence on effect. That is why you see skill progressions like 4-5-6. That leaves some bonus to rank upgrade but not that big one. I don't think rank should be any significant because it is essentially a skill level. I.e. you need skill level 4 to become an expert. Advancing to skill level 4 is much-much more difficult task then buy expert rank. Why would we value that tiny effort with such big difference?

It would be more interesting if rank would be independent of skill level and be granted for some tasks or something more challenging than just paying money. Similar to earning axe master quest. This way player could pursue either absorbing XP to convert them to skill level or chasing these rank quests (or both). That would certainly give game a new angle. And then it would be fair to give so much value to rank.

Except that in vanilla the progression through Novice/Expert/Master was what provided the additional perks. The reason I'm in favor of progressing the numbers based on skill mastery is because I shouldn't be dealing 36 damage on a successful hit at rank 1, even if it is with a Spear. Since I'm tuning down the monsters anyway I also need to tune the party back down as well.

It's fine to emphasize the skills, but there still needs to be a reason to invest in weapon/armor expertise/masteries. Otherwise I'm spending a lot of gold on not a lot of benefit.

[tnevolin]

Now that I know how it works, I like promotions getting perks like extra damage. In vanilla you just got more HP/SP and a burst of EXP in exchange for more expensive level-ups. My only real issue is that the Knight progression should be 0-2-4 instead of 2-3-4, in order to actually encourage doing the promotions. The Cavalier promotion is less free than it was in vanilla due to the amplified pull range (the archers outside of the Temple of the Moon get pulled, which that's not a fun fight at level 5), but it's still minimal effort if you don't mind eating a TPK in the process.

You persuaded me on class promotions. Let's keep it involved.

I should say that even single unit increase on damage per skill will give you a whole addition for each skill level you have already. So making knight promotion bonus 0-2-4 will turn it into a complete weakling at game start. That is my guess but you are welcome to try and prove me wrong.

[RawSugar]

Knight vs sorcerer:
in melee the knights attack is equivalent of a ~25 mana direct damage spell - or a 4 mana multishot/melee spell. the game (also vanilla) puts a high cost on ranged attacks, and a melee ability should be compared to a melee ability imo. Multishot is the closest thing casters have, it functions slightly differently with a small range being on benefit, but lacks weapons ability to attack around corners.
The question is how high a mana cost the knight attack should be equal to. I think 4 as it is now is reasonable, certainly casting a 25 mana for free would not be balanced. But if (for arguments sake) a mage had access to knights melee skill - or a sparkslike spell for 0 mana, i'd estimate it'd be about en par mid and late game, to the other options available, which is what we want; for one skill to not be clearly superior to the other.

archers compared to knights deal about half to 1/3 damage in melee and compared to sorcerers have about half mana/double cost and lower rank since they are spreading their skillpoints between several abilities. they do have a reasonably strong bow attack but sorcerers are at least as strong at range. Paladins are similar although with better melee and no benefit to bow skill.

The buffs your mod gives them has made them playable but they are still inferior to the others in my opinion. Its not gamebreaking, I just wont be using them without some additional benefit

I still really wonder about the rationale of weakening both player and monsters...

[raekuul]

I'm weakening the monsters because the first few levels of the game are ridiculously hard if you don't do exactly the right order of things, which makes it incompatible with randomizer's "the goblinwatch key is in the Control Center today lololol" approach. If I weaken the monsters without also weakening the unpromoted party, the game swings too far in the player's favor (since SkEm makes Melee/Armor/Ranged/Support skills less expensive in the long run due to how they're shared)

[RawSugar]

hmm that makes sense but: can we agree the game is too hard the first 10-20 levels currently? so cant you just weaken the monsters a little to the point where they are challenging vs players as they are now in those levels?
like if skem only buffs the player party +50% early (and i'd argue 0%) and monstes +100%...it seems like you trying to give players -25% and monsters -75%(125% vs 125%) when you could just give monsters -50% and achieve the same balance with half the work/changes just at a different level? (150% vs 150%)
and its a lot more than half the work, early game can be balanced just by tweaking monster damage, whereas you seem to want to completely redo class skills at least for early game.

[raekuul]

which is why I haven't pushed any of my adjustments back onto main yet. I'm still trying to find the sweet spot, and it's to preference anyway. What feels best for me won't feel best for you.

[tnevolin]

raekuul,

Would you like to join Slack? It seems there is an extended discussion there regarding numbers adjustment. I'd like you to be aware too.

[tnevolin]

archers compared to knights deal about half to 1/3 damage in melee and compared to sorcerers have about half mana/double cost and lower rank since they are spreading their skillpoints between several abilities. they do have a reasonably strong bow attack but sorcerers are at least as strong at range. Paladins are similar although with better melee and no benefit to bow skill.

The buffs your mod gives them has made them playable but they are still inferior to the others in my opinion. Its not gamebreaking, I just wont be using them without some additional benefit

I still really wonder about the rationale of weakening both player and monsters...

Absolutely agree about paladin and archer. We can pay attention to them next step.

I still really wonder about the rationale of weakening both player and monsters...

Didn't understand if you are for or against it.

[tnevolin]

I'm weakening the monsters because the first few levels of the game are ridiculously hard if you don't do exactly the right order of things, which makes it incompatible with randomizer's "the goblinwatch key is in the Control Center today lololol" approach. If I weaken the monsters without also weakening the unpromoted party, the game swings too far in the player's favor (since SkEm makes Melee/Armor/Ranged/Support skills less expensive in the long run due to how they're shared)

Some say it is ridiculously hard but some say that party damage is ridiculously high. These are two opposite points of view. Are we missing some options those make it either too hard or too easy?

[raekuul]

regarding slack: I've not used it before; I'll look into it.

On the subject of difficulty: You modified how skills work and increased hit rate/recovery/damage for melee weapons across the board, then found that the game was no longer a challenge so you inflated monster stats to compensate. That's fine, that's the same thing MMMerge does with Bolster, the problem is that flatly increasing every monster by the same multiplier creates situations like "this one goblin took me three minutes to kill" or "now I can't finish Abandoned Temple for early EXP because Queen Cobra" or "why is a Follower of Baa knocking my sorceror out in two hits" because it turns out the early game monsters were originally tuned for early game numbers.

Scaling back the per-rank bonuses at Novice training and simultaneously lowering monster multipliers should make it easier to test if the monsters still need to be inflated for difficulty due to the rest of what SkEm does (I've found that using a flat 1.5x for HP and AC and removing the multiplier from monster spell skills hits a sweet spot for myself, but that's not a solution to the underlying problem - somebody posted a more complex set of multiplier functions that should do better across the board since it's relative to the regions the monsters are found in, I just haven't given it a whirl yet because... the changes I've made to my instance are right for me.)

[tnevolin]

regarding slack: I've not used it before; I'll look into it.

Should be pretty easy to navigate. A messenger like many others. Send me your email.

On the subject of difficulty: You modified how skills work and increased hit rate/recovery/damage for melee weapons across the board, then found that the game was no longer a challenge so you inflated monster stats to compensate. That's fine, that's the same thing MMMerge does with Bolster, the problem is that flatly increasing every monster by the same multiplier creates situations like "this one goblin took me three minutes to kill" or "now I can't finish Abandoned Temple for early EXP because Queen Cobra" or "why is a Follower of Baa knocking my sorceror out in two hits" because it turns out the early game monsters were originally tuned for early game numbers.

Absolutely agree. In fact, it is kind of obvious that in this mod the combat skill progression is not linear and accelerating much faster than in vanilla. Therefore, monsters should be adjusted non linearly too. I guess we are working on this exact thing at the moment.

Bringing both novice bonuses and monster multipliers down should make it easier to test if the monsters still need to be inflated for difficulty due to the rest of what SkEm does (I've found that using a flat 1.5x for HP and AC and removing the multiplier from monster spell skills hits a sweet spot for myself, but that's not a solution to the underlying problem - somebody posted a more complex set of multiplier functions that should do better across the board since it's relative to the regions the monsters are found in, I just haven't given it a whirl yet because... the changes I've made to my instance are a sweet spot for me.)

I think monster still should be inflated as clearly this mod gives higher physical damage. The question is to find a good multipliers as you pointed out.

[raekuul]

I mean I'm still playing at 2x Damage and 1.5x HP/AC, I just turned off the 2x multiplier on monster spell ranks. I can deal with Rocket Tag Gameplay since that'll force me to learn smart pulling, the main problem in the very early game is "what the hell do I do now?" since all of the traditionally free quests are now dangerous to complete in one way or another (Fountain of Magic probably should be my next target but I chewed through all my food getting to Free Haven due to forgetting just how big the cluster of Mages camping the Free Haven <> Ironfist border was so now I have to spend some of my precious Water Walk money on food)