Update 2.8: Balancing & Changes - Official Discussion Thread

1356710

Comments

  • JerryDixonJerryDixon Member Posts: 385
    Seems like "on topic" for this thread should be related to feedback on the information provided. Would be much shorter and easier to read.

    +1 For fixing the star loss for upgrading (although upgrading survivors to 22 and gear to 25 produced higher star counts than anyone with 21's and 24 gear in our guild.)

    +1 For new council and stuff to build with my ~18M cans :-)

    Neutral on Wrestler. This one gets a hat tip to all The Distance complainers. You won this one. I'll get some gas back on distance days to use for raids+challenge.

    +1 On Stun. Hoping this helps even out impenetrable outposts.

    +1 For new traits...they're new...who could complain about that? (I'm guessing a lot of people that post after this :-)
    Jerry Dixon
    JSS
    Serp
  • pradipradi Member Posts: 645
    edited October 2017
    zeeblack said:

    @Mystique, Nerf Games only listen when traits needs to be nerfed. They would never listen if we complain about the useless traits

    100% agree with you @zeeblack When few players told to nerf wrestler trait, they are going to do it quickly. But they never listen to the good complains. I'm sure on 3.8 update there will be no traits on weapons. NG will nerf all traits again and again through 3.7 and on 3.8 they will remove all traits. Because there all traits are useless at that time. LOL.
    Line id : 2011406 | email : [email protected]
    romeoPapacaskjmia421
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited October 2017
    I wanted to post how good the 2.7 changes are. And I wanted to post to propose some adjustments to challenge:
    Having distance in the grind queue, the challenge time gas cost was increased by 20%. Meanwhile due to round passes gas cost of challenges were decreased by 20%. But! The grind was boring as hell (challenge, and distance will be also, very quick). I would expect to decrease the grind part of the game. E.g. I could imagine the round pass for 33% of the rounds (in each 3 rounds).
    But obviously dear NG does not want that, instead they increase again the grind in challenges. And yes, it is a race to get more stars. With boring, repeating missions.
    The same applies for well placed council levelups. When you finally manage a nice set of gears, tada, NG increases the cap. NEW CONTENT! Lol.
    The distance is very nice, which will be definitely worthless even to enter due to the wrestler nerf. Shame.
    I think I will quit very soon.
  • mik81mik81 Member Posts: 360
    @Bill_ZRT,

    In my opinion the game gravitated too much on just that trait, it was a must have and the only way to go that further. The balanced changed may mean that you won't be able to push that far, but since it won't be an OP trait, "a must have trait and way to go strategy", we'll need to be looking to different ways to deal with the challenge.

    It will open new strategies and no they won't be as good as an instant kill, an yes we will have more less optimal strategies to use, we'll need to look into mitigation, crit hit chances, better use of charge attacks, more archetypes in one class... The duke nuke concept is dead and I like it. As Tagore said if you cry for losing the Sun, tears won't let you see the stars...

    It happens in every game, take a Blizzard game as an example, they create an OP card, that makes 1 archetype the deck to play, the "imbah deck", they change it to balance the meta. When just 1 trait is so powerful that annihilates any other way to deal with high RSLs, it make sense to me that they balance it. We can discuss now if wrestling is now useless or not. But an instant kill seemed way to powerful, there isn't nothing really that powerful in this game. I would probably cap its use but not change it, but I see the change more in line with what NML meta is.

    Now the "nerf" to stun... well they haven't change anything to the trait, just added a capped to the chance of resist a stun. A golden armor trait is giving you already that 75% so you aren't losing that much. You are just losing the interact with luck, but let me go to the numbers to see how bad is that "nerf":

    75% stun resistant means you only need luck 1/4 attacks.
    a 35% luck means you get lucky ~1/3 times. 1/3*1/4=1/12
    So luck was interacting 1/12 times with stun resistance in average.... That's what we lost. If you have more chances to be lucky then 1/10 maybe, but the big part of the stun resistance is on the golden trait not on luck. I think we can live without it, maybe we can have room for other traits, and luck is not anymore a must have trait... When a trait is needed in every single class, every archetype, so good you can't live without it... is when I'd think we need to re balance it. You may not need to shop for the perfect survivor, as now you may be able to balance him with badges, weapon/armor traits... that really opens the door to theory craft.

    It just my opinion, I understand the frustration, I understand that now we have lost the "imbah" nuke trait capable of killing one shoot any type of walker regardless of level and health. We need to adjust and play differently. It shouldn't be that bad. But I do understand the issue that adjustments can create in long term players.

    jimmorrison369PutchucoWeekOneromeo
  • mik81mik81 Member Posts: 360
    @jimmorrison369
    My impression is that luck is a independent roll. You succeed on that roll you get lucky(in game text showed) and then you apply the benefits to luck to that chance to happen (following the calculations that you have done). Am I wrong?

    Otherwise I see very little use for having an in game text telling you that you have been lucky.

    mik81 said:

    @Bill_ZRT,
    75% stun resistant means you only need luck 1/4 attacks.
    a 35% luck means you get lucky ~1/3 times. 1/3*1/4=1/12

    That is not how luck works. The luck% will get multiplied with and then added to your chancetrait.
    If you have 75% stun, and 35% luck.
    75*(1+35/100)=101.25%.
    Or
    35% of 75% + 75% = 101.25%

    Or in other words.
    If you have 35% luck, then you have 100% stun.

    Meaning that in future update you'll get stunned 1 out of 4, instead of NEVER.
  • InvaderInvader Member Posts: 2,066
    Tapatio75 said:

    I just started upgrading my first rifle lvl 22, so I guess thatll be the only one


    Lucky you...5 complete sets uprgaded over the last weeks :neutral:
    kjmia421
  • DLichDLich Member Posts: 5,526
    edited October 2017
    mik81 said:

    @jimmorrison369
    My impression is that luck is a independent roll. You succeed on that roll you get lucky(in game text showed) and then you apply the benefits to luck to that chance to happen (following the calculations that you have done). Am I wrong?

    Otherwise I see very little use for having an in game text telling you that you have been lucky.

    The best way I can try and maybe understand why the word "lucky" shows up is let's put it this way.

    If a survivor has gold stun resist at 75% then put numbers 1-75 as being "resist"

    Then when you stack luck of let's say 20% for survivor that's 20% of 75% is 15% extra

    Put a RNG number 1 through 100

    1-75 is stun resist (normal)
    76-90 is stun resist (due to lucky)
    91-100 is not stunned.

    If RNG hit's 45 then it's stunned (but not by luck trait)
    If RNG hit's 84 then it's stunned (by luck and hence lucky appears)
    If RNG hit's 93 then it's not a stun

    This is my assessment of how the game determines a stun with less than 100%. This can be also used for anything that might happen (critical hit, body shot, dodge etc...) The only difference is with stun resist we know all the variables. I don't know what the odds of a body shot are at any given time and apparently all the other "offensive chance traits" are affected by body shot so that information would be really helpful. I could know the actual odds of interrupt going off if I knew the odds of my hit being a body shot.

    Gold piercing with 30% reduction in the chance of a body shot is great. But 30% off an unknown number is still an unknown number lol.

    *edit... This is also why knowing if body shot percentage caps at 100% or exceeds that number in the higher RSL's

    I still would love to see someone at around RSL +10 or their survivors getting normal or crit hits. Maybe i'll have to watch some videos.

    image
    | OG | NOC | USA | UK | CA | CQR | UC | RAD | ZEN |
    Other Leaders | Kick_ass | Pic | abailey362 | GunnerGaz | JMo2127 |
    MAVERICK'S 1 Million Star Club | OG | USA | NOC
    Analyze This with ALF4reals | v1 | v2 | v3 |
    | My YouTube Videos | My 1st Interview | Best Analogy Award!! |

    Freemium... the "mium" is latin for 'not really'
    kjmia421
  • mik81mik81 Member Posts: 360
    @jimmorrison369

    That message is very confusing then... If lucks is just an addition to any chance of trait, why do we get that message? I thought that in order for luck to be applied you need it an initial roll that would make you "lucky" then you apply it to that chance of trait.

    I mean you are getting lucky all the time... I don't know how interpret that in game message....

    I would like also to know if the stun cap reduction will be also applied to fatty walkers it seems only fair to me that we they play with the same rules as we do.
    jimmorrison369kjmia421
  • jimmorrison369jimmorrison369 Member Posts: 1,827
    edited October 2017
    DLich said:


    76-90 is stun resist (due to lucky)
    91-100 is not stunned.

    If RNG hit's 45 then it's stunned (but not by luck trait)
    If RNG hit's 84 then it's stunned (by luck and hence lucky appears)
    If RNG hit's 93 then it's not a stun

    Yes, that is how I imagined it. Least computational power needed I can think of.
    kjmia421
Sign In or Register to comment.