Andor's Trail

The most build right now are either high damage and many hits, or lesser hits but with critcals.Except for some monsters that are immune to criticals there is no viable way to counter .
Now my suggestion is. shouldn't bark skin also reduce critical damage taken by 10% for each skill point(or maybe 5%)
And shouldn't block change reduce the chance to be criticaly hit? (for example every 50 block chance=5% more chance to avoid a critical hit?)
I don't know if this game will provide a pvp feature but i feel like block and damage resistance needs a bump up.

DeltaKnight wrote:The most build right now are either high damage and many hits, or lesser hits but with critcals.Except for some monsters that are immune to criticals there is no viable way to counter .
Now my suggestion is. shouldn't bark skin also reduce critical damage taken by 10% for each skill point(or maybe 5%)
And shouldn't block change reduce the chance to be criticaly hit? (for example every 50 block chance=5% more chance to avoid a critical hit?)
I don't know if this game will provide a pvp feature but i feel like block and damage resistance needs a bump up.

BC reduces your chance of getting a critical hit by reducing your chance of getting hit.

But I like the idea of either Bark Skin or a new skill reducing crit hit probability.

BC reduces your chance of getting a critical hit by reducing your chance of getting hit.

Not really it goes by the idea if you can't stop the damage caused by the atack,you try to stop the attack itself.

I'm sure you've seen having a lower attack chance then the monster block you can still land the attack sometimes, and you need a very high block chance in order to stop the attack and since the attack chance scales higher than the block chance, you can easily outrun the block chance.(10 levels = 30% block chance or 50% attack chance).And even if someone would bump his block chance very high he would been sacrificing his own damage. Let's look at my build i have 300 base attack chance 267 block chance 90 damage and 657 health (yes i'm at high level) if i would've been adding attack chance instead of block chance i would've get another 445 attack chance, if i would got another point in increased fortitude i've would get at least another 200 hp.At around 857 hp 745 attack chance and 90 damage (base), and around 100 attack chance by skills and equip, and a 4.5 critical multyplier, all i need it's a few succesuful strikes to kill my opponent and if he would have crazy block chance he would require to many hits to kill me,which i could outrun, i won't even start about the damage resistance because at 4.5 critical multyplier i would get around 300-400 damage, you can't posibily nulify that damage with damage resistance.

Now this is hipotetacly(or how is it spelled) for pvp case but crits goes over block , the same goes for atack. In an attack vs attack, attack vs crits, crits vs crits cases, the one who goes first will as well win, but in the cases of criticals vs block, the one who is first wouldn't actualy changes to much.

Now if you the reader, actualy read all that i wrote, i hope you can see my point that Crits builds are way to better than block builds,which in some way destroy ballance and some of the fun (i would love to go around with a succesuful damage resistance and block build)

On topic: Adding something at my sugestion, you can't reduce the critical damage taken by more than 75% and you cant reduce the chance to be criticaly hit by more than 50%.(which if you count the lesser chance to be hit that you get from the block chance it goes pretty well). I don't want to kill the critical builds entirely if it were for a future pvp feature.

I tried to suggest changing critical hit calculations before.

What we have now is a model like this:

Attack damage * Critical hit Multiplier - Damage Resistance

I suggested something like this:

(Attack Damage - Damage Resistance) * Critical hit multiplier.

But it was voted down.

(Attack Damage - Damage Resistance) * Critical hit multiplier.

It might result in a negative amnount. (3 atack damage-5 damage resistant)*2=-4 critical damage (EPIC FAIL )

And it won't actualy reduce to much damage since getting atack amage it's way to easy compared to getting damage resistance.

DeltaKnight wrote:

(Attack Damage - Damage Resistance) * Critical hit multiplier.

It might result in a negative amnount. (3 atack damage-5 damage resistant)*2=-4 critical damage (EPIC FAIL )

And it won't actualy reduce to much damage since getting attack damage it's way to easy compared to getting damage resistance.

Well, naturally there would be something to prevent damage being negative.

I just forgot to put it in there. Something like:
(Attack Damage - Damage Resistance) * Critical hit multiplier *goto_check
*label_check
*if damage <1, goto_unaffected
*else, goto_normal
*label uneffected
(xxx) hits (xxx) for 0hp!

yeah, something like that.

This was for the entire game, not just a small part of it. The way the game is played would change drastically. Defense would be a lot more viable since many critical hitters don't have that much attack damage; only 6 or so.

On the other hand, those with crit. hit builds would have to spend more level ups on AD, or they would be completely blocked by those creatures with insane DR (I think there are some with 20 now?).

So, in short: It balances offence and defence, but doesn't do what you envisioned, which I'm still not sure I get exactly. What is it that you want? If I read your post correctly, you want DR to help more against critical hits. That's basically what my old suggestion would have done, isn't it?

ince many critical hitters don't have that much attack damage; only 6 or so.

Really? Dagger of the shadow priest + flagstone priest + 2 polished ring of backstabing and you already achieved more.

Yes i want to balance them, but i'm more concerned about the scale of defence and attack chance,you can easily outrun it,and your idea on balancing them just doesn't seem to do very much,you're reducing the crit but with not to much considering the damage you can get vs the damage resistance you can get.
And that still doesn't reduce the chance to be criticaly hit which i think would be good to have, in my early fight i lost many of them because of crits.

DeltaKnight wrote:

ince many critical hitters don't have that much attack damage; only 6 or so.

Really? Dagger of the shadow priest + flagstone priest + 2 polished ring of backstabing and you already achieved more.

Yes i want to balance them, but i'm more concerned about the scale of defence and attack chance,you can easily outrun it,and your idea on balancing them just doesn't seem to do very much,you're reducing the crit but with not to much considering the damage you can get vs the damage resistance you can get.
And that still doesn't reduce the chance to be criticaly hit which i think would be good to have, in my early fight i lost many of them because of crits.

Oh, I understand. You are thinking in terms of the monster's Damage Resistance versus our criticals. I was thinking the other way round, actually, but it applies to the same thing. Get 6 DR on Blackwater, and the Wyrms and Wyrm Trainers will never be able to hit you for any hp. It's basically the same idea.

Except that critical builds going against those 22 DR beasts on the road to Remgard will probably be stuck with really low damage, of course... but this suggestion was before the critical hits got nerfed.

DeltaKnight wrote:

BC reduces your chance of getting a critical hit by reducing your chance of getting hit.

Not really it goes by the idea if you can't stop the damage caused by the atack,you try to stop the attack itself.

I'm sure you've seen having a lower attack chance then the monster block you can still land the attack sometimes, and you need a very high block chance in order to stop the attack and since the attack chance scales higher than the block chance, you can easily outrun the block chance.(10 levels = 30% block chance or 50% attack chance).And even if someone would bump his block chance very high he would been sacrificing his own damage. Let's look at my build i have 300 base attack chance 267 block chance 90 damage and 657 health (yes i'm at high level) if i would've been adding attack chance instead of block chance i would've get another 445 attack chance, if i would got another point in increased fortitude i've would get at least another 200 hp.At around 857 hp 745 attack chance and 90 damage (base), and around 100 attack chance by skills and equip, and a 4.5 critical multyplier, all i need it's a few succesuful strikes to kill my opponent and if he would have crazy block chance he would require to many hits to kill me,which i could outrun, i won't even start about the damage resistance because at 4.5 critical multyplier i would get around 300-400 damage, you can't posibily nulify that damage with damage resistance.

Now this is hipotetacly(or how is it spelled) for pvp case but crits goes over block , the same goes for atack. In an attack vs attack, attack vs crits, crits vs crits cases, the one who goes first will as well win, but in the cases of criticals vs block, the one who is first wouldn't actualy changes to much.

Now if you the reader, actualy read all that i wrote, i hope you can see my point that Crits builds are way to better than block builds,which in some way destroy ballance and some of the fun (i would love to go around with a succesuful damage resistance and block build)

On topic: Adding something at my sugestion, you can't reduce the critical damage taken by more than 75% and you cant reduce the chance to be criticaly hit by more than 50%.(which if you count the lesser chance to be hit that you get from the block chance it goes pretty well). I don't want to kill the critical builds entirely if it were for a future pvp feature.

hmm. IMO any build over lvl 50 is overpowered vs current AT, please remember that this game is still beta...

btw are you ever tryed to build another type of buils ?