DeletedUser
assuming all 220 will be totally specced for attack/defense.... 
DeletedUser23629
I'd hope the rule didn't just effect world 11, but in either case I'd say at least 30% of those level 120 players do. And I'd say with confidence 90% of the players in a battle are level 90 or higher.
DeletedUser
assuming they'll have identical builds, which I doubt....and I don't see new players popping up in older worlds every day, do you?
DeletedUser23629
You'd be surprised actually. And new players can come in all forms. They don't have to be new to the game, but new to fort fighting.
DeletedUser
Still, since every fort fighting alliance has to attack and defend forts, the balanced build would be the norm.
DeletedUser9470
maybe attack and defense strategies?
opens up possibilities...
opens up possibilities...
DeletedUser
yep, dodgers on the front lines and hitters right behind them....attackers being able to snipe from across the map.....etc
DeletedUser9470
yep, dodgers on the front lines and hitters right behind them....attackers being able to snipe from across the map.....etc
a lot more teamwork involved, im not sure i like the sniping though
for me sniping = hiding = coward
and if that is rewarded then everyone goes down that route.
tbh i dont see how that would change as negative distance bonuses should apply shouldnt they?
DeletedUser
Rather than changing the FF skill calculations, why not change the way the gun damage is calculated? Why not change the gun damage point rating to a gun damage percentage rating? The better the gun the better the percentage damage you do and the more HP you have the more damage you take per hit. This way would also enable lower level players to participate in more FF's hopefully encouraging more to keep come back.
At request of rice farmer, Please ignore this idea here. I have posted this in a separate thread now.
Apologies for any confusion caused.
At request of rice farmer, Please ignore this idea here. I have posted this in a separate thread now.
Apologies for any confusion caused.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
That's kind of a different idea. You're welcome to post it in another thread, but I'd rather we consider the original idea presented, along with any strengths/weaknesses.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
I want to be able to say yes or no to this idea. I think it is interesting, but there are some things about the way fort battles work that I don't understand atm. So it would help me to know how to look at this idea if someone would explain some things to me.
There seems to be a cap on the effectiveness of fort skills - except hp, so that past a certain number of points on fort skills are wasted. The most effective thing to do with the extra points is add them to hp which doesn't seem to suffer from any kind of cap on effectiveness.
There seems to be a big element of luck in fort battles. There are battles where I hit very often and others where I can't hit much at all... Obviously most battles fall somewhere in the middle, but those battles where I can't seem to hit anything are not due to any difference in the way I am moving in the battle.
So does this idea make it so there is a greater correlation between the points I have put in fort skills and my ability to hit and dodge? Because when I was first going for my golden gun and I had so many points in fms I was surprised that I did pretty well in battles... not much worse than I did later when I started moving points back to fort skills.
There seems to be a cap on the effectiveness of fort skills - except hp, so that past a certain number of points on fort skills are wasted. The most effective thing to do with the extra points is add them to hp which doesn't seem to suffer from any kind of cap on effectiveness.
There seems to be a big element of luck in fort battles. There are battles where I hit very often and others where I can't hit much at all... Obviously most battles fall somewhere in the middle, but those battles where I can't seem to hit anything are not due to any difference in the way I am moving in the battle.
So does this idea make it so there is a greater correlation between the points I have put in fort skills and my ability to hit and dodge? Because when I was first going for my golden gun and I had so many points in fms I was surprised that I did pretty well in battles... not much worse than I did later when I started moving points back to fort skills.
DeletedUser
Yes this idea will make for a greater correlation. With the current system, the difference between a person not specced at all and a person completely specced in fort skills is trivial.
DeletedUser
I do like rice farmer's idea aslong as all the bonuses and the mighty HP(attack and defence) get rehashed,to me it would make for a more even field.I wouldnt know how hard it would be to trial a few different formula's on Beta to find a happy medium but i give it a thumbs up.:adventurer:
DeletedUser30224
Decided it was wrong to make another proposal with the same idea, but couldn't just delete the thing altogether so here it is:
As it stands fighting comunity uses 2 values: chance to dodge and chance to hit.
Attacking:
chance to hit: Lead ^ 0.4 + Stamina ^ 0.4 + aim ^ 0.4 + 25
chance to dodge: Lead ^ 0.4 + Stamina ^0.4 + dodge ^0.4 + 10
Defending:
chance to hit: Lead ^ 0.4 + hiding ^ 0.4 + aim ^ 0.4 + 25
chance to dodge: Lead ^ 0.4 + hiding ^0.4 + dodge ^0.4 + 10
a 120 lvl player has 120 AP and 360 SP's ... more than that, but let's just pretend no quests were made.
distributing equally half AP to Str and half to Mob and so on you get 100 points to every fort fighting skill including HP ... your total health will be 100+1200+1000 = 2300 without clothes ... with clothes you get around 450 HP and that will make you 2750 in total.
I am getting lazy a bit and will not calculate the clothes on top of our 100 skill.
ATTACK and DEFENSE (stamina and hide = equal)
chance to hit = 25 + 3* (100^0.4) = 43.92
Chance to dodge = 10 + 3*(100^0.4) = 28.93
with 0.6 you get chance to hit = 25 + 3*(100^0.6) = 72.55
chance to dodge = 10 + 3*(100^0.6) = 57.55
Pure HP vs Balanced: 120 stamina, 480 HP :
with 0.6 :
ATTACK
120^0.6 = 17.68 + 25 = 42.68 vs 72.55 <-- hit chance
120^0.6 = 17.68 +10 = 27.68 vs 57.55 <-- dodge chance
DEFENSE
120^0.6 = 17.68 + 25 = 42.68 vs 72.55 <-- hit chance
no dodge skills = 0+10 = 10 vs 57.55 <-- dodge chance
with 0.4:
ATTACK
120^0.4 = 6.79 + 25 = 31.79 vs 43.92 <-- hit chance
120^0.4 = 6.79 +10 = 16.79 vs 28.93 <-- dodge chance
DEFENSE
120^0.4 = 6.79 + 25 = 31.78 vs 43.92 <-- hit chance
no dodge skills = 0+10 = 10 vs 28.93 <-- dodge chance
in attack 30 points diference instead of current 13 both hit and dodge chance
in defense chance to dodge has 47.55 diference instead of current 18.93 while chance to hit has 30 points vs 13
Pure ranged dueler vs Balanced : 120 dexterity 220 dodge and 220 aim 40 HP (this can vary, but let's just make him like this
with 0.4
ATTACK and DEFENSE (stamina and hide = 0)
220^0.4 = 8.65+25 = 33.65 vs 43.92 = hit chance
220^0.4 = 8.65+10 = 18.65 vs 28.93 = dodge chance
with 0.6
ATTACK and DEFENSE (stamina and hide = 0)
220^0.6 =25.43+25 = 50.43 vs 72.55 = hit chance
220^0.6 = 25.43+10 = 35.43 vs 57.55 = dodge chance
with 0.4: 10 points hit and dodge chance
with 0.6: 22 points hit and dodge chance
As you can see, both pure skill and range dueler have more than double the diference compared to a balanced build. Not to mention that a pure HP has very very little chance to dodge in defense. Looks really good to me to be honest.
Pure skill will really die in battle, while duelers will do slightly worse.