Author Message

LoDebar

Rank 3
LoDebar
Joined
10 Aug 2008
Posts
848
Location
Rekikyo's Neighbor United States
PostedAug 26, 2012 1:27 am
Rekikyo, you just confirmed my argument. You yourself have chosen a STR build over LUC. Because you know that 1900 STR does more damage than 1900 LUC. If the LUC part of the critical hit bonus went through the DEF, ABS, and Enchant, you would still be running the LUC build.

I know that you have lapis limits based on the piece of gear, that force you to choose different lapis than than you would normally want, and weapon enchants. and the combined effect determines the build.

But my argument still stands, that when you have the absolute freedom to choose between one of 2 lapis, a A fortune or a craft lapis with the same stat points, the Craft will result in more damage than the Fortune.

Then, there is the vast majority of us that do not have the uber stats, and the LUC disadvantage becomes more and more apparent.
Advertisement

Rekikyo

Rank 5.1
Rekikyo
Joined
25 Nov 2008
Posts
8194
Location
Gaia Adrion Necria United States
PostedAug 26, 2012 2:11 am
LoDebar wrote:
Rekikyo, you just confirmed my argument. You yourself have chosen a STR build over LUC. Because you know that 1900 STR does more damage than 1900 LUC. If the LUC part of the critical hit bonus went through the DEF, ABS, and Enchant, you would still be running the LUC build.

I know that you have lapis limits based on the piece of gear, that force you to choose different lapis than than you would normally want, and weapon enchants. and the combined effect determines the build.

But my argument still stands, that when you have the absolute freedom to choose between one of 2 lapis, a A fortune or a craft lapis with the same stat points, the Craft will result in more damage than the Fortune.

Then, there is the vast majority of us that do not have the uber stats, and the LUC disadvantage becomes more and more apparent.  


Actually I completely destroyed your argument.

as I said, I tried a Luc build. I still did substantial damage in pvp.

Luc even in Ep3 was obsolete to STR. do the math.

The damage range of a 1000 luc hunter in Ep3 on ele I was 630 - 2130 before adding weapon damage.
The damage range of a 1000 str hunter was 2100 - 2100 before weapon calculations.

In other words, the average was much higher on STR, being near the maximum consistently. Luc's Average was 1380.

That, not absorp or enchants, is why your luc build loses.

BUT; my hunter's build does have alot of luc still. I could have 1367 STR if I wanted on linkage, but I don't. Why? because I value the 400 luc more than I value the extra 120-140 STR. It adds slightly more damage for those slots, because 50 Luc does more damage than 20 STR.

I'll link you a chart reflecting A sin's STR build VS my Luc build (same armor, compared on both hunter/sin):



If you understand this chart, what it's indicating is that in most situations, except three, my overall damage capability was higher, than either of these notorious sins, because I stacked more Luc. My build even beat their build overall on a sin's damage when luc damage was applied.

What I did to make this equation was, I took the luc, multiplied it by .75, and then I divided it by the normal attack parameters (1.5 for crit, 1.4 for ele) and then added the "converted" attack power to the actual attack power.

If I get bored out of my skull, I'll add a hypothetical Luc build as well. And I'll show you, that before Absorp is even taken into account, a Luc build's average damage is about 576 less those same points allocated to STR.

Rekikyo

Rank 5.1
Rekikyo
Joined
25 Nov 2008
Posts
8194
Location
Gaia Adrion Necria United States
PostedAug 26, 2012 3:59 am
Str Build:



Luc Build:



Difference in ability (including comparing 1000 absorp to 0 absorp:



If you look at the difference between the means, Absorp has absolutely nothing at all to do with the difference in Luc Vs Str.

And it HAS ALWAYS BEEN THIS WAY.

As to "ubers vs average" players argument; I'm sorry but the majority of players atm on all OS servers have pretty good gear. They've had a year to create the current stats, and are using them to their potential now. Not only that, the OS Op cost is relatively cheap for most items, barring gold cost. You can't compare an average player's potential to pvp vs an uber anyways. They are uber for a reason: they spent more, and are more complete.

(The charts I made on my character builder I created were specifically "lapised" to make OJ STR = OJ Luc, so that there's no askew to the results. There's approximately 1100 of both in this build, before base stats. Both Sheets also use the same exact gear).

The Difference 100% lies in the range of damage being much larger and more random for luc. Has nothing to do with Absorp.

cnctina2

Rank 3
cnctina2
Joined
30 Dec 2009
Posts
918
Location
United States
PostedAug 26, 2012 5:11 am
OK I don't have any fancy charts and they are very nice by the way thanks. I hope you don't mind if I use them. But aren't you guys losing track of the issue here and comparing oranges and oranges? The simple math indicates to me that mele attack classes only need one stat to get their .3 multiplier and ranged need 2. Therefore they have the advantage over us right out of the gate simply because they can put all of their stats in one thing to get the maximum multiplier.

I believe you both agree that STR build is stronger for an archer but disagree on why.

Rekikyo

Rank 5.1
Rekikyo
Joined
25 Nov 2008
Posts
8194
Location
Gaia Adrion Necria United States
PostedAug 26, 2012 5:32 am
cnctina2 wrote:
OK I don't have any fancy charts and they are very nice by the way thanks. I hope you don't mind if I use them. But aren't you guys losing track of the issue here and comparing oranges and oranges? The simple math indicates to me that mele attack classes only need one stat to get their .3 multiplier and ranged need 2. Therefore they have the advantage over us right out of the gate simply because they can put all of their stats in one thing to get the maximum multiplier.

I believe you both agree that STR build is stronger for an archer but disagree on why.  


I believe a ranged player needs both. Just because I put most of my base into STR doesn't mean I dont value Luc. Most hunters I know, instead of linking Luc, they tend to go +700 Luc and then full on STR, which actually lowers their overall potential, but gives them about 150 more STR.

I think Hunters, are the 3rd best dpser in pvp, War being first, Sin being second. Hunters overall if played right though, can play on par with any of the others. Those Stamina/MP skills pwn all others, and well make up for the lack of a couple hundred attack.

Olaf1989

Rank 1
Joined
04 Apr 2011
Posts
344
Location
Zurich Switzerland
PostedAug 26, 2012 9:48 am
Every time Amaranth post his horrible and "self proven" wall-o-texts , it reminds me to this :

http://youtu.be/CpmDIP3Fn2Y

LoDebar

Rank 3
LoDebar
Joined
10 Aug 2008
Posts
848
Location
Rekikyo's Neighbor United States
PostedAug 26, 2012 6:09 pm
Someone with STR=1000, DEX=500, LUC=500 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 1875 + (0 to 750) bonus - average 2250
Melee attack damage: 2100 + (0 to 750) bonus - average 2475

In the above case Swords out perform bows in damage.


Someone with STR=500, DEX=500, LUC=1000 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 1350 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 2100
Melee attack damage: 1125 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 1875

In the above case Bows have the advantage

But the STR build outperforms the LUC build

Now if someone had 1000 DEF:

Someone with STR=1000, DEX=500, LUC=500 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 375 + (0 to 750) bonus - average 750
Melee attack damage: 600+ (0 to 750) bonus - average 975

In the above case Swords out perform bows in damage.


Someone with STR=500, DEX=500, LUC=1000 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 0 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 750
Melee attack damage: 0 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 750

In the above case neither weapon has an advantage - all damage is based of LUC critical hit bonus. With Bows, the average damage is the same regardless if STR or LUC build. This was the way in the old system. Note how the STR has an advantage when using a sword.

Now if same someone had 1000 DEF and their armor enchanted with absorb lapis for a total of 500 Absorb:

Someone with STR=1000, DEX=500, LUC=500 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 375 + (0 to 750) bonus - average 250
Melee attack damage: 600+ (0 to 750) bonus - average 475

In the above case Swords out perform bows in damage.


Someone with STR=500, DEX=500, LUC=1000 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 0 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 250
Melee attack damage: 0 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 250

In the above case neither weapon has an advantage - all damage is based of LUC critical hit bonus. Again there isn't any real advantage one way or the other. Except that the total damage is much less. Except in the melee case has a clear damage advantage with a STR build.


Now if the Absorb was applied the exact same way as DEF is applied, the above 2 cases would then be:
Someone with STR=1000, DEX=500, LUC=500 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 0 + (0 to 750) bonus - average 375
Melee attack damage: 0+ (0 to 750) bonus - average 375

In the above case neither Sword or Bow has a performance advantage.


Someone with STR=500, DEX=500, LUC=1000 no-ele
Bow Attack damage range: 0 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 750
Melee attack damage: 0 + (0 to 1500) bonus - average: 750

Again neither the Bow or Sword have an advantage over each other. But in this case the LUC clearly results in greater damage, and in the LUC build over the STR build, the damage is 2:1 greater.

This should be obvious to the casual observer that the way absorb/enchant is bying applied nerfs the archer/hunter potential.

Now to address the original post. when in close order combat, the base damage the bow does is reduced by 1/3.

When an archer wields a sword, the attack damage is the same as it is for fighters/warriors. As you can see in the above, the melee damage is either equal or greater than the ranged attack damage the bow has, under most conditions. When in close order combat, the sword will always outperform the bow because of its damage reduction. Which is another reason the archer class is nerfed for PvP. The only time Archers get any real advantage is when the DEF gets extremely high. But if the Absorb/enchant is subtracted from the Critical Damage bonus, then archers are just weak class that no one wants to party with.

Yes, archers should get some melee skills since they don't stay in the ranged position very long in PvP because they are a primary target for other archers and melee class fighters because they are generally squishy.

MadKeen3

Rank 0
Joined
31 Oct 2010
Posts
46
Location
Australia
PostedAug 26, 2012 9:10 pm
I want LoDebar to be the Archer/Hunter representivie to go visit the game developers to sort the Archer/Hunters skills out.
There is so many things wrong with the class that need fixing it is not funny.
I think the in game description for Pantera Shot sums up how much effort they have put into sorting the Class out.
Display posts from previous:   Sort by: