Wow... That does seem a little outrageous and extremely one sided.

>>It just occured to me that while Barbs are getting magic requirements brought up to their circle, mages are getting some of the new magical skills grandfathered based off of their other magic skills.

1) You don't HAVE any primary magic skills you've been training. If you'd rather, I could base it off your PM, but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't rather.
2) Your magic requirements are tertiary, not primary

>>This isn't just a guild vs guild thing here either. It seems rather unfair imo.

It's actually a magic thing. Barbarians are getting magic grandfathered to at-circle because there is no way to gauge how many times you've danced or roared. Magic users are getting their one skill that's always gated their magic abilities spread out into four new ones.

>>I'm getting penalized for overtraining my primary skillset, right?

Um. I'm pretty sure you aren't...

>>Tropicalo's grandfathered magic skills

If you want a reasonable discussion you shouldn't use the single most unreasonable character's skills as your baseline.

--

"The ninety and nine are with dreams, content but the hope of the world made new, is the hundredth man who is grimly bent on making those dreams come true." -E.A.P.

Ok, I got ya here. Trop's insane.


So I got on the dr profile page and looked up 150th mms - only one is listed : Vaeyrin

Lunar Magic: 1248 11% clear (0/34)
Harness Ability: 1247 46% clear (0/34) Power Perceive: 1094 62% clear (0/34)
Arcana: 718 87% clear (0/34) Targeted Magic: 815 80% clear (0/34)

Now this is a pretty lopsided character here, so its not even a very good example - but crunching the numbers:

832 Augmentation
823 Dehibilitation
786 Utility
998 Warding

So, from what she lost in Harness for tdps to what she gained in the 4 new magic skills, shes set to lose 154 tdps.

However,

We're only talking about the secondary learning rate here(1/2 of the current tdp formula)

I didn't say anything about Trop's main skills in relation to the NEW primary learning rate(2x). That is the realm of insanity. Trop gains 11,976 tdps from magic alone along with 4 brand spankin new 1000+ skills primary skills to train.

Back to Vaeyrin,

Now shes set to gain 6,680 tdps from her magic skills. 3.0 turns her 13,736 tdps from magic ranks, adds 4 new skills near or above 800,
and adds almost 7000 brand new new tdps to put her at 20,416. This doesn't seem fair to me at all.

So, what we can take away from these numbers is that she is set to gain at least 3737 tdps just from the brand new magic skills.

>>Um. I'm pretty sure you aren't...

I'm not actually losing them, they're just being given back to the game. I should get that straight. The game is taking back 3,625 tdps from my weapon skillset because I bothered to train most of my primary skills. Also, my primary skillset is going on a huge diet -

...

I'm set to lose 3,625 tdps compared to the current formula from my weapon ranks. Thats with 14 weapons over 500. I over-trained my primary skillset and I'm being penalized for it. Call it whatever you please, but the numbers say -3,625. Those skills are also going on a major diet - I'm going from 14 500+ weapons to 10. Whats up with that?

So the game is taking back 3,625 of the tdps it lent me and 4 of my 500 rank weapon skills?

While pretty much every magic primary guild in the game who trained their magic skills haphazardly are set to greatly benefit; they're gaining ranks and tdps.

---

IM: Dannyboy00001111

"Fool proof system do not take into account the ingenuity of fools, nor the power of numbers."

Keep in mind the GMs are also re-working the magic conversion formulas and the one in that spreadsheet is the last proposed one with hard calculations. I'm not sure what the new formulas will look like but keep your eyes peeled for red name posts.

~Leilond
http://tinyurl.com/Leilond-Portrait
http://drzeal.forumotion.com Learn How to PvP!

>>Wait, it's not Codiax?

Haha no I think he meant the person with the highest TDP generating skills (highest skills)

I win the award for most TDP debt.

>>Barbarians are getting magic grandfathered to at-circle because there is no way to gauge how many times you've danced or roared.

It is true there is no way to truly know the exact number, but you guys chose the absolute minimum. There is other metrics than just circle. I am 100% positvie I would have 1k+ inner fire at this point. Yet I won't even get the maximum 370.


Codiax.
Forged Weapons:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Codiax#Codiax-Forged-Weapons

<<Honestly, the fact that you've used the wrong skill for the conversion in both of your posts makes me think you don't understand the change, let alone the reasons behind it.

No, he's on the money. It is pretty outrageous, too.

Socharis: while we're on this, the argument forever has been that Barbarians are "fine" compared to to magic users when it comes to hunting at-level, even though Barbarians are typically a dozen or more circles behind their magic-using compatriots when hunting "at-level," primarily because they gained more TDPs on average (or dances were OP, whichever argument you want to ply) which meant their statistics tended to "keep up." Glancing over their new requirements it looks like they'll still be getting that advantage in circles (and thus roughly 1000 TDPs the Barbarian won't) and their skill situation has been "fixed" to the point where they have almost as many skills to train.

Of course, the uneven playing field has been there, tilted one way or another depending on how you want to argue its sides, since forever. But now that the attempt is being made to even it all out, I'm curious how that final piece of the puzzle is going to be addressed.

I guess it should be illustrated with raw numbers, so, assuming you train roughly to requirements for your circle, a Cleric will be hunting in (south barricade) celpeze at around 110th to 115th circle. At those circles a Barbarian has likely already transitioned to dillos. Incidentally the new WM requirements still provide a slight advantage in the critical 70-100 circle range where they'll be able to transition to more dangerous critters slightly slower. It's somehow even more absurd with Moonies, but very few of them are training just to their circle requirements.

When they first announced the changes, I was at about +1000 TDPs.

Since the revisions, I am at about +1000 TDPs.

I am fine with this.

You're comparing apples to oranges Leet. A barbarian has a different skillset than a warrior mage or any other guild. A barbarian's skillset is more tailored to combat and the barbarian will gain combat skills much faster, and will climb the creature ladder much faster. Of course the barbarian will(typically) have less tdps than a member of another guild within the same hunting ground. And the barbarian will usually be of a much lower circle.

~Leilond
http://tinyurl.com/Leilond-Portrait
http://drzeal.forumotion.com Learn How to PvP!

<<You're comparing apples to oranges Leet. A barbarian has a different skillset than a warrior mage or any other guild. A barbarian's skillset is more tailored to combat and the barbarian will gain combat skills much faster, and will climb the creature ladder much faster. Of course the barbarian will(typically) have less tdps than a member of another guild within the same hunting ground. And the barbarian will usually be of a much lower circle.

Exactly my point. The 3.0 changes were supposed to throw everyone onto a more or less even playing field but the one complaint -- the longest-standing complaint, at that -- has not been at all addressed. The only real saving grace is that the requirements changes themselves didn't exacerbate it, but the extension of the Magic skillset has (intentionally or otherwise) done the job just as well.

By virtue of skillset differences I don't think it's possible to balance it, not without giving one guild an incredibly hard circling requirement and the other a free pass.

~Leilond
http://tinyurl.com/Leilond-Portrait
http://drzeal.forumotion.com Learn How to PvP!

<<By virtue of skillset differences I don't think it's possible to balance it, not without giving one guild an incredibly hard circling requirement and the other a free pass.

Not for every guild, certainly. But the primary offenders have and look likely to continue to be the magic primary guilds. To some extent they have inflicted a more serious combat requirement on all of them, but it still falls pretty shy. The solution would have been to adjust Barbarian circling requirements so it's "less of more" rather than "more of less."

>>There's a functional metric for magic users that GMs can work off of. In other words, they can tabulate the time invested in them training magic. Based on that, they can extrapolate a result of what it would possibliy be like if those people were training under the new system instead. As an example, under the new system I'd probably train by casting a utility, then an augmentation, then a warding, etc, as opposed to just casting the same spell over and over.<<

There's a basic metric, sure, but it's not infallible. What if a cleric never used a self buff and instead trained PM just casting Energy Bolt over and over again? If you say that "Well that's silly they'd buff themselves to go hunt" I'd just counter "Wouldn't barbarians?"

>>There's a basic metric, sure, but it's not infallible. What if a cleric never used a self buff and instead trained PM just casting Energy Bolt over and over again?

It functions to the point where you can transfer the work done doing X to the work that could theoretically do Y.

I am sure, without a doubt, that if GMs were capable of knowing that you cast EASE 226,753 times, BOLT 63,235 times, and MAF 12 times, they'd give magic ranks based on that knowledge. But they instead are going as far as they can based on the data they can gather. They have a metric that shows "this person cast magic" and go from there. Is it a better metric than circle? Yes, which is why they're using it.

>>If you say that "Well that's silly they'd buff themselves to go hunt" I'd just counter "Wouldn't barbarians?"

And, if there was a way to gauge that metric at a better scale than circle, I'm sure the GMs would be using it. But there isn't, so they can't.

---

hypocrite, thy name is teveshszat, and i just hope i'm there to see you when you're broght down. - GERSTEINJ2

I've totally been playing a glorified commoner for the last 12 years. I was hoping that someday I could reap the benefits of skills I never bothered to use(dances, berserks, roars) in the form of grandfathered skill ranks - but as time passed, they became wise to my plans for magic domination and now everything is ruined! My aspirations have been torn asunder, alas!

...

You're basically saying that because they can't prove in the numbers game that I've danced 12 billion times and roared 16 billion in the past 12 years, its the equivilant of them not having any data to go off of? Wow.

---

IM: Dannyboy00001111

"Fool proof system do not take into account the ingenuity of fools, nor the power of numbers."

>>Pendus's request got shot down for requesting people who are higher than 150th get their magic grandfathered to their circle

I am pretty sure I saw GMs say that they're looking into what they can do when it comes to grandfathering things for the 150+ crowd, mainly because they recognize that someone might be, comparative to their other skills, hundreds of ranks behind on something once they're finally able to go from 150-151, and it would be unfair to have them play catch-up.

---

hypocrite, thy name is teveshszat, and i just hope i'm there to see you when you're broght down. - GERSTEINJ2

Gorteous brings up a great point, and I can see where the GMs are coming from. I don't think you can compare the whole TM fiasco with Rangers/Paladins because TM was not a requirement for the guild to actually function. TM didn't buff them, nor was it used as a central focus of those guilds. Barbarians on the other hand are fueled by berserks, dances, and roars. This is why they are being grandfathered in the first place: without grandfathering we won't be able to use ANY ability not even to minimum effectiveness. Without the TM grandfathering Rangers/Paladins could still buff themselves and cast a variety of spells, just not the damage dealing stat-based onces that were converted to TM (still waiting on Horde, plz :D).

That settles that. Now onto the other piece. Now, the GMs are following the only real metric they have available to them, and that is through circle requirements. I'm actually ok with that. There is absolutely no way to figure out just how much skill each individual Barbarian would have in these new skills, whereas the basic metric is already set for mages. That is where GMs are coming from.

Now, that metric is not perfect by any standards, and this is where Gorteous is coming from. Barbarians spend much time in combat (which could mean that all of their new skills could actually be grandfathered relative to their primary combats). I do understand that tertiaries are not expected to be as high as combats, but it does seem a little odd that (augmentation, for example) buffing skill requirements would only be at 370 for 150th, when the primary weapon req is 860. As an example, if a WM has 860 TM, then one of their combat tertiaries (evasion) won't be at 370. Maybe 600, maybe less, but 370 is way off.

Again, we can't measure how much each Barbarian would have used their abilities. But I do it could be re-considered given the fact that Barbarian abilities are centered around combat and it's hard to see even a tert skill being at 370 for a 150th Barbarian using his/her abilities.

---

Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.

-GM Abasha

The power behind my barbarian abilities matter to me. Hunting matters to me. Smithing matters to me.

Top skill with a primary learning rate Twohanded Edged: 910
Top skill with tertiary learning rate Mechanical Lore: 800

I am a dancing barbarian. When I hunt I dance something (dragon, badger, swan, panther (hiding) or eagle(ranged). When I forge (old style) I danced bear to pound and panther to grind. When I forge new style I dance bear. BACK TO BACK TO BACK. When origami orgami I dance panther and use the 18 boost in agility to fold much higher that I normally would. I used to have people do my first fold for me so I could do this. When I mine I dance bear or dragon. Basiclly if I am not learning down somewhere, I am dancing.

So here is a metric to use in grandfathering our magic skills. Avarage the mech lore of the top 5 forgers (cause the tert lore skill is as important to them as magic would be to them and a hunting barb), compare that to the average of their circle and use that for the metric for grandfathering our tertiary magic skill.


______
Kertig Heart Magdar Bluefletch, Bit Player of M'Riss

>Magic primary guilds will often find themselves weighed down by their Weapons requirements as well, primarily because the throttle has always been with Weapons and not with Magic, as an artifact of Magic being trainable basically anywhere.

No, the throttle is tert armor limiting Secondary weapons (and TM).

See: Combat MM with 515 defenses, 535 TM, yet 1000+ PM/Harness and 800+ Arcana/PP. It literally learns about 4 TM to 1 Shield given full pulse sizes (worse, actually, since TM sometimes is drained out while shield is still ticking). If it was a WM/Cleric I'd add in weapons limitations. Terts are just that damned bad.

A Barb is not constrained by slow combat terts like ever other guild except Rangers (and arguably Traders, since is could be debated that killing is optional when you don't have weapon requirements). That means they fly up the ladder, and their circle reqs are quickly met by combat, unlike everyone else, who have to "weave" combat in and out with higher non-combat priorities. If there was a 150th Barb and a 150th mage with identical combat skills (offensive and defensive), I'd greatly fear the mage more, because they would have truly awesome non-combat (and magic) skills. Because they would HAVE to have trained considerably longer (twice as long? 3 times? 4? More? Leilond posted some interesting numbers in Exp System folder, and that being new Exp, not old)

You're railing against just how the game IS.

>By virtue of skillset differences I don't think it's possible to balance it, not without giving one guild an incredibly hard circling requirement and the other a free pass.

Min and max circle cap hunting grounds. Which is never going to happen, the uproar would be crazy.

>Not for every guild, certainly. But the primary offenders have and look likely to continue to be the magic primary guilds.

I still think you should look to Rangers for the "most TDP crown" you seem to be looking for, not the common magic primes. Everything Barbs get (just switch some weapon at primary with some survivals at primary), plus they can work magic too.

Kaeta Airtag

>>Actually an opinion cannot be changed or corrected. Nice try back of line.-VERATHOR
>>But it can be wrong.-Starlear

>>The way I'd do it is average out the two highest lores for barbarians and base it off that or based off your circle reqs, whichever is higher

>>Yes, but this is even more dramatically inaccurate than grandfathering to-circle. It puts a chart-reading grass-braider as a barbarian who's raged far more than one who's spent most of his life on the battlefield.

Understandable, though I suspect that the chart-reading grass-braiding Barbarians are a fairly rare breed, haha. At least I'd hope so.

Would you consider perhaps grandfathering our ranks as a percentage of our highest weapon skill, or maybe a percentage of our top 4 weapons averaged..? Something along those lines? Seems that would be the best gauge as to how much time each individual Barbarian has spent raging on the battlefields, and would certainly leave most of us with a better base for our abilities than we're currently looking at.

I just think that the circle requirement for combat-related skills for a Barb should be more than 370, even if tertiary. I do get the feeling that the amount of ranks a Barb would be grandfathered was considered before what the circle requirement for those particular skills should be. And so it was set low to 370 ranks.

What will be even more interesting to see is how bad the scaling issue will be with these new skills. If a 150th Barbarian will be just as effective with their abilities (as promised) as they are now, I guarantee you'll have sub-100th Barbarians becoming incredible ability users since it wouldn't take long for them to hit 370 ranks (even as a tertiary) at all. The new skills won't be scaled properly up to even 1000 ranks if the standard is set at 370 ranks for a 150th Barb. I do believe the circle requirement needs to be upped higher, but then it seems like the GMs don't want to grandfather 500-600+ ranks.

At any rate, I do think Barbs are gonna turn out great and I can't wait to see it. This is an interesting issue and I do think everything will be better off in the long-term (as far as scaling and such) if the circle req is upped and grandfathered accordingly. For one, not every Barb is 150th. And two, mages understandably benefit when having their skills grandfathered so it won't look so bad in the end.

So that's my suggestion, raise the circle reqs for the new skills that Barbs will need for scaling purposes.

---

Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.

-GM Abasha