Jump to content
Luxuri

Monster Hunting Developer's Blog

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

You gave your reasoning and brought up data for the GX nerf, which is good. What is not good is that despite providing your reasoning for the nerf, you did not address the impact of the nerf itself nor the consideration of the values of the nerf. 

 

Seeing as you have the numbers, you are aware of exactly how big the difference is between GX and an average DPS class. In that case, why was the nerf not given values such that GX average would be brought in line with average DPS? We can see via the chart you provided that the average GX player DPS clocks in at around 2.5m, while average DPS for other DPS-specialized classes generally clocks in at around 1.5m (ranger, genetic, summoner, rebel). The utility/support classes such as Mechanic/Sorc/Mins/Wanderer all have lower DPS, but these are support characters and thus contribute more to the party than sheer DPS (something that GX does not do). 

 

Based on this, would it not be reasonable to adjust the values on GX so that after the nerf, the average GX dps is around 60% of what it used to be? If you have tested it yourself, you should be aware that the vast majority of GX players use the beta client, on which there is no animation lock for CI. This means that the average GX player goes from 4-5 casts per second (depending on ping) to ~1.4 due to the hard cooldown, while the increase in CI damage formula results in roughly around 40% more damage.

 

This means that based on the numbers, the nerf which was implemented reduces GX damage to between 40% of pre-nerf numbers (for someone who hit 5 casts/sec) to 50% of pre-nerf numbers (for someone who hit 4 casts/sec). Seeing as the average DPS for every damage-focused class in the game lies between 60% and 90% of GX dps, why is it reasonable to nerf GX to 40-50% dps? Considering that it is one of the highest budget builds for a class specialized in only doing damage with no utility, I feel that it is unreasonable to deliberately choose a nerf value to make GX land below all other damage-focused classes in the game. 

 

The choice to remove MH-customized mechanics is a good one, but GX is a class that has already received multiple customized values on many other skills. By choosing to implement a nerf of this severity, you should have counterbalanced it by raising the values or removing one of the other customizations. A number change in one of the other customized nerfs such as EDP would serve as a universal damage adjustment, without affecting gameplay or mechanics. 

 

That said, I understand that theory-crafted numbers do not necessarily reflect real-world values. It may turn out that for the majority of GX players, the nerf was less impactful than the numbers would expect. However, knowing that people have invested significant amounts of time and resources into their characters, why would you rush to over-nerf a class rather than take a more gradual approach? Massive nerfs like this serve only to cause market crashes and mass migrations away from a class - if you had implemented a smaller nerf numbers-wise, less people would be upset and you would be able to take another few weeks of data and re-adjust shortly afterwards. Seeing the huge outcry over the nerfs and seeing as the GX equip market has crashed to nearly half of what it used to be, I doubt you will be able to get any reliable or impactful data in the short-term, which just makes it even harder to figure out the true impact of these changes. In the meantime, hundreds (if not thousands) of players have been adversely affected by these changes, and will not see things stabilize for several weeks at best. For many players, RO is a game where we invest hours upon hours of our life, so having so much of that time be diminished in value is quite a negative feeling.

Edited by Takusan
Arundil, ninpou, Tudor and 8 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Luxuri said:

The first thing we see is that not only is GX outputting the highest DPS but it also incredibly over-represented in the dataset (as I'm sure you can see, so is another certain class, but I will discuss this later as we are only talking about GX at the minute).

There are 1.729 more RK than GX, this is a difference of more than half of the GX, while the AVG DPS is about the same (what looks like a 250k+- difference) and the only one nerfed was GX.
 

GX has the biggest potential DPS but don't you think it's a little bit overboard to do such a massive nerf because of less than 25% of the GX doing more than 5m damage? Those outliers are still fine because they are going to melt the boss anyway, the ones that are being gutted hard are the ones who are still farming their shadow sets and rerolling enchants in their gear. Losing half of 20m is less impactful - context being the ability to kill the boss - than losing half of 2m.

 

1 hour ago, Luxuri said:

The majority of players are not reaching super high DPS numbers I have seen a lot of people talk about. The majority of people are not outputting even 2 million DPS, no matter which class they are playing.

Then why nerf a part of the class that will affect everyone because of such a small amount of players in said class doing astronomous DPS? Why not nerf the buffs or itens that make them do it? Everything could be reverted for MH3 to maintain the idea of less custom changes going forward.

amok, m0rfeus, Skyrius and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Takusan said:

You gave your reasoning and brought up data for the GX nerf, which is good. What is not good is that despite providing your reasoning for the nerf, you did not address the impact of the nerf itself nor the consideration of the values of the nerf. 

 

Seeing as you have the numbers, you are aware of exactly how big the difference is between GX and an average DPS class. In that case, why was the nerf not given values such that GX average would be brought in line with average DPS? We can see via the chart you provided that the average GX player DPS clocks in at around 2.5m, while average DPS for other DPS-specialized classes generally clocks in at around 1.5m (ranger, genetic, summoner, rebel). The utility/support classes such as Mechanic/Sorc/Mins/Wanderer all have lower DPS, but these are support characters and thus contribute more to the party than sheer DPS (something that GX does not do). 

 

Based on this, would it not be reasonable to adjust the values on GX so that after the nerf, the average GX dps is around 60% of what it used to be? If you have tested it yourself, you should be aware that the vast majority of GX players use the beta client, on which there is no animation lock for CI. This means that the average GX player goes from 4-5 casts per second (depending on ping) to ~1.4 due to the hard cooldown, while the increase in CI damage formula results in roughly around 40% more damage.

 

This means that based on the numbers, the nerf which was implemented reduces GX damage to between 40% of pre-nerf numbers (for someone who hit 5 casts/sec) to 50% of pre-nerf numbers (for someone who hit 4 casts/sec). Seeing as the average DPS for every damage-focused class in the game lies between 60% and 90% of GX dps, why is it reasonable to nerf GX to 40-50% dps? Considering that it is one of the highest budget builds for a class specialized in only doing damage with no utility, I feel that it is unreasonable to deliberately choose a nerf value to make GX land below all other damage-focused classes in the game. 

 

The choice to remove MH-customized mechanics is a good one, but GX is a class that has already received multiple customized values on many other skills. By choosing to implement a nerf of this severity, you should have counterbalanced it by raising the values or removing one of the other customizations. A number change in one of the other customized nerfs such as EDP would serve as a universal damage adjustment, without affecting gameplay or mechanics. 

 

That said, I understand that theory-crafted numbers do not necessarily reflect real-world values. It may turn out that for the majority of GX players, the nerf was less impactful than the numbers would expect. However, knowing that people have invested significant amounts of time and resources into their characters, why would you rush to over-nerf a class rather than take a more gradual approach? Massive nerfs like this serve only to cause market crashes and mass migrations away from a class - if you had implemented a smaller nerf numbers-wise, less people would be upset and you would be able to take another few weeks of data and re-adjust shortly afterwards. Seeing the huge outcry over the nerfs and seeing as the GX equip market has crashed to nearly half of what it used to be, I doubt you will be able to get any reliable or impactful data in the short-term, which just makes it even harder to figure out the true impact of these changes. In the meantime, hundreds (if not thousands) of players have been adversely affected by these changes, and will not see things stabilize for several weeks at best. For many players, RO is a game where we invest hours upon hours of our life, so having so much of that time be diminished in value is quite a negative feeling.

Firstly, thanks for the post which is levelled and well thought out.

 

In response to your first point - we would love to be able to achieve fine-tuned changes like you've mentioned. We dream of working with an MMO such as Final Fantasy XIV which has a (by comparison) very narrow DPS ranges. Truth be told, for a team this size, we don't have the ability to "nerf DPS output of GX by 13%" (for example). We could nerf the % modifier by that amount but RO's damage formulae are just a mess and what you think might be a 13% reduction in damage ends up being wildly different.

 

To that end, and in response to your second point, we are a small team with no real QA capacity outside of the team itself. What numerical changes we see in our testing will not accurately reflect what changes players will see themselves, hence our reliance on the data we collect showcased today. You mention the difference between client types resulting in differing DPS amounts which is a fair point (and something we hope does not bias the data due to balancing, but could provide an interesting data point for the future). But the numbers you suggest I take contention with at this stage as we simply don't know. From preliminary data we've collected, there just aren't enough GX runs yet to make an informed estimate on how much DPS has decreased due to the nerf. What I'm concerned about, which you've touched upon, and I've mentioned to the team is that there will be some sort of confounding effect in the immediate aftermath of the nerf due to players not playing MH or playing different classes, or trying different builds, or for other reasons. This is why, despite being very interested in seeing how our change affects GX DPS overall, I'm holding out judgment until I can see the data myself. I suspect waiting a couple of weeks will show a clearer picture (after a few weekly resets). This lines up nicely with our patch schedule and still allows us time to further tweak GX - I have to stress though, only if it is necessary - within our MH2 development cycle and before we switch fully to MH3.

 

Finally, we realise how GX has received a lot of balance changes comparatively. I've said it before and, to risk sounding like a broken record, we are putting these changes all under review come MH3. I know it is probably frustrating to hear that change is slowly coming but I personally think the systems we have planned are probably the best option available given RO's limited scope.

 

I may have missed some of your points in your post so please feel free to reply if you'd like a more direct or detailed answer to any of your more pertinent questions.

Takusan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, abertes said:

Really appreciate the graphs, gives a great overview of how the situation of DPS looks like.

 

One thing that caught my attention was from the box-plot; that one single Star Emperor who was way above every other player in the class. The only SE player to surpass the highest damage any Warlock did. Rest of the Star Emperors look inferior compared to the top Warlocks, but that one SE puts the class one step in front of Warlock in the previous graph. 

 

What I could think about with how this single Star Emperor was so insanely in front of the other was a PKS with size ignore enchant. Just goes to show how the enchanting system of PKS (based on weekly coins) can create such a huge gap between players based on RNG. Im not taking away all credit from the SE, im sure it's a good player but that difference is not possible without RNG luck from pks. 

That one SE made it clear how good SE could be (It requires a lot, as in a lot of classes) but the nerf on SE didn't only impact him.

I wish we could have skill queue for all spam classes (such as oboro) to lessen the gap (my slow spam due to ping is max 4 hits per sec in mh2 with my oboro, which is sad D:)

 

It's nice seeing these charts that confirms what i thought about meta classes.

Maybe consider adding skill queue and other skills to low dps classes

Skyrius likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noted one thing above the dps discussion...probably a minor one but anyway 

MH3 will bring the new mobs that seems initially to be planned as MH2 (sibaris etc)

And mh3 is still far from release because we havent the dev blogs yet (like we did on mh2 lore blogs, and iirc we had like 3-4 months of dev blogs and then 2 more months of waiting)

 

So i can think about we are...6?...months from that content and this make a total of 2 years waiting for a full penetration/tempest set after GMs told us those will come

And maybe still need one year before class shadow set

 

This...this upset me more that dps stuffs XD 

I mean take your time to develop the content but at least think of release the gears before...maybe add those to the mobs we have...because all those months and years...come on 

Blazzy and Lika like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheRain90 said:

I noted one thing above the dps discussion...probably a minor one but anyway 

MH3 will bring the new mobs that seems initially to be planned as MH2 (sibaris etc)

And mh3 is still far from release because we havent the dev blogs yet (like we did on mh2 lore blogs, and iirc we had like 3-4 months of dev blogs and then 2 more months of waiting)

 

So i can think about we are...6?...months from that content and this make a total of 2 years waiting for a full penetration/tempest set after GMs told us those will come

And maybe still need one year before class shadow set

 

This...this upset me more that dps stuffs XD 

I mean take your time to develop the content but at least think of release the gears before...maybe add those to the mobs we have...because all those months and years...come on 

And we're still waiting for extended classes shadow armor/boots... XD

Blazzy and ninpou like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Reads MH3*. Wow, you have my attention.

 

First of all, thanks you for the answer. /no1

Is nice to see you're doing so exhaustive research with actual data looking for a balance. But i must say that's not what's upsetting people. WE ALL  AGREE that GX was Overpowered and required a nerf. But the actual problem is this:

2 hours ago, Ariasmen said:

1. The reason people are upset over the nerf is mostly because you over and over again take away their investments and even real money they put into the gears. 

 

It have been mentioned a lot of times in other topic, but something that upsets a lof of people is the fact that this is a "Living Content", so all the real-life-time and effort they invest in the game (and sometimes even real money ), can be wasted in a single maintenance without any single previous warning or explaination. 

 

Also, not making gradual nerfs to reach balance, but MASSIVE nerfs like:

1.- Not nerfing Ice Pick to the point of balance, but leaving the item totally useless.

2.- Downgrading the DPS of GX not by a reasonable amount like -20% (which would  already leave them under Ranger), but  directly -60%

 

""People invest massive amounts of time, effort and money in polishing their characters for MH2. And is wasted in a 5 minutes maintenance, so people gets upset"

I would like you to answer me if you're considering doing something about this particualr issue  @Luxuri

 

 

 

 

 

Also, another small question, are you doing research for unusual builds? Like, we all know RK is very consistent even with cheap Gear, (according the graphycs, reaching the 3rd TOP DPS and the 2nd Average DPS). But  most of those RK, if not all of them, are WC build, that is the cheapest build. Can we see the particular data of Builds like IB, SW, Spiral Pierce and AA RK? Can we see the data of Rolling Cutter and CRS GX?

 

Is in your plans to let other builds to shine? Or you want Jobs to be locked into a single build?

 

Thanks you in advance. /no1

 

Edited by Fu Windsword

 Compilation of the Stories and Legends of all the MVP <---- Click Here 

Visit my Youtube Channel Here. <---- RO Youtube Channel

13  15

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally i want the staff to actually see us player as human being that actually invest time and probably real money to play the content and take that into consideration when trying to nerf a class.  Still on opinion instead of nerf the class, better to buff underperformed class, or even buff the mob. Even if its tricky, why so easy to come decision to nerf but not buff? Every patch note is nerf this nerf that, nerfing not tricky but buffing is? Whats the worse could happen? So many people alrd quit and give up on the conteny bcs of the nerf. Theres a reason why mh2 leech service is so booming.


20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we expect full shadow sets for expanded classes in 2020? we are nerfed not just in MH but in PVM also because of a weird and yet not explained decision of not releasing the complete gear for us... @Luxuri

Miyuzukill likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...