Spell Scaling Feedback Thread


#81

Warrior Example: Jotun - Storm Shield

Storm Shield’s Current Damage = 18% of Dragon’s Base HP

Warrior_Pre_Scaling
Warrior_Pre_Scaling.png1600x1200 2.87 MB

After Spell Scaling : Storm Shield’s Damage = 14% of Dragon’s Modified Max HP

Warrior_Post_Scaling

Just for you Bambam.

In this case, the % for Storm Shield was decreased but the overall potential for damage increased due to consumables and research/gear. They may decide to increase Explosive Shield or Lethal Barrier %, rather than decrease it so you can hope for that I guess.

It’s always possible, although I wouldn’t count on it because only 2 dragons have LB and both spells are meant to be introductory level spells, with better spells being unlocked later on.


#82

This is a symptom of a problem caused by the lack of spell scaling.

• Lineage dragons’ spells fall behind with the introduction of runes, gear and riders.
• Players complain bases are too difficult.
• Divines start making up the slack using generously powerful spell kits.
• Players complain dragons are too powerful.
• Tower levels increase.
• Divines’ kits get better to keep up.
• Lineage dragons become as irrelevant as projectile towers.

We have become saturated with white spells because of this. Personally, I’d rather have spell scaling done, the number of white spells reduced, and the power difference between lineage and divine reduced from “absurd” to “noticeable”.


#83

I’ve been looking for this since we were told it was coming a few months ago, and am hopeful. If it makes dragons a little stronger, that’s a great thing for the majority of us not at endgame and the many whose building has outpaced their breeding.

It sounds like there was already a problem with mythic Vanguards being stupidly strong, so if they’re a little more stupidly strong, it’s just more for PG to have to balance in the next tower releases.

Is the desired result to reduce the difference between dragons and defended bases, or chiefly to make warriors and sorcs more usable? Why is this described as affecting warriors and sorcerers more strongly than hunters?


#84

ES is 6% while LB is 4%, if they use a common algorithm decreasing all so the max buffs don’t OP then the underpowered still exists with these two spells.

Using example, can change but just for sake of usability, 14% is a rounded 75% of 18%. That would make ES 5% and LB 3% plus max buffs. Other shields and similar spells are around the 10% range so I’ve suggested ES 10% and LB 7%, with the change ES 8% and LB 5%.

Point is if you take a messed up scale of current and implement a common change across the board the imbalance is still there.


#85

Kind of ambivelant until action is taken on the numerous bugs and other issues affecting the game. Has there been any discussion on mechanics to allow horizantal changes to the base to account for game rebalancing?


#86

Let me start with the very positive feedback - You’re working with the GPF and are presenting changes with enough time to actually address potential issues before going live, so a big thumbs up for this concept.

I don’t feel like I have a good enough understanding of these changes to evaluate them, though I will cover a few points that I hope will be considered by those who do have the hands on access to be able to do so:

  • The vast majority of bases cannot currently compete with dragons obtainable well below their level. i.e., through the mid 250s, I see many, many Sapphire egg capped bases, max tower level of 45s. Even emerald Equestor cuts through these like butter unless hammer spammed. When you say that defenses are currently ahead, you’re clearly talking about a very different data point. And while I agree that this is a much harder thing to balance, it’s also the game experience of a way higher portion of your player base than the Vanguard on 75s experience that you appear to be focused on. Please make sure that someone is looking at that.
  • I feel like this is making gear even more essential than it already is, and I think it’s highly likely that most lineage dragons won’t be worthy of a rider even with these changes. I’m concerned that reducing the strength of “naked” dragons will make grinding out xp during and between Breedings more of a headache. Not sure what runes you can throw on Gloomclaw to make him viable, for example, and you’re going to make a naked Gloomclaw weaker so that a buffed out Gloomclaw doesn’t completely wreck everything.

#87

Pathox isn’t OP with defenders and decent gear
If defenders are smart and don’t wasting SS randomly it’s more likely gonna die badly
Itzani is way better in this case
So I’m not sure,that Pathox is a great example


#88

My point was that PG could choose to buff the % rather than decrease it… like. They COULD do exactly what you’ve been asking for.

But I wouldn’t count on it because Static Shield is Chimerak’s spell; does 10% base health as damage. He’s a divine dragon. Why should Draco have a spell as good as a divine? It would kind of defeat the purpose of having different shields if they did the same thing but only the name was different right?

Anyways, they might “buff” your spells. They might not. They probably won’t, but it’s possible. At the very least the spells will be stronger than they currently are so that should count for something.


#89

The nice thing about Itzani is that Itzani doesn’t win by beating down with spell damage. The only spell that does damage is sand and that’s not even the purpose of the spell. I guess shadow strike does, too but that’s not really the breadwinner here. Itzani probably won’t be affected by this change at all, which is a good thing.


#90

Agreed on this, Atlas is already a must have that most don’t have or want, this seems like it will make it an even futher gap. I’m all for balance, but recent balancing has been only from the data of Atlas it seems.

Get the data from 100% of the active game, not the inactives, instead of the 35% in Atlas.


#91

Talking about Atlas, making dragons stronger also means benefitting the attackers. So this adds to the revive % change,same direction.


#92

The damage was decreased though


#93

@PGCrisis I’m grateful for 2 things here. First, that this was announced as something that’s being worked on to try to balance dragons, and that feedback is requested. Second, that the GPF is given an opportunity to test it. I don’t think many of us will fully realize the changes until it’s rolled out (so I’ll hold my opinion for then), but please please listen to the GPF feedback when they give it. It’s a good idea, if executed properly.

One request: please roll it out to all players at the same time once testing is done. Too many things go to a select few, as we’re all fully aware and frustrated by. Now to continue this transparency, can we please get a similar announcement regarding the other 2k+ response threads?


#94

How would these changes affect, say, Prospero? He’s my best dragon so far and if this works how it sounds…I can’t wait to fly him under these conditions.


#95

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#96

:flushed: pizza time :pizza:


#97

Well…this is awkward…


#98

Grabs for the popcorn in @Lutrus 's lap again
.
.
.
.
Damn still no popcorn there


#99

Remember to be constructive and not do call out posts. :rofl:


#100

Stop putting your hands in Lutrus’ lap!