Spell Scaling Feedback Thread


#1107

It’s actually a little less than 47% due to the main attack damage, but I must have written your number off as finding only the difference with the glyph as that was a known value.

But yeah that seems not too bad. For anyone who was operating without buffs this means more than that, but I agree it shouldn’t be too difficult to offset by any player who put the work in to a rider (or money)

Anyone without atlas, i fear would need to use the buffs

Yes but many will legit have pathox and be below the line. It isn’t nearly as bad as I thought. It seems the stacking was proportionally stacked to not impact the break even.

Sorry you feel that way, I’m not ranting, but had purpose. Apologies if you were offended by it, but I’d post it again if it played out the same way again. I’m not a fan of shutting things down with blanket statements and no data, as it turned out everything checked out. 47% isn’t insignificant. I did think it was higher, but it turns out anyone with up to orange tier research for hunters completed and a 30% buff will break even without anything else.

I’d personally reccomend confirming if folks fall under or over that line for anyone complaining rather than just shutting them down. And understand that for a mythic dragon, owners just took up to a 17% value loss compared to other dragons on their flagship mythic dragon. Had it been Gunnar, all 17% would have been buffs, but on pathox it’s only just broken even to where it was before.


#1108

The atk power part of the equation cancels out on both sides, so is null same as glyph boost. 47.37% is the more exact number, 1/(9.5/14).

Everything else is good. Thanks for getting back to an informative reply, your info is great when you do.

Yes his is different then the masses, but then so is all the others in the bottom list. Secondly, his is a balance change to equal the balance change of “30%”, actually 23%, reduction all other spells got. Most other spells balance ended up at a set reduction, but a few spells like CC needed in his case an extra 17% to reach the balance. All is set up to be balanced.

Except for when it’s not, can I say War Cry again?


#1109

Ya you’re not likely to sway the masses because it’s you, and because people genuinely don’t care about war cry. Maybe try sending Arelyna a pm to notify her. Link some of the previous posts/discussion/calculations from the other thread when you do so there’s something to reference other than “Bambam says it’s broken.”


#1110

Have and have… also War Cry is on Cav that lots have as I said before on maybe the 10% does it’s job thread idk, but I did. :man_shrugging: I don’t care what others think of me, but guess my hope for humanity is flawed and people can’t look past that to correct a wrong.

I don’t have towers above 35 but know towers not giving higher xp as they lvl past 52 is wrong. I don’t have Pathox but helped figure out his damage. When something is wrong, even if it doesn’t benefit me or even effect me I’ll do what I can to correct it.


#1111

I am glad that you agreee that he was nerfed. Arguing over that just distracts from the larger discussion.


#1112

Lol? Please tell me what the larger discussion is. That every dragon is nerfed if you have absolutely 0 boosts? Did you know your base is nerfed if you don’t have boosts? What a concept.


#1113

I’m not saying I’m low on boosts, but it is different. One base boost lasts 6 hours, not one run. My base stays boosted 24/7 and still I have thousands more of each base boost than I do dragon boost.


#1114

Sure. But doesn’t any meaningful run use the 30% boosts? And why should a dragon without those boosts be as strong as a dragon with those boosts?

I can see how lower levels/people short on consumables and those without Atlas may find some of their dragons doing less damage, but most of these dragons were initially overscaled. Their spell damage was calibrated for max gear boosts and they’re fighting… not max gear boosts… That’s why Divines completely roll through every Gold and Platinum base. Defense doesn’t exist. So while it may appear as a nerf, I’d like to think of it as a correction.

Don’t think I’m gonna convince anyone here, so keep believing in The Great Dragon Nerf of 2019. I’d be more concerned with bases than dragons, though.


#1115

I’m not one of the people saying all dragons have been nerfed. Yes, meaningful runs are done boosted. But not all runs are war/atlas runs.

I am just remembering being new to the game and having to forge dragon boosts at one point because I didn’t have enough (and also lightning resist add-ons so I could do my own xp runs on Halo). But I’m a bit out of touch with how easily those things are acquired by new/real low level players nowadays.


#1116

It’s actually boosted on one side and not the other. And the amount it’s boosted by is not the same for hp as it is attack. But the boost (attack buffs) causes it to be less than 47%

Any dragon which did not receive a proportional nerf became weaker compare to other dragons.

Only a small list of spells (4 according to their blog, 5 if you count radiance which is net buff all things considered) got a nerf of more than 30%, and only pathox is a recent dragon with a serious damage impact from them.

If you were a person with a 47% buff, you might be equal to before but if you had many other dragons you would have been stronger with… and pathox is supposed to be more effective as a mythic, not less. If I was heavily invested in pathox, I’d be not be happy about such a reduction in value. I’m not saying it shouldn’t have been done, but that it’s not exactly unfounded anger.

And with war cry nothing that uses war cry was mythic, and I have yet to notice (not saying it doesn’t exist) angry cav players.


#1117

Really, CC was base dps/2 pre scale? Sand in their blog had it with modified dps pre scale so I just assumed CC was the same.

(mod dps/2)+((base hpx.14)x1.2)=
(mod dps/2)+((base hp×buffx.14x(.095/.14))×1.2)

Subtract (mod dps/2) both sides

(base hpx.14)x1.2=
(base hp×buffx.14x(.095/.14))×1.2

Divide by 1.2 both sides, if no glyph then this would just be skipped because it would look like below equations already.

base hpx.14=
base hp×buffx.14x(.095/.14)

Divide by base hpx.14 both sides

1=buffx(.095/.14)

Divide by (.095/.14) both sides

1.47368421=buff

This might be the first time I’ve ever shown my work, even in school I told the teacher I wasn’t gonna.

Upset is one thing, but calling it a total 100% crap nerf, PG sucks, everyone stop giving money, and the like is way off the charts for something that is a correct balance in terms of the scaling itself. As for the HP curve that is a lot bigger issue throughout the game that should be looked into.

The error is there, if it’s not felt by everyone it doesn’t matter, it’s wrong just like the fix they just did with other spells that already were calced using mod HP pre scaling.


#1118

Hey you finally said something I agree with. What they did with a mythic that alot of people put money and alot of work into is 100% crap. Not sure how they can fix it best bet is to ramp hp differently. That’s what I’m assuming would be easiest anyway.


#1119

I was editing as you were typing this, the explanation of player anger towards Pathox better for you now?

This issue is deeper than just Pathox so would need a deep dive into most dragons.


#1120

From memory Where:
HP = base HP
AT = base attack (stat divided by 2)
BHP = total HP buffs + 100%
BAT = total attack buffs + 100%
G = Glyph + 100%

BEFORE = ( HP x 0.14 x G ) + ( AT x BAT )
_AFTER = ( HP x BHP x 0.095 x G ) + ( AT x BAT )

So we solve for BHP where before = after to find the break even.

( HP x 0.14 x G ) + ( AT x BAT ) = ( HP x BHP x 0.095 x G ) + ( AT x BAT )

I’m not sure you can simplify it any without making assumptions that aren’t always true. But you know the attack portion is much smaller. Probably best we could do was figure an average HP to attack ratio. But ignoring that, we can find an upper boundary. Simplified below

EDIT:
And it took me a second but I spotted the flaw. Well, I’m not actually sure if it’s a flaw, but you maybe right.

Sorry it was late last night when I did the math. You said it was listed in their blog as modified attack? I may have missed that blog or section

I assumed the “single shot” in the freeze spell was not modified attack; however, regular single shots have always used modified, so if it’s truly a single shot this would be unchanged and I think I agree with your math then. Let me check. Maybe I can confirm with Lee’s pre-update numbers

Adjusted for modified attack before:
( HP x 0.14 x G ) + ( AT x BAT ) = ( HP x BHP x 0.095 x G ) + ( AT x BAT )

( HP x 0.14 x G ) = ( HP x BHP x 0.095 x G )
( 0.14 ) = ( BHP x 0.095 )
BHP = 0.14 / 0.095


#1121

Gah, you have overwhelmed me with maths, good sir!

Happy birthday by the way :kissing_heart:


#1122

You’re still saying CC was off base dps before, it just goes against the grain when they posted Sand was mod atk pre scale. @Lee1230 had numbers of before and after but I can’t find his Pathox lvl. Lee can you tell if Pathox was base atk or mod atk pre scaling? Crazy might have numbers too?


#1123

See the edit I just added. Yeah would need Lee or someone with full before information to confirm.

You are probably right. A true hunter single shot always did modified attack damage, I just did the math late at night and was thrown off by your labeling it as modified attack rather than attack * modifier. And I just assumed the “spell” was fully unmodifed before the change. But referencing corthinak’s spell increasing with attack modifiers I suspect you are correct. And I didn’t think to check in on the sands spell. Seemed very different. I suspect you are correct


#1124

Ya I seen the edit, we shall wait on number confirmation I suppose. Thanks for looking it over.

Edit: you have to teach me the cross-outs I’ve needed those a couple times but don’t know how.


#1125

put a double tilde (~) on each side of the thing you want to have the strike through go through


#1126

I dont have screenshots or anything for my before numbers, just working with rough numbers off memory. And even that could be skewed because I always made it a point to use Deaths door unless I had to cloak early for some reason. But I believe modified attack was still used prior to the update, that’s why some spells would increase slightly with better gear and boosts, even though they used base HP. Corthanak is a good example of that.