Tip.It Times Tip.It Times - 15th July 2012

[Platinum_Myr]

Honestly, HP would have some impact on total livepoints more than just 10 per level. Maybe make it so that you get 20-30% more hp (scaled) if you are 99 vs 1 hp. That is, armors add "base + scaled*(constitution/99)" lifepoint boost, where base is something like 5000 and scaled is like 2500-3000. Maybe use a non linear scale if you want? The idea is that armor adds to lifepoints, but HP matters. The key is balancing the scale factor. This would allow constitution level to matter a lot more but still be dependent on what armor you are wearing at the time.

 

As for the other skills.. It is progressively more and more difficult to balance combat level the more skills are added. Does someone with 1 strength and 99 defense match someone of 50 defense and 50 attack? Probably not. It is impressively difficult to create a fair system that works well. Like anything how do you determine effective power? It is a non-trivial problem that any trivial formula won't work.

[MrNifty]

I was induced to join the site because of this week's first article on combat levels.

 

I was a little disappointed that nearly the entire analysis of the new system was on the value of the surface numbers. None of the gameplay and game design arguments put forth by Jagex were addressed. There was also no discussion about testing the system in the beta and whether the changes made a noticable difference to gameplay.

 

Numbers are just that, numbers. Personally, I don't care whether I am level 200 or level 138. The point is whether the game remains fun and playable. As such there is no reason one way or the other that Summoning, Prayer or Constitution should be part of the equation, except we have all grown so used to it.

 

It is true that the system is not meant to reward pures, and perhaps there will be a number of paid subscriptions that become redundant. Jagex seems to have already made their response to that with an increase in paid extras within the game. They will replace the minority of players with multiple combat accounts with a minority of players who like spending extra on cosmetic changes and wheel spins. I'm guessing their profits will go up, relatively speaking.

 

No offense, but an analysis of the new combat system that basically concludes "it doesn't feel right to me" doesn't do the changes justice.

[Yoko Kurama]

The formula is a major problem, on so many levels. Firstly, arbitrarily deciding to remove certain skills which had always(or at least since their inception, in the case of summoning) been part of combat(and sensibly so they were part of combat) is asinine. Prayer and Summoning are important combat skills. To just remove them suddenly, is completely uncalled for, particularly when so many people have worked hard for them. I am not against these sort of changes(for instance the Divine Shield lost it's abilities with regards to mage/range, and i am sure that shits on a lot of people who paid hundreds of millions for it, but it was worth it since it balances the triangle). In the case of combat there is simply no justification for removing those skills. When pressured, their response was "Well, don't worry we will once again arbitrarily weaken the influence of these skills on combat, therefore, the formula won't be too inaccurate as a descriptor of combat skills". More nonsense. Like I said, I am not against major change, but it should at least have some justification. From what I can tell, the formula re-work is just to simplify it for the kiddies, rather like the HP --> Constitution change was. In any case, I am not too pleased. It's part of what I called the "WoW-ifcation" of RS.

 

I am somewhat happy to hear that they nixed the idea to lower XP when training on lower level monster training. It wasn't inherently a bad idea, but it was causing major problems for slayer.

 

I read two of the articles, the one on the combat update and the one on RS and coping, I enjoyed them both.

[Platinum_Myr]

Having all of the variables made combat level difficult to calculate. It also is impossible to balance, since effectively you have to show that any two people of equivalent combat level should be nearly equivalent in power. This is impossible in either version of the formula (new or old) Creating a formula that is balanced isn't possible, so they opted for a simple version instead.

 

I would love to see a balanced formula but i really don't know how that could be done.

[Alg]

Having all of the variables made combat level difficult to calculate. It also is impossible to balance, since effectively you have to show that any two people of equivalent combat level should be nearly equivalent in power. This is impossible in either version of the formula (new or old) Creating a formula that is balanced isn't possible, so they opted for a simple version instead.

The problem is that their formula is too simple. It takes two skills out of eight or so into consideration, so your combat level is only an accurate representation of your skills when you're using that style (And for melee, not even then), and it doesn't work at all for NPCs; a player with his or her skills in the mid eighties is about the same level as a GWD boss.

 

Also not a fan of their way of enforcing the combat triangle. It looks good on paper, but it has a few unforgivable quirks - Mithril dragons are weak to magic, but will destroy mages with their ranged attack, and the fact that most monsters have a melee attack means that too many monsters are weak to magic - and it just isn't very flexible.

[NukeMarine]

First, I like the idea that "attack" should be reworked to be "accuracy" and benefits all three combat classes. If that's done, make the new formula acc+def+(max combat skill)+3 for a max combat level of 300. All weapons (range, mage and melee) will require "accuracy" to wield. "Accuracy", just as its name says, impact the chance to hit the opponent while the main combat skills impact the damage done after a hit takes place. To balance this with respect to melee armor, all armor will require either strength, range or magic level to wear depending on the combat type.

 

Has anyone forwarded this idea onto the Beta forums and gotten feedback? It would be a major change, but probably something that EOC needs.

 

Second, I agree with removing the tertiary skills from the combat formula. There's just too many quests and skills that benefit combat that to say only prayer and summoning have an impact is just naive. If you haven't done Desert Treasure, or unlocked Curses, or got a high herblore, or got Chaotics, then you're at a disadvantage in combat. The game is just too complicated with far too many variables now. Just going with Def and Offensive stats is best now for simplicity's sake.

[Alg]

Has anyone forwarded this idea onto the Beta forums and gotten feedback? It would be a major change, but probably something that EOC needs.

I can do this. Mind if I quote your post there?

[Platinum_Myr]

I agree with NukeMarine. Accurracy instead of Attack would be very interesting. Yes it would require players to train differently, but.... what would you expect? The beta's already going to be changing things. I think that it would mean moving all weapons etc to have strength requirements vs having attack requirements, or having both.

 

It is a complex change but ends up with a more balance-able system. How can you balance 99 attack and 99 strength vs 99 range and 99 mage? You need half the xp to max "range" combat offensively, than you do "melee" combat.

[Alg]

[qfc]305-306-26-63898977[/qfc]

And now it's on the RSOF.