Magic seems to weak right now (profen by math)

Spoiler Alert!

This Threat will talk about calculations that are being done behind the scenes, and thus if you do not wish your imertion to be broken by that, please leave this thread...I don't want to ruin the fun for anyone. I only wish to provide Feedback on balance. Also I know that this is subject to change. I am only trying to help setting the scales better.


You have been warned....


In the Q and A provided by Chris (Link if you haven't watched it: https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/combat-skills-spells-video-chat.38539/) he spoke about the Influence that Intelligence would have on Spell Damage, and provided the Formula "Spelldmg = Sqrt(Skilllevel+Int)*X".

So I did (or at least tried to do) the math behind this. I assumed X would be some sort of multiplied/constant that per spell would determine how much effect spelldamge would have on the progression of the spell.

Thus by comparing the spelldamge with lower and hight Int, I feel comfortable assumming the multiplier for the following 3 Spells (based on my character). I only calculated X for the maximum Damage of the spell, but due note that there is a other constant that calculates the min damage. I did choice to do so, as the mindamage-Value is much lower and would be harder to assume/calculate.

The Int of my Character currently is 35,5

Lightning (I have not a single point in it)
X ~ 3,25
Max Damage with my Int is:
(sqrt(0+35,5))*3,25=19,3 (rounded down to 19)

If this is true, 100 Int and Skill Level 100 (which is the maximum as far as I know) would bring us to this:
(sqrt(100+100))*3,25=45,9 (rounded up to 46)

Deathtouch (48 Ranks)
X ~ 1,6
Max Damage with my Int is:
(sqrt(48+35,5))*1,6=14,6 (rounded up to 15)

Assumed max Damage with Skill 100 and Int 100:
(sqrt(100+100))*1,6=22,6 (rounded up to 23)

Searing Ray (53 Ranks)
X ~ 5,9
Max Damage with my Int is:
(sqrt(53+35,5))*5,9=55,5 (rounded up to 56)

Assumed max Damage with Skill 100 and Int 100:
(sqrt(100+100))*5,9=83,4 (rounded down to 83)


What is the effect, if the above factors are in fact correct?(and yes I leave the posibility open, that I maybe jsut misscalculated it and making a baboon out of my self)
From what I have seen and from what I expect at high end levels 1000 Hit Points seem to be realistic, and thus dealing 45 Damage with a Lightning or even 83 Damage with a searing ray seems far to less to compete. Als Deathtouch does heal the character for the amount if damage it deals, and if you have 1000 Health, getting healed for 23 Health won't do much for your survivability. I know that the passive could give you another 10% if you have 100 points also in that, but that would bring your 23 only to 25(22,6*1,1=24,86 ->rounded up to 25).

Now one might argue that this does not take the Spelldamge enchantment from equipment into account. Which is true, and while having 50% Spelldamge might sound much it wouldn't help the deathtouch or lightning much.

 

So how did you determine what the X was for each spell?? Did this come from the Min / Max Damage the spell says in your window?

 

Short Answer: yes

Changing your Int Score (equiping/unequiping items with Int) will also have vissible effect on the min and max damage of your spells. As Max Damage has a larger impact (still little to what I would have expected) I used only the Max Damage in my calculation, the formula was provied by Chris in his Q&A Video, so it was more or less just filling the values and taking into account, that the game will round the damage numbers.

 

It still doesn't seem like the the spells increase when you level it up like how crafting does for example I want a clear indication that level 5 causes 2.5 damage and label 6 cause 3.0 damage on the tool tip. It could just be tha it's not listed properly yet and that it's already doing it however I just don't feel as powerful as should be and there is no way I could be successful without a regular weapon imo.

 

Level in spells is not more power it is more glyphs, might be a little more power but not as much as you think. The raising of skills does do a little more damg but more importantly it is so you can have more glyphs.

I wish it had a greater impact on damage, swing speed, casting range etc. but TAM it is very minor :-(

 

Part of the issue isn't just spell damage, but focus cost.

You shouldn't run out of focus before you've even dropped a low-level creature. To me, that feels like a great way to turn away new players from even starting their game.

 

Well it does more damage, but it is just to minor from level to level to actually notice - Example:
Searing Ray with 25 Int on Rank 1= (sqrt(1+25,5))*5,9=30,37 (rounded down to 30)
Searing Ray with 25 Int on Rank 2= (sqrt(2+25,5))*5,9=30,93 (rounded up to 31)
Searing Ray with 25 Int on Rank 3= (sqrt(3+25,5))*5,9=31,49 (rounded down to 31)

==> thus not every level will have a visible impact on your damage - also keep in mind that searing ray feels like it has the highest factor right now...

From what I see, Focus Cost is only a problem on low levels. I currently have around 230 Focus, and I anticipate, that you could achieve around 900-1000 Focus in Endgame-range, while the Focuscost for spells seem to be staying the same. This means that while a level 1 player with maybe 90 Focus might have trouble droping enemies with spells due to mana, high level players will most likly not encounter that problem, but rather won't be able to kill a monster in time due to low damage. That beeing said, I agree, that on low levels the focus cost can be a huge problem for new players, and might also need some tweaking

 

Well i have no idea what i am doing right then, but i have never yet run out of focus.
The closest i came to running out of focus was when i had a Fire Elly summoned and i fought 2 elder wolves, by end of fight i had about 33% of my focus left - and that is the lowest it has ever been
I usually run out of hitpoints long before im at half focus - had 5 HP left at end of above fight


Interesting maths though OP, thanks for sharing

 

Your math seems about right. My Searing ray is between 10-70 and 12-75... buts that's all before critical's get applied. I've seen 140+ hits with Searing rays, though the damage is incredibly fickle even at max skill. Its plenty for player versus player... near worthless versus monsters, and the reverse is true when it comes to melee. I can kill 9 Deep Raven spiders at once with hally, and struggle versus two wolves using my pvp build.
The issue isn't so much with spell damages but with the differences between melee and magic damage when it comes to monsters. Only way I see of answering this without major changes is to increase elemental damages to match and let players increase their resistances to nullify it.
We could discuss reducing melee damage so we could reduce monsters hit points also.. but melee has been low man on the totem pole for a long time and are still a long way from being pvp challengers... could reduce monster hit points and increases their resistance so that it would be more a equal fight between mages and fighter when grinding... also good training for future pvp and dealing with player armor. Perhaps by the time players get to Deep Ravens area they should have to have switched up to piercing attacks.

 

Monster Hit Points, Physical Resist, Elemental Resist <-- The answer for balance in pvm comes by adjusting these variables first. Theirs also the damage monsters do versus armored and unarmored and their movement speeds.
Currently monsters have a tremendous amounts of hit points and generally low physical resists... I think reducing the hp, increasing physical resist would be the balance everyone's seeking.
I think Archetypes would appreciate being needed to dispatch certain enemies. Perhaps the melee guy is better at killing trolls, the archer best at hunting wildlife, mage best at killing magically summoned beings.
Right now its more about using melee skills to get experience to practice mage skills.

 

You are correct about the critical hits, and my calculations also does not take +Spell Damage on Equipment into account, as I am still unsure how it is beeing handled exacty. So far I haven't seen any change to the tooltip with ot without spelldamage, but it feels like it does something.

And yes I agree with you, that the damage is fickle especially when you have a range of 10-70. That beeing said I don't think the way to solve this is to change only Monster Hit points, Physical Resist and Elemental resist. Why I beleive that they will have a huge impact, and am lookinf forward to the improved resistance changes with the upcomming wipe, I believe that magic still needs some love. I also believe, that the formula that is currently used is supoptimal....and here is why:

Hitpoints = (Base Health+Str*Constant)*(1+Adventurerlevel/20)
==> This is the formula Chris kindly provided, and while I am still not 100% sure I got the right numbers for the constant and basehealth(currently I know that Basehealth = Constant*57), the ipmortant fact here is that it is not a linear but a bit of a expotential Curve.

Now if you take the Spelldamage Formula, you will notice the square root part of it, which makes this a counter-expotential formula (not sure that's the real wording). However what that means is that while health will grow more and more each level and each Str, Spelldamage will increase less and less the more Int/Skill you put into it. Here is a small example:

Skill and Int 10 = sqrt(10+10)=4,472
Skill and Int 50 = sqrt(50+50)=10
Skill and Int 100 = sqrt(100+100)=14,142

From 10 to 50 you have 5 times the int and skill level and get not even double the amount. From 50/50 to 100/100 you double your skills and stats, but only get an increase of not even 50%. I am not sure if meleedamage also behaves anti-expotential, if so that's fair, and fights will get longer while you progress. If not, that is also something that should be taken into consideration...

 

If they are going to keep magic to be upkeep free it need to be much less damage then other damage types or we will get over flooded with magic users. Both melee and archers have quite expensive upkeep compared to magic users and that have to be balanced somehow.

 

Please explain what upkeep you are talking about. If you mean the cost for arrows and the repair of armor and weapons, magic caster have the same, as currently you can't stay out of melee combat, you will have to repair your armor as a melee fighter does. If you are using a wand or staff instead of a sword wich does a maybe a 10th of the damage you still need to repair it same way as a melee would do with his sword. On top of that, you need to gather regents for your spells, what a pure melee wouldn't have to do. I do agree in one point, rangers need to have a better way to get arrows, as those are rediculess costy over time, but that has nothing to do with the damage of spells. However if spells will do less damage even though you are comitting your self to only cloth armor and a wand, then there is no point in playing a caster to begin with.

Also please consider, Morkul, that also a archer or melee can and will profit from casting spells. Most melees I have seen will still use Tier 1 or even Tier 2 Damage or Healing spells. And as those are currently the most effective and not as you would expect the Tier 3 or higher, there is currently no point in playing pure caster at all - and that needs to be fixed. I don't want to see mages and pure casters dominate the game, but right now you see melee dominate the game. Thus I try to provide feedback on how this could be fixed, and where I see problems in the current system.

 

I think magic should be hugely buffed up, especially if you use reagents. I agree with the need for a pure mage to need reagents to be effective in magic. The spells should NOT Fizzle at higher levels and with the use of reagents, AND they should do excessively more damage with the use of reagents.

My ice arrow does 10 damage at level 60 and does not slow enemies. It should freeze them...or at least give us a spell that does freeze things...We are mages not tanks. I do not like having to spend 90% of the battle in melee with my PURE mage. I think my spells should slow/stop enemies from a distance.

Cloth should increase spell damage/focus regen and fizzle chance. Wearing cloth yields no noticeable defense. Defensive spells yield no noticeable defense. Mages should not be in melee combat for long periods of time hence the need for ranged attacks that stop and damage enemies effectively.

As it stands my melee build is much more viable, which is pretty sad to me, since magery is supposed to be powerful.

 

To claim something is weak you need to compare it to something else to.
Put up some comparison of what non magic can do and what monsters can do.

 

I agree with Lord Baldrith - Mages don't seem fiable as they are right now.

You are right, I should add a comparision.

Fighting in melee with a Longsword:
1 Attack per Second
10-15 Damage Autoattack and Crits in the range 20-25 Damage
30 Str
Tooltip of the sword says 4-13

Fighting only with spells:
1 Attack every 2 Seconds, as casting one spell will cause a global Cooldown on all other spells. Thus a wand as an auto-attackform would need to do 20-30 damage on normal attack and 40-50 on crit....right now it does around 4 damage and costs focus.

Does this help you as a comparision?

 

Probably more fair to compare mage damage to archery(range is almost always a big deal).


However, I am very surprised if they are using a straight square root for any damage formula. Something closer to the two dimensional distance formula: sqrt( x^2 + y^2) would make a lot more sense as a scaling mechanism.

 

Who marked mage damage is too high? That's gotta be a joke

 

I usually play a "Necromancer". How do I kill my enemies? Well, mostly with the sword. So, at the end I wear the plate and forget at all about magic.

 

As mentioned above, the formula was provided by Chris during his Q+A Session, so I would assume that it is correct. As also mentioned, I don't believe straight square root is a good choice due to the nature of it beeing anti-exponential while health is a straight progression.

As for comparing it to archery, that would be tought for me to compare, as I didn't speck into archery. One component however that archery and melee do have, that magic is missing is the tier 1 trait, that passivly icreases the damage of the used weaopn. There is no such thing as a trait that would passivly increase spell damage or wand/staff damage.