Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
Правила обсуждений
Пожаловаться
It's probably much like weapon damage formulas - we can change what weapon uses what formula, but we can't change the actual formulas themselves.
It wouldn't need that much to make counterattacks usable, though. Sure they're kinda eh, but the main thing holding them back is the COST, not the effect: spending your accessory slot and potentially your armor as well is too big an ask for that effect. So you could e.g. mod things in ways that make it, say, a license - or just give it to everyone passively.
That's how SFF solves unarmed combat - it just makes everyone have the Brawler license by default, so all unarmed attacks are always improved. I could see the same for counter: just make it so everyone can always counter, instead of having to equip an accessory to be able to do it. Wouldn't make counter better in its effect, but if it's free then it's whatever.
I slightly disagree, the effect itself is an issue but not so much as the cost. As you say. It is very minor and circumstantial, far too much to lose an accessory slot. It should be a 50 point license or something.
Though to be fair, if you could counter everything at all times, it likely would be too strong. If every enemy attack of any kind would always elicit an immediate counterattack, damage output would increase significantly. It'd make you do degenerate things like actively Decoy big hitters. Things would get weird.
Not sure where the "sweet spot" would be. Though of course this is mostly academic musings, since I doubt we'll ever get to that being an active possibility. But you never know, I guess.
Despite being a mod on the Discord, I haven't following things TOO closely, but I do believe that's actually been doable for a while, but I may be misremembering.
I suggest joining the Discord -- https://discord.gg/Rc5urGZM -- and asking, specifically Xeavin would know what has and hasn't been done.
Would be nice to have more radical options at our disposal!
As you implied with your sweet spot statement, the specifics are subjective but the gist is not.
@Hinnyuu @Melodia would you care to respond to some of my questions in this thread?
https://steamcommunity.com/app/595520/discussions/0/3765605292795269912/
Along with that I would like feedback on how FFXII should be rebalanced. I'm unsure of the specific strengths and weaknesses of each class, item, skill, and character. If I had a rating for each (and an explanation of why they are so rated) then I could think about the subject.
...multiplying probability is literally statistics. Statistics IS STILL ARITHMETIC. Dude. What do you think probability is? It is a rate. They are not two unrelated schools of philosophy or something, they are two parts of mathematic equations. The two can be part of a single equation, and are ANY TIME you are multiplying probabilities and multiplicative increases/decreases ON those probabilities.
You also told me to read, while not comprehending what I wrote very clearly. You gather up the skeletons. THEN stand still. While your casters, not yet strong enough to pop things instantly because you are 45 and just opened Nabreus, can kill some. And your tank kills some. Gathering up the whole map takes...8 seconds of running, it is a tiny map.
There are lots of other places where you gather up mobs NOT STANDING STILL GOOD GOD READ. And then your characters can kill 8 or 10 of them rapidly. And move on to the next area. Did you never play MMOs?
And at no point did I call you a noob. This is problem. You can't argue with a shred of honesty.
+300% damage isn't a "probability". Probability is about likelihood, not magnitude. What did you think, that just because there's a % sign in there it's suddenly statistics?
lol.
That's true. What you actually said was:
So Mr. We-Are-So-Bad-At-This-Game.... What IS that mysterious 99-SPD setup without Germinas Boots? This is like the 5th time I'm asking.
SHOW US.
Stop dodging and running away. Back up your big bold words. Or admit you lied and made it all up. I'm fine with that, too.
Not that I expect you to answer. You'll just complain about something else, and try to avoid answering a very simple, very straightforward question about a statement YOU made in an aggressively dismissive way.
Like, here let me make this really clear. In my above fire example, it does 500, plus that 50%. But whether or not you oil, that is probability. Whether or not you have time, whether or not the enemy is immune. That is probability. And then you have expose. More probability. Each stack in fact. Then you have weakness, also probability, probability that they have it, probability if they don't have it that you can put it on them, and probability that you have time. Oil doesn't just add 300% damage. It adds its damage on top of the probability of each of those. Again, this is exactly what I said "it is 300% increase on top of all previous multipliers." That is statistics. Like, I don't understand how that is anything BUT statistics in a game that has, you know...active things going on. Literally millions of variables. It isn't just math on paper. It is math in play, on any given enemy.
IDK what more I can do.
All I want is for you to show me how you can get to 99 SPD without Germinas.
That's it.
No. Those are NOT probabilities. Enemies being immune isn't a chance. It's a binary yes/no that never changes, and it's fixed for each enemy.
I don't know what "whether or not you have time" is supposed to mean.
But in any event, NONE of that has anything to do with the math I was using, because I never ever anywhere not once talked about probabilities there.
Expose has a chance to hit, which is based on a number of factors and may or may not be <100%. In which case it WOULD involve probability.
...but I never talked about Expose anywhere, I didn't mention it, I didn't do math with it, it never came up not once.
What are you saying here? "But look, this other thing no one talked about, that one IS statistics!"
Yes. You're right. The thing I never mentioned or used math on or interacted with in any way is something else. Totally true.
You're confusing things here.
Weakness, like immunity to status, is fixed per enemy. They don't just randomly appear with a weakness. Each enemy has that predefined, and it will always be the same.
You may be talking about GIVING them a weakness via Achilles - also something I didn't mention or talk about. And there's also a half dozen or so enemies that have Shift, which periodically changes their elemental affinities. Didn't talk about that, either.
WEAKNESSES AREN'T RANDOM. They're not probabilities. An Urstrix in Giza Plains, say, will ALWAYS be weak to Wind, and not weak to any other element. ALWAYS. There isn't some probability it will... it's fixed for that enemy, and that's what it'll always be.
What probabilities? It stacks with other multipliers. Just like all the other multipliers do. Did I ever say anything else? Did I ever SUGGEST that it wasn't stacking with other multipliers? Anywhere? At all?
Why are you raging against things I never said or even mentioned?
I believe you when you say you don't understand.
Of course this game uses statistical probabilities for all sorts of things. JUST NOT THE THINGS I WAS TALKING ABOUT OR SHOWING MATH FOR.
Weakness aren't random, nope. But if you are a player coming upon any given enemy, the chance that enemy has a weakness to fire is a probability. Like. This is what I said. You don't understand statistics. You don't understand the VERY BASICS of it.
YOU KNOW all of the weaknesses. YOU PLAYING doesn't determine whether oil is good or not. Its use to players is. Not to you. To the average player, to the player running through on a NG+ or-, to a player running through on a mod. This is what you simply cannot seem to grasp. The quality of a skill in a game is not binary, it is good or bad, based on how useful it is to you, trying to min-max. It is based on how useful the ability is overall. Not in ideal circumstances. In ALL circumstances.
Even now, when given explanation of whether any given enemy, oil is useful or not, you cannot accept it and insist purely upon the math on paper. That isn't how video games work. At least not ones that have any sort of active mechanics.
You could have shut me up instantly by just providing evidence for what you said. Could have shown everyone how I got it wrong, and humiliated me publicly.
And the reason you didn't do that WASN'T because you knew you couldn't, because the original statement you made was nonsensical and completely incorrect... Noooo, it was because "you didn't want to dignify it with a response".
Yeaaaah. I'm sure that was it.
I mean, I said it earlier, I never expected you to actually own up to just making stuff up. Guess you didn't have to. We all know.
No. It isn't. You KNOW what enemies are in what area. You KNOW what weaknesses they have. None of it is random, not the enemy spawns, and not their weaknesses (rare/unusual spawns aside, which may or may not be present but also have fixed stats).
None of that is "probability", it's fixed information. If you choose not to have that information (because you're new or because you don't remember or whatever) that's fine, but this doesn't make it a "probability". It'll ALWAYS be the exact enemy type that spawns in that area, with the exact stats it ALWAYS has.
That's like saying whether or not a shop sells cake is a probability, except cake shops ALWAYS sell cake and so if you go into a cake shop it'll sell cake and that's NOT a probability - and just because you don't remember which shop in the mall is a cake shop doesn't make it a "probability" that you enter a shop and it sells cake.
....but none of that matters because I NEVER TALKED ABOUT THIS IN ANY WAY, so we're just back to "yeah but other stuff you didn't mention, THAT stuff IS statistics!" to which I can 100% and unequivocally say yes, I agree, stuff I didn't talk about is stuff I didn't talk about.
That's why I SHARE my information. I give them information, so they don't have to find out for themselves.
What they DO with that information is up to them. I just provide it. I can tell them for any given scenario if something is better or worse than something else or the same. Whether or not they then actually use the better thing isn't my concern - that's an individual decision they have to make, and it's not my place to make it for them. I just give them the facts, as best I know how.
I'll e.g. tell someone A does more damage than B, and I can prove that's the case (for the given context). That doesn't mean they then have to use A. But if they CHOOSE to use B, that still doesn't change the fact that A would have done more damage. They may prefer B. They may always want to use B. That's fine. But it wouldn't make B do more damage than A. It'd always be A doing more damage than B no matter their preference.
And if someone disagrees and goes actually no, B does more damage than A in that context - then I'm happy to listen to their EVIDENCE. And I capitalize that for a reason, because "you using A tells me you're bad at the game" isn't evidence. It's just someone being petty and underinformed, and refusing to acknowledge they just maybe kinda might not know what they're talking about.
I can't account for ALL circumstances, because almost nothing has the same efficacy in ALL circumstances. I'm talking about generalizations that hold true to a degree where just following that will net you the best outcome, on average, and I give instructions where there are notable and easy-to-identify exceptions. Like I did with the Oil thing. I MENTIONED there are exceptions, I even gave the most prominent one.
The reason I do it like that is simple: anyone who has the information and experience necessary to correctly parse the edge cases and know if they go one way or the other DOESN'T NEED THE INFORMATION I'M PROVIDING HERE. They already know how it works; they'd have to, in order to make that decision. To people who don't have the information, doing it wrong because they think they've identified an edge case is a big enough loss that on average they're simply better off sticking to the generalization - it'll be worse sometimes, but it'll still be better overall than getting it wrong by trying to deviate incorrectly.
It's trivial to set up scenarios that favor one thing or another, that doesn't prove anything other than that you can fiddle with the experimental parameters if you so choose. It's useless information to people who don't know the game inside and out already.
Everything is governed by math. Even your "statistics" are, however incorrectly you keep using that term. You're confusing "just looking at one big number" with "doing the math". It's much more complicated than that. Which you'd know if you'd bothered to properly parse my statement about Oil, for example, which WASN'T just about the big numbers on screen but about other things (like time).
I'd like to know, though, what OTHER metric you're using to determine if something is better or not if it isn't math. Psychic powers? Prayer beads? "I just know stuff"?
Something that comes up a lot is weapon animation speed, for example. Characters have different weapon animations, and some take more time than others to complete. Since the weapon animation is a fixed part of each attack cycle that cannot be reduced by any means, this means that characters with faster weapon animations can get more attacks in over time. HOWEVER the differences in most cases are so small that they either won't matter at all or will only make a minute difference. Very often it's on the order of <10%, so against any enemy where you don't even get 10 attacks in you may not even see a difference whatsoever (since you can't get fractional hits in, of course, you'd have to wait until enough advantage has accumulated to net an actual +1 attack). Yet I often see on forums and in guides that people make character-based recommendations tied to attack animation speed without explaining how much it actually impacts things; and that the fact that you might kill Yiazmat in 28 minutes instead of 30 minutes may perhaps not be reason enough not to pick whatever character you like looking at in a particular role for the other 50 hours you spend on your run ;)
If better difficulty is what you're looking at, look no further. A masterpiece to be sure. The boss fights especially have been changed in very interesting ways. Not to spoil too much but for example on the fight against Chaos you now also fight the Four Fiends from Final Fantasy I - very fun and rewarding experience. Cannot recommend it enough.