Maya Balance Thread

Hold up, I have seen this one before…

Maya really decided to tilt at windmills :face_with_head_bandage:


I am still you though, Mayska :smirk:


To be honest, I am losing faith in that :sob:




The Problem with that Argument, and that’s where your “Argument” is flawed, is that you tend to believe that you can pin down everything in a Videogame down to “flawed” for a Fact, and not keep in mind that the majority of Videogames is based on personal Opinion / Taste / Subjective, and not a objective fact. You can go objective about Technical Stuff, like how well does a Game perform and stuff, is the Voice-Acting low-Quality and stuff, but if it comes down to game-design which goes at stuff like Narrative / Story, Gameplay or even Balancing, it’s a pretty subjective topic… so you can’t trow in and generalize it with “but it’s flawed for a fact”. Another Aspect of your flawed logic goes towards this argument “try to please as many as possible”. You have to many different “target audiences” which have a certain idea of how a game should work, to please them all. That’s why Genres, Clones and Alternatives exist, because one particular Game can’t please everyone. And sure there might be some Games which are able to please a wider range of different target audience, but they tend than again to not please fully specific target audiences. That’s why also Indie-Games and the Niche-Segment exists, because they aren’t too focused on the mainstreamarket with too many different tastes and stuff, which please specific people only halfheartly, but rather can work with having a smaller community and only a specific target audience, which loves their focus.


Yeah, context be damned. Also, I believe this should go here instead: Maya Balance Thread

Regardless, considering that the “flaw” in question is related to balance and was “fixed”, I hope you won’t mind too much when I keep my pin exactly where I put it down.

And why would you presume that the "try to please as many as possible” can’t simply be in the context of the “target audience” in question and not the general populace?

Edit: Ty for moving it :zantai: :3

1 Like

> using the meme incorrectly



I’m glad Crate is one of those companies who are interested in making a good game, more so than
making “good” money.

Seldom I find a video game developer with that approach.

The games at E3 are about money. Your money. They dont give a fuck about what they created.


Well I do agree somewhat with Maya. It’s OK for Crate to have their own vision; but why leave certain things so obscure/unintuitive? Prime example is WPS. For example AQC having slower frames and still being a questionable investment (but the skill description is still misleading).

Ill omen with its spreading cooldown issue.

Agree with Hybrid pet builds. TQ is much better in that department. I have not yet reached endgame in TQ, but I generally find pets are much more flexible in that game (large flat damage from accessories, pet bonus from higher difficulty, less skill point starvation, other useful stats like RR that scale with investment etc.).

it’s not questionable, it’s just lowers your DPS regardless of how many points/mods you have invested in it.

Yeah. I was being polite and giving Crate the benefit of doubt that the WPS patch fixed the problem.

I don’t expect Crate to implement all feedback, but it would be nice for issues or good feedback to at least be acknowledged. So I just don’t post as much anymore.

1 Like

Belgothian’s Shears and Amarasta’s Quick Cut have the same animation speed for some time now.

BS rank 1: 110% wpn dmg (220% from both hands hitting), 14-19 Physical dmg (33 average from both hands)
BS rank 18: 144% wpn dmg (288% from both hands hitting), 140-218 Physical dmg (358 average from both hands, 250% Pierce damage (~8-10% at endgame)

AQC rank 1: 70% wpn dmg (210% from three hits), 19 Pierce dmg (57 total)
AQC rank 18: 115% wpn dmg (345% from three hits), 170 Pierce dmg (510 total), +55 Crit dmg

Not sure who mathed that out as a dps loss.

I mean, a noble thought, but at some point in the day we have to get some work done and not just chat on the forums.

Responding to every single suggestion or idea across multiple social platforms is simply unrealistic.

ok, i’ll just record some tests on dummy, comparing AQC and absence of it, and BB and absence of it.

The reduced animation speed invokes very significant losses, AQC is single target as well (no reason to make it slow/dps loss), the point-per-point value is extremely low and starts negative.

Of course, I get that, which is why I stated only “good” feedback. Like others said, only a minority of players realistically suggest reasonable or useful things.

With an animation speed of 23.3 frames, BS and AQC hit roughly 30% slower than a basic attack. With a 50% chance for a basic attack to be a hit with both hands, let’s say the average is 150% wpn dmg.

Normalizing it by animation speed to match BS and AQC, a basic attack thus deals average 195% wpn dmg, which is already less than both WPS do baseline, not even including the flat damage.

So…you haven’t reached endgame but concluded that it’s better in TQ based on no evidence. :stuck_out_tongue:

Sure, unfortunately everybody thinks their feedback is good. :wink:

1 Like

And this ignores the fact attacks per second is reduced, so execution occurs less often. Basic attack vs AQC is too simplistic.

1 Like

Assuming 1 attack per second, a basic attack deals 150% wpn dmg a second (wdds). Any one of those attacks can be a wps proc. AQC would then deal 210% wpn dmg, modified by its animation speed, would be 161% wdds.

Not sure where less attacks per second figures into a dps reduction.

For a small boost to damage for those 20% of basic attacks that AQC replaced; the player suffers from less attacks per second, like a reduced speed effect. The player will observe less crits per second, attacks and high-damage wps like execution over a set time frame. So the reduced attacks per second reduces overall dps and counters the benefit AQC provides.

I always known you’re a Bysmiel fan

def. not the best kind of test hence the damage is quite big, and it’s hard to accurately determine the difference. but it’s quite clear, that BS>AQC.

UPD: if it’s not enough, i can do the proper tests, but not today.

1 Like