2.3 PvP Details

Just out of curiosity, as I am not really into PvP that much: before the PvP changes, it was possible to join a Tournament with a non-50 character or a L50 class without good gear (meaning: everything around L35). With the match making and the perceived power level, it seems impossible to play PvP with any character besides the one invested most into. Is this true?

In my situation, I upgraded my Paladin’s gear, but I am really bored playing it. So I leveled up 3-4 other classes, farmed gear and spells and invested a tiny amount of Glyphs into it (raised only 2-3 pieces to L45). This results in a GS of about 19xx - 2100 depending on the character, but I get treated as a 2700+ Gear Score character anyway.

Is there any way around this? Because this makes playing PvP even less interesting for me and I completely skip Honor as currency, which is not a very good choice.

Reset your citadel and don’t put any points in…(actually serious)

Well, hold your thoughts on that matter.

As Jeto replied in another thread,

As 2.4 has been finalized and sent off before the weekend, we may very well see the next round of PvP changes this coming week.

Pretty much, outside of the “workaround” Zudaio said, which has the consequence of nerfing your main character to tank one’s PvP rating.

I have this exact problem on my Necro. The easiest opponents offered to my necro tend to be 500-700 Gear Score above the PvP gear on my necro… which results in something like 30% win rate on the easiest opponent on a good day. On my other characters, with mostly Epic 35 gear, 50% on a good day if the game doesn’t constantly throw them up against throngs of opponents all with twinblades and tricked out crit boosting gear.

Pretty much pick the easiest opponent offered, never expect to win, and if you do consider it a pleasant surprise. :pensive:

No clue what the situation will look like after the incoming PvP changes, though.

I’ll keep my fingers crossed :slight_smile:

@Lyrian: you are correct, I have a ~30% win chance by just fighting the weakest enemy, but barely :wink:
[edit: to clarify: when joining a tournament with my characters at GS 1900-2100 instead of the character with the highest equipment, which I currently really don’t want to play anymore ]
But resetting my citadel means limiting my chances of playing L100 dungeons (and kingdom defense), which I need to gather Glyphs to level up the new classes equipment :frowning:

As food for thought: while PvP is currently balanced in the end-game setting (which is fine for me), where broken mechanics or flaws in the ruleset are more obvious - PvP should be accessible by weaker characters as well. In the best case, it should not matter if you play your high-end character or a newly equipped one, you should be matched according to the realistic strength. Of course, you should be placed in different leagues to begin with - why should a new-comer be placed in the highest league, just because a completely different character already aced the lower leagues?

Just imagine the worst-case scenario: you have your omg-I-pwn-everything uber equipment, everything is at L50, the colors match and you even optimized all of the bonus slots. Now this feels really boring, but you like the game, so you switch to another class. Currently, you would need to keep playing the old class for PvP until you have the same level/quality of gear.

So a suggestion would be to “perceive” the power and store it individually for each character. Also, consider making the points / leagues character-based instead of account-based. In the meantime: I don’t mind losing a couple of fights in a row if the “perceived power” then drops to a level, which is suitable from this point on.

1 Like


At last, Toragon vs their skin walker

2 Likes

The Team just knows that they are just itching for an alternate universe / doppelganger story arc. The alternate Toragon model is already in-game. :stuck_out_tongue:

image

2 Likes

And now, I’ve “seen it all”.

Critted by a Pally for 130k on Turn 1, after 80% skull damage reduction was applied, in PvP today.

But, you know what? I can’t even be mad about that. Why? Because it is going to be a long and excruciating wait for 2.5 and the spell revamp to occur so that damage parity with skulls can finally occur I can then cast for 130k damage on opponents, after 80% appropriate elemental resistance is applied. Fun times ahead. :tada:

@Lyrian do you recall the opponent, so I can get some people with bigger spell brains to have a squiz into what was happening

image

That was the player. That said, I would argue that the player is not really doing anything wrong with their loadout. Rather, as has become very popular, they are taking advantage of some low-hanging flawed mechanics regarding skull damage.

Here’s what’s happening:

  1. Maximum damage reduction for any given damage type in-game currently is 80%. Therefore, with maximum damage reduction for that damage type, 20% of damage will be inflicted on the opponent.

  2. The amount of damage modifier needed to fully overcome that 80% damage resistance is [100% full damage / 20% damage received) = 500%.

Check: 500% damage modifier * 20% damage inflicted = 100% damage taken (aka full damage)

  1. Because the player already has 100% base damage output, only 400% more additional damage is needed to fully overcome maximum skull damage resistance. This takes the form of Critical Hit Damage Bonus.

So, how does one get 400% additional damage bonus from skulls? Quite easily, actually.

  1. One of the easiest ways to quickly boost crit damage is from stacking +Cleave attributes.

While Mythic +Strike attributes yield +8% bonus spell output:

image

Mythic +Cleave attributes add +80% crit damage output:

image

Therefore. +Cleave attributes are ten times more efficient for damage output than +Strike attributes

So, at 80% per +Cleave attribute, it only takes five of those to reach 400% crit damage bonus to fully negate maximum skull defenses. And that’s before Gear effects are applied.

  1. Gear: The two lowest hanging fruit pieces of Gear for making the most of skull damage for most players are Bloodfang Twinblade (for boosting crit chances) + Runic Wristband (for further boosting crit amount)

image

With the increase in the size of the gameboard in a previous update, it is very easy for the board to naturally contain significant numbers of the right colored gem to boost crit chances to close to (or reach) 100%.

image

Late game characters in Mythic gear easily field mono-color masteries in the thousands, resulting in several hundred percent additional crit damage being added from the gear effect from this piece alone.

As a random example, here is a Shaman in PvP deploying such a build that I took some screen snips of today while typing this post:

Pre-Combat Opponent Crit Stats:

image

Turn 1 In-Combat Opponent Crit Stats after Twinblade and Wristband effects applied:

image

Quite intimidating for a healer class, and likely strong enough to one-shot me through maximum block at more than 1.5x base damage on a successful crit after 80% damage reduction is applied. As discussed and verified by multiple players above in this long thread, dedicated melee oriented classes can reach 1000% or higher with Critical Hit Damage Bonus.

And that’s really just the tip of the iceberg on the matter. There’s other gear/gear set bonuses that affects crit/crit chance, Mercs have a spell that boosts both, and so on.

The whole skull crit/crit damage mechanic needs an overhaul badly. As long as players can easily achieve enough crit hit chance to semi-reliably crit and enough crit damage modifer to overcome 80% skull damage reduction, there’s no real reason to run a spell build at all as skull damage is simply vastly more efficient right now even with the new Dragonking Axe in play to boost spell damage.

4 Likes

Thanks for sharing, I have passed this on to the design team!

1 Like

A well explained and detailed post. Hope 2.5 brings better and much higher damage on spell usage.

Big note on this analysis:
You have 4+ options (4 spells, plus any elemental weapon damage) per turn to utilize +strike attributes, and only 1 per turn to utilize Cleave. This makes cleave not equal to x10 of +strike. Cleave is further hindered by crit chance, so that reduces this math even further. Throw in the ability to match 10’s of skulls per turn and the math swings back to Cleave.

I would argue that spells are too weak, this in turn has created a meta with focus on skull damage (crit% and crit damage) and skull damage mitigation (block). If spells were a bigger part of the offense of the game, then the meta would swing to spell damage and resist. Eventually with good balance that meta would shift as players find new ways to increase their performance. This game may be too simple to really support all of that though.

The issue you are experiencing in PvP (1 turn kills) is more of a balance issue with PvE and PvP health, armor, and resistance numbers. PvE health and armor is way higher on your PvP opponents, and the game is tuned to those numbers.

Identifying and advocating for changes to the game mechanics based on PvP results is really not the way to go about this. Using sample groups of size 1 to analyze the game as a whole is also not a good practice.

Last note: Losing fights should be part of PvP. If you don’t like getting one-shotted then change your build or playstyle to better your chances of survival. Be realistic though, look at your stats. Are you really losing that many fights?

2 Likes

I’d like to see win/loss records and build stats. I think alot of issues in the game, tend to be over exaggerated. Balance in this game is actually pretty good. I see people making issues of things such as Fallen Shoulders for example, when Fallen shoulders is actually pretty easy to counter. Chain or remove all the skulls and Fallen Shoulders can’t heal the opponent, completely countered, that easy. As for spells, we see all too often people running mono color builds, which do offer certain advantages such as the spell effects being stronger. But a diverse color spell loadout tends to be stronger as mana gain isn’t split between your spells and you’re in a better position to take advantage of whatever the current board might be. I do agree with the poster above me, that making sweeping changes to the game based solely on PvP might be more damaging to the game than helpful. Also since the majority of the players seem to focus on Armor, spells are almost always going to have a distinct inherent advantage since Resistance is often more of a lesser priority.

1 Like

I have updated this chart for the new 70% possible bonus we have currently in 2.5. The top10 problem remains the same.

This flaw in the scoring system would be very easy to correct and would make the tournaments fairer and more competitive. The solution is as simple as:

  • Allow players to fight their doppelganger just as the rest of us can.
  • Lock in the scores for all defense builds a few days before, or at least prior to the final day, of the tournament to prevent any manipulation at the tournament end.

Punishing the top 10 best gear players in the tournament is horrible design, and the fact that it has lingered for over three months and 2 updates is difficult to understand.

Reminder, these are hypothetical scores to illustrate the top10 scoring problem:

Seeded Rank Base Score Perfect 70% Victory Total Possible Rank Possible
1 3500 5950 50150 11
2 3400 5780 50320 10
3 3300 5610 50490 9
4 3200 5440 50660 8
5 3100 5270 50830 7
6 3000 5100 51000 6
7 2900 4930 51170 5
8 2800 4760 51340 4
9 2700 4590 51510 3
10 2600 4420 51680 2
11 2500 4250 51850 1
12 2400 4080 51850 1
13 2300 3910 51850 1
14 2200 3740 51850 1
15 2100 3570 51850 1
16 2000 3400 51850 1
17 1900 3230 51850 1
18 1800 3060 51850 1
19 1700 2890 51850 1
20 1600 2720 51850 1
21 1500 2550 51850 1
22 1400 2380 51850 1
23 1300 2210 51850 1
24 1200 2040 51850 1
25 1100 1870 51850 1
2 Likes

Just quickly jumping in here while I run around, we are looking at having you be able to fight yourself - that’s been long-standing feedback from the community we have continued to share!
And I have added your second point and this table to my ongoing pvp feedback doc :sparkles: thank you for this detailed feedback @00h00m

2 Likes