worse comparison ever, especially since you bring up a weapon you can doubletap with.


At higher levels, doubtful. Higher health has a bit of influence on how you hunt, especially since it also affects your sipping. This is not to say bards are bad hunters, far from it in fact if you can waste a lot of power on illusoryself it might be better then knight but nobody has that kind of access to power.

Druids could use an upgrade though. They are the suck.

You have to remember that the magic attacks both have absolutely no miss chance, an important factor because it makes bashing more reliable, and that they also have a higher base damage (or so I've been told). That is what makes them stronger in the lower levels before crits. A magic user WILL kill the same creature faster when critical hits are not factored in. However, and this is an important however, physical classes and magic users rarely do kill the same creature when on the same level due to the ability to tank. One aspect that has already been covered is how constitution goes better with strength and dexterity than intelligence and charisma, but also the amount of DMP a class can have. Warriors have armor to give tons of physical protection, psychometabolism have things like Ironskin, you have Vitality and Regeneration in Athlethics and don't get me started on Harmony. Druids have... what, barkskin? And Guardians have... Halo/Demonscales. There really is a huge disparity between the DMP of the classes. This again allows warriors and monks to take on far stronger creatures, and thus gain far more experience, than what magic users can. If anything, I'd want that gap to be closed first.

Here are my suggestions for how to at least make bashing more comparable.

1. Remove the dodge (not miss chance, dodge) of npcs.
2. Remove shielding from npcs. I'm very iffy on this, but the ability to practically ignore shields is a big boon to Monks and Warriors when hunting.
3. If you are going to make magic attacks hit twice, reduce the total damage of those two attacks to less than what our current damage is. Less damage for more critical hits is a fair trade.
4. Give magic classes more protection against damage, at least the damage from mobs.

Everything is fine as it is. Lusternia is the utopia that humans made.

You shall not complain.

This is a ridiculously bad argument unless they've overhauled the experience system. Last I heard, things like 99-100 take something like the same amount of experience as 1-80 or something. If it takes exponentially more experience per level as you go up, it's like saying that for the first 20% or so, non-warriors/monks are better.

We've revisited bashing several times in the past, and, as I understand it, Roark figures out the amount of damage per second to see if bashing mobiles is in the same range. Obviously, we aren't interested in making all classes carbon copies of each other so there will always be discrepencies, and some classes may always have an edge (within what we consider a reasonable range).

That said, we'll take a look at it again after the monk overhaul.

That's understandable. However the way I see it, at the higher levels, monks and warriors attack faster, have more protections against damage, have a higher number of attacks, which equals less wasted criticals and have the racial advantage in that classes with good strength and dexterity (the important damage stats for monks and warriors) also often have good constitution, which is so incredibly valuable in PvE it is not even funny. Thus, the discrepencies almost all favour the physical classes. That is where I want a change.

Once you get a high enough crit rate, dps isn't really a good measure. A WS crit is enough to instakill something whether it takes you 32 hits to kill it or 2 hits to kill it, for example, and even the lower level crits pretty much do the same. Someone can hit twice as hard as someone else, but if the weak guy crits twice as often, he comes out ahead unless as he's never doing more than basic 2x critical hits.

Thanks! You might want to take into consideration more than just damage per second, though, like number of criticals being gotten and the squishyness of the archetype, which I think is the main problem with Druid/Guardian bashing.

Perhaps you're not quite considering the fact that, for the higher-level mobs (the ones that a high level should be hunting for decent experience over time), a WSC from a 1h warrior or monk will not kill the mob (it takes more than 32 hits). At the same time, one annihilating from a Mage very well may, because the damage is greater than 2x (though slower). As annihilatings are more common, it balances out that way. It's imbalanced for slightly lower health mobs that fall to one Annihilating from a Warrior and clump, due to the fact that if we crit-kill one, we have a chance to crit-kill the other right after (an example would be most of Astral linking).

Idea: Allow nature curse, abjure cosmicfire and cast blast to work in tandem with moonburst, nightkiss, point staff, point crudgel and symbol strike. This gives all of the relevent classes two attacks and two chances for a critical hit, without simply allowing two attacks and doubling damage.

...

That would make caster hunting WAY too easy.

I'm going to make this another post simply because it's more work than should go into an edit, but going to do some math.
We'll take, say, a caster-class with a 4s attack rate, a 50% critical rate (higher than we're really going to see achieved ever, but going to use this just due to the fact that it's said the 'higher crit rate affects it more than lower'), and 100 damage per hit.
Then we'll take a 1h fighter with a 3s attack rate, a 50% critical rate, and 30 damage per hit. 5 levels of crits. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it's a flat rate (20% chance for each of the rates, though it's not actually this. The lower rates have a higher chance of hitting.)

Thus, the caster has a 50% chance of getting a critical on a full attack combo.
The warrior has a 75% chance.

Now, let's do 40 attacks each (to get the average).
Caster:
20 hits of base 100 (2000)
4 100*2 (800)
4 100*4 (1600)
4 100*8 (3200)
4 100*16 (6400)
4 100*32 (12800)
Total: 26800
Total Time: 160s
DPS (with crits): 167.5

Warrior (will get 80 hits, 40 with each hand):
Left Hand:
10 hits of base 30. (300)
6 30*2 (360)
6 30*4 (720)
6 30*8 (1440)
6 30*16 (2880)
6 30*32 (5760)
Total: 11160
Right Hand:
10 hits of base 30. (300)
6 30*2
6 30*4
6 30*8
6 30*16
6 30*32
Total: 11160
Grand Total: 22320
Total Time: 120s
DPS (with crits): 186

So, the Warrior is higher... until you count in the base miss rate, and the fact that high-level NPCs really like to dodge (which is very annoying). Each miss or dodge is an extra time loss of about half a swing added on, and should be able to expect 3-4 or so in 40 swings. 4 whiffs pulls DPS down to 177 (10 points off from the caster). These numbers are (OBVIOUSLY!!!) not the actual game numbers, but they do help with exploring the issue in general.

Given that numbers can be this close even though I'm doing mathematical operations that heavily favour the warrior, such as a much higher chance of the upper crits than is actually the case, along with a higher crit rate that can be attained... I do have to say that a lot of you are latching on to perceived faults raised by others instead of actually experiencing the damage issue yourself.

That said, Warriors definitely can tank (many) mobs better due to things like surge and NPC damage not scaling, and have a decided advantage as 1hers when fighting multiple mobs (both due to extra health and the chance for carry-over damage).

I would also fully expect that Roark would be calculating in critical rate when he's doing DPS calculations. He's not usually the sort to forget that kind of thing.

why would somone disagree with monk bashing being slower at low levels? most Low levels can do like 1 kick and thats it.

i loved my aquamancer to death.. but im never going back there for the simple reason that it sucks at bashing.. when i first changed from aqua to cantor at around cirlce 85, the difference was like night and day.. Even though cantors have no physical dmps, and aquamancers was tankier relatively, i killed a whole lot faster and thus can bash longer (we must also consider willpower drain)..

The mages 4s base attack is too low imho.. it should be faster.. a 3s standard casting speed will be the easiest change in my opinion..

Now this formula change is something to look forward to. Perhaps this huge chasm in bashing speed/efficiency will be addressed..

Read Xenthos' post. There isn't a 'huge' chasm in bashing speed.

I think you missed the part where he said the numbers are imaginary. I need to see if I can find dates before I repost the charts, but last time I did the math on this based on real numbers, monks killed kephera warriors an average of 20% faster than druids, plus had the advantage of less variance in the time to kill.

EDIT: And before you say "that's monks," the advantage of a narrower distribution also applies to warriors. The question is more if it's pre- or post-nerf.

And I think you missed the part where he said the numbers were hugely in favour of warriors, so reality, it would be even worse for warriors.

Not numbers. Number. Specifically, crit rate. There are other numbers that are hugely against warriors, like citing double the real miss rate.

I'm not going to delve into numbers here, but do remember to factor in risk and unreliability as more than just "slows you down by X%". It can get even tougher people killed. I remember not long ago Klia, an igasho knight, complaining about dying several times do largely to strings of misses against astral mobs.

The same way it seems like occasionally we get strings of criticals, so to do we seem to get strings of misses, something the caster classes are going to benefit from the former and be immune to the latter. Random number generators aren't perfect after all, and for whatever reason do seem to have some "stringy" behavior.

Thus, I feel that a slight speed advantage to archetypes that are capable of missing is not inappropriate, seeing as they bear a slight increased risk due to said miss rate.