I initially messages Iosai a few weeks ago but I haven't received a response and it's a bit long for the short questions thread, so here we are!

There are several levels of weaknesses and resistances given to mobs and I'm looking for exact numbers, preferably from the admin. This is about the only game I've ever played where mechanics are kept a secret, and not only do I not like that, it affects people from making informed decisions when it comes to artifacts, and in my case, has kept me from purchasing credits since I'm unable to know if I'll actually benefit or not.

The reason I'm asking is because I've been considering buying more of the artifacts that change weapon damage to another type, but I've come across a couple of circumstances where I'm not positive it will actually benefit me, and I'm not about to waste 250 credits.

I searched the forums, but I couldn't find if this has already been discussed. If it has, a link pointing towards it would be awesome.

Thanks. :)

This is really a question you'll want to take up with support. As a matter of policy, we lowly admin don't really discuss point values when they're deliberately hidden beneath rounding phrases.

Like, email support@? or artifacts@?

Either or, really. I meant support@lusternia.com, though. You'll like as not get the same answer either way.

Ok. Pretty lame, especially when it affects business, but I'll give it a try.

Especially when buying one rune is mostly pointless; you need two (500cr) to even get a 33% switchover. A 1/6th conversion is going to fall through the cracks when you don't even know what the resistances really are.

There are better ways to implement the things, but for whatever reason, they are supposed to be an immense credit dump (which, unfortunately, is universal to the Warrior class and their weapon runes). With that in mind, it would be really nice to get clearer resistance numbers so one can know when the 500cr spent for a 33% damage conversion type actually benefits you.

I'm curious as to why distinct numbers are inherently necessary - having a damage conversion to a type they're weak to is going to be beneficial either way, and to a type they're resistant to will be not so much. I'm sure you can guesstimate that "fatal" is really good and "minor" isn't so hot. I guess I'm missing something, because the same argument of 'not knowing without clear resistance numbers' could be applied to damage types period - ie why complain about divinus bashing if you don't know just what it means.

Not to argue one way or the other, I'm just curious as to what hard %s (+2000%) versus vague terms ("super effective!") means when you know it's going to benefit you either way.

Incidentally, I would still love to have warrior weapon runes switched over to a system closer to what the Magic classes get with the +damage rune; instead of being attached to a weapon, you'd attach them to a piece of jewellery, and they provide their effect no matter what weapon you're wielding.

For the sake of resetting and making sure that they're at (or below) the stat cap, just create a 50cr rune that you have to slap onto a weapon to make it take advantage of your weapon-rune array (if the rune is not attached, it has base stats, if it is attached the weapon uses the weapon runes possessed by the owner).

One can always dream. It would be nice. :(

Eventru:

I'm curious as to why distinct numbers are inherently necessary - having a damage conversion to a type they're weak to is going to be beneficial either way, and to a type they're resistant to will be not so much. I'm sure you can guesstimate that "fatal" is really good and "minor" isn't so hot. I guess I'm missing something, because the same argument of 'not knowing without clear resistance numbers' could be applied to damage types period - ie why complain about divinus bashing if you don't know just what it means.

For example: Mob has major weakness to cutting and to fire. Which is better? They both are the same perceived value but there could be up to a 14% damage difference in the two.

Xenthos:

For example: Mob has major weakness to cutting and to fire. Which is better? They both are the same perceived value but there could be up to a 14% damage difference in the two.

Are you going to spend 500 credits just for variance of that amount on a single mob? I mean in that example, would you get a cutting rune (assuming one exists!) because it might do +14% damage more than fire? Or forgo runes because of one mob?

Eventru:


Are you going to spend 500 credits just for variance of that amount on a single mob? I mean in that example, would you get a cutting rune (assuming one exists!) because it might do +14% damage more than fire? Or forgo runes because of one mob?

You don't get them for one particular mob, you get them to help you in bashing period. In the case of warriors who not only spent 500cr on the runes, but additionally another 1500 on the pliers, you want to actually be getting the use out of the things you paid 500cr for when they will help you and not have them sitting around hindering you otherwise.

Eventru:

I'm curious as to why distinct numbers are inherently necessary - having a damage conversion to a type they're weak to is going to be beneficial either way, and to a type they're resistant to will be not so much. I'm sure you can guesstimate that "fatal" is really good and "minor" isn't so hot. I guess I'm missing something, because the same argument of 'not knowing without clear resistance numbers' could be applied to damage types period - ie why complain about divinus bashing if you don't know just what it means.

Not to argue one way or the other, I'm just curious as to what hard %s (+2000%) versus vague terms ("super effective!") means when you know it's going to benefit you either way.

So, if they're slightly weak to magic, but completely neutral to cutting, since I have a 10DMP cutting buff, I need to know whether or not a magic rune is going to be more beneficial than straight cutting damage.

That's all I'm really asking.

Eventru:


Are you going to spend 500 credits just for variance of that amount on a single mob? I mean in that example, would you get a cutting rune (assuming one exists!) because it might do +14% damage more than fire? Or forgo runes because of one mob?

Yes, this is pretty much me asking for one zone that I hunt often. If I can hunt it just a little bit faster I'll be that much more effective!

Okay! Well at least I understand now, heh.

Ardmore:

So, if they're slightly weak to magic, but completely neutral to cutting, since I have a 10DMP cutting buff, I need to know whether or not a magic rune is going to be more beneficial than straight cutting damage.

I kinda doubt it's going to be enough to matter, in said situation. I certainly wouldn't pay 500 credits for a slight damage buff vs. mobs.

That's good for you. I would, that's why I'm asking.

Eventru:


Are you going to spend 500 credits just for variance of that amount on a single mob? I mean in that example, would you get a cutting rune (assuming one exists!) because it might do +14% damage more than fire? Or forgo runes because of one mob?

There are like three top-tier high-level bashing areas, so... yes, absolutely people would do this.

I'd says some clearer numbers would help artifact sales along. It's like influence runes, I've heard mixed and mostly negative reports about them, but if they had some clearer numbers maybe that'd help players in determining at what point they would pay off, or offer feedback for a balancing thereof. Theorycrafters thrive on numbers, and are likely also the ones who want the very best, but only if they can be sure their investment is a sound one.

Unless of course we're not supposed to game the system like that. But really, anyone who is dedicated enough and has credits to burn could then gather the data and publish it. We're a much smaller community but it's foolishness to believe hiding data will keep it hidden.

Calixa:

I'd says some clearer numbers would help artifact sales along. It's like influence runes, I've heard mixed and mostly negative reports about them, but if they had some clearer numbers maybe that'd help players in determining at what point they would pay off, or offer feedback for a balancing thereof. Theorycrafters thrive on numbers, and are likely also the ones who want the very best, but only if they can be sure their investment is a sound one.

Unless of course we're not supposed to game the system like that. But really, anyone who is dedicated enough and has credits to burn could then gather the data and publish it. We're a much smaller community but it's foolishness to believe hiding data will keep it hidden.

This seems obvious to me. Sure, better influence is superior to worse influence... but is the difference worth the money? If I don't know, I'm never going to buy it. Same thing can be applied to many of the artifacts. Why should someone have to spend the time and money to get information that should be readily available? Even emailing support is a unnecessary hassle.

Sorta related to my last point, and expanding on the above post: Magic find in Diablo 3. When the developers explained how the formula worked, which turns out is far more attractive than what players had theorycrafted, prices on magic find gear hiked. I generalize and more factors are at play here (breakable object nerfs, gold inflation due to bots to name some) but it still stands as a fact on its own and serves a good example here.

To translate this to Lusty: If you offer transparency on how something works, and players like this, you bet they are suddenly going to want stuff previously assumed to be ok but not that great.

I think people can probably dig up some more examples from other games.

I got a reply earlier saying they weren't going to give me the information on this.

But I guess it's good to continue to point out how stupid it is that they withhold this information.

Very stupid.