|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
posted March 18, 2007 11:23 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I indicate that you think that every point of luck gives you +10% chance for lucky strike.... Are you trying to fool us all or just dreaming? And with expert luck you have +3 luck, not +5. Other buffs are not granted by hero. And OK ,I made a slight miscalculation(was after 3,5 beers ), but corrected doesn't look better. And you get +5% chance of lucky strike (proven by observations and common sense)
I'm sorry to disappoint you here but 1 Luck indeed gives +10% chance to do a lucky hit. I don't get it why you say it's proven that it's 5% but you are wrong. Just check the manual
And no, in my games, 5 luck happens even more than 50% so I think we should rely on what it says on the manual and not on our experience
Well, I checked the manual, and you were correct. But that only means that luck is seriously overpowered ... IMHO.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
dfortae
Known Hero
|
|
posted March 18, 2007 11:28 PM |
|
|
Morale is even more overpowered than luck. Morale affects EVERYTHING since it means you could either move more often, attack more often, cast spells more often, etc.
Now I know why they were capped at 3 in Heroes 3 instead of 5 like in Heroes 5!
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted March 18, 2007 11:45 PM |
|
|
Instead of capping they could reduce the chance. I thought they did...
And yes, leadership is as well overpowered, but at least it gives +0,5 action, not +1. Luck is more overpowered.
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted March 18, 2007 11:49 PM |
|
|
The thing is that basic leadership gives the same chance as expert luck. Only in longer games does it make too much of a difference.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
dfortae
Known Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 01:56 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Instead of capping they could reduce the chance. I thought they did...
And yes, leadership is as well overpowered, but at least it gives +0,5 action, not +1. Luck is more overpowered.
Actually leadership is more overpowered. Again, luck only affects attack. Morale affects everything. +0.5 action means twice as fast (not 50% faster).
|
|
dschingi
Famous Hero
the guy with the dragon golem
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 09:37 AM |
|
Edited by dschingi at 09:43, 19 Mar 2007.
|
Comparision between morale and luck damage boost
Quote:
Actually leadership is more overpowered. Again, luck only affects attack. Morale affects everything. +0.5 action means twice as fast (not 50% faster).
A creature needs to get 2x good morale to act twice as often as a creature without morale, just think about it.
To clarify that luck is better than morale in terms of the potentially highest damage, I made a little table. Other circumstances than the average damage are not included!
morale or luck | average damage multiplier of
value | morale | luck
| |
5 | 1.333 | 1.5
4 | 1.25 | 1.4
3 | 1.176 | 1.3
2 | 1.111 | 1.2
1 | 1.053 | 1.1
0 | 1 | 1
-1 | 0.947 | 0.95
-2 | 0.889 | 0.9
-3 | 0.823 | 0.85
-4 | 0.75 | 0.8
-5 | 0.667 | 0.75
| |
(values rounded)
Conclusions:
- Good morale gives a lower damage boost than luck at low morale values. The boost of morale is not linear, it becomes better with higher morale values. At a value of 10 both morale and luck would provide the same boost, 2.0. Of course this isn't possible because they are capped to a maximum of 5.
- At the other hand, bad morale has a higher impact than bad luck. This is simply because with bad morale you can deal no damage at all, while with bad luck you still deal half of the normal damage.
sorry for going off topic... I just wanted to clarify this.
If anyone wants to see the formula for the table I can post it later. Have to go now...
edit:
Well, the table doesn't look like it should. The left column shows the morale and luck value, the middle one shows the damage multiplier that as much morale would provide, and the right one does the same with luck...
____________
open source for an open mind
|
|
ZombieLord
Promising
Famous Hero
that wants your brainz...
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 09:54 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Instead of capping they could reduce the chance. I thought they did...
And yes, leadership is as well overpowered, but at least it gives +0,5 action, not +1. Luck is more overpowered.
Actually leadership is more overpowered. Again, luck only affects attack. Morale affects everything. +0.5 action means twice as fast (not 50% faster).
I don't think so. Luck affects retaliations, Morale not
And Morale also improves speed or more actions so it's better than +50% more damage. Though I think Luck gives too much bonus IMHO, it should be around 66%.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 10:15 AM |
|
|
Quote:
At a value of 10 both morale and luck would provide the same boost, 2.0. Of course this isn't possible because they are capped to a maximum of 5.
Actually, there is a technicality here, which is not quite taken into consideration. The case is, that for considering Morale bonus, there is a difference between first attack and later attacks, because Morale bonus only affects the time after first attack, whereas Luck, since it applies on the first attack also, affects the whole effect of battle.
To understand this, consider the case of +10 Luck and Morale (100 % chance of Good Luck and Good Morale). Luck will affect all attacks, and thus give a damage multiplier of 2.0.
Morale, however, will not apply to your first attack - said in another word, the timing of your first attack will be independant of your Morale modifier (as long as positive). With 100 % good luck, you will still only get 2 attacks on the first 1.5 turns, corresponding to a 1.33 modifier. After the first attack, you will get 2 attacks on 1 turn (because each attack takes only 0.5 turn), corresponding to a 2.0 modifier.
What does that mean? Well, in long combats, the two would be almost equally good in terms of damage: In 10 turns, Luck would do 20 times damage, and Morale would do 19 times damage, corresponding to multipliers of 2.0 and 1.9, respectively. In a 2 turn combat, however, Luck is the better, because it will do 4 times damage, whereas Morale would only do 3 times damage (2.0 vs. 1.5).
There is a solution to this, however: After finishing the Tactics face, all units would have their morale calculated, and units could start combat with good morale, providing the normal 0.5 ATB bonus. This was in fact the case in Heroes 4, if I remember, and would ensure that Morale affected the whole duration of combat, thus making the two closer to each other, and providing a well needed boost for Morale and Leadership in particular. It would also be a nice way of countering the nasty randomness of the initial ATB values.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 10:18 AM |
|
|
|
ZombieLord, what about casualties? If you strike once, get the retal, and strike the second time via morale, the total damage will be lower than one GOOD luckblow and you will also lose less via retaliation thanks to the bigger damage done after the luckystrike.
|
|
TowerLord
Promising
Supreme Hero
Hero of Good, Slayer of Evil
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 10:42 AM |
|
|
luck seems to be better than morale... but there are some other things to take into consideration :
1. useless lucky strike ( you kill the stack even without luck) -> morale is not affected by that, because you can move to the next creature
2. luck might not do 100% more dmg because opposing stack isn't that big, just 30%,40%,50%,60% more ... in this situations you might prefer morale
3. luck on useless stack is always useless, while morale on useless stack might get your stack to take one more retaliation or block an important shooter etc.
still with these situations, luck seems to be better, the 100% against 50% is too big difference !
|
|
dfortae
Known Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 12:30 PM |
|
Edited by dfortae at 12:30, 19 Mar 2007.
|
Wow, again, you guys are missing the OBVIOUS. Morale affects EVERY ACTION. Luck just affects damage. You guys are obviously just interested in damage, which is unfortunate. To be good at strategy, you must consider all aspects of battle. This is why morale is better.
Getting 2 castings of haste in from an Inquisitor in a timely manner will make you do much more damage than 2 luck attacks. That's just an example, but there are COUNTLESS others...
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 01:07 PM |
|
|
And how many units benefit from morale ate very faction? Casters and imperials. Ain't much.
I'd say both of those effects are extremely welcome to happen, and the discussion which is better is pointless.
|
|
Pomo
Famous Hero
The lone peasant
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 01:25 PM |
|
|
Just as a side note, does anybody else think leadership (not morale) is underpowered because you'll very likely be able to max morale without it? +2 just for having a single faction army with a hero of that faction, the other +3 isn't really hard to get from some minor arties and map locations. Luck on the other hand starts from 0.
____________
linkTouched by His Noodly Appendage
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 02:05 PM |
|
|
Pomo: Yes, I have often wondere about the reasonable in Having morale depart from Luck in that manner. From that perspective, Luck is definitely much more woth it that Leadership. Not mentioning that Luck have a couple of excellent Abilities (Soldier's Luck, Resistance, Elven Luck, Warlock's Luck, Dead Man's Luck) whereas those of Leadership are pretty mediocre (Diplomacy can be good sometimes, whereas Recruitement and Estates are plain waste of skillpoints for your main Hero, and apart from Knight's abilities, you have to search long for a really useful racial ability in morale.
And I have to agree with Doomforge, that even though you do in fact get an extra full action (move + cast), the value of double damage is very close to that (for instance, double damage from luck means not only that you take out more enemies, but also that you suffer less from retaliation).
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 02:09 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I'd say both of those effects are extremely welcome to happen, and the discussion which is better is pointless.
I still think luck is obviously better. And before 2.1 you can imagine how much better it was..
not to mention that morale is neutral for undead 
But my opinion is, both skills are too overpowered -- who cares they are impredictable? They have just too high bonuses.
Quote:
The thing is that basic leadership gives the same chance as expert luck.
I really can't get what you're saying.
Basic Luck gives +1 luck.
Basic Leadership gives +1 morale.
Of course you start from 2 morale. So No Leadership gives +2 morale. And Basic gives +3. The thing is, Basic does NOT give you +3 alone, it only adds +1 to the already existant +2. So no it is certainly NOT better than the Luck skill.
|
|
dschingi
Famous Hero
the guy with the dragon golem
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 02:54 PM |
|
|
@alcibiades
My table does indeed not include that you have no benefits from morale at the first turn.
The fact that luck triggers on retaliations is missing, too.
All you guys have good points.
Taking Leadership for the morale bonus is just not such a common choice because you often get some morale booster from artifacts so it can happen that you get over the cap of 5 and would therefore waste skill points.
____________
open source for an open mind
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 03:20 PM |
|
|
What, then, are you guys ideas on how this is solved best? What do you think about:
- Reducing chance of Good Luck and Morale triggering from 10 % per modifier to 8 % or 5 %, or something else?
- Removing or changing the cap on Luck and Morale modifier, for instance setting it to +10 instead of +5?
There are pros and cons to making such changes. Reducing the triggering chance and raising the cap would favor Morale, because as it is now, you will often hit the roof in an army with only one faction creatures (+2 Bonus) and one or two artifacts. By letting bonuses go beyond 5, the chance of your +3 bonus from Leadership being wasted is diminished, and this would also make sense with the appearance of Sorrow and Mirth, likely to come at some point (we already know Sorrow is prepared for the game): Sorrow provides -1/-2/-3/-4 morale, and Mirth would probably provide up to +4 Morale - widely redundant, with a +5 roof.
On the other hand, Luck would suffer from such a reduction. Expert Luck provides +3 Luck, which would correspond to +15 % Damage - less than the 20 % Attack provides, and less dependable, but on the other hand able to deal crucial damage when it applies (especially good for Ranged armies - like Sylvan!). A couple of Artifacts might increase this to +5, but because no global Luck modifier is available, as there is with Morale, you will rarely go beyond this limit. If +5 Luck corresponds to 25 % chance of triggering, that's 25 % extra Damage, which is still comparable to Attack. This would seem more ballanced that the current +50 % damage. If spells like Misfortune and Fortune were added (+/- 1, +/-2, +/-3, +/- 4 Luck), and maybe even a global Luck modifier (how could that work!?), that might still lift you to the current levels, if you really focus your army on Luck (again: Sylvan). Certainly, as it is now, Luck stands as one of the most powerfull Skill, and some nerfing of this would not seem out of place.
The great minus of such changes would be the fact that Heroes without the Luck or Morale skills would only rarely have chances for these to trigger. If a +2 modifier corresponded to 10 %, it would only happen rarely. Is that a problem, or is that only fair, to justify spending the skillpoints?
As a less radical change, one could simply reduce the chance from 10 % to 8 %, so that +3 corresponds to 24 % of triggering, or +24 % damage. That would set Luck on par with Attack, in terms of damage bonus.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
siinn
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 03:54 PM |
|
|
Quote:
As a less radical change, one could simply reduce the chance from 10 % to 8 %, so that +5 corresponds to 40 % of triggering, or +20 % damage. That would set Luck on par with Attack, in terms of damage bonus.
this is what has to be done to balance luck skill well!
|
|
Pomo
Famous Hero
The lone peasant
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 04:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
As a less radical change, one could simply reduce the chance from 10 % to 8 %, so that +5 corresponds to 40 % of triggering, or +20 % damage. That would set Luck on par with Attack, in terms of damage bonus.
this is what has to be done to balance luck skill well!
Personally I wouldn't say so. If luck provided on average exactly the same damage boost as attack, I would choose attack nearly every time - excepting cases where I particularly want the abilities (i.e. warlocks, against particular enemies resistance, soldiers luck sometimes). Attack also has very strong abilities though, and has the crucial advantage of being reliable. Luck needs to have some edge on average to make it worthwhile.
The numbers Alc has posted add up to 24% damage boost for expert luck though (3*8%) unless I'm missing something.
____________
linkTouched by His Noodly Appendage
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 19, 2007 04:40 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The numbers Alc has posted add up to 24% damage boost for expert luck though (3*8%) unless I'm missing something.
Yeah, I messed up the numbers, got another factor of 50 % in from somewhere.
Wow, so +5 Luck Modifier currently corresponds to 50 % extra damage? 
____________
What will happen now?
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
