Page 23 of 24 FirstFirst ...
13
21
22
23
24
LastLast
  1. #441
    People apperently don't understand the reasons for an ilevel squash. They keep saying things like "your minds can't comprehend large numbers". This is just silly. Stop that.

    The reason smaller numbers may be required is because how ilevel scales. Its not a case of getting 10% more stats each tier, there are huge leaps between expansions due to how level scaling works.

    Let's compare each tier set for Prot Warriors, just looking at Stamina and Strength on the chests.

    Tier 1 - 20 Str 28 Stam
    Tier 2 - 17 Str 40 Stam
    Tier 3 - 21 Str 43 Stam

    Tier 4 - 25 Str 48 Stam (+3 sockets, 12-18 Stam per gem)
    Tier 5 - 38 Str 47 Stam (+3 sockets, 12-18 Stam per gem)
    Tier 6 - 37 Str 69 Stam (+3 sockets, 12-18 Stam per gem)

    Tier 7 - 81 Str 111 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 7.5 - 92 Str 127 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 8 - 106 Str 135 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 8.5 - 113 Str 147 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 9 - 120 Str 157 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 9.5 - 136 Str 180 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 9.5H - 153 Str 206 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 10 - 144 Str 191 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 10.5 - 162 Str 219 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)
    Tier 10.5H - 183 Str 251 Stam (+2 sockets, 24-30 Stam per gem)

    Tier 11 - 341 Str 512 Stam (+2 sockets, 60-75 Stam per gem)
    Tier 11.5 - 385 Str 578 Stam (+2 sockets, 60-75 Stam per gem)
    Tier 12 - 368 Str 611 Stam (+2 sockets, 60-75 Stam per gem)
    Tier 12.5 - 420 Str 689 Stam (+2 sockets, 60-75 Stam per gem)
    Tier 13 - 426 Str 730 Stam (+3 sockets, 60-75 Stam per gem)
    Tier 13.5 - 489 Str 824 Stam (+3 sockets, 60-75 Stam per gem)

    Tier 14 - 1063 Str 1835 Stam (+2 sockets, 240 Stam per gem)
    Tier 14.5 - 1220 Str 2071 Stam (+2 sockets, 240 Stam per gem)

    Starting to see the problem? The scaling is out of control, and unnecessarily so. Even if we ignore the fact gems are scaling faster and faster (first doubling from BC to Wrath, a bit more then doubling Wrath to Cata, and quadripling from Cata to MoP!), stats on entry-level tiers are tripling every expansion! Meaning Tier 17 may start off a bit like:

    Tier 17 - 3500 Str 5000 Stam (+2 sockets, 1000 Stam per gem)

    And...

    Tier 20 - 12000 Str 15000 Stam (+2 sockets, 4000 Stam per gem)

    And...

    Tier 23 - 38000 Str 45000 Stam (+2 sockets, 12000 Stam per gem)

    The numbers just keep going up and up, and most of us know WoW will keep going for a long time (look at Everquest as an example, and it was never this popular). Even if we can accept it, the engine will just get more and more taxed. Its already running more numbers then it ever has even if we discount the scaling, due to more complex fights with positional dangers, multiple different cooldowns and abilities and the like. Not to mention increased polygons in the enviroment and models. Eventually the system may start suffering slowdown, even if computers can easily handle it with a newer engine.

    Reducing the curve now makes sense. Better now then having to rescale even more things later down the line.

    Heck, old gear may not even need to be touched. Just slowing down the rapid rate the gear is inflating. Maybe even saying 'to hell with it' and not having a big 'jump' between expansions, since raiders tend not to be pleased getting rid of their epics for greens and blues anyway.

  2. #442
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    I suggest you read up on what exponential growth even means. Changing stat growth to linear was never part of the deal in the first place, nor would it even have been possible or sensible with the changes they considered.
    I know exactly what exponential growth means, and yes, its stupid, but that was the proposal, changin stat growth from exponential to linear. It is perfectly posible, and it isnt sensible, which is why they didnt do it.

    I think the ones that doesnt know what is talking about is you, if you say its not possible to change an exponential growth into a linear one...
    Last edited by Crashdummy; 2013-02-07 at 01:16 PM.

  3. #443
    First, i'd like to ask some of you why would you think that by having big numbers , computation should increase? For example , currently boss health in 5.2 and further might overlap the 2.147 billion mark that a signed int can hold , which would mean that blizzard has probably already migrated to long , which are 8 bytes long and can store extremely huge numbers. Even with the current inflation , it would take years before anything could reach the threshold of a long integer. Now this mind you , is boss health. It's not common in programming to have the same type for every number in the game. Game stats and even damage might still be stored in an unsigned int , which can hold 4.9 billion.

    If blizzard will switch from that unsigned int to an unsigned long , even if they will increase the current stat inflation , we will probably never reach the threshold. What does this mean in terms of computation? Well , as long as the type of the number is the same , the size of that number is irrelevant for the cpu , because the 4 bytes of the unsigned integer will always stay 4 bytes , regardless of the number size. This of course means that increased numbers will not increase the power needed to compute. Although , if they switch from the unsigned integer format to a long , which is 8 bytes , this could be slightly more taxing , but only slightly. Today's cpu's can easily handle mathematical calculations on the 8 byte level , so the change will probably go unnoticed.

    The only reason a squish might be necessary is for aesthetic reasons. Imagine having a sword with 100k-200k damage and +15000 to agility with a gem that increases mastery by 5000. With that sword you will do 150k~ white damage and perhaps 5-6 million yellow damage crits. Now in terms of gameplay , as long as the health of mobs is increased , the gameplay remains exactly the same. But , in my opinion at least , it would simply be ugly to look at. The numbers will simply be comical.

    In my opinion the best way to address this is to have a squish that will simply divide all current values by a certain ratio, including mob health, armor values and so forth. This will ensure that item progression through expansions will still be valid , and people will not feel *weak* for some reason.
    1001 0111 0011 0111 1000 0101

  4. #444
    Pandaren Monk
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Xsy View Post
    The only reason a squish might be necessary is for aesthetic reasons. Imagine having a sword with 100k-200k damage and +15000 to agility with a gem that increases mastery by 5000. With that sword you will do 150k~ white damage and perhaps 5-6 million yellow damage crits. Now in terms of gameplay , as long as the health of mobs is increased , the gameplay remains exactly the same. But , in my opinion at least , it would simply be ugly to look at. The numbers will simply be comical.
    Indeed.

    Plus, imagine how easy it would be to balance PvP if everybody just had 10 HP...
    Quote Originally Posted by Tychus View Post
    Back in my day, we walked uphill both ways, in the snow, barefoot. That made being in school all the better. Now you kids use these fancy automobiles and get there almost instantly. What's the point of school when you can just drive there?

  5. #445
    If by "easy" you mean "next to impossible". Imagine if somebody found a way to do 2 damage instead of 1. He just doubled his DPS.
    Quote Originally Posted by Durandro View Post
    Starting to see the problem? The scaling is out of control, and unnecessarily so. Even if we ignore the fact gems are scaling faster and faster (first doubling from BC to Wrath, a bit more then doubling Wrath to Cata, and quadripling from Cata to MoP!), stats on entry-level tiers are tripling every expansion! Meaning Tier 17 may start off a bit like:
    Nope. How about you show that there actually is a problem, and not just numbers that get bigger over time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crashdummy View Post
    I know exactly what exponential growth means, and yes, its stupid, but that was the proposal, changin stat growth from exponential to linear. It is perfectly posible, and it isnt sensible, which is why they didnt do it.

    I think the ones that doesnt know what is talking about is you, if you say its not possible to change an exponential growth into a linear one...
    No, you merely didn't understand what i said. I didn't say you can't change exponential growth to linear growth. But go ahead, show me where they said they were changing it to a linear stat growth.
    Last edited by huth; 2013-02-07 at 04:26 PM.

  6. #446
    Quote Originally Posted by Moontalon View Post
    I'm sick of it too but people will never stop talking about it. Even if and when it happens people will talk about it saying it's the best/worst thing to ever happen to WoW. :P
    Actually, if people somehow were loud enough in support of it, and Blizzard did it, people would be on the forums in a few days saying "WTF! I can't solo MC! You guys said it wouldn't change anything!!1"

    And the rest of us who actually understand math would be saying "I told you so."

  7. #447
    I like the squish just because it smooths out the progression through older expansions. It would make the leveling process smoother for new people. Also, heirloom gear at those transitions where it becomes almost useless until you get 61/71/81. But it doesn't make much difference to me either way.

    This reminds me about the debate between pi and tau. Anyone already in the higher level of maths wouldn't give a shit either way over a factor of 2. But using tau makes trigonometry more elegant and simple to understand for someone just learning about it.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment (Blue Tracker / Official Forums)
    No, it's neither harassment NOR ninja'ing to roll on any item the system allows one to.

    Nor is it against any rules to votekick a member from the group - one person can't do it, apparently someone agreed with the rogue.

  8. #448
    Over 9000! Frozenbeef's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Uk - England
    Posts
    9,140
    As long as it has 0 effect..and i mean 0, on combat other than the damage is 3 on someone with 100 rather than 3k on someone with 100k i wouldn't mind it :P

  9. #449
    If you want proof that the squish is not a simple cut by x% go start a new toon. Look at your health. A human priest for instance has 103 starting health. Now to drop avg dps to 1k you would have to cut all stats by 99% which means the priest will have 1 health at level 1. I don't care how ridiculous you think numbers are right now starting toons with 1 health is even worse...that means starting beasts couldn't do any dmg till level 3 or 4.
    My System
    Ivy Bridge 3570k OC 4.0
    ASRock Z77 Extreme4
    HD Gigabyte 6950
    Mushkin Enhanced Blackline Frostbyte DDR3 1600 8GB

  10. #450
    Blizzard has never tossed out specific numbers but the general idea was to scale item level closely with player level until the level cap when players got access to tier gear.

    Take today's game from 1-60 where item level on gear scales 1:1 with player level; gear from a level 60 instance (Blackrock Spire) is item level 60 but quickly inflates at the end of each expansion due to the raids. Naxx item level 90; player level 60. Sunwell item level 160; player level 70. ICC item level 277; player level 80.

    The idea would be to extend this to the level cap (e.g. item level 70 blues dropping from Mechanar, item level 80 blues dropping from Utgarde Pinnacle, etc) and flatten all item level inflation until you reach the level cap.

    I don't know where this linear stat growth idea came from. Poor choice of words I think.

  11. #451
    Quote Originally Posted by Cows For Life View Post
    I don't know where this linear stat growth idea came from. Poor choice of words I think.
    I think it's that some people don't realize that stats would still grow exponentially even if they did this since they aren't growing linearly with iLvl.

  12. #452
    Quote Originally Posted by theturn View Post
    If you want proof that the squish is not a simple cut by x% go start a new toon. Look at your health. A human priest for instance has 103 starting health. Now to drop avg dps to 1k you would have to cut all stats by 99% which means the priest will have 1 health at level 1. I don't care how ridiculous you think numbers are right now starting toons with 1 health is even worse...that means starting beasts couldn't do any dmg till level 3 or 4.
    Worse yet, you would be in your 50s before you found a chestpiece with +1 stamina on it.

  13. #453
    The Lightbringer MasterHamster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,793
    I think we've always been "concerned" about potential items in a new expansion.
    And as soon as we get there, there's zero issue.

    Are people having seizures? Reading the item squish threads before MoP release, one could've thought that would happen.

    But sure, I wouldn't mind smaller numbers... problem is it'd become a huge task if they want to preserve our character power vs older raids, or low levels.

    Making the iLvl curve more linear would lead to 90s being way less powerful than old raid bosses power would be cut. Maybe 60 raids wouldn't even change? But suddenly level 90s are in ilvl 230?
    I think it speaks for itself what effect that'd have.

    I'm actually a bit pissed that Blizzard made it seem so easy to reduce the numbers. Gave some sort of false legitimacy to the argument.
    Nyoro~n? (´・ω・`)
    5:2 diet? Pft!

    Weight lost since 21st of June: 57kg/~125lb

  14. #454
    People forgot what an RPG is, too feeble minded to realize that an itemsquish would only help the game. Too lazy to develop my thoughts, I have unsubscribed anyway because game feels uninspiring and dull with button spam.

  15. #455
    Hopefully they'll do it.
    “The north still reeks of undeath. Our homelands lay in ruin. Pandaria oozes our hatred and doubt. What hope is there for this world when the Burning Legion again lands upon our shores?” - Eric Thibeau

  16. #456
    Pandaren Monk
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,845
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    If by "easy" you mean "next to impossible". Imagine if somebody found a way to do 2 damage instead of 1. He just doubled his DPS.
    Yeah... But it would be quite easy to prevent people from doing 2 damage instead of 1.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tychus View Post
    Back in my day, we walked uphill both ways, in the snow, barefoot. That made being in school all the better. Now you kids use these fancy automobiles and get there almost instantly. What's the point of school when you can just drive there?

  17. #457
    i saw "i think" then stopped reading.

    im only curious about facts not somethings thoughts

  18. #458
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam the Wiser View Post
    I'm okay with going back down to 1k dps.
    Ah, well, ok, so that at lvl 10 you're at - wait a second - 0,0001 dps? What the heck people? Do you even think about that?
    That squishing would bring nothing but confusion. Every old raid must be changed etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsjel View Post
    I remember being the first person in my guild (at that time) to break the magical barrier of 1k dps back in TBC, and everybody was like in awe of that. Good times.
    I remember being the first person in my guild (at that time) to break the magical barrier of 100k dps back in MOP, and everybody was like in awe of that. Good times.

    Item squishing would be terrible useless. Its fine how it goes.

  19. #459
    Quote Originally Posted by theturn View Post
    If you want proof that the squish is not a simple cut by x% go start a new toon. Look at your health. A human priest for instance has 103 starting health. Now to drop avg dps to 1k you would have to cut all stats by 99% which means the priest will have 1 health at level 1. I don't care how ridiculous you think numbers are right now starting toons with 1 health is even worse...that means starting beasts couldn't do any dmg till level 3 or 4.
    Not really. The classic wow values are ok up to the raid stuff. The ilvl of an item used to show what characterlevel should wear them. So a ilvl 50 chestpiece was made for a lv 50 character. So up to that point the item progression worked. Only when they introduced raiding as an endgame activity they broke with that principle since they had to give the players more powerful drops while their characterlevel would stay the same.
    So if they'd squish the items it would start at lv 60. So you wouldn't have a priest with 1 hitpoint doing 0,0001 dps.

  20. #460
    Quote Originally Posted by Yriel View Post
    Not really. The classic wow values are ok up to the raid stuff. The ilvl of an item used to show what characterlevel should wear them. So a ilvl 50 chestpiece was made for a lv 50 character. So up to that point the item progression worked. Only when they introduced raiding as an endgame activity they broke with that principle since they had to give the players more powerful drops while their characterlevel would stay the same.
    So if they'd squish the items it would start at lv 60. So you wouldn't have a priest with 1 hitpoint doing 0,0001 dps.
    Which is where the new problem comes in: a max level has trouble soloing old content because 1-60 content is unchanged, but the higher levels are significantly weaker.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •