Tree of Savior Forum

Swordies will be buffed, aren't you thankful?

General Discussion
#183

Multipliers are relatively irrelevant for the damage difference.
Swordsmen damage skills are not as potent thats all there is to it. They never have been.

Carter strike hits 4x (there are some other modifiers to consider but im simplifying), basically this is 400%.
Earthwave has a 2.5x modifier
Seism has a 1.7x modifier.
Multishot 10 hits 11 times, thats a 1100% modifier. If you have a 2h bow on a flying enemy you can count this as 2200%.
Fireball 5, 500%, Fireball 10 = 1000%, Fireball 15 = 1500%.
Frost Cloud 3200%.

Lol what flipping modifiers are going to make up this difference? You need concentrate to give 150% more damage?

Lets be real swordmen have
more health
more sp recovery
more physical defense
more block
and 2 more on their buff limit.
In korea they have 1.3x more physical attack from STR.
Their auto attack has inherit cleave

Archers have
More accuracy, more evasion and more crit rate.
Auto attack hits only 1 target, but subtracts defense.

Clerics have more SP recovery
Their auto attack has inherit cleave
Wizards have more magic defense.
Auto attack hits only 1 target but its Magic-type.

How are you planning to give Swordsmen equal damage output or greater (for the sake of kiting) when statistically they have the most base benefit of all classes prior to skills.

How does Swiftsteps 25% mean jack chit to this discussion.

Carter Stroke was one of the most complained about moves by people in ICBT2.
Hits 4x. Even if you take it as a 50% modifier on each of those hits.
Thats 600% scaling (multi target)

Fireball 5 is 500% multi-target. Fireball 10 is 1000% multi target, Fireball 15 is 1500% multi target.

Multi shot ends up as 1600% (1 target without aoe ratio).
This trend continues where damage focused archers and wizards have stronger damage skills then Swordsmen.

Swordmen damage skills aren’t tailored to do similar damage to other class types, but thats what people are often wishing they did, despite having multiple advantages in other areas.

1 Like
#184

-More Health is pretty much your only good point, but even then it’s not that great because high hp just means you can take a couple more hits before dying. High HP is necessary for Swordsman to stay in melee and do damage, and since most available potions only heal a static amount of health and campfires are flat increases at specific intervals, you have tons of downime between fights. Meanwhle, Wizard and Archer can kills most mobs quickly, effectively and safely due to and high damage, CC and range.

-More SP recovery is irrelevant most of the time, since you still need to use SP potions a lot just to do poor damage. I really don’t know where you were going with this. It’s not like Wizard can’t get improved SP recovery by simply going Sorc C1 for a circle, either.

-Physical Defense hardly matters when you need DoV buff to improve your Physical Damage based on percent (one of the few percent-based increases Swordsman have), and doesn’t help vs Magic attacks.

-More Block is only relevant for Peltasta and Highlander, and Peltasta has to be facing in the direction of incoming damage and Highlander Cross Guard “wears off” after so many seconds for… actually I’m not even sure why that has to be the case, it’s just stupid really. Clerics can get away with Blocking with Stone Skin in Priest C3, have healing and Physical/Magical mitigation (Safety Zone and Counter Spell). Wizards can go CON and use Animus. Archers have Barrel… and in all of these situations all of these other classes can use these skills WHILE they do damage and use abilities… so whats your point with Swordsman having move Block? How is it more effective than the other situations mentioned for other classes?

-2 more buff limit hardly matters when Swordsman buffs hardly do much, aside from Gung Ho OR Guardian, Warcry, DoV and FInestra… I kinda already brought this up with the flat increases before, but I guess I have to bring it up again. And if you’re talking about party play, the buffs only matter if they’re defensive since Swordsman are being treated as tanks the majority of the time.

You’re mentioning multipliers based on individual skill hits/damage… I mentioned passive/buff multipliers that benefit as many damage skills as possible, how relevant they will be for future ranks and that are available at R# rank. Archers and Wizards have strong ones that are available at early ranks or immediate ranks. Most, if not all, of Swordsman damage buffs/passives are flat increases or limited increases that will not scale well with later ranks, and Swordsman don’t get damage multiplier passives/buffs until much later ranks. Why is that?

To show you why your argument has nothing to do with mine, pretend the level cap increases to 400 and mobs have 1000 defense on average. Without STR or buffs Cartar Stroke will deal 0 damage because its basically no longer relevant for those mobs. With STR and damage increases, the skill will inflict damage, but it also depends on how much damage the skill does in relation to the mob’s health to determine how relevant its use is. Quick Cast +50% increased Magic Damage, Archer C2 +Crit Rate and Ranger C1-3 Increase Missile Damage benefit all ranks of damage for their respective classes, including the damaging skills of FUTURE RANKS.. I didn’t mention individual skill multipliers of early ranked classes because despite the fact that they have a multiplier, because their base damage is flat and low, they risk becoming irrelevant at higher levels/ranks. Quick Cast, Swift Step and Steady Aim… again… are always going to be useful.

You seem to be under the assumption that I want Swordsman dps classes to be exactly on par with Archer/Wizard dps classes. I never said that. I just want Swordsman to scale better and feel more rewarding to use, and to not be so glaringly behind in dps compared to Archer, Wizard and even Clerics while going a dps route.

Having Higher HP doesn’t mean Swordsman shouldn’t have passive/buff multipliers at early levels. Making them flat increases that are hardly relevant in upper ranks/levels is just insulting.

1 Like
#185

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

#187

Why you dont try something that dont use cataph??

Oh wait… because cataph is the only class that can make swordsman appear more in battles right?

Oh good, for a moment I tough people complain about swordsman because the rest was really bad in comparicion with other class types, but you is right.

Oh, also, nice tank you did, I stay imagining how much magic you can take, because you know, you are a tank, right? You is really great, can even tank magic, how awesome you are.

Kermit-Sitting (1).jpg500×626 182 KB

#188

This is horse ■■■■. Melee mobs in general are not a threat to anybody due to our combat system unless you need to channel an ability. What is a threat is homing projectiles which by their very nature, don’t care if you are also ranged. These classes have less health which means these attacks do a greater % of their base health then they do a swordsmen.

[quote]
-More SP recovery is irrelevant most of the time, since you still need to use SP potions a lot just to do poor damage. I really don’t know where you were going with this. It’s not like Wizard can’t get improved SP recovery by simply going Sorc C1 for a circle, either. [/quote]
SP was a typo, its HP recover. Clerics have the SP recovery bonus. Swordsmen on the other hand are operating with 2x+ the hp recovery of their compatriots.

[quote]
-Physical Defense hardly matters when you need DoV buff to improve your Physical Damage based on percent (one of the few percent-based increases Swordsman have), and doesn’t help vs Magic attacks. [/quote]
This is nonsense, there’s 4 combat classes at R7 going by Shinobi, Doppel, Dragoon, and Corsair C3. Just because Doppels gimmick is trading defense for offense does not mean the defense stat itself is irrelevant, nor does it mean in this game of numbers that you simply discount it at irrelevant.

Who are you kidding.
Highlander and Peltasta are 2 thirds or 66% of your rank 2 flipping choices.
Even still you recieve block just for having a shield, and the swordmens block rate is higher then everyone elses with a shield before CoN because they have an innate bonus to block. This means swordsmen passively receive less physical damage dealers then other classes while equipped with a shield. Block is 100% damage mitigated when it procs, are you out of your damn mind.

[quote]
-2 more buff limit hardly matters when Swordsman buffs hardly do much, aside from Gung Ho OR Guardian, Warcry, DoV and FInestra… I kinda already brought this up with the flat increases before, but I guess I have to bring it up again. And if you’re talking about party play, the buffs only matter if they’re defensive since Swordsman are being treated as tanks the majority of the time. [/quote]
Aside from Gung Ho? Lol what?
Swordmen buffs are all sizeable relative to the current skill damage of their abilities.
Their weakness past rank 7 is only relevant if they were unchanged into rank 8. However given Blessing recently (which is basically a party version of Concentrate currently) was updated in Ktos, this is up in the air. As it is now the buffs all still find purpose within the context of current swordsman damage output.

[quote]
You’re mentioning multipliers based on individual skill hits/damage… I mentioned passive/buff multipliers that benefit as many damage skills as possible, how relevant they will be for future ranks and that are available at R# rank. Archers and Wizards have strong ones that are available at early ranks or immediate ranks. Most, if not all, of Swordsman damage buffs/passives are flat increases or limited increases that will not scale well with later ranks, and Swordsman don’t get damage multiplier passives/buffs until much later ranks. Why is that? [/quote]
Of course because it is COMPLETELY relevant to talk about the damage output of skills.
I could boost Concentrate to a 30% damage modifying skill. Unless this is a T0 buff of which there are few in the game, it’s minor because the base damage of swordmen skills is currently significantly lower than the dedicated damage skills of other classes. That was the point of bringing up carter strike, because it is a notable that people complained about for having high damage output in the past, despite that during that same time it was outperformed damage wise by multiple skills. This trend doesn’t change, because swordmen skills themselves nowhere near as potent.

[quote]
To show you why your argument has nothing to do with mine, pretend the level cap increases to 400 and mobs have 1000 defense on average. Without STR or buffs Cartar Stroke will deal 0 damage because its basically no longer relevant for those mobs. With STR and damage increases, the skill will inflict damage, but it also depends on how much damage the skill does in relation to the mob’s health to determine how relevant its use is. Quick Cast +50% increased Magic Damage, Archer C2 +Crit Rate and Ranger C1-3 Increase Missile Damage benefit all ranks of damage for their respective classes, including the damaging skills of FUTURE RANKS.. I didn’t mention individual skill multipliers of early ranked classes because despite the fact that they have a multiplier, because their base damage is flat and low, they risk becoming irrelevant at higher levels/ranks. Quick Cast, Swift Step and Steady Aim… again… are always going to be useful. [/quote]
Only quick cast has guaranteed significance out of those 3.
Steady aim affects missile damage yes, of which some skills do and do not fall in. Swiftsteps value is based on the crit rate you have. It will be 95 crit rate for 10% crit chance (which is 5% average damage) @ 400 before crit resist. Swiftsteps damage contribution can be useless or minor depending on your stats
% modifiers are just as subject to relative value as flat numbers are.
Again you can throw up a modifier, but 1.5x 1 is still just 1.5. If swordmen don’t have sufficient base, it doesn’t make a lick of a difference, nor does it objectively make a difference if their skills at rank 8 are already in line before previous buffs are considered.

[quote]
You seem to be under the assumption that I want Swordsman dps classes to be exactly on par with Archer/Wizard dps classes. I never said that. I just want Swordsman to scale better and feel more rewarding to use, and to not be so glaringly behind in dps compared to Archer, Wizard and even Clerics while going a dps route. [/quote]
How about you then actually then look at the damage these classes deal, and determine how much of a % Each swordsmen rank 6/7/8 class is supposed to do to their contemporaries and how much more they then are required to hit, to meet your vague requirements of damage contribution.

It makes no difference. The only thing that matters is how you are objectively at your finish, if X skill is no longer in use but your rank 8 performance is still in line with expectation then it doesn’t matter.

If my dps is 280
and your dps is 280.
Then it doesn’t matter if yours includes a rank 1 buff and mine doesn’t, unless someone starts stripping buffs or we run into the buff limit.
These buffs were flat, but they were all significant for the time at which they were obtained. Splitting hairs that they need to be %, when the reality is that so long as the end result is the same it doesn’t matter.

1 Like
#189

why don’t you just GTFO ?
4 class, sword man almost useless, wizards can good at every term: tanky, dmg, pve, pvp.

also 2 attack types, magic is superior compare to physical

a much imbalance game is just an failed one, people will quit it soon when they know it. Just see, we only got 25% players left when compare to the start, what a nice number for just only few months

there are never be an perfect balance in every game but it needs an acceptable balance and ToS is not at both PvP and PvE

if you cant beat them, join them ?
that’s why you just GTFO, what a jerk logic
you have no right to discussion here with that fking logic, go away kiddo

3 Likes
#190

elitists will do everything in their power to stay on top :sunglasses:

#191

Swash Buckling and 40k HP doesn’t make you a tank

1k physical defense makes you a tank

a Mage, Quarrel Shooter, Swordsman, Cleric can pull that off very easily using a shield with high defense, highly upgraded plate armor, aspersion buffs, and plate mastery attribute

Ever played Final Fantasy? Have you run into a Cactaur yet? those things are godly tanks and they only have about 10hp ~ 20hp

This guy here was a bad ass tank back in the days ( R.O.S.E Online CBT )

#192

I don’t like repeating myself, so copy-pasting what I’ve already said ^o.o^

The current R6 and R7 ranks of Archer benefit greatly from Missile Damage, and we can assume future ranks that use Missile Damage will also benefit from these buffs. Since the future ranks are EXTREMELY likely to be Missile-based, Steady Aim is a good investment.

Archer C2 Swift Step scales with whatever Crit rate you have from DEX and +Crit Rate gear. Using a random flat value to try to debunk the fact hat it’s a % increase in rating is pretty silly.

Archers also get a +100% increased damage to flying for using 2H Bow and -25% Defense penetration for using a Crossbow at Archer C1.

The point is that Archers and Wizards have more flexible options with higher ranks they can choose. If I go Rodelero up to C3, I can only get Doppel C1 as opposed to going Doppel C2 with Rod C3. If I want to get Dragoon, I have to sacrifice a rank in Doppel until much later (R10 if I want to Dragoon C3). Heck, if a new rank comes out and I want to try it and keep damage increases, I have to basically determine how many ranks of Doppel I need which can cut into my R8 R9 choices. Same issue with Cata and higher ranks. Archer can safely choose Ranger C1-C3 to get +Missile increase damage to their liking and have way more flexibility in higher ranks they can C3 without sacrificing too much. Same with Archer C1/C2 passive and attribute buffs. Same with Wizard C3 only really needing ot sacrifice some early circles of Cryo/Pyro/Linker/Psyko if they want Quickcast. They have tons more flexibility with higher ranks of what they want without having to invest deeply at R6 and R7 for %damage buffs that also have a drawback.

There are bigger threats than just Physical damage such as homing magical damage where very little mitigation exists for it, and Physical Damage can be countered with Evade (Guardian) and Block (Cross Guard). I’d rather have 10/10 DoV than ~500 Defense with 0/10 DoV as a dps Swordsman. I can always just use Cloth 4-piece and fight Magical enemies, or wear Plate 4 piece and manage Cross Guard between skills… or simply try to move out of the way of damaging abilities. Surpassing enemy defense for lower-level skills to stay relevant and killing enemies quickly is better than getting pelted down for a longer period of time and taking armor durability damage and having to repair more often as a result.

I don’t feel like repeating myself or droning on about the other points. You must think Swordsman are fine with just the +Strength buff and that nothing else that I’ve addressed in my other posts mean much of anything. I just want to say that I enjoy the main idea behind some of the classes in the Swordsman tree, but there are glaring issues with Swordsman that need to be addressed if their dps classes are to be relevant for the current highest rank and future ranks.

1 Like
#193

There’s no random flat value. Your example was 400.
95 is literally the 10% value of a 400 character based on the current crit formula. Swiftsteps damage value is completely dependent on your crit rate. It’s a skill of fluctuating value, there is no argument to that, its literally the reality of a crit rate modifier in the games formula for Crits. The less crit rate you have the less Swiftstep contributes, to points where it can produce no significant benefits.

You can throw out modifiers if you want the damage type modifiers hit 50% - -25%. 2h Sword and spear hold 10% modifiers, Highlander has its shoddy crit attack modifier. These are all nice, except again, -again- “What are you modifying” if your skills damage itself is insufficient it doesn’t matter.
2x 2 is still 4. 2x 50 is 100. If your damage is low prior to the modifier or the modifier is not large enough, there is no guarantee that this is significant to classes who have considerable bases.

Magical damage existing doesn’t dismiss the value of physical defense.

I don’t recall saying swordsman were fine, but you can try that deflection.
You’re putting a half-assed focus on modifiers because “well he has them” when everyone has higher damage output skills, which are relevant precisely because of the desire to down enemies in as short a time possible. The modifiers again being a wash and not at all contingent of any healthy balance just because they’re brought into a discussion.
There are multiple paths at each branch. Just because you have a % buff doesn’t mean things are resolved or even that it was part of a resolution.
Rogue has Sneak hit severely affecting its critical chance, but Fletcher does not. If you’re just making choices based on buffs and their value in the future then Fletcher is Dead on arrival, this is of course not how it plays out in reality where instead the opposite is true within the community.
Neither Cyromancer or Pyromancer hold a general % damage Buff, so you’re saying their both DoA to wiz 3 damage wise. That may be true for Cyro, but Wiz C3 competes with Pyro C2 at rank 3, and Pyro C2 does considerably more damage.

How in this exchange has your focus on % buffs improved class balance when your interest in them only implies dismissing the damage classes without them.
What objectively matters is how you perform at any given rank to content of that rank.

There are 5 slots, well over 80 class considerations for a comp, you can’t simply throw buffs on lower ranks and hope it resolves some disorder in upper ranks.

1 Like
#194

Suppose 95 is 10% crit chance at 400. Which means 950 Crit rate is what you need for 100% crit chance.

You then need 950/1.25 crit rate to reach this value at 400, which means you only need 760 Crit rate before the Archer C2 modifier is applied to achieve 100% crit chance. That is 190 Crit rating saved either through gear or stats. Assuming just stats, that’s anywhere beterrn 95-140 stat points you’ve saved from having to invest in DEX to achieve the same thing, all from an Archer C2 passive attribute from a buff. And that’s just at level 400. At higher levels, you will save considerably more stat points from that investment because of how Crit Rating requires higher rating values as your level goes up.

Keep in mind, that result neglects monster Crit Resistance, which means more Crit Rate would be needed to achieve 100%, but it doesn’t change the fact that you’re saving a considerable amount of points on stats or having to obtain Crit Rate gear and you can instead focus on +Physical Damage or +Crit Attack for gear in places you would need +Crit Rate without Archer C2 buff passive attribute.

If you were statting DEX to reach 100% Crit chance, you could use those points on STR and/or CON as Archer.

1 Like
#195

I agree. like you said with finestra flat line crti boost it ain’t gonna help later on and even a trait that boosts attack by int? like really lol
Finestra would of been better as well as like every other swordsman buff except maybe R1 if they worked on % over fixed numbers. fixed numbers don’t scale well.

like Finestra should give % more crit rate and a slight % boost in block but % less evade ,

Guardian should give % boost def and traited evade but % less attack,

High guard should not have a 50% atk lose unless High Guard gave a lot more on the table like maybe some elemental res to actually make them able to tank magic? otherwise the penalty needs to be reduced.

Double Weapon assault needs some sort of additional effect or it just does not work with all that stamina drainage once you out of stamina better spam those stamina pills. but would it not be nice to get a boost to auto attack only a small boost but surely if the idea of that skill is to auto attack it would be more enticing to use it over just like 5 seconds before the rest of the skills are off cool down?

while I did mention maybe not Gung ho and Concentrate I think Gung ho should have something to encourage using it late game over Guardian evade boost is so much stronger than what Gung ho would give and concentrate does not last long enough but other than that they are ok concentrate does not lose additional loses on a multi hit skill so it makes it useful for that and Gung ho is at least decent till 200 if you don’t have Guardian

I didn’t mention Deeds of Valor or Trot as for the most part they are good buffs

now lets see why this would make a difference

Archer- Swift Step (Movement speed + % , PDef - , Evade + % (Critical +% traited up to 25% R2 only) can apply to all party members) already way better VS Finestra
Kneeling Shot - (Can’t move Damage + (+dex) Range+ Aspd + +% crit traited up to 10% more Damage) Better than most swordsman buffs even though you cant even move

Ranger - Steady Aim - (+ %Attack) No cons like Gung Ho scales better because % based

Quarrel Shooter R3 - Running Shot (aspd + % , Damage +%)

Rogue - Sneak Hit (+% Crit chance when attacking a enemy behind)
Evasion R2 ( +% evade )

Now that’s archers Lets compare swordsman pitiful buffs

Swordsman- Gung Ho - (+Patk - Pdef trait both increase the Atk boost but alos the Pdef penalty)
Concentrate - (Few hits of + attack can be enchanged up to 100 attack only really works on multi hit skills later on or scales badly)
Retrain R2 - (Lower max HP Chance to stun each hit)

Peltasta - Guardian - ( +Pdef - Patk tratied to have % boost in evade )
Swash Buckler - (Aggros enemies +Max hp % up to 25% when max traited kind of useless the health boost when it does not give like temporary health or anything or a health mechanic that goes down faster to swash buckler hp)
R2 High Guard - (Block + Atk -50% +1 Pdef per trait level also boosts 2 shield skills that already have low attack + 50% damage penalty when traited too)

Hoplite - Finestra - ( + Crit rate + Block - Evade trait to boost amount of enemies hit by 3 but doubles evade lose 10% of int goes into attack like what were they thinking with this one? why on earth would a swordsman ever have INT in their build its so useless. it really should get replaced with something else. this is the most useless trait on tree of savior)
Stabbing - ( not a buff but boosts Evade and Mdef by % while using it)

Barbarian - Frenzy R2 ( + Atk per hit up to Stack limit with trait stack can transfer targets at the cost of half of a stack)

Cataphract - Trot (Move Speed +)

Corsair - Jolly Roger (only thing that makes this a support class. Chance to steal items, + atk each kill in area lasts 5 secs unless another kill is achieved, Traited has a chance to nullify attacks in the area if you have party members
Double Weapon Assault R2 (can combo with both weapons, Costs stamina)

Doppel - Deeds Of Valor - (+Atk % - Def % Aspd +)
Double Pay Earn - (2x better loot 3x more damage (2x if you have trait)

Templar - Battle order ( +Str sorry this skill is worthless and makes this class not live up to being support type. your meant to be leading a bunch of people yet your only combat buff boosts str not effecting half your members)

I think that pretty much covers it so what did we learn? just comparing archer to swordsman they get more % buffs and less Negatives put into their buffs and it shows no matter how many swordsman gets they are just not scale worthy unlike archer buffs

1 Like
#196

It’s not about more or less dex its about
Damage contribution.
For Swiftstep to be a 10% increase in average damage via crit you need 760. crit rate excluding crit resist
As they gives you 20% more Crit chance at that point, which ends up as 10% average damage.

The less crit rate you have the less Crit chance swiftstep results in, making it less of a damage increase.

Buffs already fall off as new buffs with greater power replace older buffs when you have to prioritize one over the other as a result of the buff caps without sufficient Daino.

ultimately what matters -again- is the attacks themselves but this is beating a dead horse. 10% of 50 is meagre to 2000 health enemies 10% of 500 is not to 2000 health enemies.

Outside of Doppel Swordman damage buffs are flat increases to a stat/output however these are all potent for when you recieve them, enough to make the priors insignificant.
It takes 600 Crit rate to get the same out of Swiftstep that you get with Finestra. A hoplite isn’t obligated to invest in dex to get that quantity, where as an Archer requires investment to 600 crit rate.
This doesn’t mean anything from a balance perspective without knowing the numbers they push out at the end.

1 Like
#197

Unfortunately, I don’t think Archer C2 Swiftstep attribute carries over with the buff for the party ^o.o^

But the stat points you save from trying to crit cap can be used towards damage contribution. 95-140 stat points in STR at higher levels will be x2 that amount at max rank (due to the fact that at a certain point, 1 stat point = 2 STR for every point invested, and circle multipliers… averaging this value out to the lower end to be x2 by rank 8). That is around 200-280 STR, and you gain +Crit Attack with STR too, so the damage increase is much higher than just 200-280 per hit but rather 300-420 per hit due to Crit attack additive damage (I know its applied after multipliers, but I’m looking before them). And this is just at level 400. Level 600 you will get more damage from STR due to circle modifier and Archer C2 having stronger value for higher level.

You keep trying to change the point of how beneficial the Archer C2 attribute is, an R2 investment from a stat-point/crit-cap and gearing advantage to some other point I never really intended to argue for or against. You cannot convince me that 200-280 STR worth of points saved is a minor damage contribution.

Most Archers that invest in Archer C2 go stronger into DEX because they get more out of the bonus due to DEX… I already explained how beneficial it can be in terms of saving stat points towards DEX and that those points can go towards STR instead. In fact, most Archers investing in C2 have a stronger option for reaching the 100% crit cap as opposed to other Archers who don’t aside from maybe Rogues but they must attack or be relatively-behind any targets hit from their attacks which is not ideal in AoE and multi-target situations.

I’m not even including the 10% increase to Crit Rate from Kneeling Shot either, to be as fair and relevant for most damaging attacks as possible. 95-140 stat points [by level 400, not even 600] saved from a R2 attribute is ridiculous, but other Attributes (Like Ranger C1 Steady Aim) is probably even more ridiculous… but that isn’t what I’m trying to prove. I’m just saying that Archer C2 Swiftstep attribute is more significant than you make it out to be.

Unless a new Archer buff overrides Swiftstep, Archers that have invested in Archer C2 have no reason not to use it. same can be said about Steady Aim and Quick Cast (from Wizard). Same with Running Shot from QS3. Many Warrior buffs, in comparison, are hardly worth using after a certain point (Concentrate for example). Gung Ho is only somewhat useful due to Doppel DoV, but unfortunately as Circles increase, the value of flat Physical damage decreases due to the fact that you’ll gain more STR per stat point, reducing the value of flat Physical damage increases.

I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. This must be back to the individual skills point you brought up. Swordsman have strong skills at R7 (Doppel C2 Cyclone and Zornhau, Dragoon Gae Bulg) and even at R6 they have strong options (Doppel C1 Cyclone, Rodelero C3 High Kick). The problem is that a lot of these stronger abilities have a long cooldown, so you have to rely on C3 abilities from R3+ ranks, or have Skull Swing from Highlander C3 to make the target’s defense irrelevant, or have Physical Damage to increase lower-ranking attacks to remain relevant to make use of multipliers such as

~Cross-cut (Highlander C2) + Skyliner (Highlander C2) …or… Cross-cut (Highlander C2) + Double Slash (Sword C3)

~Helm Chopper (Barb) + Cleave (Barb)

~Crown (Highlander) + Zucken (Doppel C2) …or… Zornhau (Doppel C2) + Zucken (Doppel C2)

~Skull Swing (Highlander C3) + Vertical Slash (Highlander C3)

Heck, if you’re fast enough you can use Vertical Slash after some of the other combos above to do higher damage due to more debuffs.

~Crossguard [Stagger] (Highlander) + Thrust (Sword)

-Rodelero C3 High Kick and any Strike Damage ability afterwards (Cartar Stroke, Helm Chopper, etc)

Not to mention the multiplier for armor types.

It’s not like Swordsman don’t have strong attacks… but they lack appropriate buffs to keep most of their lower-circle attacks relevant at 200+… either that, or they need more attack options (lower cooldowns) for their R5+ attacks

Oh how I wish I had +100% increased damage to certain monsters just by equipping a specific weapon like Archers and from a Circle 1 attribute with 100% uptime, or +50% increase damage just by applying a buff that would help me with 100% uptime like Wiz C3, a R1-R3 investment that will last forever. Instead we’re left without those things, so even Barb C3 buffs, a heavy, strict R3-R5 investment for flat damage increase with less than 50% uptime you mention don’t help us enough and definitely will reduce in value as levels increase instead of staying relevant throughout all levels like the other buffs mentioned.

I don’t care about a buff that is just relevant for when you get it and doesn’t scale later on. I want buffs that will remain relevant in future ranks. Why can’t Swordsman have more of those besides very limited Weapon Specialties, DoV, Gae Bulg and High Kick? And why do Swordsman have to invest so heavily in higher ranks to achieve partially what Archer and Wizard can do at lower ranks in terms of buffs and passives?

2 Likes
#198

When you have 500 in a stat, you gain 2 points in that stat for every stat point you invest in it. This goal is easier to meet with STR and int because of their class modifiers, but harder for the other stats. This encourages singular stat investment as you reap more benefit out of a stat the more you pump into it.
Dex on the other hand continually loses value per point because of your level being a divisor, which means you keep pumping into it to maintain crit chance.
Swiftstep doesn’t free you of this.
I’m not marginalizing Swiftstep as a buff I’ve framed it exactly for what it is, it requires you to invest into Dex (although Gems are sufficient at current level) to reap significant benefit out of it and you get about 10% damage out of it if you heavily invest in dex, since it’ll take you from 80% crit chance to 100% if you have that much crit rate. If you don’t it contributes less crit rate which means less crit chance and as such less of a damage contribution.

The point was that with the buff limit cap buffs can lose their priority.When you can only hold X amount of buffs you’ll go for the most valuable ones, this can force out certain buffs. They’re not going to all be equally valuable from the start. Swiftstep is <=10% if you’re not prioritizing its evasion as well it may lose out to other considerations such as Swells, priest buffs, chrono buffs, later archer buffs, etc. If you want to extrapolate to future levels you’re not guaranteed to still hold value (without Daino) of older buffs when they take less priority over new or more potent ones.

The value of Flat skills decreases relatively speaking because damage increases from multiple factors, including level, while monster health increases. This doesn’t mean Flat buffs are a problem it means that in an evolving process they’ll be left behind if you get high enough bases/multipliers where they lose out on the characters priority list when faced with the buff cap or the consideration of cast time. In a static position such as rank 7 to rank 7 content, 5 to 5 content, 8 to 8 content. Being flat doesn’t mean anything balance wise.

It’s simple.
If the dps at rank 8 is 280 and the dps of another is 280 then how they achieved that dps doesn’t change that their damage output is the same. It doesn’t matter if Flat or %, The end result is the same.
It’s not indicative of balance whether a buff is flat or not, particularly because of the class system we have.
Your damage output for any given class is not the same because their bases different, their number of hits differ, their internal modifiers on those skills, the effects that the classes put out differ.
You can’t simply sum that up with “Well if the buffs were %” it doesn’t remotely work that way, it’s a shallow thought.

To use your own examples.
Pyro C2 and Wizard C3 are both rank 3 classes.
Wizard C3 has a 50% damage attribute via Quick Cast.
Pyro C2 doesn’t. Mind you Pyro C2 does more damage at rank 3 then a Wizard C3. These classes also have connections into later rank classes.
Quick cast 50% existing as an attribute doesn’t suddenly mean Wizard balance is good. Hell the lack of C2 Cyro - Ele, and C2 Pyro - Ele is a clear example of this buff not giving any particular benefit to in class balance despite Elementalist having specific attributes for both of those C2’s.
Because of the different choices classes can take, simply having a % buff doesn’t mean you balanced out anything.
This isn’t to decry % buffs, it’s just a stupid thing to focus on given the class system of this means you have no idea what paths any given person is doing to any other class. That Class being significant for the content of its rank is the first thing you can actually guarantee. Then even when you do you then have buffs in relation to each other, and then the considering of backtracking in order to get more buffs to maximize later rank skills, which again isn’t a good sign for class balance. Once you position that these buffs are necessary for competitive damage the question becomes of ignoring classes without these buffs or who have weaker buffs. It’s not all created equally nor expected to be since classes have different themes, you can’t simplify things to a Flat vs % buff issue.

1 Like
#199

Gung Ho, with flat attribute damage (its current implementation), does not scale well later on. Even investing into Sword C2 to increase Gung Ho, it’s still a flat increase.

Compared to investing a circle in Ranger C1 for Steady Aim, an ability that increases Missile Damage by 10%.

The increase may seem insignificant, but with higher ranks and abilities, an Archer R8 ability that has say 1500 base and normally does 10-15k damage will hit for 1.1x more with Ranger C1 Steady Aim buff. This would make the damage 11k-16.5k. Sword C2 Gung Ho would not yield the same increase. Gung Ho, Sword C2 with +85 damage (max skill and attribute) would yield 10566-15850 in the same scenario, and I’m being fairly generous. As levels/ranks increase, the 1.1 modifier for just Ranger C1, not even C2-C3 but C1 will continue to be good while Gung Ho damage becomes less relevant.

I’m using an extremely fair example of a 1500 damage skill. If you were to compare with other skills that do 2000-3000 damage, Gung Ho would lose even more value. Hell, just by investing more in STR over time as Swordsman, the amount of physical damage increase you get from Gung Ho compared to not having it up decreases in percentile value.

Trying to argue that flat vs %increase is shallow is ridiculous. The only way flat damage would be better is if it was flat damage designed to match what its value should be at max level (600, or R10-11) and was available at early levels… but that is lopsided design and would make the current content way too easy. The flat buffs that are “good for the level you obtain them at” will decrease in value as further ranks are added whereas percentage-based ones that are good for the level you obtain them and also good for future levels, are simply better overall.

Ranger C1 Steady Aim can greatly surpass Barb C3 Warcry with max attributes/targets just by being applied to skills that are +3300 damage in base or after STR + skill damage calculation, and that isn’t far off considering Cannoneer and Musketeer skill damages… and those are just R7 classes. I intentionally left out DoV argument to simply compare Ranger C1 Steady Aim vs Barb C3 Warcry alone. Even if you considered Barb C3 Warcry with max DoV stacks, Ranger C3 for x1.2 modifier exists and will continue to scale well with higher ranks. One Archer buff available at R2 outscales a R3-R5 investment from a specific class for Swordsman, and a R2-R4 investment from Archer outscales the R3-R5 magnified by max DoV… and will continue to scale well for any higher damage.

Just my opinion, but this is how I think ToS models itself out to be between the roles of Archer, Wizard and Swordsman.

Archer and Wizard should always be superior to Swordsman dps for their niche, and that’s completely okay. From my little experience as Archer and Wizard:

-Archer has superior Single-target damage abilities, compared to Wizard and Swordsman. Has an edge against flying types. AoE is limited, but doable.
-Wizard has superior AoE damage options and can hit more targets, compared to Archer and Swordsman, but typically lack dps against flying-types.
-Swordsman are all-rounders that can do dps to any kind of mob, but must utilize damage-types against armor-types to maximize damage and they don’t do any singular role as well as Archer or Wizard. This is largely due to Swordsman needing AoE Ratio to hit more targets and will always be sub-par to Wizard in regards to killing multiple targets, and the fact that Swordsman don’t have as fast attack speed or low cooldowns as Archer does for its AA/abilities.

AoE ranking: Wizard > Sword = Archer
Single-target dps ranking: Archer > Wizard = Sword
All-rounder: Sword > Archer = Wizard

I acknowledge that different classes have different roles, but making one class have flatly-scaled buffs compared to other classes that have skills they can gain early that scale and stay relevant throughout future ranks, just seems like a serious imbalance. The reason I never argued about difference in skills/hits/etc is because I’ve long-since acknowledged the fact that Archer, Wizard and Sword tree will have different specialties when it comes to dps. Just because they have different roles doesn’t mean one tree should be at such a heavy disadvantage of having flat-scaled buffs that decrease in value at higher ranks, and said tree must also invest in R6/R7 in a specific class to get a damage percent increase with a relatively-big drawback.

I’m arguing that there should be better balance in how Swordsman buffs/passives scale to be comparable to how Archer and Wizard buffs and passives scale. I’m also arguing how Swordsman are at a disadvantage for requiring investment in higher ranks to achieve similar increases as the other 2 from their early ranks.

2 Likes
#200

You’re not at some intrinsic advantage or disadvantage based on how your buffs scale. It’s literally relative to the output of the skills that are in use. Its not a vacuum piece. The themes are generally correct (as far as damage goes) but it misses all the specifics between classes of a base class.
Highlander and Barbarian aren’t trying to deal damage the same way, their focus in damage isn’t the same, they’re not expected to deal the same amount of damage either. Barb C1 and Highlander C2 as rank 3 classes aren’t tuned to do the same damage, they’re damage expectations aren’t the same.
You can’t say “Make Gung ho 5% + 1% per skill level” for instance and think it simply resolves things.
Thats the problem, its not a matter of Flat vs % scaling buffs because that marginalizes and ignores all the context of classes balance at the end.

Hell we see this in the Archer class with the Ranger and Archer 2.
Where it becomes a discussion of “eh I wont go Ranger 3, because Swiftstep + Steady aim 5/10” is worth more then Steady Aim 15. The other skills of the class become irrelevant in the grand scheme compared to how much % modifiers you’re getting from buffs.
This hasn’t resolved balance (Steady Aim used to be flat) it certainly has muddied it for players who are not looking into multiple variables. As you still have classes with inherit struggles with % modifiers where X buff may not have as much signifance as Y, or X level of the buff.

You can call for % buffs vs Flat but it’s literally not the break point of class balance.

It becomes particularly wonky for instance if you expect C1 skills to resolve your problems. Swiftstep Critical Rate modifier is a Rank 2 attribute, that gives incentive to take Archer 2 as a class when put aside Ranger C1 and QS C1. However as we see in play it becomes a method of how do I grab multiple buffs to benefit when min-maxing, which puts other class options within the ranger tree on a lower level.

Bottom line is when you have variance you can expect things to be uneven and in the case of Swordsmen balance throwing modifiers on pre-existing buffs doesn’t resolve things. You absolutely can do it, given the changes they made to Steady aim and Blessing they likely will do it, its simply not indicative of balance however. Its the end results that matter. So whether the buff is in play or falls of grace doesn’t change

1 Like
#201

another one of those people who thinks swordies are just meat shields hahaha. NO. swordies are strong early game but late game falls of hard.

#202

I obviously disagree with this considering my standpoint. However…

I agree that Highlander and Barb have different damage output and utility/purpose.

Highlander has lower damage output, but has a different playstyle. Highlander can take advantage of Bleed and Knockback, and can rend the defense of targets with Skull Swing. Highlander is excellent support for AA and other classes that do physical damage, especially if they do that damage quickly. Highlanders are 2H specialists (well, they should be with 2H spears as well, but I will save that gripe for another argument) and can utilize Cross Guard as a defensive manuever.

Barbarians have higher AoE ratio on most of their abilities (except Stomping Kick, for some ungodly reason), and they do higher damage in comparison to Highlander. Barbarian also has buffs/debuffs for both single-target and AoE scenarios. Most of the Barbarian abilities have better utility in hitting multiple mobs. The only Highlander ability that outranges Barb abilities, to my knowledge, is Cartar Stroke and that ability requires charging to improve its potential damage.

I understand that Barbarian and Highlander will play out differently. They’re 2 of my favorite early classes of Swordsman.

However, if R8-R10 existed and I knew Barbarian buffs would never be % increase, I would feel safer choosing Highlander C3 for almost any build.

I’d only need to invest in Barb C1 for kToS Cleave +Slash damage buff, and I can dump extra points into Stomping Kick since it increases in damage based on Evasion of boots and height (and there may be possible buffs to increasing jump height or encounters that may call for falling on enemies or give the opportunity to do so). I’d only ever consider Barb C3 in a build if Stomping Kick was excellent utility in fights and I wanted it to be stronger. Seism and Pouncing may be okay for R8 but maybe not for R9 or R10… it’s extremely hard to tell since nobody can predict the future, but its extremely likely that enemy defenses will increase to 1000-1400 at that point and their hp will be much higher than the average 120k-160k that we see now, so cycling in such an ability at R9-R10 may be a complete waste of time without Skull Swing or armor break in general.

Highlander C3 is futureproof just with Skull Swing (which improves in effectiveness for targets that have higher defense) and Cross Guard (which scales based on level and STR, not some stale/flat value) alone, but may still be able to use multiplier combination abilities like Cross-cut + Skyliner for damage because of Skull Swing making enemy defense irrelevant at all levels of play.

If R10 was available and the average enemy defense for regular mobs is anywhere betwen 1000-2000, what reason would there be to pick Barb C3? At most, you’d only need Barb C1 for kToS Cleave Slashing damage increase buff and I guess Stomping Kick if Evasion on boots reaches high levels. Highlander C3 is currently a better late-game investment unless they buff Barb to give % increases to damage as opposed to flat ones that are relevant for R5-R7 and maybe R8.

If Barb buffs were %based, min-maxing would happen, but since Highlander provides utility that Barb doesn’t, both Highlander and Barb would remain relevant in future ranks like RangerC1-C3/ArcherC2-C3/QSC3/WizardC3

Archer can go Ranger C3 AND Archer C2 to get the best out of Steady Aim, Kneeling Shot and Swiftstep attribute, and have complete freedom with their R6+ choices. I think the SR that is part of the Korean team that can do ET 17+ actually has a build similar to that (Archer C2 > Ranger C3 > SR C2). I’ve already mentioned before that Swordsman cannot easily get away with something like this if they wanted to go Rodelero for High Kick and Doppel C2 for buffs, or Fencer with Doppel buff, etc… they miss out on a rank of Doppel or their R6 C2 or R7.

Heck, Archers could go Archer C2 > Ranger C3 > Falconer > Cannoneer to fulfill the role of high damage Cannon abilities… but other trees of Archer have utility, like Fletcher C3 for single-target dps, QS C3 for Running Shot, Wugushi for poison debuff tht scales off of STR or Physical Damage, Hunter for grounding flying targets and increasing Slashing /Strike damage by percent (though they are still a bit buggy atm), Falconeer for Circling… basically, even if Archer doesn’t go Ranger C3 and Archer C2 to min/max their dps, they have other roles that perform well for the utility they have. If they want to sacrifice ranks of Ranger to do so, they can because they could just use Ranger C1 for +10% Missile damage or not invest in Ranger at all if they are going for Poison (Wug) or Slash/Strike damage (Sapper)., and/or some other damage type that isn’t Missile available at higher ranks.

Even with the %increases from Archer C2, Ranger C3 and QS C3… and Rogue… it doesn’t invalidate the roles of the other classes within Archer tree, and Archers have more flexibility with what kind of role they want to choose while still being capable of maintaining buffs that will remain relevant for R8+.

Just fyi, I’m not trying to be a jackass or argue for the sake of arguing. I really want improvements for Swordsman. I want to understand your argument and why you think %buffs are not the solution. Actually, what would your solution be, if you have one? What would you do to give Swordsman a stronger edge to fulfill their dps roles?

2 Likes
#203

I’ll try and minimize the back and forth by skipping to your last statement.

I say % buffs are not the solution because expectations of each class (not just swordsman) differ.
If you look at Wizard C3 for instance, this has caused a bit of homogenization in class choice when it comes to damage. While Pyromancer still stands potent just because of the raw damage output of its skills. Quick Cast attribute had not strengthened the balance within the Wizard class because in “Future proofing” the reality is that there is a 50% damage gap on two paths. Eg. If you attempt Psychokino C3 into Necro C2, Your damage output of Necro skills drops 50%.
However (and this goes specifically to my argument) when you look at the end result it may not be a 50% dps gap or even a 50% difference in burst if the inherit strength of Psychokino skills contributes that much damage.
Same with Pyro and so on.
At one point or another it just comes to the reality that you can’t simply expect % buffs to resolve balance within classes because each of their contributions has to be measured and in line with that classes purpose.
If you just tack it on its a bandaid with lasting ramifications (Hello Steady Aim!)

They’ve already put down the basic premise as far as Swordsmen damage goes.
Gung ho for instance reduces defense for offense. This isn’t a percentage but its significant relative to R1,R2 and R3.
Deeds of Valor again is trading defense for offense.
Shinobi Bushins again disregarding their AI complications, trade defense for Offense.

Whether Flat or %, you want a Swordsmen to trade in its staying power generally (there’s always just making the damage notably conditional) for it to be a competitive damage dealer.
Deeds of valor is going to hit 15 in R8. That’ll be a 150% Damage boost (given you can stack that high). That’s a large difference between other classes in the swordmens tree, but its fine self contained within Doppel. Now if R9 comes out we then have an “issue” of how do R9 damage focused classes without Doppel stand in relative value compared to R9’s with Doppel. Mind you that is the problem with percentage buffs, you don’t worry about this in flat situations (you can, but its easier to make it a short term problem) since you know those buffs become less significant so their balance is contained within their rank to an extent. You accept this on some level that these paths aren’t all able to excel the same ways and so even at R7 not all of these classes can be potent damage dealers and one will excel more than another for damage in X situation.

The “solution” is to make each class do what it needs to do for its rank.
We know via Elementalist having two attributes exclusive to C2 Cyromancer and C2 Pyromancer respectively, and cross class combos like Feint + Barrage that you can work out minor synergy problems after-the-fact.

So long as the class is able to do its job/role on its own for content at its rank you can work from there.
To that end the main “problem” of Swordsmen at R7 is making sure R7 classes (Dragoon C1, Templar C1, Squire C3, Corsair C3, Fencer C2 and Doppel C2) are line with the expectations for R7.
If a class doesn’t fulfill its identity then throwing a % on top of it just is lazy.
Especially if you try to hit it from C1.

That for instance was part of the problem with Rodelero it has all this CC but its an Attack type class that is looking to pin down enemies and wreck them, but didn’t have the damage to wreck them so that was adjusted within the Rodelero skills themselves to make sure they do what they’re supposed to do.

Look at each class “is this performing its role properly” -Nope?-
Why doesn’t this class do its role. “It isn’t hitting hard enough, the buff doesn’t do anything ,blah blah” so you improve those in the kit, you can fool around a bit to lead builds by creating combos like Feint+ Barrage.

Ranger C3 isn’t even in a great situation. The Ktos Steady Aim, yes is powerful in tandem with other skills, but for ranger specifically a lot of skills not named Barrage do fairly poor damage, not because they do poor damage late-game, they’re not that good from the start (High Anchoring, Time Bomb Arrow). Steady Aim works as a steroid to bring all their damage up to par, and that was nerfed in Itos despite that buff basically bringing those skills in line and none of the skills were increased individually to compensate. So while Steady Aim still has benefit as a scaling buff, it doesn’t fix up the flaws in the rangers damage output which is notable because Ranger “attempts” to be your AoE class choice relative to Archer and Quarrel shooter. Its a class that isn’t very good at what it says it wants to be in the first place which is unfortunate. Ranger declares itself an aoe type archer and yet outside of Barrage the aoe is bad, and Barrage aoe is bad unless you use it at point blank typically as a means of single target bursting a target. Wow.

I can’t just throw a 5% + 1% skill level on Gunghoe or 40% on concentrate and think it’ll resolve issues in the swordsmen class for the same reason I can’t do that with any of the other classes and all of the base classes have problems.
The whole “Future proofing” is really just “My class choice will be a better choice than the guys who did this” which really just says the niche’s their attempting to create for each class aren’t playing out which is understandably difficult because they have so many classes but can’t simply be resolved by throwing a % on a C1.

Even moving past Swordsmen, take Sorcerer. This class has issues, I can’t simply solve them by Moving Quick Cast to C1 for instance so I get more damage a % modifier doesn’t resolve my underlying issues. These are things that are nice, but whether Flat or % the end result (power in relation to rank 5/6/7) is whats off.
Many of my cards lack skills currently or the skills themselves are weak. Salaimon is weak and its attributes have little effect due to their small proc chance and the lack of potency on its burn. Could go on and on, bottom line those issues have to be solved within the Sorcerer kit, synergy with previous or future classes is secondary when your skills have problems at the very rank they’re made for.

Hell Cross-Guard “scales” but its block rate realy expects that you put levels into the skill its 3.5xlvl scaling vs guards 5.5x. The skill naturally doesn’t block as much and if you don’t invest in it, you’ll find these shortcomings become more apparent earlier sooner then later, despite the block addition being flat. Its fine however because its a Good R2,R3 and R4 skill, and being as such has made it useful past that.

1 Like