Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes.

19 (57.6%)

No.

10 (30.3%)

Critical burs- uhm ... what?

4 (12.1%)

Total Members Voted: 33

[JovankaB]

Maybe replace current luck protection with:

Max number of bullets which can bypass armor per burst/shot:
Random from (6 - Luck/2) to (21-Luck*2)
Luck/2 rounded down.

In case of critical bypass:
Character with luck 1 could be bypassed by 6-19 bullets per burst/shot (12-13 on average)
Character with luck 6 could be bypassed by 3-9 bullets per burst/shot (6 on average)
Character with luck 10 could be bypassed by one bullet per burst/shot (just 1)

So low luck would be still bad against critical bursts, but critical burst damage would be nerfed in this
case and high luck would protect against critical burst bypasses. Both could not avoid sniper bypasses.

[T-888]

Maybe replace current luck protection with:

Max number of bullets which can bypass armor per burst/shot:
Random from (6 - Luck/2) to (21-Luck*2)
Luck/2 rounded down.

Luck*5=damage reduced in %

Both suggesting a damage nerf. Players are concerned about just changing frequency, so be it. I agree, it's not the most effective way to just change raw chance, that's just the easiest solution.

How are you going replace it? I don't understand, because if bypassed bullets are calculated in every critical hit, that's like just increasing overall damage of critical hits, there needs to be some kind of frequency, as for when at what shot the critical hit is considered as bypass, then the calculation of bullets bypassed.

So low luck would be still bad against critical bursts, but critical burst damage would be nerfed in this
case and high luck would protect against critical burst bypasses. Both could not avoid sniper bypasses.

Critical bursts wouldn't be nerfed, only bypasses, think about it that's the desired effect. That feature just shouldn't be applied for single shot and be reliant only on pure frequency, including grenades, pistols etc. etc.

Can't replace it, can add and merge it, if it's possible.

[Spotty]

How about 2 rolls when you attack, and use whichever is lesser?

For example, critburster attacks, roll 1 is a 3x crit bypass and roll 2 is just a regular hit, roll 2 will be used. Whenever both rolls hit a 3xcrit bypass will be the only time it will happen.

It will greatly reduce frequency of major crits, and yeah, its a crit nerf. But any method to change frequency will be a crit nerf.

[T-888]

The same coin can be looked upon from two sides. Nerf? I say balance.

Roll already determines the power of a critical hit including bypass, since it's the same critical hit only it ignores a large portion of resistances available for the player. When you hear the word roll think chance, probability. If ,for example, roll 90-100 would grant you bypass out of 1 to 100 random roll. It's basically the same thing as reducing frequency directly without the intervention of roll, the exact effect can be simulated- lower chance to score a bypass.

Damage can be altered by reducing the damage multiplier upon certain rolls, for example, roll 1-20 is 1x damage, 21-40 is 1.5x, 40-61 2x and so on. It's like that already.

My suggestion is to reduce the frequency of bypasses, since those type of critical hits are the ones that does insta-kills and aren't balanced, i don't see normal critical hits an issue anymore because of the recent changes for damage multipliers. Reducing purely damage multipliers to balance out bypasses would make critical bursters useless overall due to the damage reduction, why do we need that? Critical bursters have their place and i think they should be viable, just some features has to be balanced appropriately.

I think Silent death had it's place in the game, just instead of thinking solutions how to make it work in a reasonable manner, someone decided that it is easier to just fix it, make it impossible to use grenades with the perk at all. That's equivalent to just removing bypasses from bursts completely and that's stupid.

[Sarakin]

Like I said earlier, frequency is not a good thing to balance, because either you cant do a bypass at all due to bad luck and thus, doing overally low dmg, or you just roflstomp someone with instakill => High spikes of damage.

I like Jovankas suggestion, only number of bullets should be taken from % of each bullets fired from a particular weapon (bypasses are not tied only to avengers)

[T-888]

I like Jovankas suggestion, only number of bullets should be taken from % of each bullets fired from a particular weapon (bypasses are not tied only to avengers)

I like it too, but there needs to be frequency when the % of bullets are calculated as bypassed, when the shot is considered as bypass. Can't do it on every hit, major DPS boost in that case. Whether you like it or not, but frequency is a part of bypasses, it is impossible to make bypasses occur without some kind of chance involved, can make them constant, it's still frequency.

Like I said earlier, frequency is not a good thing to balance, because either you cant do a bypass at all due to bad luck and thus, doing overally low dmg, or you just roflstomp someone with instakill => High spikes of damage.

Frequency is one of the things that needs to be balanced, i already said that it's not the most efficient way how to seal the deal.

Doing overall low damage? I don't follow. Bypasses are that does too much damage currently, problem exists within their chance to occur, more bypasses = higher damage overall dealt. Less bypasses ... come on you must understand that. Lowering the damage for bypasses wouldn't touch normal critical bursts, witch are in my opinion strong enough at the moment. Bypasses currently are like adding fuel to to an existing, burning fire.

[Mayck]

To get some put information right.
The previous unaimed criticals had 2-3x multiplier. Now they have 1,5-2x multiplier.
Also about the chances in bypasses on unaimed shots depending on luck
(note: the Guy in CA does not have Man of Steel):


So with LK6 you have aprox 12% chance to experience unaimed bypass when critically hit in CA and attacker has Better Crits. That makes around 3% chance to get bypass critical and 22% chance for normal crit if attacker has 25% critchance. (also on next update bypasses should be visible in log even on lethal criticals, so it will be sure if the hit was bypass or not)

Imho the primary reasons that among the BG(lasor gatling) builds the crit build is most viable choice right now is:
1) on first three perks the reasonable choices are Toughnesses(which give protection only against normal damage type), Weapon Handling and Critical perks (which give a chance to drastically increase damage even to the Toughness chars).
2) The fact that there are no luck requirements on toughness (nor BRD) which created a delusion that luck is dump stat for tanks and thus LK1 chars are easily killed by the critbursters.
3) No inteligence requirements for BROF thus both tanks and damage dealers have 2 or 3 int and lots of spare points to give into luck or other stats.
In the end when creating an anti-critburster tank you end up with high luck and toughnesses... so you can just replace toughnesses with the critical perks and have crit burster instead, because you have protection against bypasses with your high luck.

Imho one of the simpliest solutions to the problem is either make different crittable for critical bursts and singleshot unaimed and alter multipliers or bypass chances, the Jovanka's suggestion with partial bypass, or maybe both.

[T-888]

It's true until other information is provided.

This information had to be provided like ages ago, now need to process the information to conclude the problem.

bypass chances, the Jovanka's suggestion with partial bypass, or maybe both.

Both in my opinion. That i already understood, partial bypass balances out the damage dealt, lower frequency due to normal critical bursts already doing a lot of damage.

hahah it seems Solar provided quite a sloppy chart.

[manero]

imo nonaimed crits are fine since last update. Quite powerfull but ok.

[T-888]

1HKO's still happen, insta-kills should be removed from this game. I don't want normal critical bursts to be less powerful, they already got their fair share of balancing medicine.

[Sarakin]

You dont seem to understand, what I was trying to say, that frequency shouldnt be too high nor too low. The crit. damage is what matters. If you set frequency too low, you would expect to have high crit damage, in other words, instakill, while on the other hand, setting high frequency of crit bursts would expect you to have very low damage.
Frequency and damage should be set somewhere inbetween, where you rely on crits and bypasses to do some serious spike damage, but not that you instakill every other guy on the battlefield.
You should have a choice, either you go with no crits and thus, pure dps should be higher OR you can go with crits, where you might surprise some enemies with high spike damage, but your dps should be lower.

[T-888]

But the whole point of this is to make critical bypasses occur less and do not make insta-kills, that means decreasing frequency and damage dealt by them, if the frequency is low but the damage the same as high as it is right now, you said it yourself.

Lets face it, even if the chance to bypass is 0.01%, it will happen and youll be damn pissed if that happens to you.

That is my opinion that bypasses should be a rarity, and they shouldn't do insta-kills because normal critical bursts are strong enough.

[Sarakin]

I dont mind if critical bypasses occur frequently, what matters is damage, thats what I said.

Now they literally instakill, so even if you set the lowest frequency, it wont change much imo.

[T-888]

Actually in both cases it wouldn't be so bad, to be honest.( don't misunderstand me, low chance+ low damage or same chance + low damage) So i guess that's a decision to make for developers, as well i hope the staff understands what needs to be done, at least can be done.

[Sarakin]

If you set low chance + low damage, build wont be viable anymore. I want to preserve build variability as long as it doesnt hurt overall gameplay.