Suggestion Gem Overhaul

Discussion in 'General Archive' started by _Baragain_, Sep 26, 2015.

Dear forum reader,

if you’d like to actively participate on the forum by joining discussions or starting your own threads or topics, please log into the game first. If you do not have a game account, you will need to register for one. We look forward to your next visit! CLICK HERE
?

Does this idea interest you?

  1. Yes.

    62.5%
  2. No.

    4.2%
  3. With some adjustments, yes.

    29.2%
  4. I'm a twink and I hate every idea you have.

    4.2%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. _Baragain_

    _Baragain_ Living Forum Legend

    The History:
    Gems are a necessary evil. Without them, your character can be OK, but not great. A long time ago (when LVL 40 was still the cap), they only got a big as polished. Then, when people started hitting the wall of improvement, they introduced radiant and flawless gems. This helped and allowed people to improve more, but again people started to hit that point of diminishing returns. So along came sacred and royal gems.

    The Problem:
    However, there is a problem. If they keep raising the level cap, even these top tier gems will be relatively insignificant. Take for example a LVL 45 character with 5 sacred amethysts. That is 500 HP. The character then levels up to 50. Those gems are still just 500 HP. Now lets say that LVL 55 comes out. It is still just 500 HP. Now imagine 5 years from now and they have LVL 75. Do you think that 500 HP from 5 sacred amethysts will still be significant? It is doubtful that it will be more than a drop in the proverbial bucket. Sure they could introduce another tier above royal gems, but then we just enter the realm of absurdity when it comes to the real life cost of these gems. The alternative problem exists too. While gems at high levels are going to get less and less useful, at low level, they are ridiculously OP. If you have a LVL 10 twink, they could have 4K HP, 500 Resist, 1500 armor, 500 damage... crazy high stats for a low level player and then they ruin PvP for low level players who aren't spending thousands on their character. And anyone who has been on the forums for any significant length of time knows my opinion on twinks.

    The Solution:
    I never start a topic that is balance related without having a plan of how to fix it.
    The answer is rather simple actually. For gems that are not already % based (Like Sapphires, the Solstice Star, or Jewel of Rage), you can make them scale. Taking polished amethysts or polished rubies for example.
    LVL RangeAmethystsRubies
    1-1052
    11-1573
    16-2094
    21-25125
    26-30166
    31-35217
    36-40278
    41-453310
    46-504012

    Right off the bat, everyone is going to say "Wait! That isn't fair! 2 damage for a polished ruby? They are worth 6400 andarmant!" My response to them is "What normal LVL 10 is going to have 5x polished rubies or even 1 polished ruby?" My other response is "They will also gain 1 damage each as soon as the level up." Leveling up from 1 to 11 takes less than an hour, and leveling up from 11 to 16 takes another hour.

    The other complaints would be with respect to the lower tier gems. The don't need to be too heavily nerfed. In fact, if a flawed ruby stayed at 1 damage from LVL 1 all the way to LVL 35 or 40, I'd be fine with that because at low levels, it would help close the gaps between twinks and normal players but at higher levels, it would still encourage people to keep upgrading their gems. The selection of the values for each gem at the lower tiers would have to be carefully considered, but I'm just laying the ground work. The people at BP with 4 year degrees in video game design and gem math would have to calculate where the balance lies. :p

    The Benefits:
    Without doubt, this would upset Twinks immensely... and guess what, I DON'T CARE! I think that this, along with limiting how much an item can be upgraded with glyphs (no more than 5 levels beyond the character's XP level) would single handedly fix low level PvP, and anything that can fix that mess can not, by definition, be a bad thing. :D

    The other benefit that this would have is that it future proofs gems. As I stated in the problem section if the gems continue to use the current system, they will be next to useless in a couple of years or impossibly expensive to keep relevant in the future.

    The Question:
    How can this be better or what is wrong with this idea? I'm not perfect and this idea was developed in the middle of the night while I was half asleep. Please feel free to offer constructive comments as to how this system could be refined or issues you see with the system. Twinks, please go troll newbies in the game. Your input is not welcome here as you are one of the things that is wrong with this game to begin with. Go level up and then your comments will be worth listening to again.
     
  2. silverseas

    silverseas Forum Duke

    The gem types that probably benefit most from this kind of scaling would be res, cyanites and onyxes. It kind of sucks how every time you level, the % bonuses you get from these gems plummets. :v
     
  3. _Baragain_

    _Baragain_ Living Forum Legend

    True, but the other gems lose their value relative to the damage the monsters do, the HP that they have, that sort of thing. The only gems that really don't get impacted much by leveling up are the % ones because it is just as useful at low levels as high level ones.
     
  4. _Baragain_

    _Baragain_ Living Forum Legend

    But you aren't losing damage so there is no reason to refund any andermant. You'd simply need to level up as the game is designed and you'd gain it back. This is to encourage people not to stay low and spend tons of andermant for the purpose of exploiting the benefits of their high tier gems at the expense of the newer players who are just trying to enjoy the game and all it has to offer without having to spend hours and days and months farming without leveling up.

    I say again, nothing is lost in the long run... actually you'd gain in the long run, but those who are staying low just so that they can be OP would be nerfed down to reasonable levels and have no option but to level up.
     
  5. sebastian_fl

    sebastian_fl Count Count

    I like idea, even though it is not going to happen :) I would change the scale a little bit to incorporate lower tier gems. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 for rubies for levels up to 10, 20, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50

    Why shouldn't sapphires get scaled too? Even though they are % based. Twinks will switch to speed builds and get 10 sapphires to get speed to 2.01 or something on a very low lvl. I would also prohibit using gems above polished for the levels before 20-25, and flawless for ones below 30, royal below 45 or something like that.
     
    _Baragain_ likes this.
  6. _Baragain_

    _Baragain_ Living Forum Legend

    That's why I leave it up to the "professionals." They obviously know more about this game than we do. :p
    Good point. I guess the only safe gems would be the ones that are truly % based off of other level related stats like the Solstice Star or the Jewel of Rage. It's 1% speed and the fact that they are rather rare, even on twinks, wouldn't be significant enough to make it go either way.
     
    sebastian_fl likes this.
  7. fab

    fab Advanced

    For example:

    If you combine 3 polished rubies ( 10 damage ) = 1 radiant ruby ( 15 damage )
    and that is already way too much shortchanging from my view, it should be at least 20-25 damage for a radiant ruby.
    Their prices is really very steep for those offensive gems and they should give back a little more rather than sticking to their own way of viewing.
    3 polished rubies = 1 radiant ( 15 damage )
    3 polished sapphire = 1 radiant ( 6.5 speed )
    3 polished onxy = 1 radiant ( 170 critical hit value ), it be about 200-220 for a radiant onxy
    FOR onxy should be a little higher as recently critical have been nerf real bad !
    I personally think at least a minimum of 75-80% increased values should be implemented for those expensive offensive gems, and for defensive gems should be about a 45-55% increased in values as they doesn't cost not as much as those offensive gems.
    ALIEN GEM is on their way, xD
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2015
  8. Shiladitya

    Shiladitya Padavan

    Low level twinking really hurts at the beginning levels 8-20. <- If data were researched on how many players created account on DSO and how many gave up DSO I can bet all my money that that is the level range where they will find maximum dropouts. That being the case those dropouts are mainly people who either have no idea of how pvp works, how their characters work, how to incorporate different things to make ur char better, in other words what people would call noobs, noobs either to the game or to MMO-RPGs in general or to PVP in general.

    Having a nerfed gem system wont help in that base because noobs would still lose because they just dont have any idea that having a flawed ruby in your weapon can increase your damage or a flawed amethyst can increase your hp. they have no idea that improved items give 1 extra stat and legend gives 4 extra stat. Thus your idea is very good indeed baragain but I believe it should only be incorporated from level 20 onwards.

    So how do players pvp in those levels?

    1> Only duels/3v3 allowed before level 20.
    2> all players wear default white gear scaled to level.
    3> Knowledge or Fame do not have any impact on pvp in those levels.
    4> Jewels dont have any impact in those levels.
    5> There is no "death".
    6> There is a timer.
    7> Points are distributed according to whoever does more damage or whoever hits the enemy more number of times.
    8> Once the match is over the winner or loser is announced along with the point distribution showed.
    Eg: Player 1: Player strikes:15 , Player Damage: 55; Total Points: 70.
    Player 2: Player strikes: 12, Player damage: 47; Total points: 59.
    Player 1 Wins.
    9> Along with this class based suggestions are shown of how to improve, such as:
    For DK: "Dk's have to run in close to their opponents. They are a melee class. The 'charge' skill helps to get you close to your opponents, as well as escape from dangerous situations."
    Similar suggestions like the one shown now on DSO when a player dies, only skill related, Not "Get stronger by combining 3 polished gems into radiant gems" -_-

    10> Once the players gradually get into the groove of their characters and know how to use them efficiently, they are ready for the next step. By that time since they were doing pve till level 20 they will get familiar with items, gems, uniques, etc. Now they are released into the real pvp world . There on they can buy gems and stuff for pvp but only within limits as per your suggestion. They can wear items upgraded to maximum 5 levels + and buy gems which are scaled.


    The win/loss system need a bit of modification because obviously different base stats of items and base speed of items will have an impact on the points, but modified and properly calculated, this system can:
    1> Remove low level twinks.
    2> Encourage people to do more pvp.
    3> help increase interest of the player in skills and the class itself.
    4> Not be frightening,confusing and disappointing, it would remind people that in the end this is just a game.

    This is just something I thought up randomly so it will have flaws.
    I hope DSO listens and implements this, but given their love of money from twinks, I can barely imagine.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2015
  9. tothmartin

    tothmartin Someday Author

    Dear Support,

    after the level extension the (especially the damage gems) became useless. I see double handed weapons with 90 damage magic bonus and a legendary item can have 4 similar value. If I compare this with a royal gem, it has only 31 damage bonus.
    I estimate the following values should apply on lvl50:

    Royal damage:50-60
    Royal Speed 15-17%
    Health and resistance: 180
    And also + 30% on critical hit and defense stones.

    In the past there was a gnob glove which gave 10% attack speed now if you have luck, a legend can have up to 40% attack speed.
    The other types are less affected but should be tuned to have the real value according to the costs and effectiveness.

    P.S: My topic was moved here, sorry that I did not check it first :)

    --MERGED--

    Was this idea forwarded to the developers? The stones are weak now we need this addition or let us to have 6 slots in an item on lvl 50...
     
    Last edited by moderator: Nov 5, 2015
  10. Mal3ficent

    Mal3ficent Guest

    Yes it was.

    Cheers.
     
  11. MegaNuker

    MegaNuker Forum Ambassador

    Another suggestion along this line is an item like buff that increases only a certain type of gem. The trade off is you have to pic you buff and blessings well.

    Suggested buffs for 50. Damage Gems +25% Armor Gems +5% and
    Oynx gems +10% HP +20%. Hmm let's suggest one for speed and resistance. Saph +15% Resistance +15%.

    And every 5 levels increase the %s.
     
  12. misterbean

    misterbean Padavan

    This is exactly what I was thinking about. Our resistance has decreased and will decrease even further at levels 55 and then 60. We will need 3k-4k resistance and it's impossible to get this with these low gems. An increase in the stats of the gems will be very welcome.
     
    _Baragain_ likes this.
  13. Darwarren

    Darwarren Count Count

    The sliding scale is a great idea for the next major change in leveling.
    BP is more likely to do another reinvention of the game, trashing thousands of toons in the process, and giving us another round of rants and desertions. That will give them plenty of things to fix and balance, and keep their routines intact.
     
    _Baragain_ and Shiladitya like this.
  14. BigPapa

    BigPapa Forum Overlooker

    Can anyone confirm a value change for Amethyst's and Diamond's in R158? Heard some rumors.
     
  15. _Baragain_

    _Baragain_ Living Forum Legend

    Interesting... they have changed... almost all of the higher tier ones have! I'll add the new values I can scrounge to my test server thread tomorrow if someone doesn't beat me to it, but to give you a taste, +10 rubies are now +11 and +15 rubies are now +16 and radiant sapphires are up to 6.60 as opposed to 6.50.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2015
  16. littlemichel

    littlemichel Active Author

    radiant Amethyst ,diamond and cyanite become 70 ,for polish become 45
     
  17. Poor_man_song

    Poor_man_song Forum Greenhorn

    that's so humble :oops:

    Ultimate cap is level 60, it will take decades for L75 :D

    As long as you can purchase your strength, forget the word balance, (oh well bank balance still matters...

    r158 brings will power gem, and you'll met flying thunder gods very soon
    with infinite life (bug)

    and there're more gems soon to come

    You can set a required level to gems, it won't fix
    You can change values, it won't fix
    You can make them scalable, it won't fix
    You can set them on percentages, it won't fix
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2015
  18. Jettemee

    Jettemee Junior Expert

    Baragain, I'm glad you initiated a thread on this matter about the need for a revamped gem model. This was long overdue since the dawn of the game.

    Right after I retired from DSO, I sent Bigpoint a message on my two cents about what I thought needed change that ultimately lead to my decision to leave. Your topic outlines exactly one of my underlying complaints.

    [image removed]


    I had made a similar chart but had adjusted crafting values.
    Here's the example chart for polished ruby by level grouping.

    LevelMultiplierPolished Ruby(base 2)
    1-10 1 2
    11-15 1 2
    16-20 2 4
    21-25 2.5 5
    26-30 3 6
    31-35 4 8
    36-40 5 10
    41-45 6 12
    46-50 7 14
    Now, what I meant by adjusting combining values. Observe. This is what it was at level 45 a few months ago.

    Now:`````1-2-3-5-10-15-20-25-31
    Revamped: 1-2-4-7-11-16-22-29-37


    Whenever we combine three gems of your choice, you get the next value up. Now the interval from a full ruby to a polished ruby is a massive 5 points. The intervals between whatever former and latter tiers needs to be smoothed out (like those curved graphs, not sure what it's called), and not rough 1-1-2-5-5 jumps...., more like 1-1-2-3-4-5-6 is suitable.

    I see that R158 is going to bring some value adjustments to accommodate the level 50 cap. I think all gems need a rework, including sapphires and most definitely rubies as they give too little value for endgamers. Those cyanites were a joke, but luckily you could build your armor value through gear alone. Alright, enough bashing on the botched gem system. :D (@devs: I'm sorry but the gems definitely need to through a revision process as it was lopsided from the start.)

    I also support capping the max upgradeability of any gear to 5 levels above the toon's current level. Anyway...

    Good luck Baragain & forumers! I hope the end of the twink era is nigh.


    *Fine Print: I must confess, I've built a twink but by no means loaded it with nothing more than a several polished gems and some moderate glyph farming (pfffft, like I'm a threat to a full royaled and fully glyphed level 20 toon). No, I'm not a hypocrite, I wanted to contend with the twinks (twink killer? lol) but still got my butt handed to me. I was honorable if I was rematched with apparent weaker ones often giving out wins. Now that R155 negates the need to PvP in order to get those convenient supportive skills, mainly stun breaker, twinking isn't such big a deal but still the unfairness remains. Ok, I'm clean! :p
     
    Last edited by moderator: Nov 9, 2015
  19. Master0fpuppets

    Master0fpuppets Forum Baron

  20. _Baragain_

    _Baragain_ Living Forum Legend

    I agree that R158 is a step in the right direction for the end game players , but it still favors twinks and is not future proofed. I like your idea. The "base value" idea combined with multipliers based on level is elegant and easy to understand. The base values would need to be calibrated like you said and the multipliers too, but it is a quality idea. Thanks for sharing.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page