Brand Build Testing

The tower awaits!

Re: Brand Build Testing

Postby Ferret » Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:14 am

Ah, ok. :) Stat penalties yielding too much bonus for the impact may get addressed in the re-balancing I'm doing for the next build: I may also address it from the other side and have those bonuses have less impact on certain Brand modifiers too though. It'll depend on what I end up thinking the problem is :D

Hmm.. I don't think I want to go down the road of giving extra bonus for "mismatches". Most mismatches are fairly easy to nudge a demon into taking advantage of. There would probably also be disagreements on what is a mismatch and should be rewarded, and what isn't. Unless something very glaring pops up, I think I'll have the Brands play things as they fall for now. Something else to remember is that there are currently more Brands available, and more easily, than will necessarily be the case in the release build for Brands: those "mismatched" Brands will become more valuable simply because you can't be certain you'll find a "perfect" version, or even a better one, that gives the same type of effect.
User avatar
Ferret
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 3:18 pm

Re: Brand Build Testing

Postby Ferret » Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:57 pm

Wow. :o The "two Brands spawning on the same space" bug was in some very old code: it wasn't specific to Brands, it was about Items in general.

I was in fact, trying to check to make sure there were no Portals or Items on at a spawnPosition before spawning an Item (including Brands) there... but this check was being foiled by the fact that a spawnPosition actually includes a 3x3 sqauare so that it can handle group spawning used by enemies, the spawnPosition I was checking is only the center position.

What this means is that, if I had an Item at say, (3,5), and I checked (3,5), it'd come back as a bad spawn. But if I checked (3,6), (3,6) could come back as valid... and then decide to put it in (3,5) anyway. In essence, I was checking one step too early. But I've apparently been doing it wrong since the first Items were added to the game, making this a very old bug indeed. :)

Thanks again for the report!
User avatar
Ferret
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 3:18 pm

Re: Brand Build Testing

Postby Saler » Tue Apr 30, 2019 9:58 am

Saw a level 1 brand with “no passive abilities” condition and “-26% Sp costs” and “-1 cunning”. That might be a bit much. I'm not quite sure – Tormentor + Ritualist would save more SP, and Lifeweaver and Blessweaver are roughly the same. It would also be blocked by great abilities like Bloodthirst, Vigorous and Warmth. However, it still slows Auras and reactives, and not having the earlier mentioned passives gives you more slots to fit these in. I don't think it's too bad, but it is something to watch out for. If there is a problem, then it's caused by “no passive abilities” giving too many extra benefits.
Ferret wrote:It's funny because I mostly intended them to be a support unit: the one attack and the high Strength were more a nod to them being bears than anything else. :D
Saler
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 3:05 pm

Re: Brand Build Testing

Postby Ferret » Thu May 02, 2019 1:05 am

-SP% Costs already got the stuffing nerfed out of it in upcoming build #8. :D Also, very high "boon bonus" %s given by negative modifiers/restrictions have diminishing returns now, so that would also help I think.

That may cause that Brand you mentioned to end up fairly iffy, but on the other hand, it IS a Level 1 Brand, something you'd find long before you actually had access to a great many useful passives. :)
User avatar
Ferret
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 3:18 pm

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron