- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 4,429
- Reaction score
- 34,414
- Points
- 663
- Age
- 33
Magic
So turns out I'm stupid and I never bothered to calculate how badly balanced the Magic regulations were before V2 update, and in hindsight, how badly I crippled mages by not calculating the loss rate of Proficiency points. Here is a quick graph of calculations I did:
As one can see, Mages flat benefited from being mages up until 5 spells, with no real proficiency loss. This basically means that at a base level, mages with up to 5 spells had the exact same skill capacity as non trustee non mages, but got extra utility and often offensive spells for free along with it.
When the V2 rework got out, everyone got horrendously nerfed because of the flat rate loss that wasn't proportional to the point accrue over the years, it was blind to the age of the mage at a minimum level. As such, I have modified the system now to be entirely proportionally dependent on the amount of proficiency points a person could have at minimum were they 14 years old, with a slight exponential curve that happens very strictly at 5 spells and up. This maintains the idea of battle mages being possible, but fairly nerfs early mages with fewer spells down to reasonable levels so that Magic is an actual thing people have to spend years investing into, instead of something that can be tacked on for free and buffing a trustee character with excessive Proficiency stats and abilities.
Magic point changes:
The Vampire calculations were a bit out of whack too. The original system was a lot fairer, then I accidentally nerfed it by forcing a 100% point loss on Vampires, then I un-nerfed that by reducing the point loss to 50% and now I've reduced it further to accomodate the 3 years = 1 Vampire point = -1 Proficiency Point. This last method worked best, and my middle solution of the exponential loss wasn't beneficial, it caused a similar problem to the first Mage calculations where young Vampires were proportionally more OP than older Vampires.
Vampire points changes:
Apologies for those who will have to re-submit their app for review. Generally speaking, a correction like this should not warrant a re-review. You can simply adapt the proficiency points that you've gained (i believe in nearly all circumstances, especially mage and Vampire characters gain additional points they can spend) and just @tag some lore staff member to re-apply the "Approved" thread prefix. Generally speaking if changes remain within the ranges of 10 Proficiency points difference, you don't need a re-review and just need to have the thread re-tagged as approved.
So turns out I'm stupid and I never bothered to calculate how badly balanced the Magic regulations were before V2 update, and in hindsight, how badly I crippled mages by not calculating the loss rate of Proficiency points. Here is a quick graph of calculations I did:
When the V2 rework got out, everyone got horrendously nerfed because of the flat rate loss that wasn't proportional to the point accrue over the years, it was blind to the age of the mage at a minimum level. As such, I have modified the system now to be entirely proportionally dependent on the amount of proficiency points a person could have at minimum were they 14 years old, with a slight exponential curve that happens very strictly at 5 spells and up. This maintains the idea of battle mages being possible, but fairly nerfs early mages with fewer spells down to reasonable levels so that Magic is an actual thing people have to spend years investing into, instead of something that can be tacked on for free and buffing a trustee character with excessive Proficiency stats and abilities.
Magic point changes:
- 0 spell from 0 to 0
- 1 spell from 4 to 0
- 2 spell from 8 to 2
- 3 spell from 12 to 3
- 4 spell from 20 to 5
- 5 spell from 28 to 9
- 6 spell from 36 to 16
- 7 spell from 44 to 29
- 8 spell from 52 to 48
- 9 spell from 60 to 60
- 9 spell from 60 to 60
The Vampire calculations were a bit out of whack too. The original system was a lot fairer, then I accidentally nerfed it by forcing a 100% point loss on Vampires, then I un-nerfed that by reducing the point loss to 50% and now I've reduced it further to accomodate the 3 years = 1 Vampire point = -1 Proficiency Point. This last method worked best, and my middle solution of the exponential loss wasn't beneficial, it caused a similar problem to the first Mage calculations where young Vampires were proportionally more OP than older Vampires.
Vampire points changes:
- 0 muter from 0 to 0
- 1 muter from 3 to 3
- 2 muter from 6 to 6
- 3 muter from 9 to 9
- 4 muter from 13 to 12
- 5 muter from 17 to 15
- 6 muter from 23 to 18
- 7 muter from 28 to 21
- 8 muter from 34 to 24
- 9 muter from 40 to 27
- 10 muter from 40 to 30
Apologies for those who will have to re-submit their app for review. Generally speaking, a correction like this should not warrant a re-review. You can simply adapt the proficiency points that you've gained (i believe in nearly all circumstances, especially mage and Vampire characters gain additional points they can spend) and just @tag some lore staff member to re-apply the "Approved" thread prefix. Generally speaking if changes remain within the ranges of 10 Proficiency points difference, you don't need a re-review and just need to have the thread re-tagged as approved.
Last edited:
