If the prices and the use of major runes has been so small compared to minor and major runes is because of the great health penalty they inflinge and the smaller benefit they provide. (Sacrifiing 75 instead of 50 and you get a major one)
If arenanet wants players to use major runes as often as the others, they should consider reducing the health penalty to -25/-30, so that it becomes affordable to be used by players.
Major runes health penalty should be lowered
Deathwingg00
Mordakai
I think most people agree, the question is how much?
If a sup rune is +3 for -75 HP, then wouldn't two +2 maj runes be better for a net +4 att at -50/-60 HP?
Of course, +3 in a single att is more useful than +4 accross two att, so I think -50 HP for a maj is too much.
But I'm thinking -35 Hp for major.
If a sup rune is +3 for -75 HP, then wouldn't two +2 maj runes be better for a net +4 att at -50/-60 HP?
Of course, +3 in a single att is more useful than +4 accross two att, so I think -50 HP for a maj is too much.
But I'm thinking -35 Hp for major.
Deathwingg00
That's the idea.
Currently:
+1 -> -0
+2 -> -50
+3 -> -75 (I sacrifice only 25 more and get full rune)
+1+1 -> -0
+1+2 -> -50
+1+3 -> -75
+2+2 -> -100
+2+3 -> -125
+3+3 -> -150
If we reduce it to -30 we would have:
+1 -> -0
+2 -> -30
+3 -> -75 (I sacrifice over the double, maybe not so interesting)
+1+1 -> -0
+1+2 -> -30
+1+3 -> -75
+2+2 -> -60
+2+3 -> -105
+3+3 -> -150
We have to keep in mind that the +3 rune allows you to get benefits of having 16 points on an attribute, whereas the +2 rune does not.
In conclusion, the power a +3 rune gives you is much greater than the +2 rune, still the penalty of a +2 rune is as bad. And definitely, if people don't use major runes is because of that big health penaly
Currently:
+1 -> -0
+2 -> -50
+3 -> -75 (I sacrifice only 25 more and get full rune)
+1+1 -> -0
+1+2 -> -50
+1+3 -> -75
+2+2 -> -100
+2+3 -> -125
+3+3 -> -150
If we reduce it to -30 we would have:
+1 -> -0
+2 -> -30
+3 -> -75 (I sacrifice over the double, maybe not so interesting)
+1+1 -> -0
+1+2 -> -30
+1+3 -> -75
+2+2 -> -60
+2+3 -> -105
+3+3 -> -150
We have to keep in mind that the +3 rune allows you to get benefits of having 16 points on an attribute, whereas the +2 rune does not.
In conclusion, the power a +3 rune gives you is much greater than the +2 rune, still the penalty of a +2 rune is as bad. And definitely, if people don't use major runes is because of that big health penaly
quickmonty
Sounds like a good idea. I would like to see the cost of major runes increase.
Sevanyr
35hp would be enough to peak my interest in using these runes.
/signed
/signed
Mentalmdc
If you imagine runes as a number of attribute points saved to get to level 12 then we find that a major runes saves 36 points (20+16) with a 50 penalty, and a superior saves saves 49 (20+16+13) with a 75 penalty
Ratio of - Points Saved : Health Lost
Major - 36:50 / 18:25
Superior - 49:75 / 16:25 (its actually 16.3 however u cant spen a third of a point, can you!?!)
Therefore a Major actually gives you more spare attribute ponts per health point lost than a superior does. Maybe people are just under-estimating the usefulness of a major rune.
Now a minor rune beats both the major and superior if calculated in the same way, giving a wopping 20 points saved for no health loss making it a ratio of 20:0 (which i think calculates as oo:25 but i'm not really sure what happens with ratios of zero
)
I have always used a superior and a major or two majors on the 2 main attributes that i am using and i dont seem to have health issues.
I suppose its really down to opinion, but if your not trying to max out (16 points) an attribute line then majors are the way to go.
-THE M-
P.S. I hope my calculations are correct
Ratio of - Points Saved : Health Lost
Major - 36:50 / 18:25
Superior - 49:75 / 16:25 (its actually 16.3 however u cant spen a third of a point, can you!?!)
Therefore a Major actually gives you more spare attribute ponts per health point lost than a superior does. Maybe people are just under-estimating the usefulness of a major rune.
Now a minor rune beats both the major and superior if calculated in the same way, giving a wopping 20 points saved for no health loss making it a ratio of 20:0 (which i think calculates as oo:25 but i'm not really sure what happens with ratios of zero
)I have always used a superior and a major or two majors on the 2 main attributes that i am using and i dont seem to have health issues.
I suppose its really down to opinion, but if your not trying to max out (16 points) an attribute line then majors are the way to go.
-THE M-
P.S. I hope my calculations are correct
jummeth
conversely when you go over 12 attribs, does that mean the attribute cost becomes infinite there for the cost:health ratio is infinite?
30-35 is a decent figure. I'd go for it.
Atm, the only class I'd consider getting maj runes for is a monk since the sups are stupid prices.
30-35 is a decent figure. I'd go for it.
Atm, the only class I'd consider getting maj runes for is a monk since the sups are stupid prices.
Deathwingg00
The problem imho is that minor runes do not have health penaly. The only way to make major runes be somewhat worthy is either by having minor runes with -25 health or major runes with -25/-30/-35 health.
Now look at this:
+1+1+1+1 = +4 (+0) -> -0
+1+1+1+2 = +5 (+1) -> -50
+1+1+1+3 = +6 (+2) -> -75 (One attribute at 16)
+1+1+2+2 = +6 (+2) -> -100 (Why -100 instead of -75? No attribute at 16)
+1+1+2+3 = +7 (+3) -> -125
+1+1+3+3 = +8 (+4) -> -150 (One attribute at 16 and another at 15)
+1+2+2+2 = +8 (+4) -> -150 (Why? No attribute at 16, maximum one at 15)
Please remember that the +3 rune allows you to reach 16 points on your attribute which gives you the best results, whereas +2 rune does not.
Now look at this:
+1+1+1+1 = +4 (+0) -> -0
+1+1+1+2 = +5 (+1) -> -50
+1+1+1+3 = +6 (+2) -> -75 (One attribute at 16)
+1+1+2+2 = +6 (+2) -> -100 (Why -100 instead of -75? No attribute at 16)
+1+1+2+3 = +7 (+3) -> -125
+1+1+3+3 = +8 (+4) -> -150 (One attribute at 16 and another at 15)
+1+2+2+2 = +8 (+4) -> -150 (Why? No attribute at 16, maximum one at 15)
Please remember that the +3 rune allows you to reach 16 points on your attribute which gives you the best results, whereas +2 rune does not.
Mentalmdc
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jummeth
conversely when you go over 12 attribs, does that mean the attribute cost becomes infinite there for the cost:health ratio is infinite?
|
It is impossible to have more than 12 points without runes/hat, which does not mean an infinate cost if we were able to use points for more than 12 attribs then their cost would increase by more and more each time e.g,
Attrib Level 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16
Point Difference 13 - 16 - 20 - 25 - 31 - 37
Point Increase 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7
This would further reinforce my point.
-THE M-
Mentalmdc
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Deathwingg00
The problem imho is that minor runes do not have health penaly. The only way to make major runes be somewhat worthy is either by having minor runes with -25 health or major runes with -25/-30/-35 health.
|
Major runes seem like they are worse off because minor runes are astoundingly better than Major or superior if health is a key issue. If health is not a issue then there is no point in even arguing about it on this thread as the best results would obviously be obtained from all superior runes.
The key here is to get a balance between health loss and attribute gain and it is because minor runes allow an attribute gain with no health loss that people are loadthed to pay a 50hp penalty for one extra attrib. If minor runes were increased to 25hp penalty then nobody would ever think that majors had anything wrong with them. It is therefore not majors that need a buff, but minors that need a nerf, and as most people are opposed to nerfing skills/items, they do not notice the unfair advantage that a minor gives, and believe that it is major that bears the problem.
hopefully this will make people reconsider.
-THE M-
NatalieD
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mentalmdc
If you imagine runes as a number of attribute points saved to get to level 12
|
Quote:
|
but i'm not really sure what happens with ratios of zero
|
quickmonty
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mentalmdc
The key here is to get a balance between health loss and attribute gain and it is because minor runes allow an attribute gain with no health loss that people are loadthed to pay a 50hp penalty for one extra attrib. If minor runes were increased to 25hp penalty then nobody would ever think that majors had anything wrong with them. It is therefore not majors that need a buff, but minors that need a nerf, and as most people are opposed to nerfing skills/items, they do not notice the unfair advantage that a minor gives, and believe that it is major that bears the problem.
hopefully this will make people reconsider. -THE M- |
Deathwingg00
Now from the player's view (and considering the PvP issue) minor runes might not be able to get nerfed, though it would be considerable, nerfing them right now would also damage the PvE economy, really badly, because runes pre-nerfed would be worth a lot and they are all around everywhere. So the best solution afaik is to decrease health penalty on major runes.
Hunter Sharparrow
Not sure what this 1+1+3+1 stuff is for. Runes of the same kind don't stack so you can't have four minor runes of swordsmanship to get +4 in it at 0hp loss while a +3 rune gives -75hp. I agree that the -hp for a major is too high and should be a number in between 0 and 75 so either 37 or 38. How about giving the minor a -25hp. +1/-25hp, +2/-50hp, +3/-75hp so for every increase in the attribute there is a 25hp drop this way too the vigor runes could provide the amount of hp the other runes take away so minor +25hp, major +50hp and superior +75hp.
Deathwingg00
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hunter Sharparrow
Not sure what this 1+1+3+1 stuff is for. Runes of the same kind don't stack so you can't have four minor runes of swordsmanship to get +4 in it at 0hp loss while a +3 rune gives -75hp.
|
Mentalmdc
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Deathwingg00
Now from the player's view (and considering the PvP issue) minor runes might not be able to get nerfed, though it would be considerable, nerfing them right now would also damage the PvE economy, really badly, because runes pre-nerfed would be worth a lot and they are all around everywhere. So the best solution afaik is to decrease health penalty on major runes.
|
They changed all the items that had allready been bought, i'm sure they could do this with minor runes too
Plague
I personally still wouldn't use them. 20 HP doesn't go much of a way. I'd still use Sup runes.
Really, you either have to look at it in a way that Sup runes are always better (superior, in the case of vigors and absorbtion - why use anything else?) or look at runes as a ladder. Minors have no negatives, Superiors have heavy downsides, and Majors... well, are crappy Superiors.
Make them have another affect, such as reducing energy or damage dealt or increasing points of damage dealt when hit. -2 maximum energy, -3 damage from all attacks, +2 damage when hit.
Really, you either have to look at it in a way that Sup runes are always better (superior, in the case of vigors and absorbtion - why use anything else?) or look at runes as a ladder. Minors have no negatives, Superiors have heavy downsides, and Majors... well, are crappy Superiors.
Make them have another affect, such as reducing energy or damage dealt or increasing points of damage dealt when hit. -2 maximum energy, -3 damage from all attacks, +2 damage when hit.
Mr D J
/signed
Mandy Memory
I suggest -40 for major. (Just my idea)
M3lk0r
/signed
Would really help rangers with utility builds. I would imagince damage (wars and air/earth eles) classes still need +3.
Would really help rangers with utility builds. I would imagince damage (wars and air/earth eles) classes still need +3.
Deathwingg00
Looks like the health penalty reduction on major runes is seen generally in a positive way by everyone. At least we all do agree that the -50 health penalty is simple too much.
Hello Kitty
/.signed
Anet plz make us -35 major runes! >_<
Anet plz make us -35 major runes! >_<
SpeedyKQ
/signed
I think -25 or -30 would be the best balance.
I think -25 or -30 would be the best balance.
Undivine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mentalmdc
Do you remeber how they nerfed the leutenents helm from denravi??
They changed all the items that had allready been bought, i'm sure they could do this with minor runes too |
What your math isn't showing is the strategy behind people's decisions. You shouldn't think of it as "saving attribute points vs. health," you should think of it as "reaching a high rank vs health."
Deathwingg00
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Undivine
No, doing so doesn't just change the runes... it changes everyone's armor! Care to buy your FoW armor all over again?
What your math isn't showing is the strategy behind people's decisions. You shouldn't think of it as "saving attribute points vs. health," you should think of it as "reaching a high rank vs health." |
What it is indeed very pointless is your argument about buying your FoW armor all over again... what the heck does that have to do mate? If you don't like the rune on it, replace it for another one. As simple as that. If you fear health penalty, simply replace that rune for a minor vigor that does nothing and you're all done. Peruse!
d4nowar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Undivine
No, doing so doesn't just change the runes... it changes everyone's armor! Care to buy your FoW armor all over again?
|
NatalieD
Undivine was talking about the idea of adding a health loss to minor runes. I don't think there's any way to override an existing rune with no rune.
Blaarg
You couldn't do no rune, but you wouldn't have to rebuy, just use a bunch of minor vigors instead 
kvndoom
Minor runes don't need a penalty. The reason you pick your primary class is because you get one attribute (Fast Casting, Strength, etc) that's exclusive to that class, and you are able to increase your primary class' power with runes and armor. Minor runes are a small boost with no penalty. Without penalty you have the ability to get up to 14 in one primary attribute, and up to 13 in all others. If a health penalty was put on Minor runes, people would stop using them too. And still no one would use Major runes.
Other than Absoption and Vigor, Major Runes are practically unused. As they stand now, Major attribute runes could be removed from the game entirely and hardly anyone would care. It certainly wouldn't hurt the economy, since they have no value whatsoever. Most Minor Runes are worth more than their Major counterparts. It's either Minor or Superior. All or nothing, so to speak. I agree with the -25 or -30 for Major Runes. Some health loss, but not as large a gain as with Superiors.
OR... make Superior Runes -100 HP. Heh. There would be some very happy Monks in China if that happened though.
Other than Absoption and Vigor, Major Runes are practically unused. As they stand now, Major attribute runes could be removed from the game entirely and hardly anyone would care. It certainly wouldn't hurt the economy, since they have no value whatsoever. Most Minor Runes are worth more than their Major counterparts. It's either Minor or Superior. All or nothing, so to speak. I agree with the -25 or -30 for Major Runes. Some health loss, but not as large a gain as with Superiors.
OR... make Superior Runes -100 HP. Heh. There would be some very happy Monks in China if that happened though.
VitisVinifera
/signed
I do consider this a no-brainer. I don't think there is a single person who would use a major except for Vigor or Abs. When an entire class of items are useless, I don't think Anet intended on this. They might as well do away with major runes, or balance them between minor and sup.
oh yeah I'd love to see them have some value as well
I do consider this a no-brainer. I don't think there is a single person who would use a major except for Vigor or Abs. When an entire class of items are useless, I don't think Anet intended on this. They might as well do away with major runes, or balance them between minor and sup.
oh yeah I'd love to see them have some value as well
Nevin
The way I see it right now when I'm composing a build is.
Minor runes by default, they have no negative effect- But I could be more powerful, and I have a lot of extra HP so hmm... Loose 50 hp and gain 2 attrib points in what I want... Or I could loose just 25 more and get another attrib point. When 25 more health gone is compared to 50 health gone, it doesn't seem like a big loss.
All in all, I think runes are balanced out fine. And they also added health giving armor sets, which are to help the players with this issue. A health giving armor set gives I think... 35 Health.
As a caster..
35 Health Armor
50 Superior Vig Rune
30 Staff Head
30 Staff Wrapping
Thats 145 HP to blow off on runes, not too bad.
Minor runes by default, they have no negative effect- But I could be more powerful, and I have a lot of extra HP so hmm... Loose 50 hp and gain 2 attrib points in what I want... Or I could loose just 25 more and get another attrib point. When 25 more health gone is compared to 50 health gone, it doesn't seem like a big loss.
All in all, I think runes are balanced out fine. And they also added health giving armor sets, which are to help the players with this issue. A health giving armor set gives I think... 35 Health.
As a caster..
35 Health Armor
50 Superior Vig Rune
30 Staff Head
30 Staff Wrapping
Thats 145 HP to blow off on runes, not too bad.
Sientir
I'm /signing this, particularly because I think it is crazy that you have to have a superior vigor rune just to overwrite the penalty from a major rune. I do use major runes though. >.>
Deathwingg00
I'd like to have more people signing this if possible How may we know what the developers think about it?
How may we know what the developers think about it?
Cjlr
Anyone else always think of matrices when this comes up?
[1 1 1 1 0
1 1 1 2 50
1 1 1 3 75
1 1 2 2 100
1 1 2 3 125
1 2 2 2 150]
and so on? Always comes to my mind. What you can do with it, that's a little tougher to work out.
[1 1 1 1 0
1 1 1 2 50
1 1 1 3 75
1 1 2 2 100
1 1 2 3 125
1 2 2 2 150]
and so on? Always comes to my mind. What you can do with it, that's a little tougher to work out.
Deathwingg00
Update - Thursday June 1
Decreased the Health penalty on attribute-boosting major runes from 50 to 35. Existing runes are unaffected.
Thanks ArenaNet and NCsoft.
Decreased the Health penalty on attribute-boosting major runes from 50 to 35. Existing runes are unaffected.
Thanks ArenaNet and NCsoft.
Tuoba Hturt Eht
Thumbs up, ANET, for listening to the players.
Keep up the good work aye.
Keep up the good work aye.
Deathwingg00
New penalty table:
+1+1+1+1 = +4 (+0) -> -0
+1+1+1+2 = +5 (+1) -> -35 [-35 jump]
+1+1+1+3 = +6 (+2) -> -75 (One attribute at 16) [-40 jump]
+1+1+2+2 = +6 (+2) -> -70 (No attribute at 16) [-35 jump]
+1+1+2+3 = +7 (+3) -> -110 [-35/-40 jump]
+1+1+3+3 = +8 (+4) -> -150 (One attribute at 16 and another at 15) [-40/-75 jump]
+1+2+2+2 = +8 (+4) -> -105 (No attribute at 16; 1 attribute at 15) [-35/+5 jump]
+1+1+1+1 = +4 (+0) -> -0
+1+1+1+2 = +5 (+1) -> -35 [-35 jump]
+1+1+1+3 = +6 (+2) -> -75 (One attribute at 16) [-40 jump]
+1+1+2+2 = +6 (+2) -> -70 (No attribute at 16) [-35 jump]
+1+1+2+3 = +7 (+3) -> -110 [-35/-40 jump]
+1+1+3+3 = +8 (+4) -> -150 (One attribute at 16 and another at 15) [-40/-75 jump]
+1+2+2+2 = +8 (+4) -> -105 (No attribute at 16; 1 attribute at 15) [-35/+5 jump]
Symeon
Congratulations on this, and thanks to ArenaNet and NCsoft.
I'm sorry to say it, but this thread now has to be closed
.
I'm sorry to say it, but this thread now has to be closed
.