Jump to content

Kubik

Client Developer
  • Content Count

    1534
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Metagross31 liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Change Quest more than once.   
    I will post here all the actual logic of of that feature:
    🀣 yes this one line is all the logic. In total 39 lines was changed (including empty lines) because I decided to put it to new file, because that makes more sense to me, and I also added config option to skip/use this one line, and 2 new functions UI can use read write this config option πŸ™‚
    But it is not done, there are two kinds of "Client Developers", and UI (the checkbox) to enable it in game will not be added any time soon, even thou it is most probably low effort task it is quite deep in the priority stack.
    In comparison this feature requires Server developer, and most probably both kinds of client developers, to make it work, so I can not add few lines, to make it working without UI on my own 😞
  2. Volin liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    I never heard about any game having boosters random, and I think it would be stupid decision, to make it random.
  3. Xamos liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    And merged, so it will go out with next patch for the main server, I guess UI will not be ready by then, so in config.json in section "ui", add "randomize_cards_in_booster" with value true, and be surprised when when it starts working πŸ™‚
  4. Xamos liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    πŸ€” to me personally it sound stupid to not have them in defined order, but designers seems to like to have it as an option, so here is an preview:



  5. Metagross31 liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    And merged, so it will go out with next patch for the main server, I guess UI will not be ready by then, so in config.json in section "ui", add "randomize_cards_in_booster" with value true, and be surprised when when it starts working πŸ™‚
  6. Dallarian liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    πŸ˜› no πŸ˜› I made only a config option for it πŸ˜› I am not touching that GUI πŸ˜› you can make it yourself πŸ˜›
  7. Mynoduesp liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    πŸ˜› no πŸ˜› I made only a config option for it πŸ˜› I am not touching that GUI πŸ˜› you can make it yourself πŸ˜›
  8. Metagross31 liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    πŸ€” to me personally it sound stupid to not have them in defined order, but designers seems to like to have it as an option, so here is an preview:



  9. Kapo liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    πŸ€” to me personally it sound stupid to not have them in defined order, but designers seems to like to have it as an option, so here is an preview:



  10. Eirias liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Shuffling booster card positions when opening boosters   
    πŸ€” to me personally it sound stupid to not have them in defined order, but designers seems to like to have it as an option, so here is an preview:



  11. Kubik liked a post in a topic by T1421 in Adding additional options to filter cards   
    Old thread but with the new filter system you can now do it your self.
    My daily used filters:

    upgrade=1&charges<1&copies>1
    upgrade=2&charges<2&copies>1
    upgrade=3&charges<3&copies>1
    --> ThatΒ are cards which i can apply a charges upgrade
    upgrade=3&copies>1
    upgrade=2&copies>2
    upgrade=1&copies>3
    upgrade=0&copies>4
    --> That are cards which i can sell / reforge
    (i keep the cards i will need up upgrade the charges to max)
    Β 
  12. Kubik liked a post in a topic by Mynoduesp in Deselection of active selection   
    I'd love to see the feature to deselect certain units and/or units of the same type from ones active selection via the UI below.
    In case you did not know, this is already possible via the units themselfs:
    Use <SHIFT + leftclick> to deselect a specific unit and use <SHIFT + CTRL/STRG + leftclick> to deselect all units of a kind.

    Furthermore: If possible let the UI dynamicly expand or at least increas the default to a 3 by 4 grid to increase the units shown from 9 to 12.
  13. Bkingn liked a post in a topic by Kubik in AOE damage overflow bugfix (high impact)   
    I would suggest first fixing it first so it does not miss so many enemies πŸ˜› There is optional boss one step sooner (lvl=2 instead of lvl=3), but no unit defined for it, so every time game decides to have it there, it only logs warning that boss is missing 😞
  14. Damo liked a post in a topic by Kubik in AOE damage overflow bugfix (high impact)   
    Why me? I just provided real time data for how the damage works. Implemented formulas @wibryz write and did some small testing. He is the one who did trough all these numbers to figure out what is wrong and how to fix it. (And I would say it was less than 4 days for the actual analysis and fix πŸ™‚ )
    How much HP does "usual" targets of Shadow Phoenix have?
  15. Dallarian liked a post in a topic by Kubik in New Gamemode: Monument Rush (rPvE)   
    Sounds technically possible, but I do not think there is single person in the team that have all the required knowledge to do all that 😞 (not even talking about time)
    You can open the editor and try for yourself
  16. Metagross31 liked a post in a topic by Kubik in AOE damage overflow bugfix (high impact)   
    Why me? I just provided real time data for how the damage works. Implemented formulas @wibryz write and did some small testing. He is the one who did trough all these numbers to figure out what is wrong and how to fix it. (And I would say it was less than 4 days for the actual analysis and fix πŸ™‚ )
    How much HP does "usual" targets of Shadow Phoenix have?
  17. Mynoduesp liked a post in a topic by Kubik in AOE damage overflow bugfix (high impact)   
    Why me? I just provided real time data for how the damage works. Implemented formulas @wibryz write and did some small testing. He is the one who did trough all these numbers to figure out what is wrong and how to fix it. (And I would say it was less than 4 days for the actual analysis and fix πŸ™‚ )
    How much HP does "usual" targets of Shadow Phoenix have?
  18. Kubik liked a post in a topic by wibryz in AOE damage overflow bugfix (high impact)   
    There is a longstanding bug in the calculation of AOE (area of effect) damage, affecting spells, unit abilities and unit attacks which have a max damage per target and max overall damage. Examples of affected spells are Eruption or Fire Sphere, abilities like Rifle Cultists' Dark Grenade or AOE attacks of units like Construct, Frost Mage or Deepcoil Worm.
    TL;DR at the bottom!
    Β 
    How the bug works:
    If an AOE damage effect kills a unit, only 50% of the overkill damage is transferred back to the pool of available damage which is to be distributed to other targets.
    Let's take Fire Sphere (u3) as an example. The spell has a maximum single target damage of 6000 and a maximum total damage of 8000. As it stands, the spell will only ever do its full damage if its primary target (closest to the area of effect center) has at least 6000, and its second target has at least 2000 health.
    If you use Fire Sphere on a group of weaker enemies, it's effectiveness will vastly diminish. Let's take for example a group of 8 Sunderers (u3), which have exactly 1000 HP each, for a total of 8000 HP. Fire Sphere will kill 3 of them, and damage a fourth Sunderer for 375 damage, leaving him with 625 HP. Total damage dealt: 3375. It would get even worse for lower health targets.

    Why does it happen? Because of faulty calculation in the damage formula, which returns only 50% of overkill damage to the pool of remaining damage.
    So what's the maths behind it?
    Before: max single target damage = 6000, damage in pool = 8000
    Target 1: health = 1000, damage dealt = 6000, overkill damage = 5000, damage returned to pool = 2500, remaining damage in pool = 4500
    Target 2:Β health = 1000, damage dealt = 4500, overkill damage = 3500, damage returned to pool = 1750, remaining damage in pool = 1750
    Target 3: health = 1000, damage dealt = 1750, overkill damage = 750, damage returned to pool = 375, remaining damage in pool = 375
    Target 4: health = 1000, damage dealt = 375, health remaining = 625
    Β 
    Is it a bug, or is it a feature?
    That's a non-trivial question. But so far, there is every indication that this is in fact a bug.
    1. There is no indication whatsoever in the spell descriptions, especially the big AOE spells like Fire Sphere, that they massively lose effectiveness against groups of enemies, or that they deal only half damage to further targets.
    2. Against a heterogenous group of enemies, the total damage dealt varies greatly, depending on which target was closest to the spell center, thus in which orders the targets are affected.
    3. Logic dictates, that there is no reason for an explosion to lose effectiveness (as in: deal less overall damage) the more viable targets are affected.
    4. Increasing "maximum single target damage" reduces the overall damage dealt by the spells, if they are used against groups of enemies, to a point where Lava Field sometimes deals more overall damage than Fire Sphere. How does that make sense?
    Β 
    What's the proposed bugfix/change?
    To enable full overkill damage overflow. As in, if the single target damage is 6000, and the target has only 1000 health, let 5000 damage return to the remaining damage pool.
    Β 
    Using the example above again, that's 8 dead Sunderers for a total of 8000 damage and a happy, fulfilled Fire Sphere.

    Β 
    Can it be implemented easily?
    We've been hard at work and testing with Kubik (who's effort and insight are massively appreciated!), and the relevant code already exists, ready to be implemented. It also is easily adjustable, should it turn out that another value, like a 75%, or 80% damage carryover on overkillis the sweet spot.
    Β 
    What will change if the bugfix is implemented?
    Every AOE spell, ability and attack, which has a listed damage per target and maximum damage will be affected by this change. However, the degree to which it will have an impact, varies greatly from one case to another. For most cards, especially with low damage numbers, the increase will be negligible (not JUST because these are low numbers, but primarily because those spells/attacks have a low chance to kill a target with any given shot).
    Generally, the bugfix is a direct buff to many cards and abilities. However, damage is only actually increased if 1. at least one of the targets is killed, 2. there are more viable targets in range than (total_damage / max_singletarget_damage) rounded up. Also, to be clear, damage is NEVER going to be increased for the primary target
    Spells which are affected the most, are spells which have high enough numbers, that they are expected to reliably kill some, or most of their targets. The greater the single target maximum damage of the AOE damage source, and the greater single target maximum damage in relation to total maximum damage, the more any given spell/attack/ability is affected. Also, spells/attacks/abilities which have a larger AOE and the above characteristics, tend to be affected more (because more targets fit into the AOE).
    Β 
    My predictions concerning the impact on specific cards:
    High impact: Fire Sphere, Rifle Cultists* (ability: Dark Grenade), Boom Brothers* (ability: Boom), Necro Fury* (ability: Bone Shards), Altar of Chaos (against really large groups), Worldbreaker Gun (attack and ability: Heavy Snowball, though the latter only against really large groups), Shatter Ice, Comet Catcher (against really large groups).
    * - Unholy Hero increases the impact
    Moderate impact: Construct (attack), Giant Wyrm (attack), Ironclad (attack), Wasteland Terror (attack), Abomination (ability: Blessed/Tainted Fury), Skycatcher (attack), Gemeye (attack), Volcano (attack), Artillery (attack), Hatecaster (attack), Deepgorge (attack), Thornbark (rooted attack), Treefiend (rooted attack), Lost Horror (attack), Soulshatter (>3 targets), Backlash (depending on void power, may be low impact), Corpse Explosion (>3 targets), Morklay Trap, Shadow Phoenix (>4 targets), Lost dancer (ability: Necro explosion, only with lots of targets in range), Nasty Surprise (>3 targets), Necroblaster (attack, and shadow affinity ability: Tainted Voodoo).
    Low impact: Magma Hurler (attack), Sun Reaver (ability: Metal Spikes), Deepcoil Worm (attack), Twilight Bombard (attack), Lost Disruptor (attack, moderate impact against grouped very low health fliers), Shadow Mage, Eruption (>3 targets).
    Β 
    My predictions concerning the impact on PVP balance:
    (I am not an active PVP player currently. I did play a decent amount in times of Battleforge, but I am in no way up to date, so take these predictions with a grain of salt).
    Shadow will slightly gain in power, as the explosions have actually high enough damage numbers to reliably kill at least some of their targets, but except for Shadow Mage, it only ever becomes relevant when there are >3 targets in range of the spell/ability. The slight buff to Eruption shouldn't have an impact. Otherwise I expect nothing much to change. The vast majority of significantly affected cards are T4.
    Β 
    My predictions concerning the impact on PVE:
    Enemies: Long range AOE attackers, like Bandit walkers and high tier defensive towers (e.g. artillery) will be more proficient at murdering grouped units.
    Players: Stronger tools of destruction at player disposal. It should only really affect T4, and shadow at lower tiers (Shadow Phoenix in particular should be noticeably more effective against large groups, Necroblaster will get stronger, Corpse explosion and Soulshatter will also be noticeably more effective).
    Β 
    Final thoughts:
    I was for a long time under the impression, that large AOE damage sources are somehow underperforming, without really understanding why. Fire Sphere! Enormous explosion! Which... kills 3-4 units out of a cluster of 15 units. Now that I found out why those spells underperform, I've taken the effort to try and fix it. That's the result. I consider it a bugfix, even though it is also a moderately impactful balance change. That's how Skylords Reborn, and earlier Battleforge, handled AOE damage. A bug that had largely become a feature. I propose we change it in a logical way. Maximum 8000 damage in the area? If the targets in range have as much overall health, the damage will be dealt in full.
    Β 
    Special thanks:
    Kubik, for his unending patience and making the unreadable mess of code actually parsable for the human mind.
    Β 
    TL;DR:
    High tier AOE spells and abilities promise big numbers. Against lots of small targets, numbers are much smaller, because overkill damage is halved (multiple times). The proposed change fixes stuff, so that big spells deal the promised damage. Fire Sphere -> big boom -> big damage -> lots of dead bandits. Vote big damage. Vote dead bandits!
  19. Kubik liked a post in a topic by Mynoduesp in Guide to how melee works in battleforge skylord   
    For easier comparison [old value] -> [new value]
  20. Mynoduesp liked a post in a topic by Kubik in SOLVED: Issues with implementing new voicelines   
    https://github.com/jonwil/snrtool
  21. Kubik liked a post in a topic by LEBOVIN in Upgrade Count Error   
    Since new cards were added in the patch it is sadly wrong again^^
  22. Kubik liked a post in a topic by Majora in Community update #16 - December 18th   
    You also have to keep in mind that reforging is finite. Like Windhunter said, 750.000 cards have already been reforged. While that number will rise, I doubt it will be double in the same amount of time. Reason being that most of the active players have now reforged most of their inventory, and simply dont have enough cards left to keep up the reforging pace. Once everyone has burned through their backlog, you can expect the market to settle down a bit. Its the effect of releasing a drastic system like this one year after a release. Im really curious how the market will look 1 year from now.Β 
  23. Metagross31 liked a post in a topic by Kubik in Future Card & Content suggestion   
    have you checked?
    specifically:
    [Open]Β Balance Developer
    [Open]Β Game Designer
  24. Kubik liked a post in a topic by Mynoduesp in Community update #16 - December 18th   
    try "promo:1" πŸ™‚
    For values (health, attack, upgrade, charge, copies) you need to use "=", but for attributes (a.e. promo, flying) you need ":". Think of it as true/false for 1/0 rather than the number.
Γ—
Γ—
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use