forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

DOH!!!

Or you are Sauron the deceiver!

(In my defense I have been out of the action for your little name change gig.)

Glorelendil wrote:

Rocmistro wrote:

Glorelendil wrote:...

Generally speaking ....

Wait...I think we're saying the same thing: in TOR generalists are more optimized than specialists.

Hrm, I think so too. But to me, that's what not pimping out a full weapon quality schema is about...specializing is going "all in" to that weapon....3 qualities all the time, every time. As counte-rintuitive as it sounds, picking a damage roll (endurance vs. piercing) is about committing to a "damage path" so you can free up more resources to be a generalist...

If that makes sense.

Oh, by "generalist" I meant "improve whatever is weakest". Great crits but low damage? Grievous. Great combat but terrible Parry? Reinforced. Awesome Parry but terrible Armor? Protection. Etc.

Rocmistro wrote:
Hrm, I think so too. But to me, that's what not pimping out a full weapon quality schema is about...specializing is going "all in" to that weapon....3 qualities all the time, every time. As counte-rintuitive as it sounds, picking a damage roll (endurance vs. piercing) is about committing to a "damage path" so you can free up more resources to be a generalist...

If that makes sense.

Ok, I'm still not getting this. How does "committing to a damage path" free up resources? Can you give me an example?

Sure. In TOR there are 2 ways you can take out a foe: Cause a wound or drop them to 0 endurance.

Would you agree that for maximum efficiency that the best way to achieve this is to almost guarantee certainty of one or the other, and that in trying to advance both paths, you result in waste/redundancy?

So again, this is only a relevant dilemma because you only have 5 item quality picks. If you decide to push both efforts, you are using 3 of those 5 picks. You can, otherwise, focus on one of those 2 damage paths, by selecting only those rewards which stack with wounding (fell, keen) or damaging (grievous). (barring cultural rewards, which futher complicate the analysis, but let's focus on the constants for now).

By committing to one of those damage paths, instead of both, you thus free up resources, ie, quality selections to focus on 1 of those other weak spots you were referring to, thus making you more of a generalist. Ie, you spend 1 quality or 2 to pick up a cunning, reinforced shield, or a couple cunning crafted armor, or maybe you bounce over to a grievous bow so you can have something to do in the opening volleys stage.

As Mr. Miyagi said: Walk down road; walk left side, safe, walk right side safe....walk down middle...squish like grape.

Rocmistro wrote: Would you agree that for maximum efficiency that the best way to achieve this is to almost guarantee certainty of one or the other, and that in trying to advance both paths, you result in waste/redundancy?[/i]

Ah, I see. No, I would disagree with this assertion, actually. The mechanics (and the possible scenarios) are just too complex to make such specialization optimal. You can optimize to fish for Pierces, but you can't demonstrate that that strategy is more optimal than being sort of good at pierces and sort of good at regular damage.

The simplest example of that is simply that Weary affects Protection rolls. So against adversaries with Great Size draining them to zero Endurance has a greater statistical reduction on their ability to make Protection rolls (as well as their ability to hit you, thus giving you more chances to get Pierces) than Fell does. So more endurance draining might get you the killing blow faster than higher Injury would.

In some ways I think dealing damage mirrors avoiding damage: you can't focus on just Parry or Protection, you have to balance them. Well, you can do whatever you want, but it's not mathematically optimal to do so. Even if you knew in advance exactly what enemies you would be facing.

Rocmistro wrote:Another advancement tactic is try to spread out your common skills to get a 3rd rank in a given skill of each of the 6 different categories; this increases your chances of chances of rolling a great or extraordinary success and thus pegging out 3rd advancement points in each of those respective areas.

Minor quibble here (though you probably realize this): you of course need to have a Trait that can be used with that great or extraordinary success, to get that 3rd advancement point. Otherwise, just having that greater chance (of a great or extraordinary success) doesn't really do one any good.

Majestic wrote:

Rocmistro wrote:Another advancement tactic is try to spread out your common skills to get a 3rd rank in a given skill of each of the 6 different categories; this increases your chances of chances of rolling a great or extraordinary success and thus pegging out 3rd advancement points in each of those respective areas.

Minor quibble here (though you probably realize this): you of course need to have a Trait that can be used with that great or extraordinary success, to get that 3rd advancement point. Otherwise, just having that greater chance (of a great or extraordinary success) doesn't really do one any good.

No, but the converse is true as well, which I think is his point.

Majestic wrote:

Rocmistro wrote:Another advancement tactic is try to spread out your common skills to get a 3rd rank in a given skill of each of the 6 different categories; this increases your chances of chances of rolling a great or extraordinary success and thus pegging out 3rd advancement points in each of those respective areas.

Minor quibble here (though you probably realize this): you of course need to have a Trait that can be used with that great or extraordinary success, to get that 3rd advancement point. Otherwise, just having that greater chance (of a great or extraordinary success) doesn't really do one any good.

I totally agree, that is why I also advocated somewhere in that post about spreading around your traits so that you have a robust tool chest to draw from when it comes time to claim APs. As I had said, if you are Lordly, Proud and Honourable, it might be hard to find a trait to tag when you make that Extraordinary success in Travel.

Glorelendil wrote:

Rocmistro wrote: Would you agree that for maximum efficiency that the best way to achieve this is to almost guarantee certainty of one or the other, and that in trying to advance both paths, you result in waste/redundancy?[/i]

Ah, I see. No, I would disagree with this assertion, actually. The mechanics (and the possible scenarios) are just too complex to make such specialization optimal. You can optimize to fish for Pierces, but you can't demonstrate that that strategy is more optimal than being sort of good at pierces and sort of good at regular damage.

The simplest example of that is simply that Weary affects Protection rolls. So against adversaries with Great Size draining them to zero Endurance has a greater statistical reduction on their ability to make Protection rolls (as well as their ability to hit you, thus giving you more chances to get Pierces) than Fell does. So more endurance draining might get you the killing blow faster than higher Injury would.

In some ways I think dealing damage mirrors avoiding damage: you can't focus on just Parry or Protection, you have to balance them. Well, you can do whatever you want, but it's not mathematically optimal to do so. Even if you knew in advance exactly what enemies you would be facing.

But this is why you have team-mates, Elf. Is it more efficient for 2 melee combatants, one of whom drives piercing blows, and one of whom drives endurance damage, or both trying to drive both piercing and endurance. And besides, it's not like your weapon never scores endurance damage or piercing blows if you don't add a quality to it. It just respectively enhances it to that task. The same logic drives travel roles; one hero just simply doesn't have enough common skill points to be the guide, AND the look-out man, AND the scout AND the huntsman. So in specializing one of those roles (to a degree), you free up resources for other skills, trusting in your companions to take on those other travel responsibilities.

Another thing that all optimization needs to be discussed within is actual adventuring time. By that I mean, for those used to arguing D&D player builds at level 20 on Giant in the Playground style forums, I don't think it really makes sense to simply say: Build your best optimized TOR character with 6 valour, 6 wisdom and 6 weapon skill. Most of your time, as an adventurer, is not going to be spent at end game, or actually anywhere near close to it. I think a better test of an optimized character is more like...Valour 4, wisdom 4 weapon skill 4-5, and X amount of AP. Because you need to live long enough to see Weapon Skill 6 before you can actually enjoy it.