New Critical chance final?

[v0rt3x]

Is the new Critical chance with the RNG update (1.12) final?
I think, there must be some tweaks at Crit. chance spells/equipment.

An explanation for me as a Warmaster Barbarian:

Before RNG update (1.12):
Spells:
Execution: Crit. chance +175%
Material reflexes: Crit. chance +100%

My equipment:
Gauntlet: HC +22
Master Knight Hammer: HC +21
Off Hand Mace: HC +19 HC +20

Crit. chance with equipment = 22,8%
Crit. chance with equipment and Execution (175%) and Mat. refl. (+100%) = 85,6% <<-- really nice!

After RNG update (1.12):
Spells:
Execution: Crit. chance +175%
Material reflexes: Crit. chance +300%

My equipment:
Gauntlet: Crit. chance +22%
Master Knight Hammer: Crit. chance +42%
Off Hand Mace: Crit. chance +38% +20%

Crit. chance without equipment: 4,3%
Crit. chance with equipment (+122%) = 9,55%
Crit. chance with equipment and Execution (+175%) and Mat. refl. (+300%) = 29,97% <<-- not soo good! :-(


So i have an addition of +597% Crit. chance and only 29,97% Crit. chance!
Now i think, that today´s max. ~30% Crit. chance with good Crit. chance equipment and two spells at lvl5 is really annoying!
Before RNG update i had with the same equipment and spells a Crit. chance of 85,6%

Maybe change Execution to +17,5% abolute and Material reflexes to +30,0% absolute.
e.g. Crit. chance with equipment = 9,55% + Execution (17,5% absolute) + Mat. reflexes (+30% absolute) = 57,05% Crit. chance.

Or change also the stats at equipment to absolute: today´s Crit. chance / 10 = abosolute Crit. chance (42% / 10 = 4,2% absolute).
e.g.
Gauntlet: Crit. chance absolute +2,2%
Master Knight Hammer: Crit. chance absolute +4,2%
Off Hand Mace: Crit. chance +3,8% absolute +2,0%

Crit. chance without equipment: 4,3%
Crit. chance with equipment (12,2%) = 16,5%
Crit. chance with equipment and Execution (17,5%) and Mat. refl. (+30,0%) = 64,0%

And don´t forget. Only an explanation for me as a Warmaster Barbarian!
Can anyone do this for Archers?

What do you think?

[Hayir]

I don't understand this either, they added so many -crit chance spells but in the same time they nerfed crit chance so much that i don't even need -crit chance spells in the first place.

Your suggestion getting around 50% crit chance with investing so much into buffs seems reasonable to me.

Putting aside that barb crits are crazy :P

[ShadowForce]

I agree with vortex, I used to use the same spell combo on blunt setup to get around 79% crit chance for the duration of execution. After the RNG it's pretty much useless trying to get decent critical hit chance on barb.

[Takeyo]

It's even worse for Staff Mastery. Mages only have one crit. boost, Metabolic Control, and it does hardly anything. Before update, a well-built staff master could roll around 50% crit. Now it's more along the lines of 10-20 percent with a full crit. build and Metabolic Control active.

[crownapollo]

Originally Posted by Takeyo

It's even worse for Staff Mastery. Mages only have one crit. boost, Metabolic Control, and it does hardly anything. Before update, a well-built staff master could roll around 50% crit. Now it's more along the lines of 10-20 percent with a full crit. build and Metabolic Control active.

No one gives a shit about mages, not even most the players.

[LawZ]

Originally Posted by v0rt3x

...

I am not sure that you can directly compare the 85.6% of the old RNG system with the 29.97% of the new one.

The 29.97% is, indeed, your real critical chance, while the 85.6% was something more like a percentage to an other percentage. Check this for more information.

Best,

[Sentan]

I'm not sure if all these % are real. My conj has 3,35% spell resistance and he resists every 5-6 spell lol. Sometimes twice in a row from one person.

<EDIT>
Maybe I'm just lucky. :>

[Adrian]

Didn't we say that after the RNG update, the next updates would require Balance? So, please focus on that. Anyway, I like posts with calculations and numbers. Real numbers.

As it was said before, the current RNG percentages are real. You're not sure? Go ahead and test it.

Regarding Critical Chance in the past, there is a good example still to be reworked: Unstoppable Madness. It still uses some part of the old system and you all know how it works. It's 90% but you're not sure what can come out of that. Well, your past high percentages were so unstable that I'm certainly sure that percentage was never the real one.

I agree that Critical Chance should lead a player to choose when to have its "streak" of crits. We need to analyze the current possible sets and up until where and how it can be maxed out. Of course, keeping in mind that damage in Regnum is still something tricky and also the cause of varied rants.

This will be checked. Don't worry.

Originally Posted by Sentan

I'm not sure if all these % are real. My conj has 3,35% spell resistance and he resists every 5-6 spell lol. Sometimes twice in a row from one person.

C'mon. Months of work and analysis to be destroyed in one line of text? Please, do us and yourself a favor and make the proper tests in a controlled testing environment

[Iheartpancakes]

Originally Posted by Adrian

C'mon. Months of work and analysis to be destroyed in one line of text? Please, do us and yourself a favor and make the proper tests in a controlled testing environment

My spell resist is 3.76% and I resist maybe 1 or 2 kicks a day. It's funny how people make stats up to try and get their point across.

[halvdan]

Originally Posted by Adrian

C'mon. Months of work and analysis to be destroyed in one line of text? Please, do us and yourself a favor and make the proper tests in a controlled testing environment

I absolutely agree with you, but hell Adrian, you should understand many people have(in the better case) no idea what does it mean to do proper statistic tests.

In the worse case they'll listen to you, and do some bullshit like:
"Let's collect data from game untill they'll fit my opinion".

In that case, goodluck with the situation when half of people on forums will bash you that resists are broken still because
"xxx made proper statistic tests, and look, he got huge dataset that proves RNG is broken".