If any Immstaff want to answer the question via some simulated fights, I'd love to hear about the results.

Let's take Character A on one hand, make them elf warrior sword spec, level 51, ragesteel gear + a second sword and give them STSF the legacy.

Let's take Character B on the other hand, make them elf warrior sword spec, level 51, ragesteel gear + a second sword and start giving them passive combat legacies.

How many legacies do we have to give Character B before they are beating Character A in greater than 50% of their fights if we assume neither side enters any commands beyond the initial murder command. Wimpy is set to 20%.

My hypothesis is that not only will it take something like 4 or 5 passive legacies, like ward of blades, dance upon southern winds, chilling embrace, fires of adversity, etc. but Character A with one legacy will also be the only one to ever win a fight by actually killing Character B (instead of B just fleeing). I think that says something about STSF as a legacy and how broken it is.

Another thing that bothers me is that STSF is basically just better than polearm as a spec. Sure you don't get charge/chargeset/chop/distance out of STSF, but you get all the damage those things give and extra defenses along with a cutoff that certainly feels to be just as good, if not better, than the actual polearm spec skill of cutoff... You don't get improved trip out of STSF, but then you don't need it since you are dexy, so the only thing you are missing is neato disarm, which frankly, you can still have by taking a different spec (whip, axe) or legacy (space, fluid).

We need unpredictable edge available for low int though.

..I'd like to point out that Umiron quit.

Same goes for you throw ####ers.

NT

So if it's changed, it won't be "knee jerk".

But, if assassins haven't been changed yet with the testimonials and evidence that they are OP, I wouldn't hold my breath for a change to STSF even if it is as well (and I can't say).

nt

no texts

gr

In general, I don't like any code that encourages people to log out.

This includes assassin Mark and STSF.

In your example, it only takes 1 legacy to beat it through crashing of the waves. I wager that would make it well beyond the 50% margin.

If you want a secondary example to put it closer (but still probably past it) to the 50% mark, then give char B incardinae wave.

Also, the use of a wimpy makes it even sillier because no one dies unless you get a lot of striking blocks from char A.

First off, out of curiousity, why have a wimpy set at all? If neither of them are entering any commands beyond murder, then what's the point of having them wimpy at all? It seems like you're maybe trying to make a point about the cutoff part of STSF, but maybe that should be a separate issue?


As with the actual scenario though - with both elves having 25 INT, the STSF charges aren't going to mount up all that quickly. So if your passive legacies are something like ward of blades and chilling embrace, probably non-STSF elf warrior wins the first match. Something that makes them parry better than the other guy.

Second match probably goes STSF-guy's way if it happens soon after (assuming he keeps the STSF counter up from the last fight).

Also, if you throw out your ragesteel example and make it harder-hitting gear (say MANGLES by each elf) then I think the results could be different, because chilling embrace doesn't look so great anymore.

Most of the damage on a fight like this would, I imagine, be from ripostes/swiftstrikes, as both of them would parry LAMMF. So I'd definitely not take the legacy that makes me swing more often. Interestingly, if one character didn't practice 2nd, 3rd, and 4th attack they'd probably have more of an advantage in a fight like this.

What would you do? Neither you nor Dest like my setup, and that is fine, but how would you set up something to test relative strength of a legacy? Obviously I spent some time thinking about how to do so and this is the setup I came up with.

I sort of assume that you have some way to do tests like this since Zulg did at one point, but perhaps that know-how went with him.

Wimpy is set because it is about testing STSF the legacy, and cutoff is part of that. You think ward and chilling wins first match... That is certainly possible, but only one of us has the ability to run the scenario.

I would reset STSF counter every time... Ragesteel is the easiest way to negate the gear variable. The gear variable being such a huge factor is an entire other topic, but to take it to the extreme, they could kill each other in one hit (avg. 1k sword or something equally silly), but that doesn't really test the legacy. Since a real fight would have fleeing/healing/DR/active skills/whatever and we're ignoring all of that, why include dam roll in the scenario?

>What would you do? Neither you nor Dest like my setup, and
>that is fine, but how would you set up something to test
>relative strength of a legacy?

(snip)

>The gear variable
>being such a huge factor is an entire other topic, but to take
>it to the extreme, they could kill each other in one hit (avg.
>1k sword or something equally silly), but that doesn't really
>test the legacy. Since a real fight would have
>fleeing/healing/DR/active skills/whatever and we're ignoring
>all of that, why include dam roll in the scenario?


That actually sorta answers the entirety of this thread, doesn't it? There's no good way to run a scenario like this. If you don't include gear beyond ragesteel, it always favors the STSF guy (longer fight). If you include decent gear but assume the same dam redux (say 50?), that also favors STSF guy. But let's go further - no two elves would actually be fighting each other, right? Generally? So then you have to say ok, put one elf against one dark-elf. But then you get into the fact that they have different racial abilities (swiftstrike, for instance) so that's not a fair comparison either.

THEN you could arrive at the notion of having a STSF elf sword fight a fire giant and see how many rounds it would take to win that fight, versus a non-STSF elf sword against a fire giant.

Except we all know that STSF is great against fire giants who don't do anything but stand there.

So you choose a different PC build to pit STSF and nonSTSF elf against. Say...human assassin? Then you realize that no assassin is going to sit there and take what's being dished out without doing something, so again not a fair comparison (nonSTSF elf maybe has fist of the titans or something else that lets him continue wielding when STSF elf couldn't, for instance).

And we haven't even factored in RNG yet. You mention "Zulg did this at one point" as if to, I don't know, goad us (?) into running a big experiment up in immland to satisfy you but I'm pretty sure what Zulg did was compare shapeshifter forms, which is a much more straightforward comparison. And he wasn't doing so to say which is more useful overall, he was simply using that data to tweak things like damage and damage reduction on forms - because equipment doesn't play a factor in either of those.

So overall, I don't think this thought experiment is worth continuing on.

>So overall, I don't think this thought experiment is worth
>continuing on.

It wasn't meant to be a thought experiment. I was asking to really run the scenario. The point of an experiment is to see if your expectation match reality. Maybe Dest is right that one legacy (crashing) can trump STSF in this scenario, maybe he isn't. Wouldn't that be worth knowing?

Attempting to isolate a specific variable is why you set something like this up, not because you believe this is how it would play out in a "real" situation.

Immstaff complains about how players #### on changes and offer no suggestions for improvement. How is what you are doing any different than that? I obviously can't run it myself, and if you aren't willing to invest any time in it, that is your prerogative, and I'll drop the topic after this. But I believe running simulations (especially ones where you control for as many variables as you can) could tell you something about relative strengths that nothing else can, because real play has too many factors to make true comparisons reasonable.

I ####ing hate forums for trying to communicate complex ideas as I obviously suck at it.

The single biggest variable to determine if something is viable or not isn't a legacy or an edge or prep usage, its player skill. Sadly you can put that variable into an equation because its a constantly evolving based on the current situation. That is the main reason, that to me, these types of discussions aren't helpful. Some people can take STSF and still be horrible. Some people can play an elf warrior without STSF and still have huge success.

That's why you take it out of the equation when determining how legacies stack up against each other.

Mind you, I don't play warriors, so this discussion puts me out of my depth. But I do know simulations.

Imm confirmed. I'll find the post later ...

Fluid deceptions is anti STSF

Pretty much agree with you. That said, considering all the variables, if STSF is pretty much a no brainer for any elf/drow warrior then it might need looking at. Even more so if it's a no brainer for any arial warrior.

Arials had int downgraded, so probably not for them now.

But it is too strong an edge imo. If I wanted to make as strong a warrior as I could it'd be elf or Drow with Stsf. Or woodie.

I'd say that for the edge to be a must-take for elves and drow isn't sufficient for it to be overpowered, but it's necessary.

That is, if it's not a must-take for elves/drow then it's probably not overpowered. Or it would be a must-take.

If it *is* a must-take then it *might* not be overpowered, but it still might be.

How many fights play out where one guy murders the other guy and then both sit there doing nothing?

specifically compared to other legacies that do the same-ish thing, but not as well. I.e. fires which is basically just the defense portion of STSF...

It kinda is the point though. A fight where both parties are wearing ragesteel and not entering any commands is going to be a long fight. Long fight makes STSF look better.

Maybe also worth mentioning there's an anti-STSF edge. That's not generally the case for other legacies.

Dest knows why.

Charge/Chop will do you wonders. And cutoff will stop them from fleeing/healing.

STSF is countered by non passive melee damage. (flurry/Ambush/Drum/Pincer/etc).

Charge is non-trivial to get off against a perma-sneaker, which, if you are playing STSF well, you probably are perma-sneak. If you stand and spam charge, I'm going to dash and beat it... Probably with something that beats chargeset if I can. I can also prep for high damage via dam redux in a way you can't prep for STSF since AFAIK nothing is going to change out fast it charges other than you (probably already) being at max int/wis. Cutoff might prevent flee/heal, but then you are also probably a giant or mino which means STSF is going to be that much better that much faster...

That isn't to say you can't beat STSF with polearm but it relies on gear and skill and (sort of) a lack of those things on the STSF opponent, especially since you can't guarantee you'll output enough damage to kill them fast enough, since some of that is out of your hands.

Also not really the point of my question, merely an aside that I think it takes a lot away from polearm as a spec to have STSF do semi-reliable cutoff.

Although, the unpredictable edge takes much of the benefit away from Stsf.

Same can't be said for many other legacies.

I think Stsf is fine though. It is the fact that dex builds no longer get beaten down easily by hard to parry weapons because those weapons are easy to dodge.

And to those who say direct damage, you'd be lucky to kill the Stsf guy before he heals up and comes back charged.

Especially in an EP poor world of today. STSF in general doesn't bother me as much as the cutoff portion of it does.

I think the dex build part is of it as well, but mostly I wanted a more quantitative measure of just how good STSF is compared to similar (passive combat) type legacies.