Uh, i was mostly replying to miriyaka's last post, IN1.  But yeah, i guess this Cass guy can be included as well in my response.

I don't think my last phrase was unnecessary, it's just how this whole post feels to me, There's very few PLAYERS i'd listen to in a DG balance discussion, very few of whom have actually posted in this thread. I know this might come through as arrogant, though. Sorry but that's just how i feel regarding DG and its community.

Edit (now that i read your last post miryiaka):

Please read carefully what i briefly proposed to balance DGs (specially Reg and DA) a few posts/pages back, you'll find answers to most of your last questions. 

One last thing, how is a jump from 1200 (300 x 4 targets) to 4000 (500 x 8 targets, current Warp Area II) damage for just 1 skill point reasonable at all???? Sigh.

Hmmmm, don't get me started on Hedgie........

The problem with balance discussions is that everyone is going to have different views on how to do it. 

Some people would like to heavily homogenize the game, so that really the only thing that changes is the model of the character you're playing, but it's very balanced. 

Some people would like to totally revolutionize the game, to the point where it would play with a completely fresh meta. 

Some people would want to shift the meta, while still keeping the old meta competitive. 

Some people would like to keep the status quo, meaning that the current demigods, item choices, and skill builds are still predominant, it's just the "other stuff" isn't "quite so bad". 

Some people would accomplish balance by nerfing the top. Some people would accomplish balance by buffing the bottom. 

Some people only care about 3v3 and 2v2 balance. Others only care about 1v1 and 2v2 balance. 

Some people think it should be balanced around the end-game. Some people think it should be balanced around the early-game. Some people think it should be balance around the mid-game. 

Some people think that balance should be achieved by adding new things. Some people think that balanced should be achieved by taking away current things. 

Some people have bias, either for a particular demigod or based on their own experience and observations in non-representative games. 

The fact of the matter is that only extremely small tweaks could ever be accepted by the community as a whole (for the reasons above). If that person operated under a different paradigm, they would be critiqued down to everything. Even very small changes (eg, the Occulus Blast Off! level 1 change recently added to Uberfix). 

Even before I quit, people resisted Uberfix due to the fixes (read: "buffs") that Occulus gets. In addition, no one person is going to get balance off perfectly the first time a patch note was proposed. 

So, it'd mostly be an exercise in frustration.

Yup.  Thats why I suggested the Commissioner of Balance idea.

I don't care whether its Pacov, Hedgie, Cow, Nom, Miri, whomever... hell, we don't have to vote, y'all can just draw straws or something.  Someone should just make some changes and if it gets implemented then great.  If its implemented and a funner way to play the game then we all will be better off than before even if the changes don't meet our individual expectations.

Edit: Miri, you seem to have the programming know how and the grasp of the game to pull this off.  Would you have the motivation if Pacov could get some sorta positive signal from Stardock that a balance/uberfix mod you create would be bundled in a future patch?

Lol it just is.  At 500 damage you can still sometimes use it as a killing blow.  At 1000 damage who the hell is ever gonna pick Reg when there's a DA out there. 

This is with an assumption that reg gets buffed to, smart regs shouldn't get in trouble. Warp Area isn't even a gaureenteed hit on a DG either. If its used late game in a cloud of creeps the likely hood of it landing on a DG is 50/50 at best. Imo DA needs to have a rediculous amount of burst damage to compete at end game anyway, why not give him a bit more?

Nobody for the Commissioner of Balance idea?

Kinda realizing you guys just wanna debate how the game should be balanced ad nauseam and that you're not really interested in making compromises that could actually get a balance mod installed and breath new life into this game.

I'm out.  Gonna be in DoW II: Retribution beta February 1 anyway.

Really?  It's just like saying that?  Think about it for a minute.  Usually if you're going to pick Reg there should be another Reg or a DA on the other team to make it fair.  But if you buff DA so that he can shred 75% of Reg's HP at level 15 in 2 seconds it becomes a bit different. 

I agree DA isn't strong enough, but you should fix one of his weaknesses not put him over the top in the one area that he's already good at.  It's lazy thinking to just say let's double the damage on one of his skills.  This is like a football team with a great quarterback deciding to trade for an even better quarterback when the receivers and the offensive line are terrible.  I think a nice buff for DA would be something like combining two of his passive skills, or adding a nature's reckoning type chance at area attack to his critical hit skill.

Here's the thing (and I think we all get this, but I'll say it again) - if there are any balance changes, they need to be minor or generally agreed upon.  Generally agreed upon is not = to everyone must agree.  The changes would be implemented via a mod for one of the upcoming tournaments - this will result in players using the mod before the tournament to get experience, etc, and will increase the adoption rate (for a bit). 

My simple approach is to implement 1 or 2 changes to a single demigod.  Release the mod.  Have folks that are willing play it out for a bit.  Update the mod with an additional change or 2.  Test - then force as a requirement for a tournament.  The more crap that is changed, the more likely people will get fickle and refuse to play with the mod in the tourney, etc (easy way to expose everyone to the mod would be to have a 3v3 tournament and require that every game must have a reg in it, etc). 

It just needs to hit more targets then.  At 1000 damage you're screwing yourself if you use it to farm instead of killing.  Cutting the mana cost in half at full level like Rook's towers, or having it hit a few more targets without adding too much time to the invulnerability if that's possible would be better. 

Common Error: "armor has diminishing returns, therefore it sucks as you get more of it".

Fact: "Each point of armor is just as valuable as the last point. Diminishing returns is a math trick with a bad name that makes it sound like it sucks".

Let's say you have 10% damage reduction (lets say, 10 armor), and you have the ability to purchase a new item that gives you +10% mitigation (lets say, 10 armor). Without diminishing returns, your armor would increase from 10 to 20, and your mitigation would increase from 10% to 20%.

If before your mitigation was 10%, that means your effective hp was 111% of your max hp (9/10 -> 10/9). Now, since it is 20%, that means your effective hp is 125% of your max hp. (4/5 -> 5/4). So the first 10% of mitigation increased your effective hp by 11%, your second 10% of mitigation increased your effective hp by 14%. What gives?

Now, let's say you have 80% damage reduction (let's say, 80 armor), and you have the ability to purchase a new item that gives you +10% mitigation. Without diminishing returns, your armor increases from 80 to 90, and your mitigation increases from 80% to 90%.

If before your mitigation was 80%, that means your effective hp was 500% of your max hp (1/5 -> 5/1). Now, since it is 90%, that means your effective hp is 1,000% of your max hp (1/10 -> 10/1). So the first 80% of mitigation increases your effective hp by 500%, your last 10% increased your effective hp by 500%. What gives?

Now, you're at 90%, and you get to increase your armor by 10 again. Now you have 100% mitigation. You win.

That is why diminishing returns exist. As you get more and more mitigation, your effective hp increases exponentially. What (most) "diminishing return" formulas do, is make it gradually harder and harder to increase your mitigation, because a 10% increase is more valueable at 90%, than it is at 80%, which in turn is more valueable at 70% and so on.

Without DR, the formula for the above example was:

Mitigation % = Armor/100.

With DR, the formula for the above example might be:

M = (1 - 100/(100+A))

So for 1 point of armor, you have 1 - 100/101 == .99% mitigation, which comes out to 101% effective hp.

For 2 points of armor, you have 1 - 100/102 == 1.96% mitigation, which comes out to 102% effective hp.

For 10 points of armor, you have 1 - 100/110 == 9.09% mitigation, which comes out to 110% effective hp.

For 100 points of armor, you have 1 - 100/200 == 50% mitigation, which comes out to 200% effective hp.

So, as you can see, you get exactly 1% more effective hp for each point of armor you add, with "diminishing returns". Each point of armor doesn't get worse and worse, as the name suggests. It stays exactly as valueable, in terms of abesolute % increase to effective hp. 

The "correct" use of diminishing returns is that you get less out of things as you put more into it. For example, Inner Grace has diminishing returns because the first point gives 10 hps, but the second and third points only give 15/20 hps respectively.

This does somewhat kick in with the armor as well, but not in the same way as with Inner Grace where you actually get less abesolute gain. If you look at your relative % increases, armor does diminish.

Eg, from 101% to 102% effective hp, you only increase your effective hp "relatively" by .99%, whereas from 100% to 101% effective hp, you increased your effective hp "relatively" 1%. From 102% to 110%, you increase your effective hp "relatively" by .98% per point. The abesoulte increase stays the same, but the relative increase does not.

This is also true for health items. If you increase your max hp from 100 to 101, you increased your max hp by 1%. If you increase your max hp from 101 to 102, you increased your max hp by .99%. The abesolute value is the same, the relative value does diminish.

Lol, actually we don't agree on that either.  I say Reg needs a base speed of 6.5 

7.9, then?