10k MP looks ridiculous on low level

10k MP vs. 417 HP on the screenshots show the ridiculous disparity between those two numbers.
It's almost as if someone was too lazy/couldn't be bothered with an MP pool + MP costs based on your current level, and instead went with fixed variables for both.

https://i.imgur.com/r4lTdns.png

We had 1000 TP in the past, despite having HP either in the low 100s or as high as 70k. Never made me so much as raise an eyebrow.

well... 10000MP -> 100.00%MP if you want to add 2 more characters to the display.

It's almost as if the old mp pool and the new mp pool are pretty much the same thing, except now it's a static number instead of a varying one. Mp expenditure was still a % of your max mp per cast.


Also, you say they couldn't be bothered.... But you started playing when that was how it worked, literally.

This seems like an odd nitpick to me, even coming from you.

You do know it is not 10k but 100.00%. So, it is how much of your total mp in percentage you have left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Millybonk

.

---

Easier to balance MP costs when there's a fixed cap per level than have it change per level and scale up. Don't call it laziness, that just makes you look sour. (Not that this isn't the first time you've done it... :rolleyes:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Millybonk

It's almost as if someone was too lazy/couldn't be bothered with an MP pool + MP costs based on your current level, and instead went with fixed variables for both.

---

What.

That's how it was before.

https://media.giphy.com/media/a523ft1FTkyBi/giphy.gif

It's no different than it has always been. Only difference is they gave us a static, round number which provided easier tuning for the developers and gives us a nice number to use.

Guess this is what happens when there's a good expansion launch. People need to go out of their way to find something to be annoyed by.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vahlnir

Guess this is what happens when there's a good expansion launch. People need to go out of their way to find something to be annoyed by.

---

Normally I would agree. But 10,000 does make the display look, awkward. Personally I think they could have made the display 500mp. Then Fire would cost 40mp instead of 800. Hell they could tone it down further to 100mp and still make it work. The reason they cut it to 10,000 is because it is quite easy to balance MP costs with larger numbers as adjusting 5mp to 6mp is a 20% increase, but 500 to 505 is 1%. But I believe they just went a bit far.

We use the numbers now only in theory crafting. But in combat we're just looking at how full or empty the MP bar is since its not simple to associate with a 4-5 digit number being interacting with by 3-4 digit numbers.

I think I would actually prefer a two decimal percentage despite have the same amount of characters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaethra

Normally I would agree. But 10,000 does make the display look, awkward. Personally I think they could have made the display 500mp. Then Fire would cost 40mp instead of 800. Hell they could tone it down further to 100mp and still make it work. The reason they cut it to 10,000 is because it is quite easy to balance MP costs with larger numbers as adjusting 5mp to 6mp is a 20% increase, but 500 to 505 is 1%. But I believe they just went a bit far.

We use the numbers now only in theory crafting. But in combat we're just looking at how full or empty the MP bar is since its not simple to associate with a 4-5 digit number being interacting with by 3-4 digit numbers.

---

It has nothing to do with balance, it's about visual representation. Look at the party UI

https://i.imgur.com/S9OoaEJ.png

The reason why the last two 00 are small is because now MP is visually represented as 100%, so if a spell uses 800MP it uses 8% of your MP, if you have 5500 MP left you have 55% of your MP left, you basically ignore the last 00 in any cost and at first glance you know what you can or cannot cast based on your current mp. What you propose has zero tangible benefits.

They wanted spell costs to represent MP percentages more obviously. It was either 10000 or 100, and they chose the one that doesn't look awkward at 80. (1000 might have been better, but 10000's not horrible)

I think the dev team should get rid of MP as they did with TP.


I run out of it sometimes, specially when doing damage (DPS) which drains the MP really quick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SigmaOZ

I think the dev team should get rid of MP as they did with TP.


I run out of it sometimes, specially when doing damage (DPS) which drains the MP really quick.

---

MP is a way to gate raising. When just aoeing, you won't run out of mp unless your party is bad, or you are bad at using lucid dreaming. TP only gated aoeing and nothing else, when mages could basically aoe for days.

Also, the bold is distracting when its random like that.

I think infinite TP looks far worse.

Honestly I'm more annoyed that two of the zeroes are smaller than the others... makes me think it's 100.00 every time I look at it lmao

I just don't think of MP as percentages at all... so it ends up just looking weird to me... either make the zeroes all the same size or get rid of the little ones

Pls SE, I beg u

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avidria

100.00 every time I look at it lmao

---

That's the point though. A spell that costs 300 MP uses 3.00% of your MP. If you have 5000 MP remaining, you have 50.00% MP remaining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rongway

That's the point though. A spell that costs 300 MP uses 3.00% of your MP. If you have 5000 MP remaining, you have 50.00% MP remaining.

---

I hate it

I hate it a lot

I have no idea why even 10.000 and not just 100%. It would also be easier to have a Spell cost 4% MP instead of 400 - Its just unnecessarily complicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BatLW

I have no idea why even 10.000 and not just 100%. It would also be easier to have a Spell cost 4% MP instead of 400 - Its just unnecessarily complicated.

---

it's not complicated at all, larger numbers leave more room for tuning costs and regen
with a number like 1000 or 10000 you could have a regen tick be 300 303 310 330 333 etc whatever ends up striking the right balance
with a number like 100 you can't really have regen ticks of 3 3.03 3.1 3.33
technically you could but you couldn't visually represent it without it being four 0's like it already is

casting costs would be more severe
like 300 vs 3 relatively speaking changing 3 to a 2 or 4 is a drastic change compared to making a 300 into a 280 or 320 or whatnot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BatLW

I have no idea why even 10.000 and not just 100%. It would also be easier to have a Spell cost 4% MP instead of 400 - Its just unnecessarily complicated.

---

In a certain way, it is like that.
If you check on the group window and look for the MP numbers, the first two digits are smaller than the others. And you can go for the latter three ones as a % indicator.

Someone brought up "it's easier for the developers to tune the MP cost" - Except it was always the same. I can not back it up with evidence, but I it felt like internally, it was level-dependent anyways, so the multiplyer (internally) have been tuned by developers. And a multiplyer in x.xx format is nothing but a percentage anyways.

(e.g. Base mana cost * internal mana cost = Mana cost)

The basic mana cost was in the game anyways before and the internal mana cost multiplyer per level is now the fixed percentage. And MP was not really a massive problem in the first place, was it?

At least when I compared the screenshots of my hotbars and the new ones, when I did the math, it was exactly 1:1. Or either it was a funny coincidence.

I would not have a problem with the HP being in a percent as well. DooM II-style!

Think of it at 100.00%, not 10k. In fact, in the party window, they stylize it as just that. They emphasize the 100 and make the last two 00 smaller.

Also, for numbers above 10k, japanese uses 10k as the reference point, not 1k like we do in Europe/US.
They have specific words for 10(じゅう (juu)), 100 (ひゃく (hyaku)), 1'000(せん (sen)) and 10'000(まん (man)).
so for 100'000 or 100k (which is 100*1'000), they use じゅうまん (juuman), basically 10*10'000.
they then get a new word for 100'000'000 (いちおく (ichioku) = 10'000*10'000) compared to us getting million at 1'000*1'000

(as to why 10k instead of 1000)
And as mentioned by others, the style in party list helps read it as 100.00 instead, giving it some sense for both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SigmaOZ

I think the dev team should get rid of MP as they did with TP.


I run out of it sometimes, specially when doing damage (DPS) which drains the MP really quick.

---

Learn to manage your MP... maybe?

It's probably easier for it to be 10000 due to server ticks and MP Regen.

For example look at current Piety. If the stat interval calculated by TheoryJerks is correct, it takes 33 additional Piety for 1 MP/Tick at 80 which is 0.001%. This is important because the value gained is an integer. Their code might not include saving floating values for each server tick.

If MP was 1000, 0.001% would be .1 MP/Tick. It would be 330 Piety for 1 MP/Tick. Even if they changed the interval value of Piety to match the equivalent % regained, the value of Piety reflected on gear would either be extremely high or extremely low.

That being said, the new Piety is pretty garbage. Considering the healing + damage power sacrificed to have a relevant amount.

It is easier because your mp does not change as you level up now. So, if you tune the spell to work a way at say level 10, then you dont need to retune the mana cost for level 80.

Also, guys, it is not 10,000. It is 100.00% The last 2 0's are smaller because they represent being decimals of a percent. So, if you are at 100.00, then you have currently 100% of your mana. It is that simple.