Stats

[[f13]`11411181]

Hellflower (+71 damage +dmgamp) and Harkon's (best -ehp bar none) are pretty poorly optimized items compared to Wingbow , FWS, Symbol. LAFF

Let's ignore all that Charged Hammer, Riftshards, Shieldbreaker, Savage Mace, Doombringer etc. because you need to build your primary stat!

"plus the lack of ability to compete at all past the 25 minute mark when it comes to damage since most heroes quickly become able to shrug off their burst"
You don't play this game very much at all to say that, no offence.

[foxmindedguy]

I agree with 'tis guy. He very busy person, still come up with great suggestion.

We recently established in the competitive discussion that most balance changes are flavorful and really not many changes change the structure of the actual game. It just forces the "less than DOTA skilled" competitors to forfeit or pick a certain line-up and strat, although in actuality the forgone strat and heroes are still balanced relative to the game.

This suggestion WILL change the structure of the game but if our competitors actually L2P, it will not pwn the game balance. Okies, now as we have established the viability aspect of it, the second (and more important part) is flavor.

Do we want to adapt LOL-type mechanic where casters scale??? Probably not.

So yes, my friend, Gooooood Idea. Might be viable and might not pwn balance of the game in actuality, but will demotivate players to learn the game anew. So no! Not cool!

Bad! Bad!

PS: If you want to increase your magic damage, get Spellshards, Harkons and Codex. I believe spellshards also gives cool-down reduction too. If you want more disable, get Sheepstick. So the combination is your "suggested int" right there. Hope you enjoy.

[Tirrinar]

Hellflower (+71 damage +dmgamp) and Harkon's (best -ehp bar none) are pretty poorly optimized items compared to Wingbow , FWS, Symbol. LAFF

Let's ignore all that Charged Hammer, Riftshards, Shieldbreaker, Savage Mace, Doombringer etc. because you need to build your primary stat!

"plus the lack of ability to compete at all past the 25 minute mark when it comes to damage since most heroes quickly become able to shrug off their burst"
You don't play this game very much at all to say that, no offence.

I think you agreed with me on the first one since I said that HF and Hark were BETTER optimized because of the inferiority of int vs agi as a stat...but I could be misreading your statements.

Charged, SB, Savage, etc are all items you get for either straight up damage or AS unlike AGI they don't give BOTH. Plus this is an INT dps items vs AGI dps items comparasion I was intentionally leaving those items out...and, seriously? Doombringer? It's a gamble item used in desperate scenarios or as a laugh because you're that far ahead.

None offense taken but, I find mildly off-putting that this community falls back to a lack of games played/low mmr as a reason why people know nothing about a game, theorycrafting and hypothetical situations have little reliance on twitch based physical skills that the individual may or may not have. I wonder if S2's finest players on the balance team could beat MSI or some other pro team. Basically just because my stats say I have less than 1k games played(which btw is somewhat innaccurate since I bought a stat reset, then tanked my mmr to play with my 1300[and climbing] brother and then took a 9 month "vacation" to afganistan and then started playing again, so in actuality I only have about 30 games played from under a year ago. Though I have been watching several streams and watched all the VODs' of the last dreamHoN...thing so I'd like to think that my crasp on the CONCEPT of how the game works is fairly solid.

PS Codex uses generally get laughed at or chewed out by both teams, Shards doesn't increase your damage but lowered your opponents EHP(and is countered by an item at 1/4-1/8th it's price depending on upgrades, and Harkons isn't bought to increase spell damage, it's bought to ignore the 20+ armor everyone has when the game gets to the 60 minute mark.

[[f13]`11411181]

Yeah, I misread that. *shrug*

My main permabanned account is 1337, and I think this one is hovering around 1500 out of choice (i like being able to play games that have relatively less stress factor involved so i can try new things out on a whim).
I haven't even looked at your stats for reference, but claiming that burst can safely be ignored by a majority of a team from the 25min mark is an argument made from a position of someone who has little to no extensive experience with the game. That just simply doesn't happen, and it's honestly so self-evident that it's dumbfounding that you could even say that. Sorry if you find that offputting.

As for CH, SM, SB etc. - have you not seen that all of those items give MORE than any item with any extensive amount of agility on it? That whole diatribe about agility being so good just doesn't work out in real terms. These items are also stat-neutral, meaning that the whole stat arguments are mostly irrelevant in terms of "better carrying items". Skillsets are the main factor in making a carry, not their primary stat. this is getting to be repeated ad nauseum now.

"It is not prevalent enough? The concept is broken, sloppy design, and forgives ignoring bad positioning since they cannot be disabled or damaged by half the opposing team."
This line of reasoning is typically spouted by converted LoL players - generally players who see the hard cc and spells heroes carry as the only way for certain(often blanketed under INT) heroes to influence a game. This is also simply not the case. Shrunken Head is overpowered by design, since it gives heroes a way to force an advantage for a small window of time. The catch is, they have to create this window - and there are specific direct and indirect counters even to this.

I'd say you're getting there in terms of nuance within the game, but I think there are quite a few holes in terms of understanding specific things. No, your stats don't reflect upon your ability to observe but I'd say you're not quite seeing the same picture we are in terms of what has been and how that's influencing what you're seeing now.
(this isn't meant to be condescending at all, i'm just making an offhand observation in a thread that I feel honestly isn't going to serve any real use in debating the primary consideration)

[[iPr0]TotallyNoob1]

INT heros should get magic armour from it!
I don't believe in the added dmg though.
maybe cast speed.

[Tirrinar]

I'll give that 25 minutes was a rather arbitrary number but after a set amount of time in which most players have had the opportunity to bulk up their health pools as well as attack damage is when, more or less, when casters tend to teeter off in terms of presence when it comes to their damage and healing effects and when what CC they have built into the skillset, if any, becomes more value than what could be their primary role of magical burst damage.

with the straight up damage and AS items, I agree, they are almost undoubtedly more effective when compared with Primary Attribute DPS items, aside from a late-game harkons and it's potential for true damage AAs. I realize that skillsets are what make the carry, which is why we have non-agi carries in this game. However from a focused perspective comparing stats and only stats(which is inaccurate when comparing "who is the harder carry" i know) agility provides more value to a damage dealer than strength does which is more valuable than intelligence. Which is the entire point of this thread as far as I'm aware.

About Shrunken head(you pulled a grand assumption on the LoL comment btw) yes I've played LoL, about 50 matches or so, and yes I even "Enjoy" it to a sense, more towards the emphasis on skillshots and, yes, the validity of casters in a lategame setup, which I find has managed to pull of both AD carries and AP(spellcasting) carries without causing all casters to pull top teir dps lategame. However my dislike with shrunken comes from 2 things: first the sheer frustration of someone running into a team and slashing with abandon and unable to be stopped other than being gunned down by our physical attacks. The second is from playing the game Bloodline Champions, every skill is a skillshot and requires a good degree of aim to hit anything, plus they have no "invincibility" spells that don't put their affected hero in some form of CC state thus they have an excellent way of avoiding damage yet sacrifice something huge as well. As far as I am concerned both Void and SH grant that "invincibility" to roughly half the games roster for a long time, 1-2/3's of a team fight. Which considering the lineup of our, admittedly uncreative, professional gaming community half the roster of most teams as well. I realize BLC and HoN are two ENTIRELY different games however the concept of invulnerability without any downsides is poor design. I hated it in DotA and I hate it in HoN.
I admit that prevalent was probably the wrong terminology for it however you see at least 1 on each side in most games, and is a reccomended item for almost every carry and several non carries. It also gives decent stats, nothing amazing mind you, 190hp and 16(26 for str)damage is always welcome but it's immunity is what makes it a commonly used, broken, item.

Right now the meta for professional games are for fairly short quick win teams, heavy pushes and semi rather than hard carries. So right now nukers are fairly potent matches effectively being over at or soon after their falloff period however; when the meta shifts, and it will, and in lower teir mmr games that do last 45+ minutes where everyone has 2.5k+ hp magic damage is...pitiful and in some cases completely ineffectual towards the overall outcome of the match where that player becomes more of a liability than an asset because of 1 choice he made an hour ago.


I'll be honest i have not been a huge fan of the +2 stats "skill" I personally would have rather seen the cap at 20 with 5 ranks in each spell and 4 levels of an ultimate. One of the reasons (I feel) that casters drop off so quickly is that after lv 16 their spells just stop getting stronger even though they still gain experience. It basically raises the point of the dropoff higher, but it also lowers the max health. However this would be an even bigger change than reworking a single attribute and minor adjustment across the board of any magic damage heavy hero.




On a complete and utter tangent here, Feel Good Inc. is an amazing song.
If I'm coming across as aggravated or "raging" I apologize, I get rather...energetic when I'm talking(or typing as the case may be) about something I care about. I truly enjoy this game but feel that it suffers from some poor throwbacks to an old game that suffered from a very limited engine and much less flexible core.

[PzKw]

First of all, you seem like you were rather upset when you wrote this. Perhaps you should have taken a moment to calm down.

Now I would like to address each of your points, but it is simply impossible for anything to come out of trying to argue such a wild and mostly irrelevant mess. It will just result in an incoherent convolution with a lost purpose. More important than any type of "critical thinking" skill is the skill of simplification: What point is being argued and what basic, concise set of factors are relevant to it at the lowest level? We could go on about agility and intelligence forever. We could analyze its history, analyze average mana costs for different hero types to determine "useful mana breaks", we could come up with all sorts of things to talk about while never solving our problem.

In reality, there are the only two factors in this argument: where are intelligence heroes mid and late game compared to the other two attributes and how
much intelligence do they generally have compared to agillity/strength heroes?

I'll tell you that, on average, a reaonably farmed carry during the midgame with have around 60 int compared to 100-110 on reasonably farmed intelligence heroes. Normal strength heroes will have around 40 int depending on the hero. Of course, oddball int gains are outliers and not factored into that observation.

A good thing to note is the types of int heroes used in DHS. I emphasize the word "note" as it is not truly a key issue. As such, I'm putting it in spoiler tags.

The "in" intelligence heroes were Hag, Bubbles, Para, Ophelia, Nymph, Glacius, Polly, Tort, Tempest, and Aluna.
Also note that Tort did not perform very well.

The big similarity between these int heroes (and, interestingly, the disimilarity with tort) is that they are all either have very survivable skillsets (hag, bubs, Para), are very easy to screen (big initiators like Polly and Tempest. Also Aluna with Dejavu), or have ridiculously good skillsets (especially early game) that make it not matter anyway (Nympoh, Glac, Ophe in a general sense).
Tort, on the other, is not a very good initiator, needs to stay alive to be useful, and doesn't have a skillset that helps him stay alive.

Now with the knowledge that int heroes have a little less than double the int of most other heroes and that strength heroes are generally very lacking in intelligence, we can use the intelligence stat as a tool to solve general meta issues. Is there a meta issue right now? One can be argued. That isn't the purpose of this post however. I'm merely simplifying the issue to a managable level and identifying key topics. In addition, I'm demonstrating how manipulating stats can be used to solve these types of balance issues.

For example, say we had a super nuking meta that only allowed heavy nukers to be used. We could add something like .05 magic armor per int to nerf nuking and bring the game more into line while counter-buffing those same nukers who stack int to keep them viable (all in one simple change!).

Manipulating primary stats to fix large game issues is not something to be instantly discarded. It can be a very useful tool for balance and design. Of course, it should be used very sparingly, but don't forget to keep it in the back of your head

A wide change like that isn't sparing. It's broad. Very broad. Going back to the examples of Ints you used, precisely the same rules apply to the Str and Agi pickups. The top tier of play is very selective about what's "in" and "viable" in their picks. Going back to DHS we only saw the same 10 or so STR heroes over the whole tournament, and all of them had very specific traits in common. Ditto Agi. Does this in any way indicate that there's a problem with how Strength or Agility scales into the game? However, any broad brush change like this affects the heroes in the game, not just the ones you targetted as "problematic" - it's clumsy.

But in your post you say that the only two questions: where are intelligence heroes mid and lategame compared to the other stats, and how much intelligence do they generally have compared to those same heroes? But this neglects a multitude of other important questions: how easy is intelligence to get (since the attractiveness of it will affect what sort of heroes buy it, so the usage pattern won't be the same as it is now according to your second question), where are intelligence heroes early game compared to the other stats (since the relative strength and weakness at different phases of the game warrants question when talking about the total balance of these things), do these archetypes hold against real examples, and so on.

I'm too tired to go into this further. I'm not saying my post is flawless, nor is my argument, what I am saying is that you're being incredibly one eyed in your framing of this argument. You have set the goalposts so wide apart and your burden of proof so low that you can't help but kick a goal. I completely agree that anything in the game is fair game for balance and design (design is essentially the art of deciding what sort of game you want), and I'm very cognisant that you could make a workable game with int scaling. I'm not that narrow minded or stupid, I just happen to think that it's a wonderfully terrible idea in HoN with everything the way it actually is.

@Antimodus
The way the argument is presented makes it appear that it's based on the lowest level of Agi to be at that frames/attack, but the point I was making is that the benefits of Agi even to an Agi hero, across a decent data set, are actually not the most amazing for scaling. You would have to actually look at various total +IAS' to see how much agi you'd be wasting on a purchase, but the fundamental point is that lategame you're nearly always wasting agi (ie. agi becomes a much less gold efficient stat lategame, contrary to every popular belief), and stat growths probably don't contribute much at all to your IAS lategame at all.

[Antimodus]

Skillsets are the main factor in making a carry, not their primary stat.

Agree on this point, but the issue is not really primary stat. It's not that INT sucks as a primary stat, it's that having high INT gain with crappy STR and AGI gain is a pure liability past a certain point.

Fact is, INT has a rapid falloff in usefulness past about ~80 or so. At least on heroes that aren't Vindicator (scales directly with INT) or Tort, DR SR (can utilize a gigantic mana pool) or a couple of Restoration stone users with huge mana costs (Temp PWP).

On most heroes, beyond a certain point +INT, whether from items or stat gain, is just +dmg at best (if you're INT primary) or 100% worthless at worst. Which then the makes items that feature big +INT suddenly overpriced. This is mostly a problem when you try to balance an item like Frostfield plate. It makes balancing INT items harder because either you balance it for being a good 1st big item, and if it's not it basically means the INT component of the item lost almost all of its value.

The solution was to make the big INT items have incredibly powerful actives (Harkon's HF Sheep). That's a real design limitation, that's why it is so hard to get FFP to work as an item. Any big INT item has to be 1 of these 3 options
1. justified almost entirely by its active
2. too strong if gotten early (too cheap and early INT is strong)
3. too weak if gotten late (expensive and INT is useless)

E: So that's the logic behind those buff INT threads. Best thing would be a buff that only takes effect at higher INT values. Like say +1 base magic armor per ~15 INT above 80

[[NU]Tomate]

We all would have liked the function to be put in place right away... it was 1 of the great innovation of LOL but to have scaling spells. The fact that it wasn't put in place at the beginning simply makes it impossible to just dumb in an additional formula now. The best example I can think of is how broken heroes with physical damage dealing spells would be end game.

Think of torturer with the following end game items: Tablet, Null, Totem, Treads on INT: 14+15+35+10 = 74 bonus int. Now, let's pretend his target has as much int as him prior to items (hypothetical case), torturer just got a 74% bonus damage and disable duration??? Do you know how much damage that is. This is without taking into account the fact that torturer is 1 of the highest natural int hero in the game. His impale would now deal 2088 physical damage?

OK, what ever, let's look at hag with Null, Treads, Totem and HellFlower... Natural build for her: 15+10+35+30 = 90 int bonus... meaning her sonar scream will deal 570 int bonus damage if she's at the same int as the other hero prior to items? She would virtually 1shot a glacius... Not to mention that Hell Flower would last 5+ seconds and sheep stick 4+ seconds...

It would be completely ground breaking and not helping the heroes you think it would. Mid to late game, supports would be even more useless than they are, int carries would be the only thing existing as STR and Agi heroes would be disabled for ever due to int difference.

[[LsE]Hsssh]

It's not that INT sucks as a primary stat, it's that having high INT gain with crappy STR and AGI gain is a pure liability past a certain point.

At what point Bubbles is liability? Wretched Hag? Tempest? Please define what is crappy STR/AGI gain, combination of both is lower than 3.5 or what?

The solution was to make the big INT items have incredibly powerful actives

As opposed to big agi items like Wingbow and Genjuro? Nobody would buy them if they didn't have stupidly strong benefits not related to any stats.

That's a real design limitation, that's why it is so hard to get FFP to work as an item.

Main problem of FFP was Hellflower and Sheepstick being insanely stronger items at similar price point. Now when both were nerfed FFP stands as much better item and saw occasional pick ups when Elephant was popular hero. Another problem with FPP is that many new heroes have clearvision therefore clearvision it provides is less desirable.

Also can someone give a reason(asides of "hard support Glacius sucks at 70min game") why every stat should be equally important and scale equally thru the game?

[Rob4z]

Id suggest int decreases cast time by 0.0x ( replace x with fitting number).
adding 1% from every int would just break the game.

[changlingbob]

Id suggest int decreases cast time by 0.0x ( replace x with fitting number).
adding 1% from every int would just break the game.

Any ideas what the numbers should be like? Do you have any use cases for your numbers? I note you think that 1% per int would break the game; do you want to elucidate on why it would break the game, but some other number would not? If some other number would not break the game, would that number be noticable in circumstances where a slightly larger number did not break the game? Why is cast speed a good mechanic to attach to int? Is it better than other mechanics you have discarded? Does it have any problems that may need to be watched carefully if implemented? How would it affect the balance of items such as hellflower, sheepstick or ffp?

In short: have you put any thought into this suggestion, or did you just poop out the first thing you thought of?

[[EHOP]Epidemilk]

How about we forget the whole thing, lest there be any more accusations of "turning into LoL"

[[f13]`11411181]

I find it a bit misleading to say everything scales in LoL, therefore everyone has the incentive to farm. The latter may be true, but it's definitely not because of the former. Given that skills all scale at different discrete rates, LoL actually has a lot more fine control over which skills end up truly being worth building to scale for. It's a system that can give a lot more control over a hero's optimal itembuild, but also has the obvious downside of being very heavy on the fineprint and backend maths to actually test it.

[Rosvall]

What about adding a luxury item, maybe an upgrade to staff, that does something like this: "Spell damage is increased by ([Average damage]*0.2)%"

So having 200 damage will increase spell damage by 40%. 300 damage will increase spell damage by 60% etc.

An item like this will in essence work just as spell shards works early in the game, but be a late game item which is more potent. It allows farming nukers with bad auto attacks, such as thunderbringer, to contribute more in the late stages of the game.

[Rob4z]

Any ideas what the numbers should be like? Do you have any use cases for your numbers? I note you think that 1% per int would break the game; do you want to elucidate on why it would break the game, but some other number would not? If some other number would not break the game, would that number be noticable in circumstances where a slightly larger number did not break the game? Why is cast speed a good mechanic to attach to int? Is it better than other mechanics you have discarded? Does it have any problems that may need to be watched carefully if implemented? How would it affect the balance of items such as hellflower, sheepstick or ffp?

In short: have you put any thought into this suggestion, or did you just poop out the first thing you thought of?

Yes i just threw a random idea, cause I don't really support the idea that INT gives magic damage, all the skills deal XX damage and +XX on Level 4,
Not saying that the magic damage is a totally horrible idea, but it would def break the game.

And for my idea i just realised that | 1 int = -1 cast time | would be enuf. Thats just a random idea I threw to replace the damage bonus from INT.

[changlingbob]

Spells don't need to scale, because they are better earlier, while autoattacks are better later because they scale. This is the whole reason for the support-carry dynamic. Sometimes you get midgame heroes, who typically have a strong autoattack while also having spells, such as valkyrie, or strong enough spells to just kill heroes or towers, see thunderbringer or torturer respectively (among other things). This is the way the entire game is set up.

Any item that boosts spell damage means the midgame lasts longer. Spellshards fits this role as a midgame spelldamage item, but could be a better designed item in some respects, as it's a direct increase on how much damage spells do with no effort or fore-thought put into it. If one looks at veil of discord from dota, it requires landing an ability on people to debuff them, although it debuffs for everyone. This makes it a team item, more fitting of how spellcaster heroes are set up; survive and reign the midgame, then fall off as autoattacking takes over and support the team more.

Adding a lategame item that boosts spell damage is missing the point. Any spelldamage hero that picks it up has almost certainly fallen off, and might be propped up to just below useful; a sheepstick is almost certainly going to benefit the team more. An exception here is snowballing spellcasters, such as hag or pebbles, who can stomp midgame and force that into a win. Hag would buy such an item and continue to get kills while her team's autoattackers catch up to win, and pebbles builds items to become an autoattacker.

Adding an early game item that boosts spell damage (and I'm going to put the 'int scales spell damage' suggestion in here as well) means that most spellcasters, including strength heroes like behemoth and agility heroes like slither, become roflstompingly strong trains of death if said item/effect is any good, due to the fact that spells are already strong in the early game.

Any change that alters this build up and fall off of spell damage has to take into account that this is how the entire game is built.

[[TECH]Gorb]

I would like to reiterate that outright suggestions are to be avoided, on pain of targeted post deletion(s).

As to not break conversation flow, the previous posts have been left intact. However, Rob4z, from this point forward, posts will start vanishing if they don't feature some form of reasoned debate. Especially considering the effort going into peoples' replies to you.

[moj0j0]

Thank you for every comments, after i've read a lot of comments in here(some i can't understand due to my poor English, sorry ) The most topic you talk about are:
1. This change will make ground breaking due to OP magic damage
This can’t be come true because…
As I already explain at first, INT stat also increase magic armor which mean 100 INT enemy have won’t deal 100% bonus damage to you because your magic armor will help you reduce that.
E.G. Torturer with the following end game items: Tablet, Null, Totem, Treads on INT: 14+15+35+10 = 74 bonus int plus INT from himself at level 25(121 int total) he will have 121 + 74 = 195 total INT = 195% bonus magic damage
(assume his base magic damage spell is 300 dmg, with 195% bonus he gain, he deal 300x1.95= 585 magic damage instead) sound terrible for STR and AGI heroes?
Well if he use that spell to The Dark Lady at level 25(16 + 1.9*25 + 20 = 83.5 total INT = 11.9 magic armor, plus 5 magic armor that every heroes have she will have 16.9 armor in total which = 49% magic damage reduction) so The Dark Lady take = 585 x ((100-49)/100) = 298 damage, which isn’t deal much damage compare with old formula
For old formula, The dark Lady will take 300 x .75(from her base magic armor) = 225 damage
So the damage difference between new and old formula is just = 298 – 225 = 73 damage(approximately ½ - 1 auto attack hit at late game)
Conclustion: this change won’t make magic damage Over Power for INT based heroes in my opinion as I explain above.


2. This change will make ground breaking due to OP Effect duration
Okay, 1% effect duration seem too much after I calculate by compare with Torturer with items at the first question(195 total int) and The Dark lady at level 25(83.5 total int), 195 – 83.5 = 111.5% effect duration seem too effective, 0.5% or 0.3% should be ok
Conclusion: 1% effect duration should be nerfed, and use 0.5 or 0.3 % or fitting number instead (or event nerf its base effect duration).

The reason I want this change is : I want to see HON difference from DOTA , why magic armor must be fix and why INT based heroes must too weak in late game(I’m one who play support quite often due to most people choose carry all the time) They should shinable at late game but not too OP by improve INT stat bonus which make them have more survivability to all effect that done by AGI or STR heroes(because they are fragile and low DPS), improve a bit of effect duration which make them do support role better than now.

And last, everything I suggest can changeable, if you think it look bad, thank you for all comments.

We all would have liked the function to be put in place right away... it was 1 of the great innovation of LOL but to have scaling spells. The fact that it wasn't put in place at the beginning simply makes it impossible to just dumb in an additional formula now. The best example I can think of is how broken heroes with physical damage dealing spells would be end game.

Think of torturer with the following end game items: Tablet, Null, Totem, Treads on INT: 14+15+35+10 = 74 bonus int. Now, let's pretend his target has as much int as him prior to items (hypothetical case), torturer just got a 74% bonus damage and disable duration??? Do you know how much damage that is. This is without taking into account the fact that torturer is 1 of the highest natural int hero in the game. His impale would now deal 2088 physical damage?

OK, what ever, let's look at hag with Null, Treads, Totem and HellFlower... Natural build for her: 15+10+35+30 = 90 int bonus... meaning her sonar scream will deal 570 int bonus damage if she's at the same int as the other hero prior to items? She would virtually 1shot a glacius... Not to mention that Hell Flower would last 5+ seconds and sheep stick 4+ seconds...

It would be completely ground breaking and not helping the heroes you think it would. Mid to late game, supports would be even more useless than they are, int carries would be the only thing existing as STR and Agi heroes would be disabled for ever due to int difference.

[[IaF]Skyve]

You should check your math again. At a 1% increase of magic damage per point of int you reach a 195% INCREASE in damage - meaning the skill would be dealing 295% of its base damage, or 885 magic damage. With the magic amor values you calculated that goes down to 451 effective damage. Which is more than twice the damage a 300 magic damage nuke would be doing right now.

Further, you fail to point out why intelligence is underpowered (while a lot of people here spent a lot of effort in explaining why that is not the case).