How does Nymandus beat Ranger? (in General)


Dark Dreky July 25 2006 2:22 AM EDT

and by Ranger I mean his crazy named character....

for some reason when looking at the two different characters, it seems that Rangers character is far superior... in NW and MPR. Plus Nymandus has no AMF so it can't be backlash to his big CoC mage. I am just curious as to how the fight might actually look (read)... seems that 2.6m score with a near 700k MPR is a little crazy!

Maybe I should just go to bed...

QBJohnnywas July 25 2006 2:47 AM EDT

He's got seekers, is probably getting the best part of a million per strike in ranged. Double, triple strikes in ranged - seekers - bye bye mage before the mage even gets to fire. Then it's pretty much a mop up session.....

Seekers are a pretty good leveller where PR is concerned....

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] July 25 2006 2:48 AM EDT

It probably looks something like this:

Round 1
Nymandus shot The Showgirl with Tennis ELBow [529565]
Mrs. County, eventually absorbs damage [340512]
Nymandus struck deep into The Showgirl with Tennis ELBow [654951]
R.I.P. The Showgirl

Round 2
Nymandus skewered Mrs. County, eventually with Tennis ELBow [568955]
Nymandus struck deep into Mrs. County, eventually with Tennis ELBow [655217]
Nymandus skewered Mrs. County, eventually with Tennis ELBow [544517]
Nymandus struck deep into Mrs. County, eventually with Tennis ELBow [695448]
R.I.P. Mrs. County, eventually

Etc.

Tennis ELBow [6x5700] (+110) worth $63,696,878 + 4,052 Arrows of Pursuit in a Quiver of Adeptness (named seeker arrows)

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 2:58 AM EDT

Because he's willing to go to great lengths to find a way to beat a particular char or strat. He taken care of all viable tank strats already, combine that with seekers (named seekers being one of the most powerful items in game right now) and other than pure mage DM teams he's set. His ability to fight higher than anyone I've seen on cb2 leads me to believe that Jon was seriously unhappy with the balance up top and really wanted to shake things up.

QBJohnnywas July 25 2006 3:01 AM EDT

The old way of looking at score/PR/MPR has changed a lot for ToA tank teams....nearer to score being 4-5 times mpr.....especially if they are using one of the BIG weapons......

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 3:08 AM EDT

I will say this, I remember Spid being beaten by a huge ELB and slayer arrows when the tank was out in front (to keep them from being farmable while fighting, which was an amazing feat). I don't believe Jon came to Todd's rescue that time. Maybe specialty ammo is just supposed to be, really really special.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 3:15 AM EDT

Cephas Keken Maug Fighter shot The Showgirl [153246]
Mrs. County, eventually absorbs damage [153246]
	
 
Cephas Keken Maug Fighter shot The Showgirl [176364]
Mrs. County, eventually absorbs damage [176364]
Cephas Keken Maug Fighter shot The Showgirl [205939]
Mrs. County, eventually absorbs damage [205939]
Named seekers and a x1154 ELB with ~ 700k STR, it's the ELB that's killing everyone not the seekers, they just make it double ugly. With a less and 15 mil NW melee weapon, he has plenty of WA left over for a 60 mil NW ELB, even at 700k mpr. Anyone else want to see weapon PR increase (and WA decrease), now that weapon power increased?

[admin: please learn a little more about line breaks]

AdminNightStrike July 25 2006 3:18 AM EDT

FYI: Your "pre" tags around what should be paragraph text is fouling up horizontal scrolling.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 3:21 AM EDT

no kidding, I must have typoed so furiously that I forgot line breaks.
without pre tags I've no clue how to paste fight logs that don't involve a mile of break tags.

QBJohnnywas July 25 2006 3:30 AM EDT

Nov, it is the ELB that's doing the damage but he wouldn't get quite the result against Ranger without the seekers. It's their ability to go straight to the mage, REGARDLESS of the AoI that's doing it here...

The AoI is a lot more useful than a lot of people seem to realize but the seeker's ability to ignore it makes seekers a very very valuable weapon indeed. If more seekers appeared then mage teams should start thinking about selling their AoI to tank teams.....lol

AdminNightStrike July 25 2006 5:06 AM EDT

The easy way is to view the source and copy the html directly. That, or do a screenshot.

bartjan July 25 2006 5:25 AM EDT

Firefox: select text, right click->view selection source.

Vahilor July 25 2006 5:33 AM EDT

If i might add a question to this discussion, do seekers target the highest level mage -> even if it is a familiar?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 6:00 AM EDT

Yup. :)

QBRanger July 25 2006 7:10 AM EDT

Hence my post a couple days back about "Do we still need seekers?"

QBRanger July 25 2006 7:47 AM EDT

Without the seekers he does perhaps 100k damage to my wall per hit.

With the seekers he does 6-700k damage to my mage per hit.

Shake Some Action July 25 2006 8:16 AM EDT

I didn't even know what seekers actually did until yesterday when Nymandus started using them defensively. The size of his bow doesn't effect our fights, he kills a minion per round anyway, it's just those pesky arrows that knock me out. I'm not going to win too many fights that my FB mage goes out in round 1.

It's too easy to counter mages in general (Mage Shield, TSA, Seekers, AMF, etc.), I have trouble believing everyone thought mages were too powerful before Jon's June changes.

QBJohnnywas July 25 2006 8:23 AM EDT

Mages weren't necessarily too powerful, it was just that tanks weren't easy to run. A good tank needs a lot to be good...which costs. Whereas a good mage doesn't need anything to be good just xp.

The most important change Jon has made this month to tanks wasn't the increase in damage - it was the change to the upgrade. Those small, unchanging upgrade prices have just made it a lot easier to run a tank team, without worrying about your next upgrade costing a million or something...and as for naming...a free million in NW on your weapon anyone?

QBJohnnywas July 25 2006 8:25 AM EDT

....well maybe not 'free' but you know what I mean.....

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 8:27 AM EDT

Well making some assumptions, let's look at potential DD reduction.

AMF just large enough to get a 20% reduction, +30 Mgs, +40 TSA, 20% AC reduction (from +AC). We'll ignore ToE Aura and Protection for now.

100 * .8 * .7 * .6 * .8 = 27

Or a 73% reduction. While large-ish values for the armour, this isn't taking into account any naming bonuses either. :)

If the ToE aura is large enough that goes down to 7 or a 93% reduction. Then Protection will reduce that.

:)

QBRanger July 25 2006 8:35 AM EDT

GL:

I personally have no problem with such a reduction given the limitations of such items.

MgS-nerfs all enchantments and DD spells
TSA-expensive upgrade compared to MC or adam and -10% to spells

With my Wall's AC of 380 I get almost 80% reduction in physical damage.

My problem is with seekers. They can be gotten by anyone now that they appear in auction. And they target the highest DD mage, effectively knocking out my CoC mage before he can even cast 1 spell. All the while being able to be saved for defensive combat.

That lets someone rent a huge ELB, get 1 set of seekers for let's say 5k and be almost immune to the highest level mages in the game. When they want to fight, just switch to generic arrows and then back for defense. And cooldown did not stop this problem as people could have 3 or 4 sets of seekers to switch on and off to avoid it.

One question: Why are missile weapons not used up in defensive combat?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 8:41 AM EDT

Because I'm bored, I thought I'd total this up with max items Including naming bonus). :)

AMF (I'll be lenient here..) 50%, MgS +43, TSA +52, +AC (23+52+21+54+31) 181, ToE large enough to hit 75%.

100 * .5 * .57 * .48 * .62 * .25 = 2.12 or a 97.88% reduction.

That will drop to 3.27 in the second round (from TSA reduction) and 3.84 in the third.

Oh, all before Protection kicks in.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 8:43 AM EDT

"One question: Why are missile weapons not used up in defensive combat?"

So that your archer isn't farmed when you go to sleep because people run you out of ammo. :)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 8:43 AM EDT

Edit: Isn't farmed by people far lower than yourself, giving them massive rewards, as you damage output is negated. :)

TrueDevil [AAA] July 25 2006 8:46 AM EDT

I just hope the next change month would bring mages to be equal with tank. It's quite funny that people keep saying mages were overpowered, but strat like Elros that can kill All mage team in the game except Ranger's seems just fine. (and that's probably just because the huge mpr difference) Although, with a help of seeker, he might be able to beat him after all.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 8:49 AM EDT

" QBRanger, 8:35 AM EDT
GL:

I personally have no problem with such a reduction given the limitations of such items.

MgS-nerfs all enchantments and DD spells
TSA-expensive upgrade compared to MC or adam and -10% to spells"

Not so much of a problem for the TSA when you're also using a MgS. :P

"With my Wall's AC of 380 I get almost 80% reduction in physical damage."

VB has been given as an option to cut that down, to make sure tanks can't be made invulnerable to physical damage in CB2. There's nothing to help DD damage in this senario.

The new damage formulae and Seekers does make Decay and CoC much more unattractive now. I suppose the pay off is the cost of Seekers.

But you then just equip them for defensive time, and blast through your BA using normal arraows as quickly as possible, to limit the amount ot time Mages can fight against you.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 8:52 AM EDT

" It's quite funny that people keep saying mages were overpowered"

I think a major problem with this view is that single FB mages could put out a stupid amount of damage, and quickly. And that the anti FB mage item, was in comparison very very weak. If the RoBF reduced a lot more FB damage (enough to keep single FB mages on par with everyone else), at least everyone would have had a choice on how to stop them.

I'd hate for ELB+Archery to go back to the way it was in CB1...

QBJohnnywas July 25 2006 8:58 AM EDT

I thought arrows were used up in defensive combat - but only if you win....I was certain this was the case...

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] July 25 2006 9:00 AM EDT

I thought the major problem with mages was the ToE, with a couple of weapons with a combined NW at your free limit it was impossible to overwhelm the ToEs around your level so they were getting 75% damage reduction + the AMF reduction.

TrueDevil [AAA] July 25 2006 9:17 AM EDT

GL : I thought it was because at the lower MPR, mages might be a bit overpowered since tanks couldn't afford much NW and so on, but IMO that should be solved with 'DD reduction at lower level' , right now the only implementation is if DD damage haven't reach lvl 100 k, it's power is only 1/3 or whatever. I mean if mages were overpowered at lower mpr, then why not keep having DD reduction until, let's say level 1 or 1.5 mil to finally get the full power of DD spells, and instead, here what we get, crazy tank blender. =/

Borderliner : That's quite true, even with those 2 elements, ToE and AMF, it's already killing mages, but it seems not enough, and here we have more DD reduction with MgS and TsA.

QBJohnnywas July 25 2006 10:06 AM EDT

Aha, I've just been attacked and won - for the first time pretty much all day. And arrows were depleted.

A defending win uses arrows.

Tezmac July 25 2006 10:14 AM EDT

"I will say this, I remember Spid being beaten by a huge ELB and slayer arrows when the tank was out in front (to keep them from being farmable while fighting, which was an amazing feat). I don't believe Jon came to Todd's rescue that time. Maybe specialty ammo is just supposed to be, really really special. "

Yeah, that was me. :O)

{Quitter}Gah July 25 2006 11:12 AM EDT

"VB has been given as an option to cut that down, to make sure tanks can't be made invulnerable to physical damage in CB2. There's nothing to help DD damage in this senario."

uhh... magic damage already ignores base thats much better than a vb

"AMF (I'll be lenient here..) 50%, MgS +43, TSA +52, +AC (23+52+21+54+31) 181, ToE large enough to hit 75%.

100 * .5 * .57 * .48 * .62 * .25 = 2.12 or a 97.88% reduction. "

50% amf is not lenient... that requires training amf equally to the dd damage. And ToE only affects companion minions at 50% of what it does for the ToE wearer.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 11:15 AM EDT

Ok the statement that magical damage ignores more AC than the VB needs to get thrown out the window.

QBPit Spawn [Abyssal Specters] July 25 2006 11:26 AM EDT

when i had TAB i had about as much DD reduction as possible, and DD (in the form of snk) still beat me, and i had 4 minions, 3x tsa (37 37 34) 2x mgs (43, 40) ToE and prot(20) and amf which cast .19 on him. with all that he still beat me so i don't think DD is as weak vs things as you're saying

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 11:27 AM EDT

""VB has been given as an option to cut that down, to make sure tanks can't be made invulnerable to physical damage in CB2. There's nothing to help DD damage in this senario."

uhh... magic damage already ignores base thats much better than a vb"

The AC figures I gave were only the enhantment (or plus) figures for the various peices. Not the base, which magic damage ignores.

Magic damage also doesn't cut Endurance and Protection reducting in half either.

""AMF (I'll be lenient here..) 50%, MgS +43, TSA +52, +AC (23+52+21+54+31) 181, ToE large enough to hit 75%.

100 * .5 * .57 * .48 * .62 * .25 = 2.12 or a 97.88% reduction. "

50% amf is not lenient... that requires training amf equally to the dd damage. And ToE only affects companion minions at 50% of what it does for the ToE wearer."

I was looking at top end stuff. All the max items in the game. When considering this a 50% reduction is lenient, as AMF could theoreticaly go to 100%. So, what would a lenient, top end, max AMF percent be?

The assumption was that the ToE, also being the best of the best, was large enough to provide the capped 75% damage reduciton to it's aura. Considering this is based on damage *after* AMF, MgS, TSA and AC, I don't think that's too much to assume...

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 11:30 AM EDT

"when i had TAB i had about as much DD reduction as possible, and DD (in the form of snk) still beat me, and i had 4 minions, 3x tsa (37 37 34) 2x mgs (43, 40) ToE and prot(20) and amf which cast .19 on him. with all that he still beat me so i don't think DD is as weak vs things as you're saying"

don't get me wrong, I never said DD was weak. I always said FB was overpowered.

But, 3% of a Gazillion could still be enough to kill most folks! ;)

Now that Physical damage can do far far more than Magical, how do you reduce physical damage down to 3%?

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] July 25 2006 11:33 AM EDT

Largest AMF = 1.2M, largest FB = 3.3M, granted someone might have a bigger combined AMF but I think 50% is optimistic, even if going for mages only, which is what you would be reduced to.

QBPit Spawn [Abyssal Specters] July 25 2006 11:34 AM EDT

oh yea, i forgot to mention that i had PL too, so that another 10%, with both PL walls having over 3.2 mil hp

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 11:36 AM EDT

I forgot to add PL to my calculatios above, and left out an AoAC from the +AC as well..

BL, people need to train more AMF then. :)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 11:39 AM EDT

>_< Sorry, that didn't say what I wanted to at all...

I don't count an AMF that small as 'top end'. I don't think peopel have made a team concentrating on AMF , as until the recent changes it wasn't viable.

Like I wouldn't count a +15 TSA as top end. :) I hope this make more sense! ;)

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 11:45 AM EDT

I believe a defensive win only burns ammo if the attacker is "near" your power. Otherwise a puny 10/10 BA team could force a large team to run out of expensive defensive ammo. At least I think that is the way it was in CB1...

{Quitter}Gah July 25 2006 12:21 PM EDT

"Ok the statement that magical damage ignores more AC than the VB needs to get thrown out the window. "

fine, but the point was that magical damage can still get by AC pretty well even if it's not as good as a vb

And I believe amf only goes up to 100% when you have it trained double? whatever the dd spell is trained to... Would be interesting to see an amf team training just amf taking out all of the only mage teams ; )

TrueDevil [AAA] July 25 2006 1:15 PM EDT

PitSpawn : And when you lose to SNK, what kind of weapons were you using ? and I believe that was also before the weapon damage change. Another point would be, I remembered that your main tank only has like 150 k HP or something ? (Maybe the PL on both walls didn't absorb enough damage). All I remembered it was ridiculously low at that high MPR. You can't really blame FB for that, and .19 AMF is pretty low, what about the ToE level ?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 1:50 PM EDT

Cephas Keken Maug Fighter tapped Prophecies with A Q-Tip [88971]
I wonder how much more damage Nymandus does to that wall with his > 15 mil NW VB...

QBPit Spawn [Abyssal Specters] July 25 2006 2:08 PM EDT

i was using a vb, and my walls both died before my tank did, the battle lasted 21 rounds, 900k ToE

QBPit Spawn [Abyssal Specters] July 25 2006 2:10 PM EDT

and my tank was my last to die out of my 4 minions

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 25 2006 2:16 PM EDT

Here is the part I do not get. Why does anyone think that a Fireball should equal the damage of a piece of equipment that cost at least 15 million CB2 $ to get to where it is?

This baffles me. Why should something that all I have to do is train click down enter train be equal to something I have to pour 15mil NW into it. (and BTW we ALL know without camping the only way to get 15mil NW into a VB is with USD)

So I spend my hard earned CB2 (and likely hard earned USD) and somehow a trained Fireball should approach this?

I think I must have missed the point somewhere and I am not getting what the true argument is. I hope that is the case.

Misfit July 25 2006 2:28 PM EDT

Maybe, if there was a more viable way to spend USD to boost mage damage there wouldn't be as many complaints?

QBRanger July 25 2006 2:31 PM EDT

Nymandus grazed Prophecies with The Reaver [104390]
Nymandus scratched Prophecies with The Reaver [116050]
Nymandus grazed Prophecies with The Reaver [138793]

Answer to novice's question.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 2:32 PM EDT

wow, just wow.

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 2:39 PM EDT

Since when is a 15 million weapon "big"? I saved up over 21 million before starting my NCB...I could have put that all into a weapon, surely? And that was wuth non-NUB earnings.

In no way to I think an FB is "entitled" to be better than a weapon. I just want the PR to reflect how powerful the weapon is. All of the experience put into an FB raises PR. Not all (perhaps even none) of the net worth put into a weapon counts as PR, and those weapons can do colossal damage now.

That's the issue, in my opinion. I'm not shouting "imbalance!" I'm shouting "improper representation leading to inflated rewards!"

QBPit Spawn [Abyssal Specters] July 25 2006 2:44 PM EDT

so should other weapons have pr weights too? because va is a nice side effect, as are having cheaper upgrades such as els

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 2:46 PM EDT

Or, to put it another way, over the course of my NCB I spent a net of 25 million on buying BA. And every bit of that BA was turned into experience, which fully contributed to my PR.

So I could turn the question around, Sefton: how in the world should a 15 million dollar weapon that barely raises PR (if at all) be expected to compete with a 25 million Fireball that translates into a rather large PR?

The question needs to cover the full breadth of money sinks, and the full effect on PR to be truly comprehensive of what this thread is trying to encompass.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 2:50 PM EDT

Sutekh hits the nail on the head with a massive Morg! ;)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 3:04 PM EDT

I asked this earlier in another thread, and can't remember any answer to it. :(

If all xp trainined into DD spells increases PR, and Mages *need* DD spells to do thier tihng (just like Enchanters need their trianed enhanctment, or Walls thier trained HP), why do Tanks still get a Weapon Allowance?

They have to train Str (and you could claim Dex...) which let's them do thier 'thing', but you don't need as much in those by far now. You can use much cheaper weapons, (not cheaper as in USD costs of course) and do your thing for free because of an allowance.

I can see why it was necessary with the way the old physical damage formula worked, but not now.

Why should tanks get extra 'Power' (because that's what the WA gives) for free?

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 3:10 PM EDT

I would just be curious to see what some of the score/PR ratios for mid-level tanks would be if the WA were removed. Would they settle closer to 2-3 instead of 3-4 as I am hearing about now?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 3:17 PM EDT

I'm using a 1.8 Million NW weapon on a 10K team. My weapon doesn't raise my PR at all.

Yet, I am by far more powerful than a team (of equal MPR) using a newly purchased 50K NW wepaon. My PR doesn't reflect this though. So I get to fight higher, and earn more rewards than they do. therefore, without the intervention of USD on their behalf, they can never grow as big as me.

Is that correct? Is that the way the game should be? Is it the way we want the game to be?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 3:18 PM EDT

100K team, not 10K. :)

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 25 2006 3:22 PM EDT

Well I gladly accept the concept of increasing PR representation in tanks due to the increased damage they can now inflict. I gave that point many post and threads ago. I did not think that was the gist of this thread, but if it is, if that is all this post is asking for, is once again asking for increased PR in tanks, I am OK with that.

But Sut, you answer you own question IMHO, with buying BA. You will admit that when you buy BA and then win a fight, you are not JUST increasing you Fireball, but all your stats, in any combination you wish, from enchantments and HP and DD. Whereas I spent my 15mil to increase only the hit or damage of something that only affects melee. So if you get your FB big enough, from all that BA you bought, along with your DM and your HP, you could easily defeat my tank before melee negating every bit of the 15mil NW I spent on a melee weapon.

And yes I could then buy equipment etc to negate your DD, but the KEY word here is buy! If you take 25mil and spend it only buying BA and I take the SAME 25mil and spend it only buying gear, I get what? Not much and I grow only as fast as I can spend my earned BA, whereas you can grow much faster and increase all your stats at your leisure and whim.

Sure with 25mil I could buy quite a bit of base or low level gear. Not a decent sized tattoo and I am CERTAIN you do not think a tank can compete with a mage if BOTH are wearing the RoE.

So that is my answer, your bought BA give you MUCH greater flexibility than the 15mil I dump into a melee weapon, and thusly, creates a balance between tanks and mages.

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 25 2006 3:26 PM EDT

p.s. If I dump 15mil NW into a weapon, I have NO WAY to get it back out without selling it, and very few if any large weapons sell at or above NW, whereas your train 1mil exp one way you get up to 95% of it back to spend as you wish, will you assure me of getting 95% of my NW investment back from my weapon?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 3:26 PM EDT

Someone start a petition thread so we can let Jon know exactly how many folks find the current situation unacceptable. Whatever the cause, there is something seriously off right now, and it needs immediate attention before we have to start worrying about rewards going completely out of control. Wait and see isn't good enough.

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 3:38 PM EDT

I see your point, Sefton.

Though, for your FB-sepcific example, comparing FB to a 15 million NW melee weapon may not be the best idea. If a tank thinks they are entitled to just using a melee weapon, then they would be mistaken. *smile* Compare a CoC to a melee weapon, and FB to a big bow -- those would be more viable comparisons.

As for weapons being more specific in how their NW is concentrated (vs. a mage being able to spread out experience), I would have to agree too. BUT, there is a very, very large difference between equipment/tattoos and a mage: portability.

Tattoos and equipment can be used over and over again and can lead to a mighty team. These transferrable items have PR advantages: tattoo PR is condensed, and weapons get the weapon allowance. Even much armor has the advantage of having a PR weighting less than 1.00.

I can spend a lot of time clicking to raise a massive PR in a mage character. That is also a _very_ tough choice to make (for anyone who actually thinks about it). I know I am left with a meaningless placeholder the day I decide to start a new character or try to sell out. MPR means much, much less than tattoos and weapons in the long game, and that disparity will become more and more apparent as more folks burn NCBs to create larger gear (this phenomenon affects tattoos far more than equipment, since the NCB offers no inflated cash).

So, you are right -- weapon net worth is much more specific than being able to grow MPR. It is also abundantly more reusable. *smile* And now with the linear upgrade curve, even an NCBer can keep growing a weapon, and tattoos grow even more.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 3:41 PM EDT

I think someone failed to note the price chars sell for, you lose far far far more money investing in BA, especially during an NCB. You can expect less than 10% return on your investment should you ever make the silly mistake of selling your char.

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 3:43 PM EDT

Sefton, sorry, didn't see your last post, but I think I sort of addressed it anyway.

You are right, you can't get all your money out of a weapon. But you can get some, or you can simply keep using it (the "sell out" scenario is another CB non-entitlement -- no one "deserves" to be able to sell out and get their money back).

Now, tell me how much money I can get back for the 25 million I spent on BA? Better yet, what about when I dump in another 25 million for a second minion? That's 50 million, or $500 in your "sell out" scenario. With ZERO means of getting my money back.

In this new "tank blender", single-mage strategies equal only one thing: a dead end with nothing to show for it when the brick wall is reached.

Let me be very clear: I am NOT whining about my team here. I love Hubbell, and I knew what I was doing when I spent all that money. I know I was going all MPR (not even growing a tattoo), and I knew I was also not growing any weapons or equipment. The only thing I wasn't ready for was how colossally worthless all that MPR turned out to be at higher levels.

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 25 2006 4:15 PM EDT

And I have to agree again with most of your points as well. HOWEVER; I will say that most of your points depend upon what I do after I am done with the character I am currently playing, and I think personally that is asking TOO much from the system that is CB. I mean you seriously want CB to not only be able to react to what you are doing now, but with what you might do in the future? It is hard enough to predict how the current rules will be interpretted by current characters, let alone how future character might perfrom based upon what a user might do once he is done with his current character.

Heck your own research into the NCB forecaster (the bonus as it is applied and getting to the top with it) shows how that simple system is not accurately predicting the future, now you want current PR to change based upon what you might or might not do with a future character?

Maybe I am not understanding what you are saying, but if you are basing you reply on what kind of return I get from my gear after my current character is done, that seems to be asking a lot of CB or anyone for that matter.

Wasp [Demon Forging] July 25 2006 4:16 PM EDT

Sut, remember what Sefton said. MPR can be re-trained. Your character can easily become a tank. Although a large investment of money will be needed for tank equipment.

Infact without USD I don't see a switch of strat on the near horizon.

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 4:27 PM EDT

Wasp, everyone becoming a tank would explicitly show that tanks are, in fact, imbalanced (something I do not believe is true). Of course I could punt and just mimic some other strategy that attains a better score/PR ratio, but I am not interested in that. As I said -- I am fine with my team. I think my total PR accurately reflects my power, I think the people I can beat in my current stance are acceptable, and I think mages are still viable overall.

My point is that I simply want teams other than myself to have thier power accurately depicted.

Sefton, I think long term. I'm not talking about "after" anything. But if you you had a year to play, how would you do it to result in the "best" final character? Would you run three consecutive NCBs? Would you save cash then run an NCB and buy all BA? Would you just run an NCB and then play the rest of the 8 months at normal growth, but growing a big weapon? Something else entirely (the scenarios are myriad). These are the questions I ask myself. By and large all of the intangibles cancel each other out. As I have stated before, I don't perceive an imbalance in the game. I enjoy rock-scissors-paper, etc. -- I embrace it, in fact! All I am asking is that the rocks, scissors, and papers are all treated the same way when it comes to PR calculations, so that rewards are equitable all around. Get rid of the subsidies: abolish tattoo PR compression and do away with the weapon allowance. Then, let's fight! *smile* The same people will beat me, and I will beat the same people -- we'll all just know better where we stand, and why we stand there.

Miandrital July 25 2006 4:34 PM EDT

I dont think that the weapon allowance needs to be gotten rid of necessarily, just reduced a little bit. At lower levels a lack of a weapon allowance would make it very hard to raise a tank especially since mages are already stronger at lower levels. Maybe the weapon allowance could decrease as you get a higher MPR?

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 4:39 PM EDT

With DD being nerfed at lower levels and newbies able to hit hard with relatively small weapons, are tanks still ad a disadvantage at the low-end?

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 25 2006 4:54 PM EDT

I was basing my responses to your valid point, Tattoos and equipment can be used over and over again and can lead to a mighty team.

But that is not predictable as you suggested in a later post the myriad of things I could or could not do with my team or my year of playing CB. That said, I do not think you can or should expect the system to adjust my gear now, for how I could use it later. So once you toss that out, the idea of gear and tattoos being reusable, I think that pulls your plug on the response to my showing of the buying of BA vs. investing in a weapon being balanced.

Again, just my personal opinion, but your ability to buy BA for your CURRENT character balances out my ability to put NW into my CURRENT gear. Yes, I can re-use my equipment and yes you are somewhat hindered in what you might change your MPR into after your NCB or whatever time period you choose runs out. But again, you are saying, that now there is an imbalance because I can re-use my equipment, and I am saying there is not, because no one, not even Jon, can assure me CB will be here to re-use it.

That being said I think your buy of BA ability balances out my CB2 investment into NW ability quite nicely as it is now.

AGAIN, if you say my tank got more powerful, yet my PR did not gain, I agree with you, and conceed the point of increasing my tank's PR to better reflect its increased power, not sure I like the weapon allowance idea simply because of UC, so fortunately for my lower PR tank, I do not see a simple solution to the PR representation problem.

QBsutekh137 July 25 2006 5:06 PM EDT

Sefton, we are in violent agreement...

As I said, I do not think there is imbalance -- I think all of the long-term intangibles cancel each other out save for one: growing a massive tattoo by running several consecutive NCBs and then a final one with full BA purchasing. Then strap on the tattoo and away you go. Of course, such a strategy takes many many months. *smile*

So yes, all I am on about is the representation of PR.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 5:54 PM EDT

Sorry Sef, your arguement falls down here. :P

"But Sut, you answer you own question IMHO, with buying BA. You will admit that when you buy BA and then win a fight, you are not JUST increasing you Fireball, but all your stats, in any combination you wish, from enchantments and HP and DD. Whereas I spent my 15mil to increase only the hit or damage of something that only affects melee."

So? You are choosing to put your USD in one place, your weapon, just as much as Sute is choosing to put his bought XP into Just FB.

You could just as easily invest your 15 mil in armour, other weapons, well all items that can be increased by cash.

Just as Sutekh could choose to invest his xp in just FB, or HP or DM or all the other stats that can be increased with XP.

You both decided to concentrate.

I see the difference with Tattoos, but it just highlighs that you had more options where to spend your cash than just your wepaon. :) Instead of choosing to up your weapon, you could have spend some/all of the cash in BA instead, increasing your XP and Tattoo (potentially) obviously at the expense of your weapon. Just as spending XP in HP would be at the expense of Sutes 'weapon'.

It doesn't matter *how* you both decided to spend 15-21 Mil on your respective characters.

What matters (and we're all in agreement here I think :P) is that the improvements are reflected in the PR of your character, which with weapons and the WA it isn't. :)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 5:57 PM EDT

Hehehehehe... Unless I missed the point. :P

Which I could have, I blame it on just watching the New Charlie and the Chocolate factory. :)

A Sons of Ether avatar awakening in film!

velvetpickle July 25 2006 6:09 PM EDT

---valenvail Score / PR / MPR: 1,928,631 / 1,373,135 / 1,020,870


QBsutekh137 Score / PR / MPR: 1,844,926 / 1,546,920 / 1,487,703

Seems our score and PR are a fairly close match, and go figure I have a slight win/loss advantage vs. you, but we still draw pretty frequently.

Heat -- Score / PR / MPR: 1,872,082 / 1,463,738 / 1,046,673
*another example with a good deal of draws from my fightlist.

Blackmage -- Score / PR / MPR: 1,930,052 / 1,501,850 / 1,019,765
*50/50 wins losses

Magewraith -- Score / PR / MPR: 2,003,757 / 1,540,522 / 1,070,048
*I can't beat him

Look through my 24 hour battle summary for lots more examples....

Have mages really taken to whining about a 6% PR difference in mages and tanks? Is that what we have come to? If so, I will happily agree to a 6% increase in my PR to stop this thread.

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 25 2006 6:28 PM EDT

velvet, the cool voice of reason. Here I am going on and on about there is a balance already, then velvet comes in and shows a nice balance already exists in about one paragraph. I guess it pays to look at numbers as much as it does at concepts.

THAT said I will second velvet's motion and GLADLY accept a 6% increase in PR to bring a supposed imbalance in balance.

QBRanger July 25 2006 6:32 PM EDT

I have never "whined" about PR.

I have said that seeker arrows skew the game quite a lot in tanks favor. Being able to use seekers and a large elb can effectively take out your opponents highest level mage (in some cases his/her only mage) before melee even begins.

The whole PR thing is an extra bonus to this thread.

IMO, that was the point of Dark Dreky's first post. He wanted to know why someone with only 700k MPR could beat my character that has 1.75M MPR. Answer: large ELB and seeker arrows.

Letting seekers be equipped for defense only makes matters far worse.

Godpanda July 25 2006 6:44 PM EDT

Hate to say it, but in this case a simple change to Magic Missle would probably end this. Just saying.

But, eh, I still think Seekers would be ebtter off with like (6) base damage. yes, LESS then normal arrows. For such a big advantages a downside should exist SOMEWHERE. Besides cost, because to some people that doesn't even register as an obstacle.

QBPixel Sage July 25 2006 6:47 PM EDT

Ranger, I'll be an advocate to your proposal =D

QBRanger July 25 2006 6:51 PM EDT

'Letting seekers be equipped for defense only makes matters far worse.'

By that statement, there seems to be some confusion. I meant that having the ability to equip seekers for defense makes things far worse. That is preventing mages from attacking and defeating other characters they normally should and would.

If anything seekers should not function as seekers but as normal arrows when defending. They should "seek" only when used on attack. Even then, they are a very powerful item. One I did not realize how powerful until I played a mage team.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 7:01 PM EDT

VP, I'm Score / PR / MPR: 264,666 / 146,967 / 104,638

DyeDMC is Score / PR / MPR: 279,935 / 119,912 / 103,882

I can't beat him.

doesn't that make your post moot?

We can all pull out people of similair stats that we either win, lose or draw to to make out points.

Godpanda July 25 2006 7:05 PM EDT

When I made a team earlier it could take out single mages FOUR times its MPR and THREE times its PR. Everytime.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 7:07 PM EDT

:)

QBRanger July 25 2006 7:08 PM EDT

In fact, long ago, there was a crazy team made of 3 high EC minions and 1 tank, with min dex and a decent amount of strength.

It was able to beat tanks far above its MPR/PR/score but got snookered by all mages.

Comparing solitary characters win and losses is a futile experience.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 7:09 PM EDT

I so need a forum ban.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 7:14 PM EDT

:D

velvetpickle July 25 2006 9:55 PM EDT

Ranger I was simply comparing the PR/Score of a bunch of mages in my fightlist to my own. It had nothing to do with wins and losses neccessarily, except that we are all in the same PR "range" and I beat some, some beat me, and we draw.... seems pretty much like the textbook deffinition of ballance to me.

As you get into the top 10, maybe there are some crazy score to PR ratios out there, as well as some lower lvl ncbs I am sure, but in our score range (me and Gent) I think things look all clear....

Mikel July 25 2006 9:57 PM EDT

If you can't figure out the weakness of an Archer tank, then you need to go back and do some homework before making posts in this thread. They are very vulnerable, but very few strats are actually setup to combat a tank.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 10:16 PM EDT

2 mil + EC, what else Mikel?

velvetpickle July 25 2006 10:20 PM EDT

I think a more interesting point than the PR "imballance" is the fact that I have been forced to create a character with 15 million more NW (44%), and have had to win 20,000 (10%) more fights than Hubbel just to be competitive with him.....

I have also purchased every BA every day I could since I began playing, and the only reason I have been able to do so is the NUB. I have had 217,000 fights in roughly 200 days, so on average 1,085 fights/day. The only point I illusrate here is that while mages have to buy BA, tanks have to buy BA as well as equipment, so yes I believe a small PR advantage is in order for tanks. If a 6-10% advantage in PR is not equal to a 44% NW difference, I'm not sure what is.

any thoughts?

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 25 2006 10:23 PM EDT

One comment on the seekers not working for defense idea. If you do that, then all someone has to do is attack you, while you are fighting, and suddenly those seekers you do not equip for defense but equip for offense are neutralized. So basically, you might as well say, seekers never work when you are attacked. That seems a little drastic to me, punishing everyone, regardless of their reason, when something like a base reduction or AoI protection seems much more reasonable to me.

And to the other point recently made, if solitary fight comparisons are futile then character comparisons are as well, because the only way we judge each other is in a solitary fights. I mean, I do agree one fight comparison does not make a trend, but you cannot say that it as data is worthless. And to that point......

No GL, rarely does an exception prove the rule, now if you want to make multiple opponent comparisons showing similiar non-balanced results, to counter the several balanced results that velvet posted, that is a different matter entirely.

velvetpickle July 25 2006 11:05 PM EDT

"We can all pull out people of similair stats that we either win, lose or draw to to make out points. "

I missed that earlier... I showed 5 or 6 mages off my list of attackers, and attackees. My main illustration is that 6 mages all have a similar PR-Score ratio to my own.... these are people I win against, loose against AND draw against. My point was that all 6 characters are in my PR and Score range, and in the paper, rock, scissors BALLANCE of CB I'm sure we all win and loose to each other differently.... but our scores are all the same.

The main complaint is that tank PR is out of wack, but there are 6 examples of mage teams with score/PR similar to my own...

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 25 2006 11:09 PM EDT

vp that's because nothing on your team is out of whack, you're not using a giant tat, or a huge ELB. The disparity is when those items are in play.

TrueDevil [AAA] July 25 2006 11:33 PM EDT

Let's not mention giant Tat or ELB yet, what about TSA, MgS, and the ToE. There's none of these items on valenvail minion, try equipping your wall with TSA, MgS, let's see what happen.

If you don't believe me, try this. (I know that you said about there were some crazy score, pr at the top 10 but I don't think these examples have anything to do with the top 10)

Elros - Score / PR / MPR: 2,268,903 / 1,705,646 / 1,187,209

vs

Kaiser - Score / PR / MPR: 2,277,986 / 2,101,990 / 1,489,721
Son of Lorhar - Score / PR / MPR: 2,275,599 / 2,380,995 / 1,600,353
NWO - Score / PR / MPR: 2,273,190 / 2,132,224 / 1,564,213

Elros won against all of them, I need some explanation here about how mages and tanks are the same. You might want to say that Elros has more NW, even if these mages were to have the same NW (something not involving building another small tank or whatever), Elros will still beat them.

{Quitter}Gah July 25 2006 11:36 PM EDT

Why not just use PL? Counters exactly forcing the damage on another minion...

I'm assuming that Ranger's minion in the back isn't made for absorbing large amounts of damage as it has 20 hp... Since Nymandus' DM is bigger than Ranger's AS

QBRanger July 25 2006 11:41 PM EDT

Considering with the massive elb Nymandus has, he does over 600k damage per hit and hits 2-3 times a round due to dex alone.

So that is over 2.5M damage he does in missile, so I would need quite a massive PL on my wall to possibly survive.

velvetpickle July 25 2006 11:51 PM EDT

truedevil....

You pick the char with the largest AMF in the game and wonder why he is able to beat mages......

seriously you need explination?

velvetpickle July 25 2006 11:55 PM EDT

also, TSA/MGS would have no effect on my team aside from negative.

TSA might have a small effect vs. FB if equiped on my second minion, but an MGS would negate 500k VA, loose a ToA, or 1mil AMF/AS.

As my team is structured now, my tank absorbs the brunt of the dmg. with higher str and AC than other minions and filters 9/10ths down to other minions.

As I said a TsA might assist some vs FB, but so far I have not felt the need to add the PR.

velvetpickle July 26 2006 12:01 AM EDT

300k PL is only something like 5mil exp Ranger.... now whether you will have enough hp to make it worthwhile or not is a different story.

QBRanger July 26 2006 12:03 AM EDT

Again,

In answer to the question proposed by the title of this thread: A massive ELB and Seeker arrows allow Nymandus destroy a character well over 2 times his MPR. The seekers allow his tank to hit my mage directly bypassing my AC 380 Wall minion and do over 600k damage DIRECTLY to my poorly armored mage (since the AG's and COI's no longer give AC).

Again, something is seriously wrong with this.

QBsutekh137 July 26 2006 12:16 AM EDT

VP, your PR is LESS than mine, and that's with compressed tattoo experience, and you are saying it's hard work to compete with me? Please! Dissemble with your madness. I am MORE POWERFUL than you. You are basically making my point for me. I am MORE POWERFUL than you, yet you beat me, straight up, well nigh every time. What exactly are you blathering about?

Noting number of battles is silly: NUB/NCB takes care of that.
Noting net worth is silly: Weapon allowance takes care of that.
Noting tattoo use is silly: Tattoo PR compression takes care of that.

And you are beating me. With less power. What, pray tell, is your point (other than to solidly validate everything I have stated on this thread)?

Miandrital July 26 2006 12:19 AM EDT

Score / PR / MPR: 68,787 / 35,788 / 35,407
Current Winning Streak: 27
Most Powerful Blow: 17,353
Money: $296,886
Net Worth: $41,203,219
Battles Total Challenged Won
3,424 3,214 2,756


This is from jayuu's character Critters. It makes me rethink this whole issue. As you can see, he has nearly 42 million NW and he has only ~300 in pr from it. I am assuming most of that nw is in his claymore or his bow. That is simply crazy, and if it is this bad at the high end then I completely agree with sutekh

Recovering BA Addict July 26 2006 12:23 AM EDT

This thread is meant only for discussing me and my awesomeness. Please do not misuse your ability to post, as it is a privilege. That is all, kthx.

Miandrital July 26 2006 12:24 AM EDT

Actually, ignore my last post. I never thought about the fact that he might not have equipped all his gear :P

QBRanger July 26 2006 12:27 AM EDT

Miandrital,

NW is a total of all items on a character. Jayuu can have plenty of NW not equipped and it will still show on his character's NW. Also, remember that PR added is a function of the minions total xp armorwise. That is he can have a 100M NW set of DB's on a minion with little xp and it will add minimal PR.

Nymandus,

We certainly are discussing your awesomeness, in that you found a nice bug to exploit to get great rewards and a high score. Hopefully others believe this is a bug and fix it. Enjoy it while you can.

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 26 2006 12:32 AM EDT

My question is does he win without NAMED ammo. Get some regular base seekers and then tell me about his damage. The fact that named ammo give x150 to base ammo without any increase in PR is a massive amount of additional power. Can someone tell me how much it would cost to take 1000 seeker arrows to x150 +0 manually?

That is your overpowering factor I am certain of it.

QBRanger July 26 2006 12:38 AM EDT

Considering the bow itself is Tennis ELBow [6x5700] (+110) worth $63,696,878, I seriously doubt losing x150 from the total 'x' will drop his damage from 700k a hit to under 400k, which is what I would need to have a chance to survive missile.

With the naming of the elb, it is effectively 6x5850.

QBRanger July 26 2006 12:40 AM EDT

Just did a quick run or two with my elb, named 6x2001.

With named arrows vs Kaiser I did an average of 136k damage in missile.

Using normal arrows I did anywhere from 131k to 133k damage on average.

Not much difference using named arrows I find.

velvetpickle July 26 2006 12:41 AM EDT

hmmm my point....

you are 6% more powerful than me..... (not a real big number in the grand scheme of things)

if you are going to complain about PR not being a fair representaion of a tanks strength, I can only assume it is due to the fact that you are being beaten by lower PR tanks, and you feel they are receiving higher fight rewards...

Therefore I was illustrating that in our lvl there are 7 other mages in the same PR range (+/- 10%) whom I win, loose and draw with. If your strategy is weaker compared to mine (and other tanks) than other mages of your same stature don't go off ranting about imballances or errors of the game.

The reason for noting my NW difference and number of fights is simply to illustrate that it without a doubt costs more money and an equal or greater ammount of BA to run a competitive tank team. Therefore if tanks do have a slightly lower overall PR and slightly greater fight rewards, it is warranted!

And your comment in regards to NUB/NCB is ludacris.... if everyone is using a NUB/NCB to grow chars., than the number of fights IS absolutely valid data....

Mages are starting to feel the ballance shift and don't like it, I can understand that. I fought for 5 months as an underdog and wondered why I kept it up. Now that things have shifted to a more neutral position (if slightly skewed to tanks) mages feel the weight pressing down to enhance their strategys and I'm sure that is not an easy feeling.

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 26 2006 12:42 AM EDT

I disagree I could see it easily accounting for that factor, and if mine were not merged I would be happy to send him a small bundle for testing.

From before the change we all know how much a bunch of x150 arrows would cost, it could be ten times the value of that elbow.

Who is to say that has changed?

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 26 2006 12:52 AM EDT

But before the change, the ranged damage calculation was some sort of compilation of x on bow x on arrow and ST to determine raw damage. And we know that like most things in CB it is not linear. That said at low ST values and low X values on the elbow the difference in ranged damage from named and unnamed may be significantly less because of exponential factors.

And yes this is low by comparison, Ranger has a ST of 108K and a bow with x2001 Nym's bow is x5700 and his ST is 1,139,167 in an exponential function those massive differences could yield wildly different results assuming the x factor of the arrow is some sort of multiplicative function of the ST and x elbow factors.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 26 2006 1:05 AM EDT

the x on ammo is linear, as is the damage increase. I'm using a set of seekers that are in effect x152 +4. I posted previously about the damage increase with the named ammo, it's a factor, but not the overwhelming factor by any means.

TrueDevil [AAA] July 26 2006 1:10 AM EDT

Velvetpickle : Before the damage change, I could beat Elros. This has nothing to do with AMF AT ALL. Do you want to bet ? I am 100 % sure that I can beat Elros if he removed TsA and MgS from his team.

Assuming that you say this guy with 1.2 mil base AMF supposed to beat all the mages in the game, then let me say this, Do you think that a 1.2 mil base EC could made my mage team become a tank killer just like Elros become mage killer ?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 26 2006 1:12 AM EDT

bugs tend to not be quite so intentional

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 26 2006 1:21 AM EDT

How do you know it is linear, bump your arrows one and tell me the damage change, wait, you cannot.

Recovering BA Addict July 26 2006 1:24 AM EDT

Sefton: Yes, un-named seekers work just fine. I originally started defeating Ranger with base un-named seekers, and they still work.

Anyone attributing this to my VB (just in case): The VB has basically nothing to do with this specific case. An equivalent NW ELS would accomplish the same result, although it would take a few more rounds.

Ranger: I realize that beating someone despite a ~1mil MPR gap is slightly ridiculous, and I apologize... but I really can't justify not being as efficient as possible, and I'm sure you understand. Also, which "bug" are you referring to? I wouldn't classify renting a large weapon as such (it's not even really much over my WA, although that could be the bug, heh ) , and the x150 on the seekers doesn't really factor in. Yes, I would have no chance of beating you without seekers, but your strategy happens to be weak to them as CoC is worthless if you can't survive through ranged. I recognized this and decided to take a shot at beating you.

I just want everyone to understand that I am not trying to piss anyone off. I am merely analyzing the tools I have at my disposal and using them in what I deem to be the most efficient manner. I know I have frusterated people... most likely starting way back with Borderliner... then novice (especially, heh)... and now Ranger... and probably others who I can defeat at a large MPR deficit. All of you are great guys, and I'm sorry that it's possible for me to beat you. But then again, determining ways to defeat more powerful teams entertains me, and it's not really feasible to refrain from it as long as it's beneficial to me.

I'd go into my thoughts on the current damage calculation situation and such, but I'd prefer not to contribute to nerfing myself :)

edit: "All of you lare great guys" -> "Ranger and Borderliner are great guys"

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] July 26 2006 1:29 AM EDT

Well there is my answer.

Nym, just so you know, they do not blame you they blame CB. What is happening is a result of the rules as they are currently applied. They wish for them to be applied differently and can use your efficient use of rules for advantage as an example.

You are wise not to contribute to your own nerfing. I know I have.

Nerevas July 26 2006 1:49 AM EDT

What Ranger is referring to I believe is how you're using large networth weapons to inflate your PR:MPR ratio well beyond normal in order to receive higher xp/cash rewards.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 26 2006 1:53 AM EDT

I've seen Nym in the top5 without looking like his WA was too far above max, that alone spolit or not is quite a trick for a 700k char. I think someone is running the blender a little hard myself, but I'm not the one mixing drinks.

{Quitter}Gah July 26 2006 2:08 AM EDT

What kind of rewards are you getting anyways?

QBJohnnywas July 26 2006 2:21 AM EDT

I can't believe the amount of responses and arguments on this thread. Blimey.

Nymandus has said how he did it. Go back to the first response on the thread...mine...and I said it back then.


But there's a different point here. Most people seem to think that PR/MPR is a fixed definite amount. IT IS NOT. You can factor in weapon PR all you want but all strats have PR fluctuation depending on who you are fighting. I once called it 'Invisible PR',

In Ranger's case because his team is CoC and he has no ranged to speak of, if he is up against someone with strong ranged he effectively cuts his overall PR in that battle.

If you have a large AMF and you face a tank team where your AMF is useless you are a much lower PR in that particular battle. In fact your pr would be lower there by the amount your AMF adds to overall PR.


This is the real reason Nymandus is able to do what he does. If you are aware of this you can find opponents much higher than yourself and fight up very high.

Recovering BA Addict July 26 2006 2:23 AM EDT

Equipping a high NW weapon to beat Ranger does indeed result in quality rewards, but they are approximately the same as having sub-WA weapons equipped and fighting ~2mil score characters. The added benefit to equipping the large ELB is a score boost, which is basically meaningless since it is impossible to maintain. It's pretty much purely for the enjoyment (plus slightly, although negligible, better rewards).

In any case, I'm all for everyone being content with the ruleset, and hopefully the next changemonth with be teeming with gifts of absolute balance.

Phrede July 26 2006 2:33 AM EDT

I just read through this thread - very interesting stuff. There was quite a lot of mention of Mages not being able to spend USD to up their 'hit factor' and 'protection factor' . Try getting the largest CoI, Alatars and Corns and let me know how much it costs along with two or three of the largest MCMs.

Also Jons change was a good one as it shook things up - its exactly what was needed in here. Why should there be balance. There never was. There was always a strat that could beat other strats.

And as far as nerfing the Archery/bow thing. Its only just been introduced for heavens sake. There are a lot of people who have completely changed their strat and even started another NCB with all the costs involved in that just to try it out.

Let it run for a few months see what happens at the top and adjust accordingly if necessary - but give it time.

AdminNightStrike July 26 2006 3:23 AM EDT

Freed, that was a very well put post. I especially liked this part, as it's never been said before:

"Also Jons change was a good one as it shook things up - its exactly what was needed in here. Why should there be balance. There never was."

You're right. Things were stale. How long has it been since there've been back-to-back-to-back-to-back threads with 150+ posts in them (all related to the game!) like there have been this month? Sefton's back in full force, posting up a giant storm. Ideas are flowing freely from many areas. New strats are popping up everywhere.... I like it.

QBsutekh137 July 26 2006 3:25 AM EDT

velvet, I don't even look at who beats me, so I have no idea. You are the one who brought up some sort of pseudo-gripe about barely being able to keep pace with me, so I rebutted. That is all. As far as I know, I don't have a huge problem with tanks. As far as mages go, I am a fairly decent tank-buster since a great bulk of my PR is purely offensive (Fireball).

If I see the word "imbalance" one more time (especially if it is attributed to me), I will positively vomit. I don't think there is any imbalance.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 26 2006 3:39 AM EDT

I agree. It's not really imbalance. It's because of (and this effects all teams, not some kind of mage/tank divide) a teams 'power' being mis represented, people are seeming to be lower in 'power' than they actually are, which makes people think "Wowzorz, that guy is beating me and he's much lower than me".

Seekers have special properties, that should be repesented in thier PR incease. As is should for a BoNE over a Katana and the specials on other weapons / armour.

Dark Dreky July 26 2006 3:42 AM EDT

I'd just like to say... awesome responses! I am proud to have started such a long post!! I feel much cooler. Anyways... long story short, net worth is where it is at.

Jon obviously felt that single FB mages taking on 100m+ NW teams at an even PR was not right, I completely understand. What I feel is that mages should have some sort of net worth outlet... I mean improving AG's and CoI's comes to a dead halt at a certain point (costing 1-2m for every 1% DD increase).

Now mages need some sort of way to improve their power with money (CB2$ that is) . Give mages some sort of spending power and they'll take it... as of right now there is no need to spend money as a mage, unless you're making a wall or wall-tank, whatever. I read through the first 50 responses, and I'm not exactly sure this has anything to do with the last 100. But these are my late night two cents! =)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 26 2006 4:33 AM EDT

Just want to make one point again.

Why should a 100K NW Whip add the same 'power' (or use up the same amount of WA...) as a 100K NW Morg?

The Morg has far better stats, and a special non reducable 20% VA to boot.

The same can be said of Seekers. Why do they add the same 'power' as an equal NW set of Arrows? Seekers do the same thing as arrows, but have a special property on top.

AdminNightStrike July 29 2006 1:59 AM EDT

Ideally, this would be perfect. Since items have different NW scales, you can change the scale to reflect the power, and thus all network will be equal. Jon said in a post a while bay (circa May of 2005, it was in the PR/NW Link changelog thread): NW is NW is NW. He said that in answer to several questions regarding your points, GL.

However.............. more powerful items have a BETTER net worth scale. So, this "NW is NW" mentality breaks apart, since all network isn't created equal. In fact, the most valuable networth is in fact the cheapest.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 29 2006 6:31 AM EDT

:D That's my point! Thanks NS!
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001raK">How does Nymandus beat Ranger?</a>