Weapon Allowance (in General)
July 26 2006 4:41 AM EDT
Mmmm. Is the weapon allowance skewed? How do you properly show the PR increase a powerful weapon can give?
I'm not sure which side of the fence I fall on where weapons are concerned. I have been very surprised how little PR is added when say a large ELB is added to a char. But I also know that a huge ELB on a large char is a lot more powerful than that same bow on a base char. Which makes me think the weapon itself actually adds little to the character itself.
And those same people who are complaining about weapons aren't complaining about the PR weighting system. You can put on armours or bonus giving items that have HUGE NW onto very small characters without increasing PR hugely. You could have a 1k PR char with full available AC, making it almost invincible, hardly adding to it's overall PR. But you cannot place a 2 million NW morg on that same character without adding to PR. A 2 million NW morg adds 50 or 60K to the PR of a base character.
So the weapon allowance doesn't allow you to use HUGE weapons at small levels but it does allow you to use them at higher levels. Meanwhile DD spells are now weaker at lower levels which corresponds nicely. And can be HUGE at higher levels. And can get a boost from AG's or a CoI without impacting on overall PR too much.
If there is a problem here it seems to me that it isn't the weapon allowance but the overall way PR is calculated. IF it is a problem at all, it is across the board and not simply where tanks are concerned.
:) As for armour, I think the PR weighting takes into account your concern of;
"But I also know that a huge ELB on a large char is a lot more powerful than that same bow on a base char"
380 AC on a large character is a lot more powerful than that same AC on a base Char. ;) Or the percentage stat increases other armours give.
50% extra Str on 20 str is nothing. But on a 1 Mil Str the extra 500K is a big deal. ;)
July 26 2006 4:59 AM EDT
50% extra ST on 20 is still 10 ST, which makes a nice difference against other 20 ST minions. ;)
Again, Why should a 100K NW Whip add the same 'power' (or use up the same amount of WA...) as a 100K NW Morg?
July 26 2006 5:06 AM EDT
Yes, PR weighting does take into account the percentage increase. And yes, 10% of 20 st is a lot less than 10% of 2 million st. But have you seen the amount of PR that is actually added? Is it really the equivalent to adding 10% to your stat at higher level?
And in other areas - UC for instance and +10 helms - that percentage increase on a UC weapon gives you a much bigger weapon than you should probably have at base and yet adds hardly anything to PR, all the way up to higher levels...
July 26 2006 5:10 AM EDT
And Shade's comment is a good one. That increase in stats and performance gives you the same outcome whether you are talking 50 ST or 500,000 ST. There is still a huge boost above the people around you. If all your opponents have 20 st and you have 50 you are going to beat them all in a physical fight. The numbers themselves don't really matter - the boost to your power is what counts here.
PR weighting does not truly reflect the boost to power in the same way that weapon allowance does not. The only thing that PR weighting has in it's favour is that it increase according to the size of the character. But does it increase enough?
July 26 2006 6:48 AM EDT
smaller weapons should have lower upgrade prices imo, to even out the usefulness of the lower 'ranked' weapons a bit.
GL, have to disagree with you here. "380 AC on a large character is a lot more powerful than that same AC on a base Char. ;) Or the percentage stat increases other armours give."
It is quite the reverse in my opinion. 380 AC means 79.8% reduction to physical damage. Lets call it 80% for calculation ease. So if a small character swings at you for 1K damage before any protection factors, then they take 200 HP damage.
On a blow that does 1mil damage, the character takes 200K worth of damage. Sure it is still 80% reduced, but since the damaging blow is so high, you can still take significant damage amounts. Because stats are exponentially harder to raise as they get larger, your ability to add X more HP to a large character is significantly more difficult than that same X raise on a small one.
In the end, large AC impacts smaller characters much more greatly. When my landmine farm had all my AC gear, a base level character could totally resist damage from opponents up to and over 10 times his MPR (and PR for they are the same). Nothing close to that sort of resistance is true at larger levels.
Also the chance that you will meet weapons with extra abilities like VB will increase the larger your opponents are.
In the end, we can logically say this:
a) tanks do more damage now than they used to, and thusly are more powerful
b) tanks PR did not change from the weapon damage boost change, thusly they get more power for no PR gain.
What has to be determined is, does this increased power without a coresponding increase in PR redress previously exisiting imbalances or create new ones.
Obviously they mage teams feel it is the latter. I think if you look back at the plethora of post made about mages and their overpowering prior to the change, it is the former.
Sef, how does it redress the balance by creating another imbalance?
How does a 100 NW Whip add the same 'power' as a 100 NW Morg?
July 26 2006 9:50 AM EDT
A 100 NW whip should be almost as powerful as a 100 NW morg.
alas atm this is not the case.
If you really want to stuff tanks at a low level stick a pair of big DBs on, minimal PR increase and tanks cannot match you with weapon pth without a huge PR increase, with DB taking pth into negatives these are deadly. They don't rely on any trained stat to leverage their usefulness.
July 26 2006 10:19 AM EDT
DB enchantments cost the same as the to hit enchantments of the big 4 weapons.
you will increase your PR higher with the DBs than with a weapon with similar +.
OK GL, and I use this completely nonsensical example simply to keep other real world factors from intruding on my example.
Lets say the $5 falls out of the sky and into everyone on the planets pocket, except you, and you only get $4. This happens for a full year. Now the mystical money fairy says wow, my bad, I will make it balanced and give you $5, would you not argue that you should get $6 for a year to make up for the full year of experiencing only $4.
Yes once you get $5 it is balanced, but that balance does address your year long period of imbalance.
So that is how imbalance now (assuming there is imbalance now) can address previous imbalances.
I don't see the relevance of your example.
You personally were not forced into any imbalance. You could have used a Mage. You were not forced to only get $4 a month.
Everyone had the choice to get either $4 or $5. Changing that to $5 or $6 now doesn't solve anything...
Giving everyone $5, from now one, is balanced. It might not be fair to those who chose $4 before hand, but tough.
So take your own advice, I did. I switched to single mage FB with a ToE, once I became completely frustrated with how they were rocking my tank set ups. As a matter of fact as luck would have it, my NCB single mage's NCB ran out like 7 days before the new weapon damage change.
You say I should not complain about the mages being more powerful before, I should join them (I did) so I say OK you should not complain about tanks now, join them (will you?)
You are not "forced" into any imbalance any more than I am or was. You have the exact same choices I have or had.
And again what is good for the goose is good for the gander, you enjoyed your $5 (mage dominance) while I only got $4 (trying to run a tank), tough you say OK, well, now I get $6 (tank dominance) you get $5 (mages finally put in place), so tough right back at you :)
July 26 2006 11:17 AM EDT
looks like you solved your own problem....
"You personally were not forced into any imbalance. You could have used a Mage."
time to dump your mage!
LOL! ;) Even when running an overpowered Mage, I was trying to bring balance to the game.
I've done it, I've joined the dark side and I have a massive BoNE.
That being said, I don't realy care (for my own teams) what side of the fence they are on.
But I want CB to be balanced. I don't want these sort of things in game (OK Sute, balanced is the wrong term as there's not actually an imbalance, just a poor display of power :P ), I don't want CB to turn around in a years time and swing things back tot he mages because everyone is sick of tank dominace.
(sorry for caps)
I WANT A STRATEGY GAME
Not one with a single option so more 'powerful' than another.
But, this I'm sure can all be sorted by reflecting PR correctly.
My wepaon is massive. It's the biggest weapon in the game. Yet it doesn't add any 'power' to my team, while obviously increasing how well they perform.
July 26 2006 11:52 AM EDT
man this discussion is going on in a dozen forums right now it seems. Here is my final example for this argument.
Take a mage and tank on seperate teams. Start both the same day. Train the exact same ammount of exp., on both teams however you want to. (not UC that is another discussion). After a years time if the tank had no weapon, they would have the same PR or "power" but the tank would be unable to hurt anyone unless he spilled gangrene on them from his wounds.....
So without a weapon allowance "power rating" is absolutely meaningless!
As far as stratedgy goes GL, you try running that new tank of yours effectively and tell me the strat portion of CB has not increased.
July 26 2006 12:01 PM EDT
now with that being said, and no possible argument to that logic......
It is possible that the WA is too large and some characters have gone overboard with it. But I would say that is the exception and not the rule in most cases. Most players are still trying to ballance weapon upgrades with buying BA, and other equipment neccessary to run a successful tank.
If I had every other piece of equipment I could possibly need to run my team. I could certainly pump millions of millions into my weapon and probably overpower chars. with a similar PR to my own. The fact is that most players don't have that option, and will not have that option anytime soon, so it is kind of a moot issue.
July 26 2006 12:01 PM EDT
One word: Rentals.
July 26 2006 12:15 PM EDT
ohh man never thought I would see a day when I was arguing with Ranger :)
I don't think there are enough BIG weapons in rentals to have enough impact. And the weaps that are there can only be utlized for so long by higher level characters before you reach a point of diminishing returns....
There are only 7 melee weapons over 10mil NW in rentals currently, and they range from 25k - 75k/day. If I used that same 175k-525k/week to upgrade a weapon I own it wouldn't take a great deal of time to get closer to the lvl of the rental, so it still isn't a viable option for myself and other players who are budget restricted.
It doesn't matter what size the WA is, why does a whip of equal NW to a Morg add the same amount of power?
July 26 2006 12:25 PM EDT
Many people in the past have set up long term rentals of high NW equipment for a reasonable fee.
In the past I have seen +170 DB's rent for 100k a month, a 33M NW MH rent for 75k a month, etc...
I am in no way arguing with your VP. The only problem I have with tanks right now are seeker arrows and the vorpal blade. Especially with the new upgrade costs/method, seekers on a decent ELB are just too powerful for "balance" of the game. A low NW VB has been shown to do more damage than a 125M NW MH vs walls. Both of which are major problem in the dynamic of the game.
And I am not saying things need to be perfectly balanced as some people think or spout in the forums. I am talking about having option that can work. Right now, we have seen someone use a big rented elb and seekers, and with them take down a character almost 2.5 times its MPR without difficulty. Alone that skews the game by allowing said character outstanding rewards, and obtain a score high enough to get the top 10 excemption.
In addition, a low NW VB can totally destroy a heavy NW AC tank. The past posts I think should have shown how bad the VB is for the game as a whole. It is a great weapon vs walls and due to its other abilities (1 handed and great base damage) is great vs all other type minions.
July 26 2006 12:34 PM EDT
Ranger, Maybe seekers are slightly overpowered, but if a character is willing to undergo the daily cost of equipping them just to stay on top, I see no difference than saving up for an extremly large melee weapon that in the long term would have a similar effect. If he is using seekers on offense, a good portion of the fight rewards he is receiving are eaten up by the rental of the bow, and the daily expenditure of seekers. The additional exp he is receiving (which I'm sure is to a much smaller percentage) is not having a huge bearing on his overall char. development as he is still unable to beat many other chars. in the top 10.
The only real problem I see is if a character were to utilize seekers only on defense, for which I still have not heard a viable solution.
July 26 2006 12:42 PM EDT
GL, you have asked this question on almost every thread on the forum....
"It doesn't matter what size the WA is, why does a whip of equal NW to a Morg add the same amount of power?"
Does it matter? How many high lvl characters do you see using a whip, a dagger, a 2HF etc.
There are a few weapons utilized by tanks past the early stages of their development. Tanks will use whatever they can get their hands on early in their lifetime. They will then seek out a Kat, or Exec. sword.
A few stick with the Executioner, but most move on to a MH/BoTH/Bone/ELS/VB.... I should think 99.9% of higher lvl tanks in the game use one of these 5 weapons. Each of the 5 have their own advantages and disadvantages, and who is to decide what PR should be assigned to those advantages except the wielder of the weapon?
As far as progressions from each stage in a tanks life, some characters may make that progression faster than others, but it is a relatively short difference in time for players who are actively fighting. To think a character with a whip would be fighting a chacter with a MH is ludacris at best.
Shade you fail to realize the difference in PR gains from armor/over limit weapons. The armor only ever adds a % of the xp in the minion equipped with it but oversized weapons give a large penalty. Eg some 15M nw +100 DB on a 2K char adds very little, a few hundred PR but 10M nw of weapons adds over 200k PR.
Viable solution to end all this is to make the Seekers have a lower base damage.
Or what you could do, is change their base depending on attacking and defending. What keep the Seekers the ultimate mage kill for attacking, but only a mage deterant when being attacked.
July 26 2006 12:49 PM EDT
I don't know for sure that would fix the problem with seekers.... The base dmg of the arrow may or may not be the problem. A huge Elb firing base arrows still does TONS of dmg... Whether the seekers do Tons of dmg + a little more or a lot more dosen't seem to be the problem, I think either way you are going to end up with a dead mage... and in Rangers setup that equals a loss.
Ranger maybe you could comment on this as you have more exp with against a big Elb.... is it the bonus dmg from the seeker that kills you or the dmg going directly to the mage?
seekers are too rare to be used offensively, theyre arent enough of them. as far as the vb goes, think of the damage for each weapon as a line, a function of dmg vs ac. since its a linear function, it can be represented as y = mx + b, m is the slope, b is the y intercept, which in this case would be dmg vs minimum ac. the morg has a much higher b, vs minimum ac, than the vb, but since vb has reduction of ac, it has a higher slope, they have to converge somewhere. while the vb my ignore a little too much ac, i dont think it should be altered that much because thats about acs only real weakness
July 26 2006 12:52 PM EDT
another thought on the response I gave to GL's earlier question.... why does FB give the same PR increase as AS, or even MM for that matter?
Two characters one with a minion training equal HP/FB and a minion training equal HP/MM are obviously not equal in Str.... should their PR reflect that as well?
July 26 2006 12:58 PM EDT
Huh? Why would FB vs MM ned to be reflected differently? They work differently, by are the same "power" in my opinion...
July 26 2006 1:00 PM EDT
Sorry, to get back on topic, I see things in this game as things that fel "natural" and things that feel "tacked on". Yes, WA was here from the start as part of the NW/PR linkage, but from the start it was a "crutch" portion of the NW/PR linkage. I no longer see why that crutch is necessary.
July 26 2006 1:02 PM EDT
take a char with 500k HP and 500k MM vs a char with 500k FB and 500k MM..... will they draw all the time?
How about 500k FB vs 500k CoC.... FB will surely win this battle hands down. Wouldn't that imply a greater str to one vs the other?
This is the same scenario as a MH should have a higher PR weight than a VB..... in certain scenarious obviously each weapon, and each DD spell have their strenghts and weaknesses....
VP, FB versus CoC is game mechanics. CoC doesn't fire until melee, but does more damage. It's a trade off.
It's like asking an Archer with an Elbow to face off versus a BL tank with a Morg.
July 26 2006 1:11 PM EDT
sute.... take a tank and mage with an EXACTLY equal amount of trained exp, and similar armor.... Their PR would be almost identical. The tank has no weapon equipped, the mage has no weapon equipped. With equal PR, who is more "powerful"?
Why should a tank (who already has a greater NW investment requirement) <B>need</b> a PR bump to equip the one thing which will allow him to scratch an opponent? That is why the WA exists.
VP, your choice then is to train UC. ;)
July 26 2006 1:23 PM EDT
Now take into account the way DD spells inflict damge (higher damage in ranged, spread dmg across an entire team, NEVER missing an attack completly) and you will start to see why a higher than base weapon allowance is required.
I have to wait 3 rounds before inflicting any serious dmg to opponents, giving a FB mage ample time to decimate my defense.
Even with a 1.3mil ToA, +50 weap, and nearly 1mil dex there are times I MISS minions all together in melee, when is the last time you saw a FB do NO dmg?
Sure I can do 300k dmg in one round and there are times that I hit that tripple.... but there are times that the entire tripple strike is focused on one minon who may only have 500 HP remaining, negating not only 850k dmg, but also a substantial ammount of VA/weapon leech I have so carefully incorporated into my strategy.
So for the rounds I actually do 900k dmg to a viable character, there are examples where that has no effect whatsoever.
Hence the reason a greater than base WA is justified in the grand scheme of CB.... maybe some characters have exploited the WA to become overly powerful, but I think that is by far the exception and not the rule.
Wish we could edit posts.. :(
VP, is there any reason a 100K NW Whip should add the same power as a 100K NW Morg?
Is there any way a Tank should hve no 'power' added when using a 100K NW Morg over a Tank with no weapon?
July 26 2006 1:32 PM EDT
"VP, is there any reason a 100K NW Whip should add the same power as a 100K NW Morg?"
I asked you earlier is there any reason it shouldn't? you will never (or very rarely ever) see these two items go head to head, hence you are comparing apples to oranges (I know, I know they ARE both fruits, but still kinda different right?)
"Is there any way a Tank should hve no 'power' added when using a 100K NW Morg over a Tank with no weapon?"
again it is the lesser of two evils, I would prefer it be this way than have to add PR to a tank just to use a weapon vs. a mage with equal PR who can do damage without the need for a PR increasing item.
again, I would say loosing the WA but charging a greater PR to train DD spells would even things out more than they are now, but the fact that a mage has no PR bump over an unarmed tank with equal exp., and armor upgrades neccesitates a weapon allowance under the current method.
"Now take into account the way DD spells inflict damage (higher damage in ranged"
Just a slight correction, DD spells get penalties in ranged combat. 30%/20%/10% :)
July 26 2006 1:38 PM EDT
30/20/10% that is a penalty??? ROFL
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 4 / 4 / 10,932
Melee Hits / Blows / Avg Damage 14 / 14 / 205,097
10k ----> 200k.... that is a penalty
Missed this sorry!
"GL, you have asked this question on almost every thread on the forum....
"It doesn't matter what size the WA is, why does a whip of equal NW to a Morg add the same amount of power?"
Does it matter? How many high lvl characters do you see using a whip, a dagger, a 2HF etc."
It does matter. Because it shows how un representative the WA is. The weapons are irelivent. I was using them just to highligh the problem.
It's not just the WA either. A 100K NW Whip adds the same power as a 100K NW Morg, which just isn't right. I can't see how anyone can defend that.
The Morg is more powerful by far, so sohld add more 'power' rating to the tank than an equal worth whip.
do you mean it should have a weapon allowance weight?
VP, I don't get what you post is tying to say... DD takes a penaly in ranged. It's a penalty.
What wa the damage you quoted? What caused the diference?
Pit, Yup. I also think 'specials' should increase thie weight a well. :) Hell, if you want that to apply to DD for things like spread ability over single target ness, I'm cool with that as well. :)
July 26 2006 1:45 PM EDT
*RANGED 1st Round*
Joe's Fireball hit Exken , Iiahar , Nikepra 
470k total dmg....
Exken hit Joe 
Exken hit Joe 
102k total dmg.....
He gets 3 rounds to hit.... I get two.... who gets a ranged penalty?
even if he had to take the 30% reduction penalty for all 3 rounds he would be doing roughly 1.5mil dmg to my 300k......
once again your point eludes me....
well there could be a weight added in weapon allowance which is what i think you are saying, or a weight added in pr. i agree with velvet that it shouldnt be added in pr, but i think its a good idea to add it into weapon allowance
VP, by design Crossbows fire twice in ranged. It's like saying CoC gets penalised in ranged because it doesn't get to attack.
You're looking a Hubels FB?
You're comparing a 3.5 Mil DD to your near 1 Mil Str and expecting to do the same damage?
July 26 2006 1:52 PM EDT
the point GL is that CoC, FB, and MM (and decay I guess) have certian strenghts and weaknesses over one another, therefore a separate PR weight cannont be assigned to each spell as some are better for certain scenarios.
a VB/Bone/Both/Els/MH all have certain strenghts and weakness in certain scenarios.... If it would make you feel better to allow someone to equip a 30mil NW whip (which dosen't even exist) or a 15mil NW specialty weapon.... just imagine in your head that characters can. Since the weapons don't even exist it is really all imagination anyway isn't it?
July 26 2006 1:57 PM EDT
I am comparing 1mil str., and 1mil dex to a 3.5mil FB... 2mil : 3.5mil is not equal to 10k : 200k
VP what is the strength weakness between using a Morg or Bone? Or Bth to ELS?
As Jon's post set out, we really should be comparing str level to DD level. Dex isn't really a factor.
I'll do my tests again tomorrow, if anyone has or knows of a single minion with no AC or enchantments (but a lot of HP!) let me know, I'll need a test subject! ;)
July 26 2006 2:07 PM EDT
back to the original topic.... a 100k NW MH vs 100k NW whip...
what does a morg do? leeches life at 20% of its dmg inflicted or 20% of the characters remaining life....
how much dmg do you think a 100k NW morg does on average? enough to really sway a battle? do you think the characters defending against it really have enough hp to feed its leech?
Do we not advise new players not to train VA until higher lvls due to this factor?
How about a 100k VB vs. 100k Whip....
Reduces effective AC/Protection/Endurance by 40% on attack
do lower level characters have enough AC/Prot/End to really make that an effective choice?
I could go on through all the specialty weapons, but I am certain my point is taken...
Therefore when comparing these items I don't feel a need for a great differential in the way their PR is calculated. Entry lvl weapons are designed to be grown out of, end of story. All the specialty weaps have their own strengths and weaknesses and therefore should be viewed equally.
OK maybe this is it's own thread, but I wanted to step back a little bit and show everyone how a tank really works. I get the impression that everyone assumes you just drop a big elbow and some seekers and poof you rock. This is not the case. So a peek under the skirts.
This is a snapshot of Sefton recently. All results are based from this snapshot regardless of what you see when you look at him, if you choose to.
DX: 170,310 (w full haste 190,868)
PR / MPR: 319,131 / 224,109 with tat
Max tattoo: 288,820
PR / MPR: 242,844 / 224,109 without tat
PR Gained from Tattoo - 76,287
This is a list of the ranged damage for the top 10 on my fight list in order from first to last.
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 10 / 10 / 36,345
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 8 / 8 / 34,469
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 9 / 10 / 44,966
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 9 / 9 / 47,359
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 5 / 7 / 45,830
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 7 / 8 / 50,089
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 5 / 6 / 72,123
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 11 / 11 / 40,763
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 5 / 6 / 59,530
Ranged Hits / Shots / Avg Damage 5 / 7 / 65,062
average ranged shots 7.4 for 3 rounds
Average damage per ranged shot across top 10 opponents on fight list - 49,653.6
This is my archery stat : Archery trained exp 433,746 effect 47000 (1.00)
Total trained exp on minion Sefton - 1,906,624
total trained in archery 433,746
% of trained exp in archery 22%
So what does all this mean, well it means essential I spend 22% of my total trained exp to make certain I do on average an extra 150K per ranged total to a single minion. And that is being generous and assuming that the extra shot from the 7 ranged shots on average is applied to the round where archery kicks in, and rounding up the average damage.
now YES this data is skewed by tons of factors from did I kill them before ranged ended, was I shooting a tank one round and an enchanter the next etc etc ad infinitum, BUT in general terms the effect still applies, and that is a significant portion (almost 1/4 of it) of my trained exp must be put into a stat to make certain I get one more ranged round in and on average do another 150K to A SINGLE MINION.
Now if you by chance do not have your archery up to 1.00 you will find that your fightlist is a wreck, one fight crushing other fight getting crushed on the same opponent as the random, no extra ranged round factors in. So you can certainly try that, but in the end your score, clan score, and rewards will fluxate so violently, that you will be have great incentive to get it up to 1.00.
IF you build your strat around an elbow and IF you use archery to get 3 ranged rounds and IF you can actually hit your target, then an elbow is a decent way to go, but over powered PLEASE. Try balancing all those factors, sinking 22% of your exp into a skill that is ESSENTIAL to your strat operating correctly, THEN balance NW gains from Armor and Tattoo THEN balance the NW injection to the X and + of your elbow and how it applies to PR gained above WA, THEN come tell me that somehow, someway, mages should be equal to all that, when ALL they had to do prior to the change is train 1/2 FB train, 1/2 HP max FB train everytime to RULE. Now they only do OK, and I am OK with that.
July 26 2006 3:53 PM EDT
VP, good point...but we covered that in a previous (lengthy) thread.
The weapon advantage is that you can hit 2-3 times to my once.
So who is more powerful? I'm not being sarcastic, it is a good question. I would just like to have a peek at what some PRs would be without the weapon allowance, and what the score/PR ratios would be. If they are similar to that of a mage, then the proof's in the pudding. And everybody, I mean EVERYBODY loves pudding.
July 26 2006 3:55 PM EDT
Especially if it comes with some rhubarb.
I hope the tank is more powerful, for all the difficulty in running a tank, and I hope it is not as great of an advantage as mages USED to enjoy, but I hope it is close.
July 26 2006 6:28 PM EDT
I agree Sefton. Ammo expense, stat diffusion, more armor choices/complications -- those intangibles add up. Like I said, I just want to know what a non-subsidized CB would look like, even if it is just a database snapshot from Jonathan. Come to think, he is probably already crunching the numbers, and I have faith in that man. So maybe, just maybe, I need to shut my stupid trap.
Better yet, JW, I should jam-pack my gob with rhubarb. Tasty silence.
July 26 2006 6:34 PM EDT
Rhubarb. Custard. A sprinkle of mint.
Tasty silence indeed.
July 26 2006 8:49 PM EDT
Sute my response was in direct response to the question asked by the thread creator.
But anyway as I covered in an earlier thread, the multi-strike is really only a so so advantage in many cases. My first point is ranged rounds, (excluding CoC and some ELB users) a 30% reduction to ranged damage in the first round and hitting in all 3 of ranged pales in comparison to the penalty of doing 10k in 2 rounds of ranged vs 200k/ strike in melee.
Secondly the spread damage from CoC and FB has just as big if not bigger advantage vs multi minion teams in many cases. There are times when I watch a PL minon stop absorbing dmg (almost out of HP) and a few rounds later I tripple strike him for 300k per hit, effectivly taking him to -890k HP before I can move on to another target in the next round.....
You are gonna have to come up with a better argument than multi strikes to move this conversation on.
My orginial question stands.
A mage and tank with equally trained ammount of exp and similar armor would have similar PR. If neither char had a weapon equiped who would win the fight?
So why should a tank be charged additional PR to equip what he needs to use to become equal to the Mage?
If anyone could answer me that, I will lay the topic to rest.
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=001rfW">Weapon Allowance</a>