DD Enthusiasts, unite! (in Off-topic)
November 15 2006 11:46 PM EST
I'm actually not that much of a DD enthusiast - but I have a good reason for that.
See, if I were to make a mage team, I'd want it to be a 4 minion team. EXP split denies mages that possibility, but tanks can drop a ToA on there and be just fine. After all, even if you are lacking a little in the DX/ST department, with a little PTH you'll still hit and only EC can knock your damage (aside from expensive AC and whatnot, and that just slows you down).
However, an EFFECTIVE mage team simply cannot be 4 minions from the start. You just can't get enough points pumped on there. Additionally, unless you are wanting *two* DD spells (both weak to AMF), there's no tattoo to increase your offensive mage power.
Any chance we could get a tattoo to increase the size of a DD by, oh say, 50% of its level? ToA users get that just to STR, in addition to DX....and they also get multiple hits from that DX. Plus they get some extra PTH as well.
It just seems a little unfairly tilted there. But with this tattoo, a 4 minion team with a mage, grown from the start, just might be viable.
It seemed like a good alternative to me. I know this isn't the most ingenious of ideas or anything, but it seems like a good simple solution.
And yes, I know from the title that, since I *am* drawing DD enthusiasts, the first reply will be 'Kill Seekers! I hate Seekers! Booo Seekers!' but that's not what I'm aiming for in this thread.
Rather, I'm looking more for a balancing idea here - not to increase the power of DD. I think the power is just fine, but it cannot be spread out over a team.
Sorry GL, hate to make a thread that promotes 4 minion teams ~_^
November 16 2006 3:14 AM EST
A tattoo that increases 50% of its level might be a little overpowered. You can always use a familiar as a DD mage :)
November 16 2006 3:21 AM EST
Mmm, howabout a tattoo that does the following:
Increases DD by a percentage.
Adds some endurance to the team. Not as much as the ToE but enough to help against AMF.
And....has some qualities of invisibility but unlike the amulet can be invisible to seekers...........
Oh and it buys you breakfast the next day....
November 16 2006 3:24 AM EST
Isn't that a little too much for a tattoo, Johnny? ;)
November 16 2006 3:29 AM EST
Not really - if we are comparing to the ToA, which gives my guy ST/DX and the Bonus to PTH. And, although it's a low amount you also get a certain amount of damage reduction from ST.
Mages do need some loving...at the moment they're starting to look like that ugly guy in the nightclub who smells of milk and has the mummified bodies of his parents in the attic.
November 16 2006 3:31 AM EST
I believe what mages need is a gear that can help them with dodging arrows, especially seekers. Maybe putting evasion on tattoos would be a more realistic idea. Maybe adding 50% of its level to evasion would really rock.
November 16 2006 5:27 AM EST
I like the idea, mages don't really have much going for them at the moment, so anything added to help them is a good idea. But since tanks get the toa, mgs and tsa... plus a whole bunch of other decent cool stat increasing items, then perhaps mages should get some sort of benefit? A tattoo that adds a percentage to DD and HP would be nice to see, maybe add 30% its level to DD and 20% to HP and add some endurance to the mage. That kills a few birds with a single stone, and makes multiple minion mage teams viable from the beginning. I'm still waiting for a helm for mages though.
"Sorry GL, hate to make a thread that promotes 4 minion teams ~_^"
Johnny, remove the breakfast part and that'll be balanced ;)
Even a tattoo that just does that could be considered
overpowered imo, just think of how much power some of us would have if we didn't have to worry about getting our own
The ToE is all of these things, and in my opinion needs a buff.
It allows you to maximize the amount of xp you put into your DD, better than
even a tattoo would from my point of view. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the only way to have a mage live 25 rounds is a ToE (when AMF is involved), nothing else even comes close. Damage has been increasing left and right, and the ToE hasn't complained one bit...
Maybe take my Helm/Ring of power idea and tattoo it...
item based evasion to match the ToA, and spell levels added for AMF purposes only...a very mage specific tattoo...and an ugly way to create a decay mage in a box...something I've always wanted!
November 16 2006 11:39 AM EST
OK, I'll make another example then.
If you want a 4 minion team with a mage as its main damage dealer, number one, you're probably a little crazy.
But then, now that you've confirmed your lunacy, you have to choose a DD.
You choose CoC because you have 4 minions for them to eat through and it does a lot of damage.
But AMF still eats you alive!
You can't choose MM or FB either because again, AMF eats you alive and you are doing such small damage....
tanks will do more damage AND not have a weakness to AMF AND hit multiple blows AND are only sought by EX/AXbows which do very little damage in comparison to an ELBow!
So mages need something. A TOE obviously is NOT enough. There's hardly any variety choice for mages as far as tattoos go, as well. A TANK based team may use ANY tattoo and be effective.
A MAGE based team has a much more limited choice.
Mages don't necessarily need any changes to how DD works or anything - but another Skill or some better Equipment would sure be nice, seeing as how EVERYTHING tilts towards the tank.
And a DD increasing tattoo that gave 50% of its level to DD would be almost underpowered, IMO. After all, ToA....
The ToA still needs a weapon to work (well), so it's apples and crab apples you're comparing here. You need a way to beat AMF with NW, period. The ToE and an item that did something to reduce AMF without increasing damage done is the answer to that.
November 16 2006 11:47 AM EST
I think you could be right there - a NW slot might be what I'm looking for. *shrugs*
BTW thanks for the soap box, I've been trying to sell that idea for almost as long as I've played the game...
i think youre all making a wrong assumption, assuming that both st and dx have as big of an impact on the damage a tank does is the same as the impact of a higher level of DD does. Mages also get the bonus of only have to train 2 stats instead of 3 or 4.
in addition i had a 4 minion team that used only mages which worked pretty well. they can work you just have to do them right.
and ToE is also amazing vs amf, snk managed to kill TAB when i had it, with all my DD reduction, he still survived 21 rounds it took to kill me without dieing to amf
November 16 2006 3:22 PM EST
Pit, let me remind you once more of the Tank v. Mage comparison.
STR increases damage.
DX increases # of hits per round.
PTH increases # of hits per round.
May use any tattoo with their strategy.
May use Net Worth to boost their Damage and hits per round tremendously.
Does not recieve any backlash.
Easily overpowers its opposing EO (EC).
Has a choice between focusing on STR or DX.
May split experience quite a bit due to the ToA.
Has 4 different skill options.
May use a MgS to reduce magical damage.
Can do enormous damage in a one, two, three, or four minion team due to ToA.
The only tank-seeking projectiles are fired by weaker weapons (Ax/Ex).
May use a tattoo to increase Offensive power (ToA) or Defensive power (ToE).
Tons and tons of gears to improve tanks, largely without a considerable penalty.
Two power shield options.
DD increases damage.
May only have one hit per round.
Limited choice of tattoos.
Must conserve EXP due to AMF.
Receives more AMF backlash by training more DD.
May only increase two or three stats b/c of experience dilution.
Has only ONE skill option.
May not use a MgS.
Damage decreases incredibly as the # of minions on the team increases.
Nearly all ranged weapons may seek mages. (X-bows, Bows)
May use a tattoo to increase Defensive power (ToE).
Very few gears to increase Mage potential, many with magical handicaps.
No power shield options.
You can skew it all you want, but mages are clearly on the handicapped side.
Just ask Ranger and Sutekh. In fact, don't ask. The topic comes up by itself.
November 16 2006 3:39 PM EST
Well, I like the list, OB, but it is easy to list Pros all on one side and Cons all on the other when you get to decide the "important" criteria. *smile*
The big thing you are missing that tanks require is net worth management. Now, I could say that is yet another option tanks get to have fun with, but in reality it can be more of a ceiling (i.e. not fun). It's why people lament USD and why people dislike the loss of camping. It's hard to compete without net worth, and one has to be continually watching the weapon allowance as he/she grows.
The other side of that is that if one embraces USD, tanks are an easy way to take a short-cut to the top. Buying a large ToA and then gearing up can really make a difference, even for a small MPR. Add to that the fact that the NCB can provide experience while USD can provide net worth, and it is an obvious choice for folks who have the extra cash.
Also, your point about hitting is, to me, moot. Yes, mages can only hit once, but they always hit. Tanks live and die by dexterity, and have to combat evasion. That about evens it out in my head, or at least makes it even enough to be interesting. There _have_ to be differences, otherwise this wouldn't be Mage Blender OR Tank Blender, it would just be Blender. That's no fun. *smile*
The main things I focus on are the MPR avenues that tanks have more options on, such as with defensive enchantments. Other than pumping DM and maybe Evasion, and the idea of switching to MM, there is literally nothing worthwhile to invest in for my team. I think that is why I eventually got so excited about the Evasion changes (and ability for free untraining!), because it gave me something to play with. I was on fire for several days, messing with different combinations of HP, Evasion, and DD. I can only imagine how much fun the tanks were having, messing with HP, skills, STR, DEX, and an assortment of EDs. It's fun, and mages need more of it!
November 16 2006 5:45 PM EST
Look at NWO.
4 minions from the start and very powerful.
Mages have the ability to linearly boost their damage via xp. Tanks can do it also but they need to boost str which is not linear.
However, imagine the days of yore:
The mage and tank each line up in the field of battle.
Each has their armies. Each is fully equipped. The tank in his full battle armor, mage shield on one arm, magical sword/hammer in the other. The mage wearing his flimsy gloves and cloak, not providing my protection but very magical indeed.
Battle begins. The tank gets out his bow and arrow. Thump--his magical arrow by passes all the mages defenses and hits him twice--Battle over.
All the time the mages spells fire off exactly as god intended.
Untie, untie, now why should we untie? How did we get tied in the first place. Being tied doesn't sound all that bad, means one is not ahead of the other, what are you against fairness and equality? You want to go back to the days of slave labor, death camps, and steel toed boots kicking down doors in the middle of the night. Why it will be chaos, it will be havok, Untie, how could you....wait....what is that?, ohhhhh you said Unite......nevermind.
"Mages have the ability to linearly boost their damage via xp. Tanks can do it also but they need to boost str which is not linear."
Strength now provides a linear increase to damage doesn't it? And as both Str and DD have the same XP curve that doesn't differentiate between them.
November 16 2006 7:15 PM EST
As I understand it, you need a 4x increase in str to get a 2x increase in damage.
Still not too bad considering you can also increase the NW of your weapon to boost your damage even more. Given that mages only have 2 items that boost their DD spell compared to numerous str boosting tank items, tanks do have it a bit easier.
the amount which an increased st boosts damage still pales in comparison to the amount which an increased DD skill adds to damage. also, the may only be one EO, but there is also evasion, which can cripple tanks completely. not only that, but ax/exbow can also cripple tanks as well. for an amf to completely cripple a mage team it has to be really high, in which case they are weak in other areas, such as hp, offense etc. tanks are much more easily negated than mages, provided they dont have incredibly high nw.
'networth management' LOL
i run a SFBM it an almost maxed out ToE and its a bit of a grind
what we needs is a new class, THIEF!!
aquires the skill to weild 2 daggers, earn a bit more cash and or XP
could be geared towards being a start up strategy that a player would grow out of.
would also benefit from evasion skill and any uber gear, would rely on dex investment for this class...yeap, im done >_<
November 16 2006 11:31 PM EST
Hm, yes, a whole new "class" would be something... We have two active classes (mages and tanks) and two passive classes (enchanters and walls), with UC minions being more like tanks than anything else...
I'm not sure what else a minion could be given possible configurations, but it is an intriguing idea...
Pit, good point on the axbow and exbow -- those are tank-busting specific items. Problem is, they are tank busters that can only be wielded by other tanks. The mage-busting items can be used by a wide variety of sources, and mages cannot use axbows and exbows to weaken their arch nemeses tanks.
yea mages cant use ex/ax but they can use EC and Eva where theres otherwise amf for vs mages. And as far as easily overcoming EC, that just shows how much less st and dx matter than DD level. tanks can be overcome by them, ive had it happen to me numerous times. and tanks can no more overcome EC with ToA than mages can overcome AMF with ToE. Yea there may be more bonuses for tanks, but thats because there are much more detrimental things to tanks as well.
November 17 2006 1:33 AM EST
Show me something that, as you increase the + on it, decreases tank damage by a straight % per +.
Tanks have no MgS to deal with, no TSA to deal with.
Besides, tanks can rely on PTH (provided by the ToA, btw) when DX fails them.
"As I understand it, you need a 4x increase in str to get a 2x increase in damage."
But doesn't an 8x increase n STR give you a 4x increase in damage? Making the relationship linear.
show me a mage that can do 0 damage in a round, or even a whole fight
November 17 2006 8:51 AM EST
Right'un takes damage from his own Magic missile (1)!
Right'un's Magic missile hit Old Dwarf's bulldog for no damage
thats fighting against a charachter with an insanely higher amf, anyone at an even remotely similar mpr will not have an amf that high in relation.
November 17 2006 8:55 AM EST
Time for a different comparison, Pit.
Who is being more effective, one who trains a 400k EC or who trains a 400k AMF?
This is a tank-slanted game (tankblender, as per Jon himself), so you would think EC, right?
But no. a 400k AMF still reduces damage and causes backlash for ANY mage.
A 400k EC doesn't even affect any tank worth his salt.
EC has to be AS HIGH AS THE OPPONENT'S STR to really cause any damage, since PTH takes over where DX leaves off.
AMF doesn't have to be big at all. It ALWAYS does its job.
Like Ranger said in another thread *points*, you can't even compare the two.
and BBQ, AC decreases physical damage. not linear, yes, but when you reach high AC, most melee fighters will struggle to do any damage at all...
November 17 2006 9:07 AM EST
Yes, I know - it decreases both physical AND magical damage.
And you have to dump some pretty good money into a wall team for that damage reduction.
Meanwhile, 5 mil into a MgS/TSA antimage suit is reducing practically all of their damage first round, eventually slowing down, but costing that mage quite a bit during the first couple rounds of combat. By the way, since they are only firing ONCE per round and are getting BACKLASH everytime they do hit, they need each round they can get and all the damage they can do.
AC reduces phys damage more, by a good bit more, than magical damage. and people choose amf over ec because mages are _more_ dangerous left unchecked than tanks are, thanks for helping disprove your own point
"EC has to be AS HIGH AS THE OPPONENT'S STR to really cause any damage, since PTH takes over where DX leaves off."
This is where EC and Evasion shine. Currently, there is no way to reduce the values of either.
EC takes out Dex, Evasion counters whatever Dex is left and recude PTH.
November 17 2006 9:37 AM EST
"AC reduces phys damage more, by a good bit more, than magical damage. and people choose amf over ec because mages are _more_ dangerous left unchecked than tanks are, thanks for helping disprove your own point"
I was simply pointing out that AC is not a tank-only damage reducer.
People choose AMF over EC because it works against mages no matter how much you've got trained. Train a 200k AMF and you'll always reduce their damage and give 'em some backlash. Train a 200k EC and you're just pissing in the wind.
GL - but you have to train DOUBLE their DX level in order to have enough EC to nullify their DX. Why would you do that when Evasion has Defensive DX in the skill? EC is only good against the STR, Evasion is the way to go if you want to take out DX/PTH. (and even then it has to be pretty darned high to get it past ToA+decent NW weapon PTH)
I had an eva tank which easily competed with ToA tanks, even ones that were higher than my level, eva can be very effective. and peopl need amf because without it they get torn to shreds by mages, even if they have tsa/mgs. i know, i tried using tsa/mgs and mages still hurt a lot.
and as far as you complaining about tsa/mgs, there are db for vs tanks. db which can easily take out a tanks weapons of considerably less nw than the db since weapon and db + are comparable. in addition db can completely negate a tanks damage where the amount which tsa/mgs negate magic damage is capped.
November 17 2006 10:01 AM EST
I do not have AMF, and I don't get shred by mages. *smile* There is also offense vs. defense to consider. I gave up on defense quite some time ago, as illustrated in the threads on ToE vs. SF a while back.
With my current minion number and net worth, a defensive stance is all but impossible. I would expect the same for a tank team similar to mine.
Folks can banter back and forth all day about best strategies and what a mage or tank can or can't do to succeed, but can we get back to the original topic? The original topic is about choice. So, Pit, straight up: do you think mages have the same level of choice as tanks in the game? I'm not talking about success or anything like that, I am talking about choice (because therein lies the fun for me). Ranger would also like more choice, for similar reasons as far as I can tell.
"GL - but you have to train DOUBLE their DX level in order to have enough EC to nullify their DX. Why would you do that when Evasion has Defensive DX in the skill? EC is only good against the STR, Evasion is the way to go if you want to take out DX/PTH. (and even then it has to be pretty darned high to get it past ToA+decent NW weapon PTH)"
Answered in the general thread.
Yes, if you only train EC to the same XP as your opponent has trained Dex, you remove 50% of it. And Str.
Trian EC to the same amount your target has spend in both Str and Dex and you remove 100% of Dex. And Str.
i have to agree, the level of choice is less for mages. but i think the game is quite balanced as it is (for example the top 10 people are 5 tank teams and 5 mage teams) and i think adding choices would upset it, esp some of the ones ob mentioned. i can jsut see sut with a tat that adds 50% of its level to DD level with a 5 mil + fb.
November 17 2006 10:41 AM EST
That'd be the case IF it was trained EC vs. trained DX/STR.
But in reality, this is:
My trained EC: say I devote a solid TWO MILLION points to it.
Their DX and STR. We won't even make it a ToA tank, just a ToE one, with EGs and a HoE:
They've still got 150k STR and 100k DX to hit me with, after I devote ALL THAT experience into EC. Trust me, that's more than enough, even without the PTH that their weapon has surely got. Say they're wielding a MH, one that's hardly upgraded enough for the MPR they've gotta have:
They're still going to hit triples on me with some pretty decent damage.
Now we go to AMF. I've got the same 2 million points dumped into AMF:
AMF: 2,000,000 (?)
And they've got, we'll say, a solid 4M DD spell. As you know, there's not too many of those around. ~_^
MM: 4,000,000 (holycrap)
AMF: ~.3 if I'm not wrong, and massive backlash damage done.
Mages def don't have the same level of choice as Tanks.
Multiple Viable weapons, with different abilities. More applicable skills. More armour choices, more Tattoo choices.
Come on BBQ. If you're adding in items for STR, add in a Corn...
If the issue (and I think it's a valid issue) is that there is more item support for intrinsics than EO's, that's a different issue.
November 17 2006 10:46 AM EST
"...i think adding choices would upset it, esp some of the ones ob mentioned. i can jsut see sut with a tat that adds 50% of its level to DD level with a 5 mil + fb."
Well I think adding a tattoo that increased a tank's STR *and* DX by amounts equal to tens of millions of experience would be more than a little overpowered. I can just see DAWG with a tattoo adding 1.5M STR by itself and 1M DX....OH MY GOD, IT HAPPENED ALREADY
oh, and the tattoo idea I mentioned would really only be helpful for multi-minion mage teams. Sut with a 4, 5, or 6M fb still gets hit by like 4 seekers in one round.
first, you still assuming st add damage at the same rate DD adds damage which isnt true. second, allowing mages to train just dd instead of 2 stats and a skill allows them to get a much larger bonus from their items. using your own example above, with 10% dx bonus and 15% st bonus the tank gets an extra 150k levels. using simply 1 +10% item for the mage with 4 mil MM gets them a 400k level bonus. while the amount of bonuses are less, the focus of training only 1 stat vs 3 gives the bonuses they get larger magnitude.
November 17 2006 11:02 AM EST
BBQ, I don't get hit by that many seekers in one round. *smile*
I generally get hit not at all, or by one in round one and one in round two. And if a tank is big enough to actually hit me, he is probably big enough to kill me with those two arrows (newfreed).
If there were a tattoo that increased DD, it would definitely not be able to have an aura, just like the ToA has no aura.
And would I use such a tattoo? Increase my DD by 2 million, but lose a separate attack and kill slot? I'm not sure. That would be an interesting choice. At least I wouldn't have to worry about frying my SF in Round 4...
November 17 2006 11:03 AM EST
first, you still assuming st add damage at the same rate DD adds damage which isnt true.
You are right. The rate is different. I think that tanks get MORE damage as their ST increases than Mages. Example: Compare a mage with 50k DD and a tank with 50k STR. That tank, if he's smart, is wielding a katana and he's doing a whole lot more damage.
300k STR and 600k DD. Toss an ELBow on there. Tank's winning.
2M STR and 4.5M FB: a well-upgraded MH vs. that FB. Let's just say this: The FB will do about 1/3 of its level in damage, once per round, so about 1.5M damage. How much do you think that MH is doing? 1.5M damage per round? i beg to differ. The key here may be that there's $$$ going into the MH, but heck, we're talking reality - the tank's damage IS going to rise faster than the mage's.
second, allowing mages to train just dd instead of 2 stats and a skill allows them to get a much larger bonus from their items. using your own example above, with 10% dx bonus and 15% st bonus the tank gets an extra 150k levels. using simply 1 +10% item for the mage with 4 mil MM gets them a 400k level bonus. while the amount of bonuses are less, the focus of training only 1 stat vs 3 gives the bonuses they get larger magnitude.
But that mage is getting, say, 600k extra levels from their expensive AGs. That equivocates out to 200k extra damage.
The tank is only getting 150k levels from his comparitively inexpensive gears, and it allows him to continue hitting his doubles at well over 300k damage per shot.
The % might be higher for the mage, but the effect is greater for the tank.
Do you see where I'm coming from yet?
you guys talk about numbers, but why dont you prove it, you say 400k EC vs 44k AMF, which is better on mages?
talking about the increase in damage st gives, not what is possible based on weapons ob. so no i don't see where you're coming from.
November 17 2006 6:32 PM EST
You cannot ignore how the weapons affect damage. To do so is to look at the situation from an unrealistic point of view.
with all complaining being done about this, the more I'd like to see things really end up fair and balanced around here...
DD's can now be cast multiple times a round, train DD for a change to cast more than once, damage will be controlled by the amount of NW in your staff...*points and laughs*
when you are comparing item bonuses to st and dd level, then yes you should be comparing the respective increases each stat gives, not looking at some other items affect
November 17 2006 6:57 PM EST
OK, guess you were missing the point of my entire monologue.
However, just see if you can follow me here:
Due to the huge item bonuses possible, a trained EC will HAVE to put out more stat points than the offensive points he is nullifying to keep up with a Tank. Even with a Corn.
However, training AMF to *ANY* amount always has an effect on the opposing mage.
Therefore, AMF > EC.
We'll just simplify the AMF vs. EC part of the argument to that. Sound good?
November 17 2006 7:22 PM EST
I'm sitting here, thinking about how tanks have it so much better, thinking about mages and seekers and things like that.
So I look over at the character standings.....
Number One character in the entire game: Mage.
Top scoring single minion: Mage
Top scoring two minion team: Mage
Top scoring three minion team: Mage
Top scoring four minion team: Mage
Just an observation.......dunno if I'm trying to make a point or not...it's late.... ;)
November 18 2006 2:57 PM EST
The two main of those (4 minion and overall) are Ranger.
Ranger would dominate with a popsickle... so those don't count :)
November 19 2006 4:18 AM EST
ranger would own without any USD input, currently, that is with his current setup, sure his wall wouldn't be as effective and gears not so upgraded, but that is a team that is manageable without any real need for USD input.
and yes, JW, whoever will still say Tanks rule after that bit of information, needs a little bit of help.
November 19 2006 5:14 AM EST
I have a single FB mage, and i can dominate most tanks near my PR (tyvm EV, DB, and AoI for removing 100 +'d from my enemies' weapons and making it near impossible for me to get hit in ranged rounds). But ur original point was about making mage-based 4 minion teams from the start. I guess its about equal (leaning on tanks a little), between mages and tanks, but some more choices would be great. Stir up the mana pool some :-D These are just the words of a tired noob, so feel free to comment/flame all you want people...
I guess the main reason why we mages are feeling slightly hard done by is due to what AMF actually does. Not only does it reduce the effectiveness of the DD, but it also causes backlash.
This would not be so bad, except that there are also Seekers to take into account...
A tank with an AoI can get hit by: DD spells, GA.
A mage with an AoI can get hit by: DD spells, GA, Seekers, AMF.
And when you consider that AMF also reduces DD effectiveness, it can tip the scales heavily. Perhaps if EC also did damage to tanks when they executed a successful attack, we would have less to complain about.
Or if seekers were abolished.
Why is this in off-topic?
November 21 2006 9:00 AM EST
...because the 'Off-Topic' section is right beside 'General' in the little pop-up on the sidebar and I didn't notice my click had missed. ^_^
A tank with an AoI can get hit by: DD spells, GA, RoBF, AXbow EXbow, EC, Evasion, protection, AC+(more so than mages), ToE
A mage with an AoI can get hit by: DD spells, GA, Seekers, AMF, protection, AC-(less so than tanks), ToE.
November 21 2006 11:45 AM EST
AX/EX bows ignore AoI? I didn't know that...
same time as the seekers Sut...
AX EX bows have permanent offensive seeking ability to hit tanks...makes seekers look like the tinker toys they are!
ax/ex bows do work vs aoIs and work better vs pl as well now too. and not only do they seek out tanks, but have lasting effects on tanks in addition to the damage.
Pit_Spawn, I disagree. Tanks cannot get hit by EC. EC does not cause damage. All it does it reduce stats. Same with protection and AC, whatever you meant by that...
You are correct that ax/ex can hit tanks wielding AoI, though.
However, the damage caused by Ax/Ex is much smaller than elbows. Finally, since mages have less AC than tanks at the best of times, and can get hit by seekers shot from elbows, this translates into much larger damage incurred.
And if this argument does not cut any mustard for you (and I suspect that this is the case) then let us consider the next point about ax/ex: they have to be wielded by a tank. No mage could successfully wield one. So, you have tank teams being able to successfully and exclusively hit AoI'd mages, but AoI'd mages being unable to successfully and exclusively hit AoI'd tanks...
The RoBF is a farce; there are no great strategies using the RoBF. However, you are correct in that it can hit AoI-hidden tanks.
So, we have:
Tank: DD, GA, RoBF, Ax/Ex - but the last two are negligible.
Mage: DD, GA, AMF, Seekers - and the last two are massive, especially when you consider the DD-reduction caused by AMF also.
I agree with ranger: seekers make the game unbalanced... Remove them and things become balanced again.
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=001x4R">DD Enthusiasts, unite!</a>