AMF (in General)

BootyGod April 2 2007 4:41 PM EDT

I've been thinking recently about AMF alot, and it's roll in the game.

And, my conclusion is that for offensive purposes in the upper portions of this game... it's pretty much worthless.

In the beginning of this game, HP can match the growth rate of damage, or at least to a reasonable degree. So it's fine for both offensive and defensive purposes. It reduces damage done to you, helps kill their mages faster, and yay :)

But, I can't be the only player in the millions of scores finishing fights with -500k to -5 million HP.

So, does AMF really hurt mages? Outside of being combined with GA (and alot of mages use DM anyways), does AMF help offensively?

Now, I understand it's defensive importance. But... here is what I would like to see.

I would like to see that, as AMF get's higher, it puts a greater percentage of it's effect into reducing damage taken over dealing it back to mage. So, assuming that AMF currently (at all levels) gives 50% of what it's effect allows and puts it into damage and the other just absorbs, that at certain levels it goes to 60% prevention 40% reflection.

I think many players will find it makes it more useful. Now, I don't want to make it overpowered, and that may be what happens, but at the same time I feel like AMF is not living up to it's rather large potential, and putting a good amount of it's affect into something that has no real impact on the battle.

To use my main example, if I have 1 Hp to 1 million as Edyit's tank starts wailing on me, I'm still dead that round.

So, all I ask now is for you all to give me some feedback. Thanks.

BootyGod April 2 2007 4:43 PM EDT


QBOddBird April 2 2007 4:45 PM EDT

Works fine for me. Yeah, it could be stronger and everything, but when you properly combine it with MgS/EH, it does its job quite nicely.

Phrede April 2 2007 4:46 PM EDT

I totally agree - it needs to be made more competitive somehow (without being overpowered).
There is so much imbalance in thisd game as mages are too overpowered. (That'll start something :) )

deifeln April 2 2007 4:48 PM EDT

Ha...overpowered mages.

BootyGod April 2 2007 4:54 PM EDT

Oh, and let me specify. If you took away the tanks seekers and exshot, I think you would have a much closer balance, and a greater need for a more protective AMF. Under NO circumstances should you make AMF stronger while leaving the current version of seekers in the game.

AdminNightStrike April 2 2007 4:58 PM EDT

AMF already functions based somewhat like that. When AMF level is greater than DD level, then the percentage grows quickly. When DD level is greater, then the AMF percentage grows slowly. Basically, it makes 50% the cutoff. As long as the AMF % is below 50, you get more bang for your buck than if it's over 50%.

Somebody might have to reiterate what I just said more eloquently. I don't think I'm being clear.

BootyGod April 2 2007 5:04 PM EDT

No, it makes sense to me. The problem is half that bang is going somewhere it isn't doing any good.

QBsutekh137 April 2 2007 5:14 PM EDT

AMF can entirely kill off DD familiars, and when used in conjunction with a ToE, it can even finish off large minion mages.

Mages are overpowered... ye gads. How many tank specific game mechanics and items have to be introduced further? I'll be the first to agree that Evasion buffs were a wake-up call for tanks, but that was the first thing in a looooong time that was a boon almost entirely for mages.

BootyGod April 2 2007 5:15 PM EDT

Sarcasm sutekh :)

And yes, AMF does hurt familiars. I hadn't thought so much of that. Or more so had, and just kind of ignored it. But which is better? A change to AMF that makes it more effective against minion mages, or against familiars?

QBsutekh137 April 2 2007 5:28 PM EDT

No change at all suits me fine. *smile* AMF damages the caster, reduces the damage, and has no additional way of foiling other than training DD higher (many other spells have multiple ways of countering).

I think AMF is fine as-is. But then, one would expect me to say that. *smile*

QBOddBird April 2 2007 5:32 PM EDT

No, it makes sense to me. The problem is half that bang is going somewhere it isn't doing any good.

--Titan, 5:04 PM EDT

What the heck are you talking about? It blocks a lot of damage very efficiently, with 50% blocked being the cutoff point before it gets extremely difficult. Backlash is like a bonus.

BootyGod April 2 2007 5:34 PM EDT

What I meant was that outside of a few cases, the backlash would be better used as just more protection.

QBsutekh137 April 2 2007 5:47 PM EDT

Even more protection? Teams using heavy damage reduction (even without utilizing anti-mage-specific gear) already reduce the most concentrated magic blows in the game enough to manifest outstanding PL/leech/regen symbiosis... And you want to make mages hit even _lighter_?

Mages may hit every time, but they only hit once. So teams that use damage reduction, PL, leeching, and HP regeneration well already have counters for that single blow. Making AMF reduce the blows even further would mean mages would have no chance of overwhelming ToEs, save for Decay (which can't deliver the kill).

QBOddBird April 2 2007 6:03 PM EDT

On the contrary, I'd rather have more backlash so the mage more easily dies without me having to reach around to him. ;) But you'd hate that, being a CoC user, the DD that receives the highest backlash from AMF.

[T]Vestax April 2 2007 6:39 PM EDT

"So, does AMF really hurt mages?"

It sure does.

AMF is perfectly fine. I don't know what you are complaining about. It effectively does the job it is designed to do, which is cripple Mages. With a very very small investment you can easily stop 5 to 10 percent of the enemies DD. That is cheap compared to upping your Mage Shield another +5, and it works on your entire team, _and_ it deals damage back to the caster.

QBRanger April 2 2007 6:52 PM EDT

AMF right now is balanced just fine.

You can use a TOE to reduce AMF damage if your a mage.

Otherwise as pointed out earlier AMF can reduce damage by an easy 10% at a relatively low level.

I personally use AMF not to kill mages with AMF backlash, but to lower damage.

Nerevas April 2 2007 8:39 PM EDT

Please leave AMF alone. Please..

QBRanger April 2 2007 10:36 PM EDT


After re-reading your post I think I get where you may be not correct in your initial thinking.

At the "upper portions of the game", AMF is not thought of as an offensive spell. like at the "lower levels". It is a defensive spell and is used as such.

I do not think many who I fight rely on AMF to beat someone else. Instead they use it to lower mages damage to a reasonable level while they are doing damage. And a few use it at a fairly low level just to have the protection from decay. I know the Oxcha does something like that.

As stated, a little AMF can go a long way.

TheHatchetman April 3 2007 3:36 AM EDT

I use a 100k AMF and notice a substantial damage reduction... this is at nearly 1.3m MPR... No, its not going to win the battle alone, but its reduction at such a small level is, by far, worth the XP put into it. :)
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=0024Ut">AMF</a>