Another RoS Suggestion (in General)


Dark Dreky July 23 2007 10:36 PM EDT

OK. I don't think this is that crazy of an idea...

Why not have the RoS grant the holder COMPLETE or maybe 60-80% of its level in DM resistance to the user... and remove the "aura" effect of it. Have the DM resistance be for the holder and not for the entire team.

And another random idea I just came up with, make it increase EO's for the holder as well. I understand however that this may be a little extreme. But I think that the RoS DM protection needs to be larger and I feel that this would be a fine compromise. This might be asking too much... but I would be happy with any change.

I think these changes would make things much more interesting and leave more options for RoS viability.

You know its a good idea. Some back me up here. =)

lostling July 23 2007 10:49 PM EDT

an increase in protection may be warrented but not complete... making it increase EOs will make EO + ROS really powerful -.-

Fanta [Fanta's Forge] July 24 2007 1:28 AM EDT

Nearly complete protection to only one minion would make the RoS worse than it is now IMO.

lostling July 24 2007 1:57 AM EDT

not really... consider the ROS is boosting that 1 minion's spells... you will see 1 a very large un dispel able AS :)

my max tatoo atm is like 740k half of it is like 320k lvls and i just have to add lets say 300k lvls of AS and it will be like 204k hp per minion in a 4minion team of un dispelable hp lol thats not including corns and AOFs lol

Fanta [Fanta's Forge] July 24 2007 2:16 AM EDT

You can still dispel it, 100% of the tattoos level, or 740k protection vs DM. That is pretty big - but at least I thought the RoS was supposed to be used for heavy enchantment teams, not just one huge, very DM resistant spell.

I suppose it wouldn't really make it worse, but still, it completely changes the point of the RoS and would make teams that rely on DM to get rid of large AS/GA much less effective. Take an SFBM for example - you have a DM to get rid of enemy AS and GA so you can finish him off quicker. But then the AS is suddenly really hard to dispel... then you're screwed. Or maybe the GA is nearly undispellable. Then you'll kill yourself... but I suppose it's not actually a problem since nobody uses the RoS and won't likely even if it was modified like this.

lostling July 24 2007 2:18 AM EDT

lol i think what he means by complete means complete undispelable but i dunno :)

Fanta [Fanta's Forge] July 24 2007 2:21 AM EDT

"Why not have the RoS grant the holder COMPLETE or maybe 60-80% of its level in DM resistance to the user"

Complete % of its level or just complete? actually yes he didn't exactly phrase it very clearly :P

Dark Dreky July 24 2007 9:25 AM EDT

Well I left it open to debate. I mean, complete DM resistance would be much nicer. However, people might see this as being too powerful so I shot out a high random figure (60-80%)

The reason I came up with this idea is because the only real option for the RoS is TEEE's and WEEE's. BORING! If you were to increase the DM resistance for the holder, it would allow teams to have one uber-enchanter (like a ToA for enchanters) and not NECESSITATE the need for 3 enchanters.

Like someone said before, no one uses the RoS as it is... so why not give it a change to at least make it more interesting. This change would allow current RoS teams to keep their builds and possibly improve them.

I don't know... am I the only one who thinks the RoS needs a change?

Tezmac July 24 2007 9:34 AM EDT

No, I do too. :O)

Fanta [Fanta's Forge] July 24 2007 9:52 AM EDT

I think so. Then again a lot of other things need changing too.
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=002Ai0">Another RoS Suggestion</a>