Reduction (in General)

BootyGod October 3 2007 9:55 AM EDT

Eh. Just an idea. Wanted to throw it out there and see the response before I thought about it.

I want to see the damage of every weapon cut in half. Mage damage to be about the same reduction. Than reduce AMF, AS, protection, EC, ToE, RoBF, etcetc, to keep their balance. What's the point of this?

More defensive strategies. More rounds. And, most importantly, DECREASES the amount of randomness in the game. With smaller values, the change on each one isn't as drastic. Instead of hittig between 1-2 million damage, you will hit between 500k-1 mil. Drops the range in half.

Just a solution on getting rid of randomness and making the battles a bit longer (a good thing for melee tanks and Cone of cold/decay). Of course, it would probably be easier to just change the randomness for both DD and physical attacks in the code, but, just wanted to get this out.

QBRanger October 3 2007 10:00 AM EDT

If you look at a lot of battles, especially now with the RBF, quite a lot last 20-25 rounds.

The Randomness of the game is something that keeps my interest. If I knew every battle everything my minions would do damagewise, it would get quite boring rather fast.

The fact one can win a battle one time then lose/draw another keeps people on their A game and makes it so tweaking is needed to keep people on your fightlist or try to get you off theirs.

I would vote no to such a proposal. Imagine LD with all his HP/AC/TOE with damages cut in 1/2. 50 rounds would not be enough to beat him.

Maelstrom October 3 2007 10:15 AM EDT

most importantly, DECREASES the amount of randomness

Unless things have changed in the months I was away, Jon has always tried to increase the amount of randomness in the game. As Ranger mentioned, randomness helps to keep the game interesting and dynamic.

Aside from that, I see absolutely no purpose or logic to what you are suggesting. How would decreasing damage encourage defensive strategies? You would need to focus even more on doing offense, and you could safely ignore defense, since it now takes twice as much for you to be defeated.

smallpau1 - Go Blues [Lower My Fees] October 3 2007 10:38 AM EDT

i would like to at least see a majority of battles last into melee, instead of the no melee at all... Mainly because it takes a fairly small ranged weapon to do massive amounts (but equal to melee, with the melee weapon being 6 times larger, maybe more) of damage.

Eurynome Bartleby [Bartleby's] October 3 2007 10:40 AM EDT

Which brings us back to reducing Ranged Damage.

Lumpy Koala October 3 2007 10:43 AM EDT

I don't know what's the purpose of this suggestion as well. Are you saying we aren't defensive enough now already? I believe Sut will come in with more "verbal opinion" about defensiveness against mages :P

QBRanger October 3 2007 10:58 AM EDT


That is another discussion entirely.

DD and melee damage are fair adequate and pretty balanced.

Missile on the other hand......

BootyGod October 3 2007 12:05 PM EDT

You all take this the wrong way. This was idle pondering, not as serious idea to see if anything idea wise could be made out of it.

Maelstrom October 3 2007 12:25 PM EDT

Sorry, I forgot that we shouldn't take you seriously, Godwolf ;p

Nerevas October 3 2007 12:35 PM EDT

Defensive strategies are already very prominent and work fantastically.

QBsutekh137 October 3 2007 12:44 PM EDT

Do not reduce damage without reducing damage reduction.

With thresholds on ToEs, TSAs, and PL, can you imagine how impossible it would be to beat a damage-reduction team with lower damage blows?

By all means reduce damage, but nerf damage REDUCTION even more. Too many layers, too thresholdy, too binary, too boring.

QBJohnnywas October 3 2007 12:47 PM EDT

I'm with Sut, cut back on some of that damage reduction that exists! Otherwise nobody will be able to do any damage whatsoever!

BootyGod October 3 2007 1:06 PM EDT

Than reduce AMF, AS, protection, EC, ToE, RoBF, etcetc, to keep their balance. What's the point of this?

READ the entire post, please. I beg you all.


QBsutekh137 October 3 2007 1:10 PM EDT

FYI, I totally agree with reductions (both damage and damage-reduction). Too many things are binary in the game, and by making the amplitude of single actions smaller, it makes everything more continuous as opposed to discrete. More nuance, more tweaking, more possibilities.

In theory, it seems balanced to have huge blows and also huge damage reduction. In a way, I suppose it is. But it also means battles are decided by a few main strategy choices instead of many.

BootyGod October 3 2007 1:51 PM EDT

*points out that Sut has one of the most powerful mages in the game and that the 50-100% damage randomness must drive him bonkers*


However,, you're right. And speaking from any point of view, the reduction would be very interesting.

QBsutekh137 October 3 2007 5:42 PM EDT

Yes, the randomness miffs me.

Yukk October 3 2007 6:34 PM EDT

But apparently it keeps Ranger interested because he gets to see just how much he wins by every time :)
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=002Emr">Reduction</a>