Q about the RBF (in General)
October 19 2007 3:52 PM EDT
Does the mage shield protect/reduce RBF flame damage?
If not, should it?
October 19 2007 3:58 PM EDT
I don't know if it does. However if it doesn't, then it should not protect/reduce RBF flame damage. I consider RBF damage as if it were a splash damage.
October 19 2007 4:03 PM EDT
splash damage from FB and COC IS reduced by MGS :) (i think)
October 19 2007 4:04 PM EDT
I would assume it doesn't, since RBF damage is in a class all of its own, and the MgS specifically reduces magic damage. AC does reduce it however, but I would assume it's a special case where the total AC reduces the damage by X amount.
I don't the MgS should reduce the damage, it has enough reductions already. I remember when I was trying it the RoBF it produced laughable amounts of damage against ToE teams and high AC minions.
October 19 2007 4:04 PM EDT
"splash damage from FB and COC IS reduced by MGS"
CoC and FB do not deal splash damage, they deal magical spread damage, which is not quite the same thing.
October 19 2007 4:13 PM EDT
lol fine =x be that way
October 19 2007 4:16 PM EDT
I think since it is magical damage the MgS should protect vs it. It is quite a powerful tattoo now giving damage 100% of the time and this is one way to lower it.
The flame damage is, in most of my battles, greatly reduced by AC. I almost never do more than 75% of the max damage I could inflict, and often do as low as 50%. (Compared to 20% of my tat level)
An MgS would probably render that damage quasi inexistant, and make it a uber anti-RBF protection, especially on multi minion teams. (A MgS + 30 is not so hard to get, and would make my tat inflict damage equal to 20-45% of it's level...which on a defensive strat is really poor. Couple that with an AS on the opposite team and It is powerless.)
I dislike joining strat discussions, as I am by no means an expert at it, but in this case, since the RBF is my weapon of choice, I can, based on experience, state that the MgS should NOT protect against it.
Flame damage is not uber. The RBF protection is not either. Adding MgS as an anti-RBF measure would make it an underpowered tat IMO.
20-45% is obviously wrong, when compared to tat level. I meant 20-45% lower than what it is now.
October 19 2007 4:27 PM EDT
For someone to be beating all the people you are with 50% or less MPR based only with your tattoo doing damage is quite powerful. Perhaps a bit too powerful.
Have you fought Edyit and his massive RBF to see how much damage it does?
He gets up to 500k damage with it. With my tattoo as a RBF I have had over 1.2M damage rounds.
Yes, AC and TOE reduce it, but you cannot use a TOE with a MgS and only the + on AC helps.
I do beat them, because my strategy (or lack of, whatever floats your boat :P) is very specialized. ANY mage, even weak, butchers me. At least until I build a proper defense. If I succeed at that, then I will agree with the tat being a bit over the top.
October 19 2007 4:32 PM EDT
Dudemus has a strategy almost exactly like yours, he does very well with the RBF, no?
you know what kills RoBF without mage shield a heavy ac wall on a toe team imagine people putting a mage shield on it yeah that would kill it
October 19 2007 4:34 PM EDT
"but you cannot use a TOE with a MgS"
Indeed, but the ToE aura now being 40%, it does not make a lot of difference whether it's equipped on the ToE minion or not.
And AC already does make a big difference on the damage done by the RBF. So if someone equips a MS instead of a MgS, it will reduce RBF significantly more.
Equip a MS on the front minion and an MgS on the back minion. There, problem solved... partially. ;)
October 19 2007 4:34 PM EDT
he needs more AMF :)
October 19 2007 4:38 PM EDT
I used to have about 40% of my XP trained into AMF and FB mages still owned me. As soon as my UC tanks fell, it was lights out for the RBF minion in the next round or 2.
CoC mages simply crushed me without even blinking.
So I just stopped worrying about them and I now concentrate on everyone else.
According to his battle log, yes he does good. But does he beat lots of people at his MPR? Not that much. Many mages there? Not many more.
The people who do beat him, except for Edyit(who does have a larger RBF, and wins the tat battle), and you, at a much higher MPR, are mages.
But hey, he knows better about his own results, and I'm sure he will chime in anyways, shortly :)
I've pointed a couple times that FB and CoC are really potent anti-RBF measures. So, it's not like it has no weaknesses.
i made a strategy change to get away from the mgs and its uber damage mitigation. i think the mgs is strong to overpowered as it is. let's not give one item that much power. if we truly need to mitigate the heck out of everything in the game, at least add another item that will take up a valuable slot if you want the robf mitigation.
when i changed strats and tats, i didn't really gain many people i could beat on my list. what i did do is add a whole heckuva lot that i could stalemate, this means i am farmed less and keep more of my score. but i think much of that is focusing so much of my xp on defense. i have the highest trained evasion in game with a 205 evasion effect. as of yesterday i also now have the highest trained amf in game. add to that the third highest trained hp in game and you have a whole lot of stalemates and a somewhat protected score.
October 19 2007 5:05 PM EDT
I think your strategy is great.
The only problem I have with the RBF is the constant damage, not subject to lowering by AMF like all other "autohit" DD spells.
While DD spells hit 100% of the time, they are subject to a lot of damage reduction-MgS, AMF, AC, TOE to name most of them.
The RBF is only subject to AC and TOE, but still hits 100% of the time.
Contrary to physical damage where one has to actually hit, which can be very hard vs high DB's, high EC, evasion, etc... Then is subject to damage reducing modifiers.
October 19 2007 5:08 PM EDT
Then I suggest making it to be similar to the CoBF. Have it do splash damage to friendly minions.
i would like to know what high ac does to robf damage. for example a 200 plus ac or even higher. if it already has an effective counter, why add more? as i stated in an earlier thread, if it makes people choose between items with effects or items with ac, is that a bad thing?
splash damage would be a way to limit its usefulness on multiple minion teams while not making it worthless on single minion teams. inherently, i am always up for more of that in cb2.
i do think the mgs does alot more than most items in game now though. it doesn't really need any other boosts.
October 19 2007 5:26 PM EDT
The CoBF never did splash damage to friendly minions in cb2.
I do believe that high AC does reduce the RBF's damage. I am not certainly how effective it is.
I just see a 1.1M MPR character beating a 2.6M MPR character just using a RBF and get a bit dismayed at its constant damage and how powerful evasion really is.
That is without USD one cannot realistically make a weapon's + keep up with the evasion's minus CTH. Without using a TOA, and after the nerf of the TOA everyone called for, who knows if even a TOA will help vs the uber evasions out there.
October 19 2007 5:26 PM EDT
"Have it do splash damage to friendly minions."
Like dudemus hinted, this would basically limit the RoBF to single minion characters since it does all it's damage in combat rounds.
What would be the point of protecting yourself from magical damage during ranged combat only to destroy your team once you reach combat rounds?
October 19 2007 5:27 PM EDT
Sorry, didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean the CB2 CoBF. I meant CB1 CoBF.
October 20 2007 11:41 AM EDT
I checked out the strategy of dudemus and I am starting to agree with Ranger.
No one should be able to have an effective strategy investing XP in only 3 statistics. It just doesn't look right.
Maybe the RoBF effectiveness should be tied to DX? Let me explain...
Maybe the minion wearing should have enough DX to stay close enough to the opponent's front minion for the burns to do their work.
Maybe an equation like the following should be applied:
RBF max damage * (opponent DX/minion DX) = actual damage
That would sort of even things out in my opinion. A single minion would now have to train 4 stats to be really effective at higher levels.
October 20 2007 11:43 AM EDT
RBF max damage * (opponent offensive DX/minion defensive DX) = actual damage
three? try two HP+DD...
The RoBF has added a lot in terms of forced choices, I love it. AC is once again mildly useful.
October 20 2007 11:51 AM EDT
Actually I think the damage dealt by a RoBF is quite reasonable. A similar level DD familiar should do more damage than it. Plus, it only works during melee rounds and can be reduced by AC and ToE. It is pretty weak against tank teams unless you train a lot into evasion.
October 20 2007 12:08 PM EDT
Aside from Edyit, how many in the top 20 RBF's do not use a high evasion?
I think over 90% do.
Having a RBF as you ONLY means of damage is quite powerful as it always hit, grants magic protection.
October 20 2007 12:15 PM EDT
Returning 20% of its level as damage is not really significant as compared to the insane amount of damaged dealt by ToA archers. It is only powerful because you can use it with evasion. So which one is really the problem now? ;)
i will withhold my verdict until i see some numbers on ac and its reductions to rbf damage. it shouldn't be hard to test especially against my char as he only has one damage type. create a new char with three minions, put one with no ac, one with base items and one with some items with a plus to ac.
if ac is a good counter and no one is taking advantage of it then it seems fine and strategies may need to adapt. if however ac is not a good counter or not good enough alone then once again i would like to see something other than the mgs be the counter. a new power shield perhaps, making it difficult, or at least inconvenient, to block both dd and rbf damage.
remember, 33 to 50 percent of all battles end before a rbf can even come into play! ;)
October 20 2007 12:18 PM EDT
Well, everyone said that RBF damage is magical, so there goes a lot of AC's usefulness.
October 20 2007 12:22 PM EDT
Vs Dudemus without my TOE on:
RBF damage to my 177 AC minion Cloudscape is about 280k a round.
With 0 AC it goes up to 400k a round.
October 20 2007 12:25 PM EDT
That is not a lot of damage considering the RoBF in question is pretty big. With a ToE equipped on, I believe he will be dealing almost zero damage?
October 20 2007 12:27 PM EDT
With my TOE and AC he does 70k damage a round with the RBF.
And his RBF is not that large considering where he is fighting.
Look at Edyit's RBF for a better indicator of an appropriate RBF for MPR.
My RBF does 1.2M damage to people like novice-guaranteed each round with no GA backlash. Imagine if I made my tank all evasion and used the RBF only?
October 20 2007 12:29 PM EDT
"I just see a 1.1M MPR character beating a 2.6M MPR character just using a RBF"
da fence lvl 1,763,802
that is my tat level.
we still don't know for sure though if base ac reduces or just the plus. depending on the answer to that question ranger's stats would mean more. if he has a high base or if more ac comes from the upgrades.
October 20 2007 12:31 PM EDT
"I just see a 1.1M MPR character beating a 2.6M MPR character just using a RBF"
Ash beating Bartjan
ranger, can you also reduce edyit's damage by 75% with toe & ac? if so, then adding ac would allow for even more? if it's damage can be reduced to around 20 or perhaps even less than do we need to add more means of mitigation through the mgs or anything else?
just some numbers here for you crunchers. :)
vs 386 AC: a phantasm burns from the flames surrounding Avarice (72065)
vs 65 AC: a phantasm burns from the flames surrounding Avarice (472762)
October 20 2007 12:35 PM EDT
Score / PR / MPR: 1,828,914 / 1,530,445 / 1,125,395 vs
Score / PR / MPR: 1,967,195 / 3,414,876 / 2,637,703
Ash wins due to 2 things:
1) Constant RBF damage that is unavoidable.
2) Large evasion that without USD into a weapon cannot be hit.
3) Bart's not using a TOA or massive EC.
Either way, something is wrong when this happens. The constant 100% damage that is not subject to AMF or a MgS is quite powerful, IMO perhaps a bit too powerful.
October 20 2007 12:41 PM EDT
With TOE and 177 AC: Cloudscape burns from the flames surrounding Avarice (125613)
Without TOE and 177 AC: Cloudscape burns from the flames surrounding Avarice (459491)
Without TOE and 0 AC: Cloudscape burns from the flames surrounding Avarice (829261)
With TOE and 0 AC: Cloudscape burns from the flames surrounding Avarice (464056)
October 20 2007 12:44 PM EDT
The Space Knights could beat B Ark due to a base decay with NSC and an Exbow, but that doesn't make it grounds to put a damper on those. AC or a ToE, possibly protection but I'm not 100% sure on that one, all adequately deal with RoBF damage from what I saw when I was testing it.
At the very least, like dudemus said, make it a separate item, as the MgS is already has a lot going for it as it is.
so that' about an 85% reduction and you could go higher on ac and get more.
when i had a single mage, there were a few times that people way lower in mpr were able to beat me. they were looking for targets weak to their strategy. i would just like to rule out that just because the rbf is new, is that what is happening here.
is ash beating one person and is that a case of smart fighting? is he beating many with a much higher mpr, if so what is their ac makeup? i don't really know the answer, but i would like to find out for sure before we call for the nerf bat. with any new strategy introduced to the game, things will have to change. it is a whole new damage type and it inherently isn't overpowered if it wins. adaptation may be necessary before nerfage. if people adapt and it still is an issue then i would agree it is overpowered at that point.
October 20 2007 1:10 PM EDT
"three? try two HP+DD..."
That is ELB tank fodder.
I admit that I am a little bit biased because I hate stalemates, but I still think having to train only 3 stats to be successful against everybody with PR lower or equal to yours is not right.
October 20 2007 1:12 PM EDT
Just as a related question...
Ranger, you really really don't like the new RoBF, do you?
October 20 2007 1:13 PM EDT
I think one needs to look at the RBF users.
Basically most have the same strategy: Evasion, AMF, HP and RBF on any number of minions.
Do they all have a nice score/MPR ratio?
Can they be beaten by those with a lower MPR then them?
How high can they beat people?
October 20 2007 1:19 PM EDT
Well Ranger, the ToA tank happens to fall into that category. So are we going to create something to stop all these insane damages?
You have to understand that you do have 4 ranged rounds (With a HoC) to kill the RoBF team before it can start 'attacking'. And if you have 5 minions (with the last one a DD familiar), you'll have 8 rounds before the RoBF can 'attack' your main damage dealer. With evasion lowered to more 'acceptable' levels, a tank team do have a chance to kill anyone before the RoBF can actually get a chance to act.
October 20 2007 1:22 PM EDT
"Basically most have the same strategy: Evasion, AMF, HP and RBF on any number of minions."
Mine is completely different. I have AMF, Evasion and HP, but at really low levels.
Also, I think that dudemus expressed it best when he wrote that his fight list did not change much with the RBF, but a lot more character end up stalemating with him.
I think the issue is not that the RBF beats more characters because that is not true. Rather the issue is that more characters can't beat the RBF.
the top five high scores on my fightlist, which is people i beat always, are all lower but very close to my mpr. one is different and it a 1.6 mpr char, which is 500k below my mpr.
my score shot up because of all the people taking me off of their lists due to stalemates, not because of adding any higher scored players i could beat with the rbf and not before. i don't think there was even one of those added.
no it should not protect or reduce damage done by the RoBF because its not a DD.
RoBF damage is now the only "free damage".
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=002Fec">Q about the RBF</a>