orb of negation? (in General)


Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 7:21 AM EST

jon has been reluctant to give mages a shield of their own. what about an orb of negation that goes into the shield slot and its sole purpose is to negate the mage shield?

in other words, it does not grant ac. every plus on the orb will negate one plus on an opponent's mage shield. it has the same upgrade costs and pr weight as the mage shield. it negates all that it can on the first mage shield it finds and then if there is any overage it would be applied to any other mage shield on the opponents team if another one exists.

i would say make it a power shield, but then it wouldn't work well for single minions and we are the red-headed step-children of cb anyways, hehe.

miteke [Superheros] February 29 2008 7:37 AM EST

Yuk! Why pick on the Mage Shield? How about some gloves of negation that negates the NS, COI, and AG?

Brakke Bres [Ow man] February 29 2008 7:51 AM EST

cuz we already have pure anti mage items? and no pure anti tank items?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 7:53 AM EST

if we don't want a direct counter to the mage shield, it could also be a counterpart to it and negate physical damage on the same scale as the mage shields negation of direct damage. i would go for that as well, i just thought it would be more limited as a counter to the mage shield.

Mikel February 29 2008 8:02 AM EST

Make sure it has plenty of Negatives.
the Mage Shield isn't cheap in that department.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 8:21 AM EST

true that! i was thinking negative 5% to dd and negative 5 to evasion.

iBananco [Blue Army] February 29 2008 8:26 AM EST

"cuz we already have pure anti mage items? and no pure anti tank items?"
DBs.

miteke [Superheros] February 29 2008 9:14 AM EST

And don't forget Evasion + absurd bonus items! Then there's the damage boost from junction + AoF. And that extra round in range from HoC also hurt pure tanks. Then there was the ruling that if a tank used a missile weapon they lost their first round of combat. The AoI was also an item targeted only against tanks. Then there was the RoBF with it's added evasion and auto damage. Sure why not. You already have a skill and item that shuts down Tanks ability to hit, why not add an item that makes it harder for tanks to stop mage damage.

My tank has a heck of a time landing blows nowadays and the last thing I want to see is yet another cut to tanks and bonus to mages or archers. When was the last time you saw tanks benefit from a rule change or item?

So, besides the fact that the changes have almost relentlessly been anti-tank recently and you want to put in your wish list item while sentiment is running in your favor, why would you want another anti-tank ruling. Is the mage shield unbalanced in your mind? Prove that and perhaps I'd give your idea some consideration.

QBRanger February 29 2008 9:29 AM EST

miteke typed every thought I have on this subject.

No!

Relic February 29 2008 9:35 AM EST

If you are going to have an equivalent of a Mage Shield to Mages, then it better deny you the ability to use skills (Evasion) on the minion. It also better have at least a 5% hit to the DD.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 10:06 AM EST

if it just negates the mage shield, i think the negatives stated above are adequate.

if you want to disallow the use of spells or evasion with it entirely and have it be more limited in its use, then i would think it would need to be more useful and be the physical damage reducer counterpart to the mage shield.

i do believe evasion will be balanced soon. i don't think that the item is needed as the game stands today, but i am looking more toward the future.

QBRanger February 29 2008 10:27 AM EST

How about a tank counterpart to negate the NSC?

Pretty discouraging when I cannot hit a mage and my 2.4M AMF casts for only .10-.12. In that case, the MgS is the only thing keeping my tank alive.

QBJohnnywas February 29 2008 10:30 AM EST

I love how suddenly tanks have it hard compared to mages; come on, I've run almost nothing but tanks for the past two years - non-usd tanks at that - and I've still done better than most mage teams twice my size.

And Ranger, that poor me thing you keep pulling - it doesn't cut it - your char is number 1 in the game. Give it a rest that you've got it hard.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 10:36 AM EST

"How about a tank counterpart to negate the NSC?

Pretty discouraging when I cannot hit a mage and my 2.4M AMF casts for only .10-.12. In that case, the MgS is the only thing keeping my tank alive."

i would have no problem with that, as long as it is a glove slot as well. shield slot to negate shield, glove slot to negate gloves. it would force a choice between other gloves. as mages we have absolutely zero choices in the shield category though and i would like to see something there. it is also balance by the fact that nw negates nw. with the mage shield you have nw negating xp. i am really just looking for a way for mages to use nw to get that xp back or reduce xp likewise.

miteke stated that i should prove the mage shield is overpowered, i would reply that if it is not overpowered, then how could a physical damage reduction counterpart be overpowered as well. so let's add that version of it instead and have some semblance of balance. obviously you do think it is a pretty useful item as you have 2 on your team.

Talion February 29 2008 10:52 AM EST

"as mages we have absolutely zero choices in the shield category"

I use a MS. Works pretty well against tanks. Not a pure anti tank piece of armor, but far from insignificant in its damage reduction capabilities.

You can also choose any other type of shield to boost your AC. So there are more than 0 choices.

QBRanger February 29 2008 10:56 AM EST

JW,

Why do you never get a tank to the top ranks?

Of course one can play a tank in the lower and middle levels easily. The amount of characters you have to choose from are far more then in the upper ranks where evasion is everywhere. I would love to see you play a tank to the top rank and then see how easy it is to keep a high score. Remember the game is not just the lower/mid levels, there is a game at the top also.

And miteke has 2 Mage shields because he HAS TO. If not for those items, guess where his score would then be. He already stated he cannot hit a lot of the time. So should mages get both free and high damage as well?

I will be happy to address the MgS, NSC and other damage reducing items when evasion is fixed.

Now that missile damage, especially the broken aspect of BG's has been addressed, let us see if evasion is changed.

I remember that everyone was crying, myself included about the uber missile damage. Not so uber anymore. So let us see if Jon changes evasion.

QBRanger February 29 2008 11:00 AM EST

And Talion brought up a wonderful point.

Conundrum started to use a MS and started beating me. Forced me to have to use my MH. Yes, I know, poor Ranger. But then again, not everyone has a 200M MH lying around.

I still believe that the COI, NSC, AG and corn should give AC. But a mage using a MS, even with its penalties, is quite a powerful addition to the damage reduction axis. It is an option to consider especially if one uses a TOE.

Or not, just look at novice's use of the NS.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 11:06 AM EST

you seem to forget the nw weapon cap! : 0
if evasion is realigned, i do believe that will need to be addressed as well and it will need to be fairly restrictive, even at the top level.

when i stated that mages had zero shield options it should have read zero non-idiotic shield options. trading a small amount of ac for the negatives of a mithril shield may work with relatively low mpr enchanters, it would not be so wise on say my team though. i would also guess that removing your ms talion would change your fightlist hardly at all unless i am mistaken.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 11:15 AM EST

i guess i am mistaken on that point then, i did not realize that conundrum had done that and with success. so mages can use one shield successfully.

this does not change my argument regarding the mage shield, nor does it change the fact that there is no physical damage counterpart to it in the game. mage teams have to rely on ac, and single mage teams are at a severe disadvantage where that is concerned.

QBJohnnywas February 29 2008 11:44 AM EST

QBRanger, 10:56 AM EST [collapse]
JW,

Why do you never get a tank to the top ranks?



Simple answers to those: No USD or patience. I get bored. But that last char Monkey Business was floating around the top 30 most of the time with less than 1.3 million MPR. Which was a lot to do with how strong tanks can be without massive NW. But still my NW wouldn't be a match for some of the really big weapons.

QBsutekh137 February 29 2008 12:48 PM EST

I would see such an Orb as just more of the same: adding complexity when we should be simplifying...

This idea is pretty much a pure "tit for tat", so I am somewhat against it. It just serves to escalate everything (some like that, I do not).

I would rather step back than plunge forward.

Do away with the MgS entirely.

Nerf DD if subsequently necessary.

Simple.

Talion February 29 2008 1:13 PM EST

"mage teams have to rely on ac, and single mage teams are at a severe disadvantage where that is concerned."

So do single minion tanks. In fact, any single minion strategy is at a severe disadvantage where AC is concerned.

No that I think about it... every strategy has to rely on AC. :P

QBOddBird February 29 2008 1:13 PM EST

Aw, Ranger, with a strategy devoted 60% to repelling tanks with your giant EC I don't think you have room to complain that because your AMF isn't up to par mages are too strong...

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 1:38 PM EST

"No that I think about it... every strategy has to rely on AC. :P"

again, i meant as their only real means of damage reduction. tank teams can use ac along with the mage shield. i would agree with ranger and if mage items granted ac with their upgrades then this might not be as much of an issue in my mind.

i also agree with sut, that this is not where i would really like to go, but as long as the mage shield is in game, in my opinion we need either a counter or a counterpart.

QBRanger February 29 2008 3:02 PM EST

Ooty,

40% of my xp is in EC.

I do have a 2.5M effective AMF.

AbbathorX February 29 2008 3:20 PM EST

Speaking of AMF, we already have enough stuff for +DD and +skills and +Str/Dex. Why only the one item for +enchants? Our sad little enchanter minions look so silly wearing only a big pointy hat.

QBRanger February 29 2008 3:35 PM EST

Well enchanters usually die first so you can only laugh at their appearance for a couple rounds.

Then they typically are charred, perforated or frozen beyond recognition.

Lord Bob February 29 2008 3:46 PM EST

I also agree with Miteke.

"How about a tank counterpart to negate the NSC?"

I would love to see that. Those bloody gloves have been a thorn in my side since the moment they were introduced. If any item deserves to be scratched it's this one.

With things the way they are now, I see no reason to nerf or get rid of the Mage Shield. Keep DD damage where it is now, and if players want to add some extra anti-DD strategy to their team at an insanely expensive price, the option is there.

I will agree that mage items need AC though.

Yukk February 29 2008 4:58 PM EST

Why not just make the proposed "orb" Gloves of negation.
Then the mages can whack these on and for every +1 (at the same upgrade cost as for MgS) they negate 1 point of the MgS.

Then they mages can whack these on, spend their 250M CBD upgrading them and the rest of us can worry about a few less team-slaughtering NS users.

QBsutekh137 February 29 2008 5:13 PM EST

Insanely expensive? You certainly aren't talking about the MgS any more if you use that phrase... A +45 MgS runs only $13,375,212. I could make that money in a few weeks if I stopped buying BA and worked around high experience times.

My CoI is worth about that much, enhancing my DD by 18%... Didn't really take much to get it there.

A +40 MgS is substantially cheaper, I would assume (not sure of the cost). And all for a fairly low PR weight.

You can support the MgS all you want, but a couple things that are simply NOT true is that it takes a lot of cash to upgrade one nor that it adds a lot of PR when you do.

miteke [Superheros] February 29 2008 5:47 PM EST

"miteke stated that i should prove the mage shield is overpowered, i would reply that if it is not overpowered, then how could a physical damage reduction counterpart be overpowered as well. so let's add that version of it instead and have some semblance of balance. obviously you do think it is a pretty useful item as you have 2 on your team."

I LOVE my mage shields. They are extremely useful to a team that is set up like mine - geared around damage reduction and long fights against pesky short term teams. Likewise some of you LOVE your HoC. I have a HoC but I could take or leave it with my team. But I don't understand your argument. How does the usefulness of physical damage reduction prove that a mage shield is overpowered.

"i also agree with sut, that this is not where i would really like to go, but as long as the mage shield is in game, in my opinion we need either a counter or a counterpart."

Why why why!!! We don't need a mage counterpart for every tank strategy and vice versa. The AoI is a tank hosing device only. I LIKE the AoI. If for every tank ability we have a corresponding mage ability, things get pretty boring in my mind. Then you got a game where it does not matter if you play a tank or a mage, they are basically the same thing with different flavor text. In fact I would prefer Jon mixes it up even more allowing more specialization you can't get if you you go mage or tank. Heck, add a bunch of psychic abilities and start up a whole new category of minions with their own UNIQUE abilities and vulnerabilities. That would totally rock. In the interest of perceived fairness, do you really want to make tanks work the same as mages? Blah!

Lord Bob February 29 2008 5:55 PM EST

"Insanely expensive? You certainly aren't talking about the MgS any more if you use that phrase... A +45 MgS runs only $13,375,212."

ONLY?!? Yeah, 13 mill is chump change and all...

Oh, and you forgot the cost of tracking down and buying a Mage Shield to begin with, as it's not like they show up in auctions every day. I've been trying to buy one for the better part of February, and I expect to pay a large enough sum just for a low level/near base one.

You want your Noldorin Spellcasters? Fine. I want my Mage Shield.

QBsutekh137 February 29 2008 6:45 PM EST

I never said I wanted anything, LB. I am all for a return to simpler solutions: If mages are that strong, then nerf DD and do away with the MgS. Because you're right in that it is hard to come by an MgS, which makes it even more unfair as a "mage nerf". It's not equitable. You would be much better served by simply having DD nerfed.

So get on that bandwagon.

And yes, 13 million is chump change. Like I said, +40 is even cheaper... I assume under 10 million. If you can't earn 10 million in a month or so at the higher levels, you must be doing something seriously wrong (like running a tank :O). Joking aside, even a tank can raise that cash without too much fuss.

Mikel February 29 2008 6:57 PM EST

"And yes, 13 million is chump change. Like I said, +40 is even cheaper... I assume under 10 million. If you can't earn 10 million in a month or so at the higher levels, you must be doing something seriously wrong (like running a tank :O). Joking aside, even a tank can raise that cash without too much fuss."

Uhm not as easy for a Tank as you make it out to be. We have to upgrade weapons and other stat enhancing gear as well.

If I wasn't running a Tank, I'd probably be making tons more money than I'd know what to do with. In fact, that is how I got my start in this game. My NUB was a Mage team and with that money, and some extra USD, I purchased my way up in gear/weapons for a tank.

QBJohnnywas February 29 2008 7:29 PM EST

I normally hit a point around a million score where I'm making at least a million a week, and with best challenge bonus, nearer to two million. At that point 13 million is pretty quick to accumulate.

And as far as upgrading weapons and items; that doesn't require huge amounts most of the time - except PTH. It doesn't actually hurt your progress or winning to concentrate your money into one item. I know, because for most of last year I've only been putting money from rewards into one item, my SoD. So I'm with Sut on this one. I wouldn't quite describe it as chump change but...

Yukk February 29 2008 7:56 PM EST

Okay, so I got the numbers wrong. I bought a mage shield during my NUB. One of the things I spent my cash on so that I'm now a broke non-NUB. It's sitting around unused because for a year or more I've had no use for it.
No, you can't buy it.
My real irritation is that even with the NS, the mages want more !
It's not enough to do 8M per round and never miss and wear a pair of NS that negates a 10s of millions of EXP in AMF junctioned onto a minion with an extra +20% on top from an AoF.
No, they want an orb of negation too.

I'm not bitching really. I think things are reasonably balanced now as they are. My tank team is getting its butt kicked, but I knew the risks when I went tank with no USD. If I had committed like Mikel, maybe I'd be doing better. There are also mage teams I beat. Maybe none of them are bigger than me, but some of them aren't that much smaller.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] February 29 2008 9:23 PM EST

Right now I spend every cent I make on raising my dbs in hopes that someday I'll be able to survive the still stupidly large damage of the MsK... Don't tell me about how cheap mages are to run.

5 mil HP and 7 mil DD don't mean a thing if you're dead before a shot is fired. The only reason the MgS isn't at 10 mil for base right now is that anyone with a tank and a skill slot can destroy multi minion mage teams without breaking a sweat.

Ulord[NK] February 29 2008 9:31 PM EST

Mage seeker can be countered if you really build for it. Little Anthony can probably take advantage of his massive single fireball minion and tag on a large fire familiar for a very effective obliterater build. MSK weakness free.

QBRanger February 29 2008 9:56 PM EST

"The only reason the MgS isn't at 10 mil for base right now is that anyone with a tank and a skill slot can destroy multi minion mage teams without breaking a sweat."

Make the RBF vulnerable to a MgS and prices will go over 10M for one.

Novice,

I have a MsB, the largest in the game, and Conundrum just laughs when I hit him. I do about 500k a hit when he uses a MCM and MS. Only 2 hits a round with all my pluses starting the 3rd missile round. So when melee comes about, the only thing I have done is lower his PL wall 2M HP.

Trust me, without the MgS I am toast to Conundrum and would be to high AC/TOE mages.

You choose to use a familiar and back it up with GA/AS, the MsB is very effective vs that particular build. Vs normal mages with AC/TOE and evasion, it is quite ineffective. Especially losing that first round of melee AND having to use a lot of xp into archery. I do better vs Conundrum without my MsB.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] February 29 2008 10:18 PM EST

For reference: A Mage Shield [0] (+40) 5,674,644

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 10:44 PM EST

a 40% damage absorption for less than 6 million! no wonder you guys are so vehement about not having a physical damage counterpart. with nothing much else to spend money on for mages, we would all be getting at least 40% damage reduction on physical damage.

QBRanger February 29 2008 10:50 PM EST

Gordon Gano's familiar's Cone of Cold hit Cloudscape [3557805]

Yes my +47 named MgS saves my tank. I sort of have to have a MsB to not be hit by that.

Considering my 2.5M AMF is negated by just more then 1/2 from novice's NSC.

There, my friend, is the mages counterpart.

While people say that NSC's only help vs AMF characters and not DM ones, I will counter with this:
The MgS is only helpful vs mage type characters, not vs tanks as we get 0 AC from it.

QBRanger February 29 2008 10:55 PM EST

Now,

Consider that not all tanks can use a MgS, IE TOA ones, vs all mages can use NSC's and I think the 2 items are quite equivalent.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 11:11 PM EST

then maybe we should put nsc's on the same upgrade scale as the mage shield and make it so that mages could for less than 6 million get a 40% return on investment?

even then you have something helping against one specific enchantment as opposed to helping against on whole damage type / character build.

personally i would give up, in a heartbeat, the spellcaster's from the game if mages could absorb 40% of physical damage for an under 6 million investment.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 11:20 PM EST

"Considering my 2.5M AMF is negated by just more then 1/2 from novice's NSC."

how can that be true when his nsc's are just plus 18 with another plus from item naming. it should be a 19% reduction no?

QBRanger February 29 2008 11:24 PM EST

Problem is that mages damage ramps up linearly with many bonuses that apply directly to it.

IE, AG's give 1% bonus to damage per plus, COI the same.

Tanks have no such correlate other then the BGs. And if you do not hit in missile they are moot. All other items boost strength which gives a small amount of bonus damage per 1% str increase.

Right now, I am pretty capped on the damage I can do in melee and in missile.
My BG's are fairly maxed right now, and my strength bearing items the same.
My MH is x12k so I would really need to spend a lot of cb2 to get a noticeable increase in damage. My MsB is "only" x3750 so I can drop another 35M to double its x and get 1/4th more damage.

However mages get a nice linear increase in damage for their xp investment. 10% more xp=10% more damage.

That is why we need the MgS, to help compensate for that linear increase in "free cb2" damage. And remember the MgS is not usable by all minions, only tanks can use them and they take an enormous amount of damage when solo vs a FB or CoC.

QBRanger February 29 2008 11:25 PM EST

Dude,

My AMF casts for .10 vs novices IF.

His NSC lower what it should cast for by .18, so it should cast for .28. I get less then 1/2 the normal effect of my AMF due to his NSC.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 11:35 PM EST

well that seems wrong to me if that is what is happening, or the wiki is stating it in a misleading manner. i am not sure which is wrong though.

"Subtracts 1% from the effect of Antimagic Field per enchantment point cast on the wearer. " it seems that this should read: subtracts .01 from the effect per enchantment level.

if that is true then nsc's could negate amf entirely which a percentage based reduction would never do. something needs to be clarified in my opinion either way.

QBsutekh137 February 29 2008 11:36 PM EST

I can't use NSCs, I really can't.

Stop spreading untruths. NSCs do far less for me than AGs. So I made the choice...

I think that's the word you keep having stick in your craw, Ranger...choice. For you, you want "choice" to equal "beat everyone". The rest of use treat it as "choice".

I'll say it again, if the MgS is THAT required, then get on the REAL and ONLY bandwagon -- nerf DD. I don't hear you asking for that, and I know why. You'd rather have DD where it is, work the MgS into all those wonderful layers of damage reduction (a couple that are anti-mage only), and then complain about how you are barely hanging on...

In case you haven't noticed from recent threads, there's a whole cadre of folks who see right through that. Stop holding onto items that can be pumped with wealth or exclusivity and get back to basics... If DD is that powerful, ask Jonathan to nerf it (along with removing the MgS from the game).

Like I said, I'm all for it.

QBsutekh137 February 29 2008 11:37 PM EST

And dude, that could very well be the way NSCs work. Jonathan seems more and more inclined to the binary, thresholdy things. I don't get it either, but that's the way it is.

Maybe you can understand my desire for simpler times? *smile*

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] February 29 2008 11:41 PM EST

Don't forget Nov's DD on his IF casts for 42% more due to the junction on the Aof... so thats about a .10 AMF on a 8 mil level DD.... without that MgS negating 47 percent that would be some huge damage....

QBRanger February 29 2008 11:43 PM EST

Sut,

Right now DD has to be nerfed since evasion is so out of whack. I am waiting until changemonth to see if things balance out. Why start on a few things when fixing evasion, now that BGs are fixed may balance things.

Let me rephrase that: For most mages the NSC are a superior choice. Just as for rare tanks, the BOM is a better choice then the MgS.

And NSCs do lower the (.xx) effect.

Just take a base decay. Typically vs a decent amf the effect is 1.0. But my +11 named NSC lower that to .88. Exactly .01 per + lower. It is how they work.

And please stop putting words in my mouth. I want choice and balance. Read my past posts. Not everything I am asking for is a buff for me. IE, giving AC for mage specific items, a rolling bonus for everyone, etc..

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 29 2008 11:48 PM EST

"Don't forget Nov's DD on his IF casts for 42% more due to the junction on the Aof... so thats about a .10 AMF on a 8 mil level DD.... without that MgS negating 47 percent that would be some huge damage...."

believe me, i am fully aware of how much damage it is without the mage shield involved.

miteke [Superheros] February 29 2008 11:59 PM EST

"a 40% damage absorption for less than 6 million! no wonder you guys are so vehement about not having a physical damage counterpart. "

There is a counterpart. All non-magical armor only affects weapons. When you add up an Adam, MS, CML, and the like you get a hefty chunk of damage reduction. About 20%. BUT - and this is important - it stacks with the magical damage reduction. So if you are already at 60% damage reduction and you add in that 20%, you're reduction works out to 50% (half of the remaining 40%). Walls are intensely effective against tanks, far more effective than against mages for that reason. And with an AoI, most tanks have to go through that wall to get to your mage. I'll admit it is far more expensive than a Mage Shield, but considering how much cash a Tank has to sink into the other gear it works out pretty fair.

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 12:00 AM EST

I don't have to put words in your mouth, Ranger. You do a very good job of that without me helping one iota. i don't think you are just asking for buffs for yourself. Believe me, sometimes I think you are just asking for crazy things that make no sense whatsoever. *smile* If I thought you were just in it for yourself, you'd see a WHOLE different side of me!

Defending the MgS isn't for you, it's just nuts. *smile* Get down to brass tacks and call for what is needed (if it really is). I try to have faith that Jonathan isn't just building a house of cards here, though as time goes on and more and more items are introduced (as is the nature of the game and business model), I'm not sure how it could be any other way. However, that doesn't mean I will ever support a house of cards. I will rail and whine against it every chance I have. In that sense, the MgS has become the biggest strawman of all, and I only just recently realized that!

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 12:12 AM EST

funny how ac is now a counter to physical damage when it is convenient for showing that the mage shield has a counterpart in game. i remember though, not so long ago, when i offered up ac as a valid counter to the robf many of the same people said that it didn't count because it reduced all damage or some other such nonsense. i believe someone else said that it was just too expensive to add ac and that it wasn't really available to all strats equally.

before you say that protection falls into that counterpart strategy as well, people mocked it as an invalid counter to robf also!

Obscurans March 1 2008 12:22 AM EST

Er nobody ever told me or even on the wiki, HOW is melee damage calculated?

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 12:37 AM EST

Obs, you need to build a valid Costa Array of N=137 to figure that out.

Lord Bob March 1 2008 12:39 AM EST

"I'll say it again, if the MgS is THAT required, then get on the REAL and ONLY bandwagon -- nerf DD."

By that logic, we should get rid of Evasion and the DBs entirely and just nerf weapon damage. Still a bad idea.

Sut, this is the way I and I think Ranger sees your argument:
There are two items.
One reduces a percentage of the damage you inflict.
One reduces ALL of the damage we inflict.
You want the first one removed.
Totally weak.

In this instance I'm talking about DBs (or just Evasion in general), though I could use Noldorins in the equation instead:
One reduces a percentage of the damage you inflict.
One reduces a percentage of the damage we inflict back on you.

There is no reason, none, nada, NONE whatsoever to completely scratch the Mage Shield. And no matter how many times you claim it's the only logical conclusion, or "it's the only bandwagon" or whatever, is going to change that. Nerf DD if you feel it's necessary, I don't care. But saying the item should be removed when there are things out there that completely nullify all damage from tanks is far from "the only way." If you were simply asking for a Mage Shield nerf I could understand you, maybe even agree with you. But they are far, far from the most unbalanced feature right now, and don't deserve removal. And I don't see you picking on the things that DO need fixing.

And now I'll stop dragging Evasion into yet another discussion where it isn't the topic.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 12:54 AM EST

"One reduces ALL of the damage we inflict."

just to clarify, evasion is not damage reduction. keeping you from hitting is a very different thing from reducing all of your damage. the effect may be the same but with damage reduction it is the same for all like with the mage shield, fifty percent damage reduction will have the same effect for 1 million damage as five million, half of it is just gone.

with damage avoidance, it can be totally different against different opponents. some will hit with full damage, others many not hit at all. evasion is very effective against some opponents, but if overwhelmed, then it has no effect at all on the damage levels.



this is actually what worries me most about balancing evasion and why i brought up the idea of the orb. if evasion effect is lowered, then mages will be getting hit for full damage by more opponents than before. it is either on or off. whereas the mages shield and the other layers of damage reduction make it where 50 to even 95% of the dd can be turned off. mages cannot really do the same thing though, we can get some of the damage reduced, but not to the same extent.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 12:56 AM EST

^not to the same extent or as cheaply.

Obscurans March 1 2008 1:03 AM EST

Sure sut, {7,60,59,34,85,52,80,16,95,71,102,36,1,125,119,68,87,41,43,131,76,117, 74,61,64,37,23,53,107,48,46,135,58,70,130,54,65,49,51,39,94,13,5,73, 97,136,18,2,20,26,9,29,89,98,109,42,133,118,10,77,92,101,105,67,56,72, 8,122,88,104,27,19,4,31,45,17,81,12,82,22,121,126,55,93,15,99,79,112, 128,96,124,100,127,47,90,57,137,83,111,78,91,114,108,75,129,6,25,115, 132,113,110,33,30,103,24,35,44,21,116,84,106,66,32,28,40,62,86,3,14, 63,11,134,69,120,123,50,38}

Check it out yourself. Now answers lol.

Lord Bob March 1 2008 1:12 AM EST

"just to clarify, evasion is not damage reduction. keeping you from hitting is a very different thing from reducing all of your damage. the effect may be the same ..."

Tomato, tomahto. You're right, the effect is the same. Call it what you will, it's still 100% of our attack going to waste.

"with damage avoidance, it can be totally different against different opponents. some will hit with full damage, others many not hit at all. evasion is very effective against some opponents, but if overwhelmed, then it has no effect at all on the damage levels."

Which is why we all win against some and lose against others. It's all about numbers and strategy.

I personally see the avoidance as a much bigger problem than the reduction, but I'm also not calling for Evasion to be completely removed from the game either.

"if evasion effect is lowered, then mages will be getting hit for full damage by more opponents than before. ... ... layers of damage reduction make it where 50 to even 95% of the dd can be turned off. mages cannot really do the same thing though, ..."

Which is one reason why I support letting Mage items grant AC. I think it's a disservice to mage players right now that they don't. I have no problem at all with mages or any other players reducing damage. I just don't like it when they complain about tanks doing the same when they have items and skills that let them nullify our entire attack.

QBRanger March 1 2008 8:18 AM EST

LB stated things perfectly.

In addition I would like to add my post above about the damage factor of mages being able to be linearly increased while tanks hit a "wall" of damage capacity.

QBJohnnywas March 1 2008 8:58 AM EST

I love how a few mage teams are threatening your 'unbeatable' stance and suddenly mages have it so much better than tanks.

I think some frustration from having retrained your front minion into all AMF and forgetting the NSCs were about.

Are we about to see a post about how NSCs need to be nerfed cos they're too powerful?

QBRanger March 1 2008 9:17 AM EST

"Are we about to see a post about how NSCs need to be nerfed cos they're too powerful?"

Absolutely not. If I believed they were too powerful for the game, by now I would have posted something. As opposed to the constant ranting about the MgS.

I am pointing out that there is a correlate to the MgS in the NSC. They work differently but are equally effective. There are probably the most powerful mage item in the game. IMO one of the most powerful of all items.

But again JW, take a tank to the upper ranks and then tell me that tanks have it easier than mages. When one has a +220 bow, +5 arrows and over 5M effective Ethereal Chains, yes, I expect to hit in every missile round. Especially when facing a skill that has 1/3rd the total xp of my EC. If a mage wants to go heavy AC like Nerevas did, great. But I do believe that I really should hit.

Then add the fact mages get a linear increase to damage while tanks eventually get to a point where more CB2 gives minimal bonuses to damage and things get very tough for tanks.

I do think that mages should get AC from all mage items, and that a shield of sorts for mages would be excellent ideas. But something to nerf something else directly as proposed in this thread would be a very bad idea.

Remember the MgS linearly reduces damage but does not nullify it. The NSC can nullify completely AMF.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 9:35 AM EST

amf is a counter for all dd damage. nsc's are a specific counter to that counter.

if you want to talk correlations, what i am proposing is a direct correlation to that.

the mage shield is a counter for all dd damage. the orb of negation would be a specific counter to that counter.

i also proposed an alternative. which is the mage counterpart to the mage shield in that it counters physical damage in case you don't like an item negating one other specific item. i don't think it is unreasonable at all to want one of these, both would be nice though.

tanks do have plenty to spend their money on and they get an item that does a heckuva lot with little expenditure. mages don't have much to spend it on and we get items with very steep upgrade curves. if we can't have the shield as either a counter or counterpart to the mage shield, then i am also cool with making nsc's cost curve be equivalent to the mage shield, if that is truly the mage counterpart.

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 10:23 AM EST

Yeah, LB. I guess my idea is totally weak.

For the record, I respect your opinion and ideas and understand your viewpoint. I am entitled to an opinion just like you, and yes, my opinion is that removing items from the game is a valid "fix". There's even precedent for it -- items have been removed and/or turned into completely different items before in the game.

I'll take my "weak" ideas elsewhere... I've get better things to do.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 11:00 AM EST

my other problem with ac being used as a counter is the cost is nowhere near the same. if, as a mage, i could buy me a special robe that could. for less than 6 million in upgrade cost, allow me to absorb 40 percent of physical damage, then that would be fine as well.

there is no item that can be used by a mage that comes anywhere near that kind of cost-friendly improvement. if you then factor in that mages to even get near that reduction regardless of cost, will have to use several item slots and probably forego several item enhancements while mage shield users get all of that in one slot!

i really would like to see a mage item that is equivalent...if everyone is so against that though i do think that one of two things really needs to happen. the upgrade costs on the mage shield need to be the same as say nsc's or vice versa. i actually think it would put the mage shield into alignment with most of items in the game to make its upgrade curve much steeper though.

miteke [Superheros] March 1 2008 11:36 AM EST

"my other problem with ac being used as a counter is the cost is nowhere near the same."

Now that is a more significant point. I do not want to see the MgS vaped - it plays a creative and important part in the game. Is it too cheap for what it gives you? Even with 2 mage shields I still get thumped by mages of similar MPR and PR. I'm not convinced that the MgS is overpowered but wouldn't complain if Jonathan made that ruling and toned it down. As for evasion, it is also a nice skill that plays an important part of the game. I actually like it. But, like most players, I am absolutely convinced that the cost is too cheap. I don't care if it's binary or %. What the heck does that matter? 50% damage 6 times or 100% damage 3 times - no big deal either way 'cause it works out even in the end (and throws a little uncertainty into the battles which I like). I love the fact that evasion works differently. Bring it on. Just don't have a skill with 4M experience completely shut down an offense that cost 20M experience.

QBJohnnywas March 1 2008 2:21 PM EST

"But again JW, take a tank to the upper ranks and then tell me that tanks have it easier than mages."


Where exactly are these mythical lands of which you speak sir? My last char was sitting around 20-30 in the standings. So where are the upper ranks where tanks have it so hard? Top 15? Top ten? Top...1? Look at the MPR of some of the teams around the top 20 - Miteke's for instance: what is tank killer? About 1.8 million MPR? Doing pretty damn well...wonder why.....oh yeah...tank.....

QBJohnnywas March 1 2008 2:23 PM EST

And just to add to that: my last char was 1.2 million mpr. I had Bartjan's 3 million mpr char on my fightlist. How many mages can do that? Nearly 3 times the MPR...

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 2:40 PM EST

i also wonder where these mythical lands be? my fightlist is usually populated with people of lower mpr than myself. my score is lower than my mpr as well.

it could be that i am single-minion and other mages have it much easier, but that is another issue entirely and one that may go unchanged due to jon's aversion to such a simple strategy.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 2:42 PM EST

"And just to add to that: my last char was 1.2 million mpr. I had Bartjan's 3 million mpr char on my fightlist. How many mages can do that? Nearly 3 times the MPR..."

Any good evasion/RoBF team.... like YOU's

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 2:45 PM EST

"i also wonder where these mythical lands be? my fightlist is usually populated with people of lower mpr than myself. my score is lower than my mpr as well."

Look at LA's team for a good example of how one minion will boost your SCore over 300k.... He just bought his 2nd minion and that gave him a nice boost and a good change to his Fightlist... and it would also help if you were using a good strat with your FB Dude.... Amf is for long fights not short ones.... and yet you have FB.... a walking contradiction there don't you think?

So think about a new minion in your near future if you want a better fightlist and score.

QBJohnnywas March 1 2008 2:46 PM EST

That's an RBF/evasion team. Put a mage team up against a much larger team, especially those with mage shields or AMF or GA and see how well they do.

And when I say much larger I mean MUCH larger. I'm not just talking about say the difference between 2 million and 2.5 million.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 2:52 PM EST

QBJohnnyWas, 2:46 PM EST
"That's an RBF/evasion team. Put a mage team up against a much larger team, especially those with mage shields or AMF or GA and see how well they do.

And when I say much larger I mean MUCH larger. I'm not just talking about say the difference between 2 million and 2.5 million."

I was beating Barts char with Vlad at 1.7 mil mpr.... with an Axbow.... and It was a tank team? Your point? All it takes is the proper proportion for a mage team and I'm sure it could beat Barts team hands down....

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 3:21 PM EST

"Look at LA's team for a good example of how one minion will boost your SCore over 300k.... He just bought his 2nd minion and that gave him a nice boost and a good change to his Fightlist... and it would also help if you were using a good strat with your FB Dude.... Amf is for long fights not short ones.... and yet you have FB.... a walking contradiction there don't you think?

So think about a new minion in your near future if you want a better fightlist and score."

i appreciate your input, but it might also help if 40 percent of my damage couldn't be absorbed for less than 6 million nw no? it might also help if i could counter that with an equally cheap item or emulate the same, in regards to physical damage, with an equally inexpensive shield as well. that is the point of this thread actually!

the only way another minion will be added to this team is if and when i sell it. i have been playing single-minion teams for five years in cb as of 12 days from now. i don't see any reason to change that just because our maker thinks they are boring and kill slots are where its at. i understand this puts me at a disadvantage and am set enough on staying single minion to live with that.

i may make a few posts here and there though to see if i can get another type of advantage though, especially when part of cb has that advantage and others do not.

Ulord[NK] March 1 2008 3:28 PM EST

If you decide to stay single minion dudemus, I'm afraid single minion RoBF is as effective as it gets. You've been there, you should know...

QBRanger March 1 2008 3:32 PM EST

Dude,

You can very easily in the future boost your damage with more xp.

Unfortunately I am at the wall where I cannot realistically boost my damage without tons more CB2 or tons more xp into my strength.

Unfortunately single minions characters are at a large disadvantage in cb2.

That is why when someone starts, a 2 minion team is the least amount I would recommend.

I have advocated a lot of boosts for single minion teams such as yourself and mostly got laughed at.

These ideas did include:
1) allowing the AoL to work on single minion teams
2) allowing single minions to use armor/cloak and tattoos
3) allowing single minions to use the MgS with a tattoo

and a few others.

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 3:47 PM EST

Ranger, I don't follow your damage argument...

I can increase my DD via linear MPR increase. Items that enhance my DD are nearly impossible to grow further without a huge amount of cash. So, just linear MPR for me.

For you, you have linear STR growth (again, items maxxed out, I assume, so no help there). And pumping the weapon x is a linear NW curve (one that does not contribute to total PR, I might add).

Can you elaborate on how it is harder for you to increase damage compared to a mage?

NOTE: This all assumes you are not talking about whiffing due to Evasion. I KNOW evasion needs tweaking, and I am ALL FOR THAT. I agree with you, even though some folks still seem to think I am not saying enough about it... I AM talking about it, and that is from a standpoint of being a huge user of the stuff! So please hear that!

But once Evasion gets fixed, then why is it harder for you to pump damage compared to a large mage? Assuming all enhancement items are maxxed out due to the exponential cost scale, what is harder for you as a tank?

Actually, once Evasion gets fixed, you will potentially hit multiple times with that increased damage, while I will still be hitting once no matter what I do. I am very confused as to what "wall" you are talking about in terms of damage increase for a tank?

In summation, and assuming Evasion gets fixed, I see tanks as having several ADVANTAGES, if anything, on the damage front:

-- Weapon allowance allows a portion of that damage to not reflect in total PR.
-- Once multiple hits are achieved, hitting harder has that extra x2 or x3 (at least) factor because tanks can hit multiple times.
-- All other factors of damage are just as linear as those for a mage.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 4:08 PM EST

"In summation, and assuming Evasion gets fixed, I see tanks as having several ADVANTAGES"

this is exactly my sentiment and what got me thinking about the mage shield either needing a counter or counterpart.

i also agree with you wholeheartedly ranger regarding the single-minion changes and have made some of those suggestions myself. his reply failed to get my hopes up in that regard though so i feel we need to look at other avenues as well.

Ulord[NK] March 1 2008 4:27 PM EST

There is nothing wrong with starting with a single minion. In fact, this is the best way to create a truly potent team. You must have minion hiring in mind as you play though. I don't see a problem with that. I have to agree with Jon on this one, single minion IS boring and limits strategy choices.

QBRanger March 1 2008 5:53 PM EST

Sut,

It is well known that for a tank, it take 4x strength or 4x on the weapon x to double your damage.

My MH is now x12k, so to get 2x damage from it, i need to make it x48k. Far to expensive.

I would need to 4x my strength to 2x my damage. For you to double your FB damage you need 2x your DD level.

It is far easier for you to double your damage then for me.

I cannot explain it better.

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 6:16 PM EST

Just 2x your STR and 2x your weapon x for 2 times the damage. I didn't know it worked otherwise. (am truly claiming ignorance on this).

Do we know it is otherwise? If it is, I am back to a simplification bandwagon... Make it be 2x STR + 2x weaponx = 2x the damage. Easy.

I am not remembering the explanation where Jonathan said it was otherwise, and if it IS otherwise, you've got me 100% on board that it should be changed.

In fact, it sounds like we could kill two birds with one stone -- make it the equation I list above and then do away with Weapon Allowance. Easy.

Why has everything become so complicated? So contrived?

Why has everyone let it?

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 6:19 PM EST

Ah, just saw the OR in your statement about damage...

Here's what I said previously... 2x your STR (straight MPR scale) and 2x your weapon (straight NW increase). Not 4x one of them but not the other. Double EACH, and you double your damage. They are BOTH linear, both easy to do.

When I am sitting there with nothing else to spend money on (same place you are at by your previous comments), we can both increase our damage at the same rate.

Only difference is that my damage increase comes with concomitant total PR increase. Yours does not.

How are you at a disadvantage?

QBRanger March 1 2008 6:24 PM EST

First,

We are both at 6 BA regeneration, so who cares about PR. I certainly do not, you should not either. There is no chance right now to get a challenge bonus.

"Just 2x your STR and 2x your weapon x for 2 times the damage."
My MH is x12000. To double that x I would need 12000 x 7820 or 94 Million CB2.

I therefore need 94 Million CB2 AND 2x my strength to double my damage while you need to just double your DD spell.

And BTW, 2x my str gives me the same PR increase as your 2x DD spell.

How much simpler can I explain this.

Any multiple of 4x will double my strength. 2x str and 2x weapon x, or 4x stength or 4x my weapon x.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 6:30 PM EST

12k * 7,820 per X = 93,840,000 + the 48 mil exp it would take.... just to double the damage on your Model Sut... while it would take you... only the exp at 48 mil or so to double yours.... sounds fair to me... or maybe not... now at thet current model it would take 192 mil exp or 375,360,000 to double his damage... See how much easier Mages have it damage wise... and now with the Aof/Familiar junction buff, you can easily double the damage of your Familiar in essence doubling its level (except the hp part) for about 20 mil or so into a measly little Aof + the exp for junction... That is one reason the MgS needs to stay... even if it only knocks out 52% with the largest MgS out there....

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 6:33 PM EST

Ack let me correct that... more like 30 mil into an AoF to get +15 + named for 48% more damage, not including using AG...

QBJohnnywas March 1 2008 6:37 PM EST

In this very specific example don't forget that if you double the damage on the MORG you are also gaining the VA to go with that, and therefore the extra HP also. A much better deal I think than simply boosting damage.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 6:46 PM EST

But it doesn't have to be the MH either JW... it could be any of the top weapons.... and more for the lower ones as well...

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 6:46 PM EST

Draco, I appreciate your points.

Ranger, I do not appreciate yours.

Get off this 2x crap. You are using spectacle to make your point.

Do you have _any_ idea what it would take to double the DD on my main mage? I got most of that while a single minion. It would take FOREVER to double that (as in, CB2 wouldn't exist any more). Same state as you. I would LOVE to use cash linearly to upgrade half my damage.

And all of my damage enhancement would go to total PR (something you conveniently do not address in your response).

Your argument is so intentionally misleading that I can barely beleive it. In the time it would take me to double my DD on Joe, you would easily have the MPR to do your STR (and as much again for something else!) and would easily have the cash for it too, because we are talking years. I condensed 1.5 years years into an NCB, and have played another 2 years since. So, that's 3+ years in Joe's DD. Would take another three to double it. You can't raise 92 million in THREE YEARS? Remember, we are assuming all other enhancements are too expensive, so we wouldn't bother with any other expenses other than BA purchases.

And you could always forge to make some cash. Oh right, you don't do that. Well, not my problem. I did it, and it made me cash while my MPR fell behind.

Don't tell me what to care about or not to care about when it comes to total PR. Apparently unlike you, I'm to be talking about ideas for the whole game. PR may not mean a lot to me, but it means a lot to someone elsewhere on the score ladder.

Draco's points are better, concerning familiars, and I myself have said the AoF is too much. Familiars have weaknesses too, like the two Mageseeker arrows that you fire into him wen you fight me and kill him first round or two. So the familiar argument (while better) isn't really compelling me either.

QBJohnnywas March 1 2008 6:51 PM EST

No understood Dr. But the idea of doubling the damage doesn't take into account that a tank has the ability to double, treble and more the amount of damage they output through PTH/Dex. How many hits does Mikel do with his bow against suitable opponents? Five? If he's hitting for 3 million per strike then you can bring that damage that round to 15 million. Do we have a mage hitting for that amount per round yet?

Tyriel [123456789] March 1 2008 6:53 PM EST

Just figured I'd put a helpful sign in here...




You can continue the conversation now. :)

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 7:01 PM EST

Nahh JW... but we have a familiar dishing out 8.6 mil a round.... and Mikel only hits my evasion minion once on the last round ^_^ but thats also with a 218 Evasion

QBJohnnywas March 1 2008 7:08 PM EST

Lol, evasion. That's a whole other deal.

Over the past year I built up my SoD. Now if during that time I'd built up a tank to run it I would have (unless I was already using one) a very quick way to increase my damage output without having to a) increase my MPR or b) increase my weapon x and pth.

Remember the ToA anybody? My last team had a million st and a million dex. Pop on a 2.5 million lvl tattoo and BOOM doubled st and dex. A matter of moments is all that would take. Probably my favourite tattoo - certainly my most used tattoo. I guess a mage could pop on a familiar tattoo and double his damage in that way. But NSCs aside he'd also be doubling his vulnerability to AMF and GA, and giving mage shield users double the value of their highly prized purchase.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 1 2008 7:10 PM EST

"But NSCs aside he'd also be doubling his vulnerability to AMF and GA, and giving mage shield users double the value of their highly prized purchase."

Well if Nsc is aside.... how about doubling his damage with a junctioned AoF? all for the measly 30 mil cost ^_~

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 7:40 PM EST

"
Well if Nsc is aside.... how about doubling his damage with a junctioned AoF? all for the measly 30 mil cost ^_~"

tanks always say don't balance around usd. there is a lot of talk, as the quote above shows, about balancing around two items, aof and nsc. remember that not all mages use these just as not all teams use usd.

30 million also is five times the cost of a 40% absorption that the mage shield gives. put the mage shield on the same cost curve as the aof then? or the nsc? i can get on board with that as well or vice versa.

QBRanger March 1 2008 9:38 PM EST

Sut,

I am sorry you do not understand. I make 50k a day fighting. How long to make 90 million?

How about this: Let all AC count towards damage reduction, and get rid of the MgS?

I can live easily with that.

Vs Freed's wall I do 100k a hit. How much does your FB do? Yes, I hit 4 times a round doing 400k total. Are you Beating that?

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 10:10 PM EST

It would take you about 6 years at that rate.

I'm pretty sure I net more than 50K a day...why is your money so low?

About Freed -- I wouldn't know... He obliterates me in a round or two with explosive shot (hasn't been on my fight list for weeks). I wouldn't even take the time to try to gather information (it's not worth it). What's your point? Do you have a better example? Pretty sure I could think of examples in the other direction, too.

QBRanger March 1 2008 10:12 PM EST

Well, if the NSC has the same amount of restrictions, then the upgrade curve may be changed. But any mage can use them.

The MgS has a lot of restrictions.

QBsutekh137 March 1 2008 10:19 PM EST

I am sorry you do not understand.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 1 2008 10:56 PM EST

"Well if Nsc is aside.... how about doubling his damage with a junctioned AoF? all for the measly 30 mil cost ^_~"

i double quoted a post. i rock!

i just had to point out that you said doubling for a measly 30 million, that is actually nowhere near as insulting as a 40% damage absorption for a minuscule 6 million investment. one is almost halving damage where the other is doubling. pretty much the same ratio but for a fifth of the cost.

QBRanger March 2 2008 12:17 AM EST

Again,

Mages have a much easier time after a certain point to increase their damage.

As I tried, unsuccessfully to some, to explain is the problems tanks eventually have in boosting their damage.

The ability to upgrade the x on weapons, while linear does not give a noticeable boost in damage after a certain point.

QBsutekh137 March 2 2008 12:23 AM EST

I'll use a lot of, commas, in order to explain, to you, Ranger. What you say makes no sense. You, as I, know weapon x upgrades are linear, yet, you the say that at certain levels, still linear, it gets harder than that, for a mage.

It's math. If it's, linear, then it can't get, any harder. That's the definition, of, linear.

You don't, make, any sense.

QBRanger March 2 2008 12:38 AM EST

OK, last time.

For a mage to get 2x his damage, he needs just 2x his DD level.

For a tank to get 2x his damage he needs either:
1) 4x his strength
2) 4x his weapon plus
3) 2x his weapon plus AND 2x his strength
4) some mathematical combination of the 2.

I am at the point where the 2x on my weapon plus is prohibitively expensive.
So basically for me, at this point, the only realistic way for me to increase my strength noticeably is to boost my strength.

Yes, I can add more x to my weapon but for me to spend 7.8M cb2 will boost the x by 1k. For a weapon that is x2,000, boosting it 1k is a 50% jump. However for my MH it is a pitiful 8%. The money well for boosting my MH is dry. This is the tank's "wall" of damage I refer to. Where the expenditure of CB2 does not do much of anything unless it is huge amounts. Really huge.

Add in the fact that mages DD spells only get the + on AC to worry about and mages have an easier time doing damage that always hits. And for FB and COC, when there is but 1 minion left, the damage is incredible. I pointed out novice's familiar does over 3M damage to my tank, even with his MgS.

Given the limitations on the MgS to use, I feel it is a very nice item. Not every character can use it, but for some, it is the only way to combat mages. Especially with the NSC making peoples AMF not very helpful at all. As I stated, my 2.5M AMF does only .12 to Conundrum and Novice. Quite a pitiful effect for a nice bit of xp.

Is there anyone that understand what I am typing or am I completely lost?

AdminNightStrike March 2 2008 12:45 AM EST

For Any given weapon damage 'x' modifier of "X", and any Strength value of Y that yields a damage of N, then 10X and 10Y yields 10N.

This does not mean that 10X and Y equals 10N.

Damage only increase linearly when you boost BOTH ST and "X" linearly. Since boosting ST linearly compared to weapon X (ie, for every $7,820 you spend on your weapon (I think that's the right dollar value...), you must train 1 point of ST. Then, and only then, will your damage dealt increase linearly.

That is not feasible for large values of anything.

AdminNightStrike March 2 2008 12:48 AM EST

Forgot one of these: )

iBananco [Blue Army] March 2 2008 1:20 AM EST

Well, that's just silly argumentation. I could argue that for mages, each point of exp becomes less and less effective percentagewise too. At level 1000, 12000 exp doubles damage output, whereas at level 10000, 12000 exp will increase damage output by a mere 10%.

QBsutekh137 March 2 2008 1:41 AM EST

OK, last time.

Damage increase for tanks is same as that for mages. It's linear, and it's possible.

But let me do a sensationalist version of it, to keep up with the Joneses:

For me to get 10x my damage, it just wouldn't be possible. My current damage has 3 years of investment (more, actually, since a lot of that was single minion and now I am four). But using the 3-year figure, that means it would take THIRTY YEARS to increase my damage tenfold.

That's RIDICULOUS! How can I expect to keep up when it would take thirty years to increase my damage by an order of magnitude!

Ranger, increasing your STR is the same as my DD. Except it equates to half my expense, and half of your damage total. You keep quoting "or" statements in order to make it sound like you need four times the investment when you really just need 2, just like me. You need twice the STR (easy) and twice the NW (less easy, but doable) to double your damage.

The offset is your advantage for that involving the following:

-- STR investment is HALF of what I need to invest in DD. You get to invest the other half of that same MPR in whatever you wish... HP, an enchantment, Dexterity -- something that lets you hit multiple times (something I can NEVER do).
-- When you invest the NW (which you have anyway, and can easily be earned through many in-game elements) for the other half of the damage, it won't count a bit towards your total PR (not a big deal for you or I, but a VERY big deal for other folks trying to maximize challenge bonus).
-- By investing in other MPR (Dexterity and/or Haste) or in weapon + (prohibitive, but still an option I do not have), you can maximize that damage increase by hitting 2, 3, or 4 times a round. No mage can do that.

So, you can stop sounding so defeated, Ranger. So put upon. You haven't addressed a single thing I have said other than to confirm the math. You keep saying 4x Str OR 4x weapon X... Why not just 2x of each? Why act like this is such a big deal and then act like I don't get it? I get it, AND we agree on the math. Is this a "last word" thing? Do you just need to finish on that "I can't say any more, I am so tired, so sick of this sutekh fellow..."? If that is the case, just PM me... If you just have to have that last word, I will step aside and let you have it. Just ask.

Lochnivar March 2 2008 2:31 AM EST

Sut,

I have a hard time seeing how the damage increase for tank vs mage can be considered equally.

For Ranger to double the x on his MH would require 94mil. Now I'll grant that there is slightly less exp needed due to the higher boosts from tulks, AoM and TSA, etc but 94 mil is hardly an insignificant amount.

Even doubling the x on my humble MH will become prohibitive fairly quickly without busting out the USD....

Since I use a SF and a MH I feel fairly impartial here....
(incidentally I'm taking NS's explanation of damages at face value since he usually knows very well what he is talking about)

Obscurans March 2 2008 3:21 AM EST

Er my $0.02:

Ranger does have half a point in saying 4x strength means only 2x damage - when talking about xp only, tank damage goes as square root of strength.

Say: tank with 50M weapon at +100% ST from equips
mage with 50M in equipment, for +30% DD

give both double xp and another 50M:

tank with 100M weapon, doubled ST, for double damage
mage with 100M equipment, say now +50% DD, but also has double DD level

so the tank with 50M/2x xp has double damage, but the mage now gets (2x1.5)/1.3 = 2.3x damage

Point here is supposing you want the same *distribution* of xp on the minion, double xp simply means double level. But just having double level only gives 1.4x damage to the tank but 2x damage to the mage.

If you make things fair and give BoTH twice cash total, then the tank must spend it on weapon x to eke out double damage, while the mage can now spend it on stat boost items to go on ahead in damage potential.

And asymptotically, only an ever-increasing number of hits can balance this out. Factor in that evasion (until fixed) goes up the *same* amount, and versus anyone with evasion, the tank just sucks. Worse, more hits eventually can only be accomplished with weapon +, which takes cash... out of the ration for weapon x.

Obscurans March 2 2008 3:26 AM EST

It's not bad enough to try for extra hits. If you give them both 4x xp, the mage has 4x damage, the tank has 2x damage.

Which means to balance, the tank has to hit TWICE as much to compensate.

Given weapon + is an exponential curve, doubling weapon + needs the SQUARE of cash already invested in it. Completely impractical, as in switch to a mage now.

Off to the side, why not "weapons" that take up that slot, and have the same effect to magic damage? Like staffs that can be upgraded for x the same way.

Saying 4x xp will never happen isn't really an answer: under current conditions tanks are getting slowly screwed over, and it's not going to stop.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 2 2008 3:37 AM EST

#9 on the FORS list

"Q: Mage staffs would be cool to augment magical power!

A: private explained why this is dumb with more patience than I would:

Tanks: Can become more powerful than mages, but cost lots of money to maintain. Mages: Tend to be cheaper than tanks, but also tend to be less powerful (and less able to deal with armor penalties)

I think this provides a nice balance between spending money on your chars and spending exp on them; I see no reason to change it."


Allthough I will have to say with the way that Damage for tanks works now... it is not completely accurate....

Tyriel [123456789] March 2 2008 4:11 AM EST

So, doomsayer(s), please enlighten me:

Where are the mages doing 7523489564956234783 times more damage than any tank can do?

Where are the legions of mage teams storming the top ranks, completely overtaking every spot once held by a tank?

Where are all these tanks that not only do not do more damage than already necessary to wipe out a minion per turn (or more), but also cannot upgrade their weapons, or put XP into ST to boost their damage?

Where are all of these weapons that are already so big that any boost to them would be negligible? I've seen naught but a few in my days...

And, lastly, what happened to all of the magical spells and imbued armors that tanks could use to augment their offense? Last I checked, there were a multitude of items and spells to help a David tank take on a Goliath mage.

But what do I know. I'm but a lowly peasant in this world. :) And, as a peasant, I refuse to believe the ramblings of the kings, queens, and court jesters of the kingdom without some palpable, superfluous proof that I am unable to resist believing.

(For some reason, I feel like I'm in the 1800s right now. Can't figure out why, though... :P)

Cube March 2 2008 5:10 AM EST

^That's because the effect that is being discussed is only experienced at high mprs. Unless you have unlimited money as mpr goes to infinity, mages get better than tanks.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 5:18 AM EST

And yet CC, four out of the top five are tank teams. Even at the high levels tanks rock.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 5:21 AM EST

That's in score standings by the way; despite three out of the five top MPR being mage.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 5:36 AM EST

And, actually if you go back through the forums when mages were seen as more powerful than tanks the same anti mage arguments were being bandied around. The idea that weapons reached a threshold where it became too expensive to increase damage. The idea that mages will still keep growing and increasing in size in the meantime.

That's the kind of thing that was being spoken about in 2005. Three years later it's not the case that tanks have fallen behind. If anything it's the opposite on the whole.

Don't be fooled by one side of an argument. Take in the bigger picture. Where tanks and mages are concerned running a tank will gain you bigger targets as you climb up the ranks. Yes, you have to spend money but you_get_what_you_pay_for.

Ranger may have problems upgrading his Morg in order to double his damage. But where does he rank in the game? Why isn't he running a mage team still? Why did he change back to running a tank team when he did?

Cube March 2 2008 5:51 AM EST

Well as it goes to infinity, so over a long period of time. Like 10mil mpr? Not sure when it'd be noticeable.

The only caveat to Ranger's argument is the possibility that the price of cbd to usd goes down overtime at the same rate that it becomes more expensive for tanks. The only linear increase for tank damage is BGs so... I guess you would end up seeing very high Belegs..

This doesn't really effect the lower levels at all. Basically the idea is that one can afford to run a tank at/near max weapon allowance at the lower levels. But at... much much higher levels that becomes near impossible.

I am curious as to what Ranger's Approximate Weapon Allowance level is using Verifex's script. Both of his weapons clearly fit under it.

It really doesn't affect the gameplay except for the very top at all though, where as you point out and is true, Tanks clearly dominate.

Cube March 2 2008 5:53 AM EST

To sum up, I'm not saying it's currently an issue at all, but well it's a possibility in the distant future.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 2 2008 6:32 AM EST

Estimated Weapon Allowance: 263,927,433 for me at nearly 2.7 mil mpr And I am far from filling mine up... Ranger has 1 mil mpr on me... so you do the math ^_^

QBRanger March 2 2008 7:24 AM EST

Actually 3 of the top teams are RBF tanks.

Without the RBF, Conundrum would be the top dog. NWO would be not far behind. Novice would be there also.

The RBF is the only way, in addition to the MgS that the top 3 tanks stay there.

So spare me the top teams are tank crap.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 7:32 AM EST

They weren't always RBF teams. And yet they're still the same teams that have been dominating for most of the past year.

QBRanger March 2 2008 7:37 AM EST

My weapon allowance is over 300M. Enough for my morg and MsK.

However the PR addition does not really matter to me. It certainly does to other but not to me so I would go over it.

But for me to add 1k more to my morg, it would cost 7.8M CB2 and not give me any appreciable increase that is noticeable to my damage.

I mistyped in my last post.

The 4 top "tank" teams are RBF.
Draco
Mikel
Edyit
Ranger

Others a bit further down use the TOE, TOA and ROE.

However, I have tried all the tattoos on Koy as has Mikel, Edy and Draco and we all came to the same conclusion.

Magic damage is way too high not to use the RBF and MgS.

One can see after the top 7 or 8 characters there is a nice dropoff in scores. If Lega would use the RBF, he would jump to the very top ranks. Possibly NS would also. Freed is using a very overpowered item (which most agree) in the SOD.

So please tell me magic damage is not too much now. When the top characters who play tanks have to use the RBF. Yes evasion plays a nice part, but if the MgS was that "uber powerful all-impressive", would not the TOE be far better for me? or a familiar, or a xxxx tattoo instead. No, we all need the RBF, in addition to the MgS to try to stay alive long enough and disperse all that FB/CoC damage.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 7:47 AM EST

Why aren't you running a mage team then? If it's so freaking powerful then surely it's where you should be at? After all most of those RBF teams you mention are in your clan, so you don't have them to worry about.

QBRanger March 2 2008 7:51 AM EST

"Why aren't you running a mage team then? If it's so freaking powerful then surely it's where you should be at? After all most of those RBF teams you mention are in your clan, so you don't have them to worry about."

If you read most of my recent posts, I do not want to lose all that xp right now. But if I could unlearn for free, I 100% would become a mage team.

I am hoping Jon changes/balances things right now. I know most of my clanmates are thinking the exact same.

If Jon gave another free unlearn/relearn period, I suspect a lot of characters (given the current status of CB) would be evasion mages/RBF characters. Why the heck not?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 9:00 AM EST

"if the MgS was that "uber powerful all-impressive", would not the TOE be far better for me?"

if it is not all that great, let us have a counter or a counterpart. if they affect the game as little as you state then nullifying them or letting us have a cheap way of negating around half of the physical damage would have an equally small impact.

again, the other alternative is for you guys to keep your cornered market but put it on a different upgrade cost. since you cannot spend money usefully on your weapons any longer, you should have wads of money lying around, right?

QBRanger March 2 2008 9:09 AM EST

There is a difference between useful and uber powerful.

The MgS is quite useful to help keep 2 minions alive long enough to disperse the CoC/FB damage enough for me to actually hit mages, and do enough damage to kill them.

It is not uber powerful enough to stop enough damage where, if I do not hit, I would still live long enough.

There is a HUGE difference between these 2 ideas.

Right now I will say it-DD damage is too high. Especially with the nice buff familiars just obtained. 3% per AoF +. 3 freaking %. Yes, BG's give the same, however one has to hit to see that damage. Familiars always hit.

When novices familar can do 3.5M to my tank with my MgS on and a 2.5M AMF, that is too much damage.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 9:14 AM EST

I wish you'd make your mind up Ranger about what should work and what shouldn't in CB.

You expect your mage shield and 2.5 million AMF to be effective, and yet you don't want a 3 million evasion to be effective. One rule for you and one for everyone else is it?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 9:17 AM EST

ah, but the aof costs quite a bit more to bump up, point for point, than the mage shield.

as sut likes to say, if you think dd is too high, get on that bandwagon. having the only cheap way to get major damage reduction in game going to just one character type is ouf of whack though.

QBRanger March 2 2008 9:23 AM EST

JW,

It seems you like to twist things around that i post.

"You expect your mage shield and 2.5 million AMF to be effective, and yet you don't want a 3 million evasion to be effective. One rule for you and one for everyone else is it?"

Ok, lets break this down:

2.5M AMF vs a 5M CoC. It should do some backlash and stop some damage. However with the NSC, it does hardly anything. But I have never, until this thread said much about it. And still believe it is a good item.

3M evasion vs 10M Ethereal Chains + a 220 named MsK + named +5 arrows + 600k native dexterity. Quite a small xp investment in evasion to nuke all that NW/xp.

MASSIVE difference in the comparison. MASSIVE.

If someone had 8M or 10M in evasion and was able to nuke all my xp/NW, it would be more palatable. The only reason I have my EC that high is the defensive dex of evasion. And I hardly break through it in missile. Vs some, not at all. in melee with my MH I do 800k a hit, only 2x vs 150 AC mages. Their CoC autohits for over 2.5-3M on my tank at battles end, if my tank is solo.

Can you not see the difference in the analogies?

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 9:29 AM EST

"When trained equivalent to the opponent's DD level, AMF is at 50%. At approximately 100x the opponent's DD level, it is at 100%, completely nullifying their damage."

So against Novice you're doing what? 25% without the NSCs?

Add Nov's A Cone of Cold Ring [0] (+18)...you're down to 7%.

I'd say things are working just as they're supposed to.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 9:32 AM EST

"3M evasion vs 10M Ethereal Chains"

you have used those numbers in the past, shouldn't you halve the ec since on ly half of the effect is going to dex though?

QBRanger March 2 2008 9:32 AM EST

JW,

And your point is???

I said the NSC is working ok. Nice upgrade cost and effective. Never said it was overpowered. But I do compare it to the MgS in certain ways.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 9:33 AM EST

Dude's right, 3 million evasion versus 5 million EC is what you're actually talking about.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 9:34 AM EST

My point? You say it's too much damage, but with the level of Nov's spell the amount of damage getting through is right.

So if it's too much damage then what you're saying is that DD is too high no?

QBRanger March 2 2008 9:36 AM EST

"3M evasion vs 10M Ethereal Chains"

I am typing about xp expenditures.

It is what I am comparing all this time.

I know my EC has 1/2 the trained level effect. I also know that evasion has a lot of items that boost it through the roof. That is part of the problem, the freaking AoF. Only the corn can boost my EC level.

And I was off, I have 8.5M levels of EC vs Draco's 3.1M levels of evasion. Both learned levels.

So again JW, your point is?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 9:39 AM EST

"I am typing about xp expenditures. "

but that is silly! i could put all of my xp in decay and never win. i should then complain that it is too weak?

if you aren't comparing apples to apples then you cannot expect your comparison to be taken seriously.

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 9:45 AM EST

My point Ranger is just above, which incidentally you didn't answer. Nice swerve.

QBRanger March 2 2008 9:45 AM EST

My god!!!

Decay is a +/- type of spell. Yes higher levels can defeat AMF, but the effect is the same 1/2 damage to the front minion.

EC is not.

So you truly believe it is ok for 3M levels of a learned skill to nullify 100M of a bow, upgraded arrows, 600k native dex and 5M effective levels of EC? And make a 200M MH hit 1 or 2 times a round when it should 4 times?

O'Rly?

Well we do have another item similar. The NSC. It can nullify tons of AMF. But, I do like it as an item.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] March 2 2008 9:47 AM EST

dudemus, 9:39 AM EST
"but that is silly! i could put all of my xp in decay and never win. i should then complain that it is too weak?

if you aren't comparing apples to apples then you cannot expect your comparison to be taken seriously."

Evasion is a tool to a means... as is EC... and Decay... to think anything else is silly. You cannot use any of those alone to win... but you can use other things to counter each, and you can use them in conjunction with other things to win. I.E. Robf/Evasion minion.

QBRanger March 2 2008 9:51 AM EST

"My point? You say it's too much damage, but with the level of Nov's spell the amount of damage getting through is right."

Right now, I need the RBF and MgS to survive since magic damage has been effectively boosted.

We used to type about the axis of missile damage, evasion, damage reduction.

Well guess what, missile damage has been reduced. Let us see if the rest of the axis gets tweaked. But right now, evasion and magic are way too powerful.

If you will not see that, especially since the top 4 tanks all have to use a MgS and RBF to win, nothing more can be posted about it by me.

And this orb of negation will make mages that much stronger. How equal is that for tanks?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 9:51 AM EST

this is what i mean is silly:

"And I was off, I have 8.5M levels of EC vs Draco's 3.1M levels of evasion. Both learned levels. "

for comparison sake you should then say something to the effect of:

half of my ec affects dex, so we have a 4.25 million levels compared to 3.1 million levels

QBJohnnywas March 2 2008 9:53 AM EST

Dr, I think you'll find that Dude, hell me, Sut we all agree with you on that one. Ranger's points revolve around him being forced to mix items in order to win. ie he HAS to use the mage shield and RBF to survive against mage teams. He has to use his Morg along with them to beat Conundrum. If Ranger feels that those aren't choices but that he is forced to do so, then that really does imply that Ranger at least, feels he should win because of one spell/item/strat choice.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 9:53 AM EST

"So you truly believe it is ok for 3M levels of a learned skill to nullify 100M of a bow, upgraded arrows, 600k native dex and 5M effective levels of EC? And make a 200M MH hit 1 or 2 times a round when it should 4 times?"

that seems more fair than 6 million cb dollars negating 40% of dd xp no matter your level. on a dd with 60 million xp invested, that would absorb 24 million xp, all for just 6 million investment and it will keep doing that 40% for as long as i invest xp into dd.

QBRanger March 2 2008 10:03 AM EST

Dude,

Then you and I will never agree on that point.

But also consider: Mages only have to worry about the + on AC, tanks have to worry about the entire AC. If I would use my Heavy AC set on my tank, that would mean another 104 AC points to my damage reduction or about 21%. It would apply to all minions (the base) instead of the MgS's 1 minion effect.

It would be very interesting to see how things would be without the MgS but with all AC applying to magic. The MgS with all its restrictions is a balancer to that part of the damage reduction axis.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 10:09 AM EST

"It would be very interesting to see how things would be without the MgS but with all AC applying to magic. The MgS with all its restrictions is a balancer to that part of the damage reduction axis."

i can see that and understand where that is needed even, but it really cost so much less than ac or even plusses on the ac and that is where i take issue with it.

you honestly think that 40% damage reduction, across the board, for the negligent cost of under 6 million is fair?

QBRanger March 2 2008 10:11 AM EST

"he HAS to use the mage shield and RBF to survive against mage teams. "

It is not JUST me. Draco, Edyit, Mikel all have to use the same strategy. There are plenty other tanks have HAVE to do the same. If it was just me, I would have no basis for my posts about this. It is about what is needed or not my most of the people I know or fight against. I have had plenty of conversations about this with edyit, Draco and Mikel and guess what? They all agree with my points. Almost to the letter. I, however, am the most vocal about it.

I have to use my MH due to the evasion factor. That is different from why I have to use the MgS. There are plenty of tanks that agree with my views on evasion. A few have posted theirs as well.

QBRanger March 2 2008 10:28 AM EST

"you honestly think that 40% damage reduction, across the board, for the negligent cost of under 6 million is fair?"

Add in the base cost of 5M for a MgS. 11M for 40% reduction.

That does seem a lot low. However, the upgrade curve of the NSC is far too steep itself. I would think somewhere in between would be appropriate.

I agree on that point, however an orb to nullify the MgS is something I do not consider a good idea. Next should we get a glove to nullify the NSC or xxx to nullify yyy?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 10:33 AM EST

on further contemplation, i too think that the cost curve adjustments would also be the best means of balancing this as well. i think the mage shield does need to go up, i am not real sure the nsc's need to come down though. i had only used them for a while and don't remember them being too restrictive as mages don't have a lot else to spend money on.

we can agree sometimes!

QBRanger March 2 2008 10:44 AM EST

I agree with the NSC being fine where it is.

Perhaps a midpoint between the current MgS and the current NSC would be appropriate. Somewhere about +38/40 or so being the utter max without having a Freed type bank account :)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 2 2008 10:48 AM EST

most mage items cap naturally around 15 to 18. my input on mage shield cap would be 25, with 33 being very expensive to get. reducing damage with any item by 1/4 to 1/3 should keep that item useful but not required.

wotan [Sepapoisid] March 2 2008 10:58 AM EST

+50 MgS would be +33 MgS but grants AC ?

QBRanger March 2 2008 11:02 AM EST

Now that would be great.

:Less Magic defense but some AC as well.

I really like that idea a lot.

QBRanger March 2 2008 11:03 AM EST

And yes,

All items except for DB's should grant AC as well.

QBsutekh137 March 2 2008 11:35 AM EST

I woke up this morning with a clearer head, and apologize for not fully understanding the 4x STR stuff last night. I get it better now. I was not fully listening to the other side of the discussion, nor was I fully making clear my side...

Yes, going only MPR to increase damage would take double the MPR for a tank (as compared to mage), especially in current state where hits are not easy to come by. But in the "classic" tank model, where two hits are fairly common (and would be if Evasion did not create defensive dexterity, or some other such "fix"), increases to damage get that multiple-hit bump. That is part of what I was trying to say last night, but it does drag pth into things (the part that is more complicated for a tank).

But the complexities come with upside and downside, like anything. A mage's damage has no upside or downside. It just hits once. A tank can miss. That is the fundamental thing that makes tanks different. Any more similar, and tanks would just be mages swinging a sword (or vice versa).

The parts of my argument still hold:

-- When increasing damage with equal parts of STR and weapon x (both linear), the tank gets to hide some of that total PR. I am not saying that is good, bad, necessary, or unnecessary, I am just stating it as fact. Tanks get to hide power, and hidden power equates to better rewards as a tank rises through the ranks.
-- If the tank is getting multiple hits, a lesser damage increase per hit can still equate to the same damage increase for a mage per round.
-- Additional: JW's point about VA -- another tank-only part of the equation is leeching HP via a weapon. So, increases in damage, even if smaller than that for a mage, have that option as well.

In scanning more recent posts, I am seeing the CoC power coming up... CoC still has the classic problem -- keeping the team alive. Granted, right now Evasion is helping with that as far as tanks go, but even if you take Evasion out of it, some of these CoC teams would be damn hard to beat (without the right key). The classic ways to survive are DEs and/or damage reduction. Violent Femmes is all DEs, so is susceptible to DM. I think that is entirely fair. VF doesn't even use Evasion. So, if you can't beat VF, it means you aren't using the rock against his scissors.

The other way to stay alive is what Conundrum uses -- layers of damage reduction. Even if you take Evasion out, it is still hard to get through ToE/PL/HP, etc. In fact, his Evasion is useless against me, and yet he has ben using me as a punching bag fir months... Me, an ultra-overpowered mage! *smile*

So, isn't it a bit much to put the cart before the horse and say "DD is too strong" before we see how the Evasion and RoBF changes pan out? Aren't we just discussing in a vacuum?

QBRanger March 2 2008 11:38 AM EST

"So, isn't it a bit much to put the cart before the horse and say "DD is too strong" before we see how the Evasion and RoBF changes pan out? Aren't we just discussing in a vacuum?f"

Agreed with completely. But I think this was all in relation to the title of this thread. Right now, as things currently are, such an item as an orb is too powerful/much.

Right now, tanks have a very hard time getting 1 hit, much less multiple ones. Right now to increase my damage, the factors discussed above fall into play. If evasion is changes and multiple hits become possible, then I do see your points completely.

But I agree we should see how the whole RBF/evasion thing pans out. Then we can go at it again :)

QBsutekh137 March 2 2008 11:41 AM EST

Yeah, I already came out against the orb idea, way, way up there. *smile*

Happy Sunday, everyone!

QBRanger March 2 2008 11:45 AM EST

But Sut,

What about raising the upgrade cost on the MgS a bit, make +33 or so the "max" level and give it AC bonus also?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] March 2 2008 12:00 PM EST

If we're looking to fix the MgS I would like to see it be what it always should have been a linear effect ramping cost minus to a specific amount of damage. The PR effect would have to be a very honest one, to keep small chars from equipping massive ones and running rampant, but I believe this is the most fair version of the MgS.

QBsutekh137 March 2 2008 12:19 PM EST

Sure, revamp the MgS...that would help... I'd still rather do away with it, since I don't understand why it exists in the first place... But in lieu of that, I'll take whatever Jonathan deems a good idea...

Mikel March 2 2008 2:44 PM EST

Ok, If you want to do away with the Mage Shield, then Give me a skill that I can train that will be on/off to all DD, similar in XP costs as Evasion is to a 4 mil ToA tank with a +219 Elb and do away with To hit penalties for all ranged weapons in Ranged and all Melee in Melee.

Now if you want your Orb, Here's a list of valid restrictions for the minion wearing it.
Knocks all ST/Dex to 0 (including dex gained from Evasion trained on that minion, Haste/GS cast by other minions will work on it).
Cancels all EO/ED Spells cast by that minion. (except those that still function at a zero level, IE Decay, Protection, EC).
Can not be worn with a Tattoo.
Gives no Protection from DD.
Does not block damage from a VB.

And by the way, I do support Ranger and his words. The only way I can survive vs DD is to spread out the damage as much as possible and use an RoBF, since I can't dream of hitting some of the top Evasion minions at all. The BG's have been fixed, but I'm not even using them anymore.

Mikel March 2 2008 2:57 PM EST

"No understood Dr. But the idea of doubling the damage doesn't take into account that a tank has the ability to double, treble and more the amount of damage they output through PTH/Dex. How many hits does Mikel do with his bow against suitable opponents? Five? If he's hitting for 3 million per strike then you can bring that damage that round to 15 million. Do we have a mage hitting for that amount per round yet?"

JW, not doing that much now with BG's fixed.
Not including evasion teams, I hit on avg about 3 times for 1.5 mil damage.

Mikel March 2 2008 2:59 PM EST

and that is vs NO AC, Less as they have more AC.
vs Freed's 440 AC, I average about 350k per hit.

Ulord[NK] March 2 2008 3:15 PM EST

BG was giving 7% per point before, now it gives 3% as it should. So your bonus damage went from 105% (+15 just for argument's sake) to 45%. You should see your damage go down from 205% to 145%, slightly under 30% less. If you don't use bg (which is a choice to make), you would do slightly less than half the damage you did before. If you were doing 4mil a hit before, I don't see how you start doing 500k a hit. Freed's 440 ac is pretty much a bit of an outlier.. How much did that cost him? I'm afraid to count. (not to mention the crippling PR increase, it is beyond me why he would do this before he hits 6/20).

I think you also forgot to mention that you stopped using a ToA so have a lot less strength. I still die to elbow users in one hit if they hit me. It is true that evasion is wonderfully overpowered and hence keeps mages alive, but please don't start chanting that elbow does no damage.

QBsutekh137 March 2 2008 3:17 PM EST

Mikel, many folks (including me) that Evasion needs fixing (not sure how many more times I am going to have to reiterate that...)

So, AFTER that fix, assuming we get one of some sort, what is your take on the MgS? When you can whack away 3-4 times every round, with a guaranteed 2-3 against folks without massive DBs or dexterity (i.e. an average mage like me), then why would you need the MgS?

I am very familiar with the "we need MgS because of Evasion" argument, but we have moved beyond that on this thread (at least I thought we had). In a "fixed" Evasion world, where does the MgS fit and why?

Mikel March 2 2008 3:38 PM EST

My point is dual,
I lost half my ST and my Damage output dropped in half, while my x remained the same, instead of dropping by 1/4.

Because I'm not a ToA, I can only get 3 hits per round max.

Now I can't survive vs DD with out that Mage Shield if I'm using a ToA on my Tank, my other option is AMF, but as being pointed out, the NSC's are doing a good job negating that option as well.

So for the most part, I'm forced because of needing multiple minions to spread the FB/COC damage around to use an RoBF.

And just like Ranger said, give me a free retrain and I'll become a mage team instead of tank.

But instead of continuing this argument, let's just wait and see what happens with evasion first. I'm thinking he won't change it as it is.

Ulord[NK] March 2 2008 3:42 PM EST

I take back whatever I said about Freed. He's beating ranger so I think the challenge bonus more than makes up for it :3

Obscurans March 2 2008 4:23 PM EST

Testing since I am fighting anyways:

Average damage on 348,775ST (~100 hits): 118k
Average damage on 498,748ST (~100 hits): 148k

Per hit, not per round, and it supports ST^2 proportional to damage. 43% addition to ST, only 25.6% extra damage, 1.256^2=1.578, so not yet as bad as ST^2, but definitely sub-linear.

QBRanger March 3 2008 3:23 PM EST

The Grid shot heat with Spiral [482855]

I am so glad evasion got fixed. My only hit in missile.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 3 2008 3:29 PM EST

which round did you hit heat in ranger?

QBRanger March 3 2008 3:36 PM EST

Last in missile.
Rarely I hit him in the last 2 rounds.

But never in round 4. Always rounds 5 and 6.
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=002Mkc">orb of negation?</a>