New weapon wanted (in General)

QBRanger July 20 2008 11:59 AM EDT

One that attacks from behind.

Sort of like a boomerang, or long chained flail.

To get around all those AC walls with Steel Skin.

1H or 2H, no problem.

Just a decent attack base of over 80.

And of course the weapon artist to actually make one to be useful.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 12:01 PM EDT

the first dm i had, my college buddy, let me talk him into giving my halfling cleric a hammerang! i loved that weapon. ; )

QBsutekh137 July 20 2008 12:18 PM EDT

Ranger, an interesting idea, but doesn't the AoI make that idea useless enough to not warrant anyone really trying? Mind you, this is coming from a non-tank runner, but AoI seems to pretty much control everything in the realm of physical damage, does it not? Mind you, twice, I think the AoI is just about the most retarded item going, but there it is.

QBRanger July 20 2008 12:25 PM EDT


Here is my thinking.

Magic can now attack from behind and in front. Decay not counting as it is not a "kill" spell.

Physical, excluding the specialty xbows and mageseeker, goes from the front. But those other weapons are bows, and again, melee tanks are out of luck. Typical for how the game is progressing.

Since we are not making minion order less important, why not give tanks the choice to attack from in front or behind first. At least make it a melee weapon since missile weapon users do have a choice of something else.

I also dislike the AOI quite a lot, but it is here to stay. I would like to see the AOI changed a bit to make it have magic, including decay, bypass it. But that is my liking.

TheHatchetman July 20 2008 12:36 PM EDT

Or... Have the MoD skip it's first primary target until last (not counting an AoI in play)? For example, it hit's the second minion of a 4 minion team with no AoI's equipped, bypassing the first minion entirely. Then it goes for the third, then fourth, then first. Say the second minion has an AoI, then attack order would be 3,4,1,2.

Kinda gives people some incentive to put your damage dealer up front, even with SG out there, and gives AoI a little more use in the middle of a team (whereas now, if it's on your third minion, half your killslots are dead by the time it gets used :P)

Also kinda makes wall placement a bit difficult, unless you just wanna throw a dinky enchanter in front of your wall... Not sure how this would effect things, if at all, but just typing what comes to mind as it comes.

Far as a "Weapon Artist" I don't like it so much as it has been presented. Though, allowing items to be DE'd for "Blacksmith credits" at an increased rate from the current disenchant, though not 100%, or even 90... :P 75-80% seems fair though (forging rate). I can hear the rabbles amongst the crowd, but take note that your Armor and other weapons would also be DEable for the creds. Furthermore, there would likely have to be two levels (silver and gold if ya wanna be shiny about it :P). The first level of credits would come from disenchanting most rares, and be usable on all forgable items. The second level of credits would come from disenchanting non-forgable items (bet you're glad your ELB got made unforgable now, huh? :P), and could be used on any item able to be upgraded by the blacksmith...

QBsutekh137 July 20 2008 12:39 PM EDT

I still think folks would just wear AoIs on any target they didn't want hit. So yeah, a tank might lose a little strength (AoM), a wall might lose a little AC (AoAC), or a team might lose some leadership (AoL)...

But that's about it... Is that worth introducing a whole new weapon? Would you really even use one once everyone plays ring-around-the-amulet and everything leveled back off? Especially now since AoI can be purchased directly from Jonathan as supporter items?

I guess you would be putting a dent in AoF, though -- is that the motivation here? *smile*

QBOddBird July 20 2008 12:40 PM EDT



Brakke Bres [Ow man] July 20 2008 1:18 PM EDT

nope, don't think this is a good idea, cuz I smell overpowered very very fast and this idea screws up many many strategies. Cuz I suspect you want a weapon that could avoid up front evasion minions?

But when this "weapon will ever be introduced, you just do 3 AoI's on the minions and the evasion minion not wearing one.
Problem solved for this type of weapon.

And besides I asked a long time ago (I think it was in CB1) why isn't there a melee weapon with seeking ability?
The answer I got, and which I'm going to give you, is you can't simply make a blow into thin air and expect the melee weapon to magical find its target.
If you make such a weapon you need to first ignore all the 3 minions standing up front and somehow jump over them and try to hit the last one.

Unappreciated Misnomer July 20 2008 1:30 PM EDT

aka booterang! a boot you throw at lazy netherwing peons to straighten them out ^_~

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 1:33 PM EDT

as far as it making sense, it would probably be best as a dd spell that dealt physical damage. i propose calling it the maxwell's silver hammer spell! ; )

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 1:34 PM EDT

"aka booterang! a boot you throw at lazy netherwing peons to straighten them out ^_~ " work is da poop!

QBOddBird July 20 2008 1:50 PM EDT

"nope, don't think this is a good idea, cuz I smell overpowered very very fast and this idea screws up many many strategies."

where were you when SG came out?

Lord Bob July 20 2008 1:56 PM EDT

Excellent idea.

QBRanger July 20 2008 2:43 PM EDT

"nope, don't think this is a good idea, cuz I smell overpowered very very fast and this idea screws up many many strategies. Cuz I suspect you want a weapon that could avoid up front evasion minions? "

And SG does not screw up any strategies?

Where have you been the last month?

C'mon Henk, let us have something for tanks, esp melee ones. Throw us a bone at least, we're dying out here.

Brakke Bres [Ow man] July 20 2008 3:20 PM EDT

where I was the last month? In Tunesia, on holiday.

I'm not saying melee tanks don't need love, but the ask Jon to make a weapon that magical hits minions for you is a bit weird.

QBRanger July 20 2008 4:09 PM EDT

As wierd as having MM hit from behind and SG from in front.

Yes, let's keep things Mage Blender for a while longer.

VivaPinata July 20 2008 4:13 PM EDT

Kind of like a melee mageseeker/exbow/axbow without the drains?

Brakke Bres [Ow man] July 20 2008 4:15 PM EDT

MAGIC missile makes sense
targeting ranged weapon makes sense

targeting melee weapon that somehow hits the last minion ignoring the 3 standing in front of it doesn´t make sense.

And if you want a back to front capability, get MM yourself.

QBRanger July 20 2008 4:21 PM EDT

Sure Henk,

Let us forgo tanks from now on and be a magecentric game.

I am proposing something that may perhaps make melee tanks viable again.

But you are entitled to your opinion.

QBRanger July 20 2008 4:22 PM EDT

But I expect nothing more from someone still using an abusive strategy.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 4:32 PM EDT

that sure seems like a personal attack to me, but then again i guess my opinion should be discounted as well since i am using an "abusive" strategy.

one question though, since you have made several threads stating how the new spell is overpowered, aren't you yourself using what you term an "abusive" strategy. should that negate your opinion as well? oh the drama!

QBRanger July 20 2008 4:43 PM EDT

I have to use it to "keep up with the Joneses".

I hate having to use the EF, but a melee tank on its own, without magic, is foolish to do right now.

I am kind of "if you cannot beat them join them".

However, while using the EF/SG, I continue to state it is way overpowered.

Unlike some who use the evasion/rbf axis of playing and still believe nothing is overpowered out it. In both the evasion part and the RBF damage type part.

The drama continues......

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 4:47 PM EDT

and were you using the toa or the toe before that?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 4:54 PM EDT

i could also bring up the usd you have spent on the game if we really want examples of "abusive" strategies. the main point i have here is this: if you are going to make statements such as "But I expect nothing more from someone still using an abusive strategy. " you really should make damn sure your nose is clean.

it is really a "People Who Live In Glass Houses Should Not Throw Stones ( don't criticize other people when you yourself have faults and weaknesses ... )" kinda thing and i myself am quite tired of these types of attacks when people do not agree with us.

QBRanger July 20 2008 4:54 PM EDT

The TOE.
Why do you ask?

While using it, I stated it did need a nerf, which it got.

Perhaps a bit too much, as with the SG spell it is nearly not as efficacious. But I have called plenty of times for a nerf of something I have actively used.

Shall I list them:

VB (Lost 50M on that nerf)
TOA (on TAB)

among others.

But those that use the evasion/RBF axis of damage continue to spew that it is well balanced, pfft.

In this thread I was asking people opinion on a new melee weapon. In some attempt to bring back the melee tank. As it is next to worthless to play one now. I should know with the biggest melee weapon and one of the biggest tanks it was not possible to keep my same fightlist with all the changes last month.

And still, evasion has not gotten a nerf. While the top melee weapons all stay the same.

QBRanger July 20 2008 5:02 PM EDT

And people have to get off the USD did this or that or the other thing.

It is part of the game, like it or not. It was within the game legal.

However, Jon has added things to significantly reduce the influence of it. Like ENC and 1/2 the WA. It certainly impacted my strategy and quite a few other tanks. Some who are/were at the top. Some of the heaviest spenders. And plenty of non-USD characters as well. Most tanks but perhaps a couple mages.

Just look at the USD/CB rate. Dropping like a lead stone. It was about 5-6 per million before ENC and the disenchanting. Now some sell at 2.5 per. The influence is less and less.

Many people including yourself have accused me of trying to protect my "advantage". My posts, chat etc...

But I have actively railed against what I personally believe is overpowered things. Some of which, in my last post, I have stated.

So, since I have used USD, am I forever banned from saying something is abusive? Seems that way.

It does not change the fact that evasion/RBF is very abusive and overpowered, but I have seen only 1 person who uses it admit it.

Glass houses work both ways.

BadFish July 20 2008 5:03 PM EDT

Oh I so desperately don't want to get involved... but i MUST say this.

I do not consider a winning streak of almost 3000 "keeping up with the Joneses". I consider it "Trouncing the Joneses into the mud". I'm not sure how you've managed to twist your situation into one where you need a bunch of "help" by nerfing away any holes in your strategy (if there are any; winning streak of 3k, for christ's sake) But you certainly seem to have convinced a great deal of people to remain silent. Well, not me. I think if you stand at the top of the heap and STILL see something wrong with people getting too close to your power for comfort, you need to cut us all some slack, come down off of your high horse, and remember what it was like to NOT be the most powerful character in the entire game of CB. Remember what it was like to lose a fight. Remember what it was like to lose 30 fights a day and not really see anything wrong with it.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 5:09 PM EDT

i truly do not remember accusing you of trying to protect your advantage. i have accused you of propagandizing and soapboxing though.

i truly think you are doing what you think is best for the game, in a very loud and boisterous manner. ; )

i also think you let your emotions get the best of you at times and don't necessarily realize when an apology may work better than justifications.

QBRanger July 20 2008 5:12 PM EDT


Without a EF, I would lose to at least 3 people. Those that use the SG/EF. People who I easily beat before.

If that is not overpowered, I have no idea what is.

BadFish July 20 2008 5:18 PM EDT

Unlike dudemus, the only thing i HAVE accused you of is trying to protect your advantage.
I see no reason to argue that EF/SG are overpowered. I merely suggest that before they existed, there were other overpowered strategies, one or more of which you likely took advantage of to get to where you are today. Even now you use an admitted overpowered strategy instead of the strategy you prefer because you do not want to lose. To "at least 3 people."
This is all well and good. It's called "playing CB"-using the strategy that wins. But should you get to a point where you find it slightly more challenging or irritating than previous, i do NOT believe in throwing your weight around as the most powerful character in order to get things done the way you want them to be done.

QBOddBird July 20 2008 5:39 PM EDT

Everyone shush, and don't say such blasphemous things as "people selling for 2.5/mil"

At that rate my debt would have literally doubled

CBD is still 3.5/mil, let's not set the standard by the lowest price anymore!!! *sobs*

Also, you people got this thread way off-track. The main idea here was that we need a


QBsutekh137 July 20 2008 5:42 PM EDT

Ranger, dude's point is a simple one of duplicity:

Someone else using a strategy and defending it, even one considered by some to be overpowered = "wrong", in the eyes of Ranger.

Ranger using a strategy and defending it, even one considered by some to be overpowered = "keeping up with the Joneses" in the eyes of Ranger.

That's two sides of a mouth, a forked tongue, a face with two faces.

It would actually be MORE powerful for you to be LOSING with a strategy you consider _should_ be viable than to be winning (er, keeping up with the Joneses) with something you yourself have been putting down. You get that, right? You understand the power of humility and leading by example? If not, check the Wikipedia for "Gandhi". There's power.

Plus, the coup de grace, as it were -- people are AGREEING with you on here. Even _I_ have been agreeing with you on recent threads. But that doesn't appear to be good enough. Anyone who disagrees gets at least one summary response telling them they are wrong, superlatively so. Words like "all", "nothing", and "everyone" start coming out so predictably as to be redundant.

You know you're better than that. I know you're better than that. I fear you don't even have any idea of how many people respect you WITHOUT you having to go off on anyone who so much as prefers Pepsi to Coke (or whatever drink you like -- that's about as important as this discussion is, big picture).

I really am trying to help get things on track, because a thread of consciousness where we don't get Ranger's opinion (at least) is not something I prefer. You have your own thoughts, insights, and damn fine ideas on a lot of things.

Can you bring them to the table without ripping off the tablecloth?

QBRanger July 20 2008 6:52 PM EDT

Moving back to the table.

I personally would like to see such a weapon. Something to spice up the tank side of the equation.

If someone does not, then thats OK, contrary to how I may have acted/posted in this thread.

But a Hammerrang would be very cool.

Goodfish July 20 2008 6:58 PM EDT

In the spirit of the thread:

buff tankz plz!

Honestly, I remember a long time ago, when I actually played, Jon explicitly made changes and said, in his own words, "Welcome to Tank Blender."

And ultimately, I think tanks should ALWAYS have the higher advantage. Pouring NW into both a good set of armor and decent weapons is, in my opinion, "worth" more than simply expending experience. I've always hated Mages, to be honest, because I think they are generally boring (mainly Fireball, which is the cheesiest spell in the game), but it seems they've gotten a number of serious buffs while I've been on hiatus.

The idea of a reverse weapon- especially if it was ranged only- could add yet another (and largely unnecessary, but that's beside the point) layer of strategy to minion order.

I support the Hammerang.

QBRanger July 20 2008 6:59 PM EDT


You are a bit off in this analogy however:

"Someone else using a strategy and defending it, even one considered by some to be overpowered = "wrong", in the eyes of Ranger.

Ranger using a strategy and defending it, even one considered by some to be overpowered = "keeping up with the Joneses" in the eyes of Ranger. "

You fail to see my point. I know the strategy I am using is overpowered. I want it to be nerfed. I hope it is and expect it to be. However, I have to use it to beat those that I used to in the past.

That is a lot different then using a strategy and not admitting it is well overpowered and trying to defend it to the end of time.

I am in no way defending the SG/EF strategy I run. I know it sucks and is OMG overpowered. But I might as well use it, since if I do not, I lose 3-4 people off my fightlist. Please show me my posts defending the EF/SG as a balanced spell/familiar. I do not believe you can.

Running a strategy and defending it are 2 different things.

Hope that helps clarify things.

QBRanger July 20 2008 7:04 PM EDT

I do agree.

I always believed that equal MPR, a tank with more MPR should have the advantage.

However, not everyone believes as such, esp with USD in the game.

Jon neutered USD's influence recently. Great changes in my opinion.

But perhaps with lowering the WA and with ENC he went a bit too far.

And the new spell is certainly too far, IMO.

Therefore my suggestion for a new type of melee weapon. One that hits from behind.

It is just a suggestion and wrongly lead to some harsh words in this thread.

I will try to get back on track.

QBRanger July 20 2008 7:05 PM EDT

Should be tank with more NW. OOPS.

Cube July 20 2008 7:06 PM EDT

"I'm not saying melee tanks don't need love, but the ask Jon to make a weapon that magical hits minions for you is a bit weird."

I agree fully with this statement of Henk's despite the grammar.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 7:09 PM EDT

ah, here we have the problem then, in your original statement with which i took offense you said:

"But I expect nothing more from someone still using an abusive strategy."

you really didn't differentiate between using and defending in that first attack. you are in fact guilty of that which you seem to disdain, thus the duplicity and thus my posts!

now that we have that worked out, hammerang me baby!

Goodfish July 20 2008 7:10 PM EDT

Well it isn't exactly that a backwards-striking weapon would be my ideal change, but I think we need to start moving back to Tank Blender, and soon.

I suppose I should clarify and say that I support changes in favor of tanks, generally speaking.

QBsutekh137 July 20 2008 7:30 PM EDT

Yes, I think the weapon idea is fine. Like I said, I think people will AoI around it, but choice is still good!

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 7:56 PM EDT

all in all, the pendulum swings, over time we hope that each swing gets smaller and we reach some kind of equilibrium. i do think we are closer than we have ever been and do not expect mage blender to last nearly as long as tank blender did especially now that we have two people to work on balance issues and bug fixes.

QBRanger July 20 2008 8:03 PM EDT


I disagree.

The pendulum has been towards mages for a while now.

Ever since evasion got its major boost.

You may disagree and I respect that, but I feel it has been this way for a long time now. At least 6 months.

And the new spell, with its instakill, keeps the pendulum towards mages. With a larger swing then ever.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] July 20 2008 9:00 PM EDT

i do think mages have it better now. i think that has only been since the last changemonth though. in my opinion, it was tank blender from the inception of cb2 till that time, especially during the usd blender phase.

regardless of that though, i do concur that we need to be moving towards balance always. as i have stated before though, often we need to go through a data gathering phase so that the direction and magnitude can be refined. this would be as opposed to adjustments made based on anecdotal evidence.

which comes back to what i often state, give it some time and jon will get us there, hopefully even faster now since we have jon and nightstrike to both work at it.

i am in no way saying "do not discuss these things." i do think we need to discuss them civilly though and try to respect everyone's opinion.

Tyriel [123456789] July 20 2008 9:48 PM EDT

I'm sorry, but...

"targeting melee weapon that somehow hits the last minion ignoring the 3 standing in front of it doesn't make sense."

Throwing fireballs, blasting people with freezing cold, shocking them with your hands, doing whatever Decay does, casting spells, especially ones that retaliate when you're attacked, etc.

What of _those_ make any sense?

Give them their hammerang, or whatever. They could probably use it right now.

lostling July 20 2008 11:23 PM EDT

:) attacking from the back is nice... but this still seems like a ranged weapon lol....

i remember someone put forward once a trident or some sort of spear...
allowing you to hit in the last ranged round....
or allowing you to hit the last minion in the pack first

:) makes more sense then hammering doesnt it? :)

INDColtsFan18 July 20 2008 11:40 PM EDT

hammerrang, sounds like a great RANGED weapon to me.

But, If it will keep ranger from making all these "Help me become more powerful" posts, then im all for it.

BrandonLP July 21 2008 12:24 AM EDT

Give me Hammerang or give me death!

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 21 2008 3:11 AM EDT

Just got back froma Stag do in Barcelona. ;) Forgive me if this has aldreay been mentioned.

But, why?

We already have Ranged Weapons that ignore minion order.

And if it's to get round high AC walls (are they actually causing you a problem Ranger?) then we've got the VB.

Why do we want/need a Melee Weapon to hit from the rear, and doesn't that relegate the AoI to uselessness?

QBRanger July 21 2008 6:24 AM EDT


For the same reason we needed a front attacking damage DD spell.

Why did we need SG?

If rear minion MgS walls were a problem for mages, why should they not go CoC or FB. For them it is only 2% xp loss.

For me to go VB, that is 100+M CB I lose, others less.

How about this answer: For variation. For equality. To really make minion order mean absolutely nothing.

Daz July 21 2008 6:31 AM EDT

From a slightly different vein, you could have boots or gloves or something that make it so that melee weapons always hit from the back - Rogues Sneakers, Rogue Gloves, that sort of thing.
The Rogue sneaks around the combat using these and stabs people in the spine.

Maybe a Cloak would be better. Then you could use Frodo's Rock cloak, to keep in with the LotR theme.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 21 2008 7:56 AM EDT

Ranger, there wasn't an DD AoI.

DD has always been front hitting and Spread, it was MM that changed this. SG added nothing new, we already had a front hitting DD. :P We have Ranged weapons that bypass Minion order, DD doesn't. It always hits either front, rear or spread. Nothing the Mage can do to change that.

Sure, variety is good, and if it's variety you're after then how about something like a long Melee Weapon, like a proper Spear/Polearm that for example bypasses the first visible minion and hits the second. Still gives the AoI reason, and adds variety.

Unless of course you could have a rear minion that's wearing an AoI that the rear hitting Melee weapon bypasses to hit the first visible rear minion.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 21 2008 8:04 AM EDT

Daz, great ideal! How about adding it to the AoI?

The Tank is invisible, so can sneak to the rear. Makes the choice between using a AoM on a Tank or an AoI. ;)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 21 2008 8:11 AM EDT

Also, this would negate the next complaint of;

"ZMOG! We got that new Ultimate Hammerang of Rear hitting. But no one can use it cuz all my NW is tied up in my MoD! Weapon Artist now!!!"

superior me July 21 2008 10:10 AM EDT

one of the reasons i dont use a melee weapon is i find theres no point with the amount of evasion minions out there i figure if i cant kill them with a bow that is knocking on the door of my enc with archer i dotn know what will, so in the evasion minion regard i dont see how it will help, and i agree im new and ive seen ranger post multiple times on ef/sg being overpowered but i feel if this "hammerang" came out what would stop him his EF would no doubt wipe out any ac wall and with the str on his tank combined with not having to hit on 400 ac plus would demolish many teams, and then chances of him/her losing again would go down the drain but i can see how this would help many other cbers who dont have 6m mpr or a lvl 8m EF, oh and i also this the evasion RoBF setup is explointing the system and furthermore preventing the rise of single minion teams (no bias what so ever :))
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=002Ukj">New weapon wanted</a>