Balance to the game (in General)
August 6 2008 11:51 AM EDT
There are many tool players whine about. Lately it is the AoF.
This is more than likely the second weakest of the amulets.
The AoL being the weakest if you can kill the leader.
Boosting skills and enchants as it does.
But it boosts the negitive enchants also.
EC, AMF, I am not sure about DM
EG, EB, boost skills and dex we do not here whining because of them.
Mages do not have to delute their xp into different attribute to be effective. So they will move up much faster than a tank team.
EC is over powered in the fact it newters a tank team with one spell.
maybe balance it by say making
AMF reduce evasion.
Increase the evasion curve a little it is pretty powerful.
Add penaltys if you do not have a %of str. and dex. trained called sickness would be like the WA and ENC for tanks.
And deterorate the Hp of Evation walls that do not have hp trained,
so that they would just drop dead out of exhaustion.
These are just silly ideas, to give tanks a chance.
Give balance a chance.
August 6 2008 12:10 PM EDT
Thanatos for President.
August 6 2008 12:11 PM EDT
Me for dictator
I'm sure creating a thread every other day rehashing the same perceived imbalances of the game is definitely one way to not annoy Jon.
August 6 2008 12:12 PM EDT
I didn't realize that was the goal of forums, Joker. I'll keep it in mind next post :)
August 6 2008 12:14 PM EDT
August 6 2008 4:18 PM EDT
"There are many tool players whine about. Lately it is the AoF.
This is more than likely the second weakest of the amulets."
Granting 30%+ bonus to a skill that completely annihilates one class of damage is anything but weak.
"But it boosts the negative enchants also."
The only "negative Evasion" is accuracy on weapons (and DX to a lesser extent), and the AoF doesn't boost that.
"EG, EB, boost skills and dex we do not here whining because of them."
We do, just not as much. These items boost both skills and Dexterity, kind of almost evening each other out, since the extra DX helps somewhat vs. the extra Evasion. The AoF boosts Evasion at a much more efficient rate.
And why would anyone complain about boosting Dexterity? Actually getting to hit an opponent once in a while isn't what is overpowered.
"AMF reduce evasion."
How would an anti-MAGIC field help reduce Evasion? It just doesn't make any sense from a logic standpoint. It's like saying I have this spell called "Fireball" which grants extra defense to archers.
"Increase the evasion curve a little it is pretty powerful."
That might be a solution.
"Add penaltys if you do not have a %of str. and dex. trained called sickness would be like the WA and ENC for tanks.
And deterorate the Hp of Evation walls that do not have hp trained,
so that they would just drop dead out of exhaustion."
I don't like either of these. I think both add needless complexity to the game.
My suggestion is the same as it ever was: make Evasion decay in melee rounds. That means it's still used to do what it was meant to do; that is, evade attacks. But tank offense isn't ever 100% ineffective... you just have to survive enough rounds until you can connect with a hit.
"Give balance a chance."
Let's at least TRY it for a change.
August 6 2008 4:39 PM EDT
I love that ! Make evasion decay at 50% per round like the EH !
I'd even let them start again with 100% in melee at that point :)
August 6 2008 4:44 PM EDT
Well, I was thinking more like 10% per round *grin*
Even I don't want to kill off Evasion THAT much. *another grin*
Well instead of decay... how about we do something that doesn't completely neuter it. I mean, none of the skills/spells in the game decay. Why would Evasion?
August 6 2008 4:59 PM EDT
If you have to ask that question, you have no idea of how unbalanced this game is right now.
my problem with decaying evasion all along has been that it would likely replace both + upgrades on weapons as well as trained dex. if you know evasion will reach zero at a certain point, why would you not put everything into str and damage (and hp to stay alive) and just wait for the decay to take care of evasion?
unless you also make str decay at the same rate, in which case we would probably be left with the same results as of now?
August 6 2008 5:08 PM EDT
Perhaps decaying evasion would make them useful again.
And give mages something to put CB into.
I have thought that 50% decay is wayyy to much.
I would like to see, if a decaying system is used, a 5% per round decay in evasion.
August 6 2008 5:13 PM EDT
We all agree Evasion is overpowered. Perhaps this is the way it was meant to be?
This may be one of the ways Jon manipulates the CB economy, skill and spell popularity, and overall game mechanics. Make a few skills fairly unuseable/overpower a few other skills for a while in order to help game balance fluctuate instead of becoming boring and stagnant.
Regardless, I agree with dudemus. Jon's the boss and as far as I'm concerned, he won't steer us wrong.
August 6 2008 5:47 PM EDT
"my problem with decaying evasion all along has been that it would likely replace both + upgrades on weapons as well as trained dex. if you know evasion will reach zero at a certain point, why would you not put everything into str and damage (and hp to stay alive) and just wait for the decay to take care of evasion?"
We still have to stay alive long enough to hit, which is tough with mages flinging around spells as powerful as they have.
true bob man, but if you could get away with not spending cash on + upgrades and not using xp for dx, then it would make it much easier to stay alive longer, no?
look at it this way, i beat lega now. if he knew he would be able to hit me in round ten or eleven...always, then why would he still have to train dex or upgrade the plus on his weapon. wouldn't it be wiser to use that xp to stay alive and then use the cash to make that hit harder?
furthermore, with hp and str increasing encumbrance, i really see the above mentioned scenario playing out in most cases.
August 6 2008 6:03 PM EDT
"We all agree Evasion is overpowered. Perhaps this is the way it was meant to be?"
If this is "the way it was meant to be" then it is an example of willfully bad balance and game design. All this "trust the developer" stuff is all well, and good, but guess what; developers make mistakes too, and sometimes they make poor decisions that affect game balance in a negative way. Sometimes it takes play testers - us in this case - to point out the problems so the developer can fix it.
Remember, developers make bad games too, and when they do, they get called out on it. Jon has not made a bad game. In fact, he has made a great game. But when he makes changes that turn out not so well, we as players have every right to call out the problem and ask for a balanced solution. Game developers are not immune to criticism. I should know, I'm an aspiring game programmer myself.
For those in the "trust the developer" camp, play Superman 64 and then tell me to trust THOSE developers!
August 6 2008 6:06 PM EDT
"true bob man, but if you could get away with not spending cash on + upgrades and not using xp for dx, then it would make it much easier to stay alive longer, no?"
I'd say due to DBs, natural Dex, the desire for more hits, and the difficulty in surviving 11+ rounds against spells like Cone of Cold and Insta Death.. uh, I mean Shocking Grasp, I don't see + and Dex going anywhere.
And if we can pump more into damage and strength, great! it would be nice to do some damage on par with your spells for a change.
"I love that ! Make evasion decay at 50% per round like the EH !
I'd even let them start again with 100% in melee at that point :)"
I like that, but instead make it decay relative to how low their Dex is. Basically it makes it useless for mages, but how could someone with no dexterity happen to dodge most everything? This would also boost tank teams as they would be the ones now using it and would make them compete against each other more.
August 6 2008 6:16 PM EDT
"I like that, but instead make it decay relative to how low their Dex is."
That's a good idea.
so its big evasion in range to kill archer, and then decay in melee based on DX? I like that idea.
August 6 2008 6:18 PM EDT
But Black Velvet? Man, that stuff's nasty. I had a half-pint of that a few weeks ago and had to heavily dilute it with Coke.
Do you guys honestly think mages will keep a big portion amount of their EXP into evasion if it decays by 50%? This will go right about to tankblender. It looks like people here are more worried about making evasion useless than about finding some type of balance.
Definitely not by 50% I'd say, but some would be nice. And besides its been mageblender since 05' :S .
these threads always take the same direction, evasion needs to decay...let's base it off of dex.
i would fully agree, as i have stated every other time this discussion has been brought up, only if we can also decay strength and dex. those big weapons must get heavy after all that swinging right? as for the dex issue, when we introduce an innate attribute, say intelligence and then allow that attribute to be trained by mages and increase their dd then we can make tanks train it for them to to their full damage amount. after all, it takes some intelligence to know which end to grab right?
my main point is, why introduce all of this complex garbage at all? why not just make other adjustments to make evasion less effective? start with the aof and either adjust its boost to evasion or just its boost to defensive dex. do we just have a need to make things overly complex and convoluted?
August 6 2008 6:39 PM EDT
"i would fully agree, as i have stated every other time this discussion has been brought up, only if we can also decay strength and dex. those big weapons must get heavy after all that swinging right?"
Then spells need to decay as well.
Honestly, this is a ludicrous idea. The point here is to NOT allow one character class' attack to work at 0% efficiency. With that being the case, why in the world would you "nerf the nerf" so to speak and reduce tank offense even further?
Dude, it seems to me that you just don't want tanks to compete offensively.
"why not just make other adjustments to make evasion less effective?"
Because no minion's attack at reasonable levels of equality should be reduced to absolute null without possibility of ever doing damage. The only way I see to fix that and allow some attacks to get through is to make Evasion decay. It's purpose should be to avoid ranged and early melee attacks. Late melee attacks backed by reasonable Dexterity and accuracy should always connect.
August 6 2008 6:46 PM EDT
Dudemus, let me ask you this: do you honestly think what we have right now is preferable to Evasion decay?
"The only way I see to fix that and allow some attacks to get through is to make Evasion decay."
from what i understand the consensus is that defensive dex more than the evasion effect is the problem. if we start cutting into that defensive dex, in the ways i mentioned in the other thread, then at some point we will get to where some attacks are getting through.
you say that i want no attacks to get through and this is not true, however there is then a big range between some attacks getting through and what you are proposing which is wait a bit and then they all get through. that would mean that no matter what someone puts into evasion, it will not matter after a certain number of rounds.
unfortunately, we truly do not know what jon expects from evasion or where the sweet spot should be.
i am not advocating silence or for the community to shut up and deal with it. what i am saying is that we have a much greater chance of getting jon to listen to rational, small adjustments as opposed to sweeping new game dynamics that throw out current systems and replace it with ones that in reality have more problems than what we have now.
if def dex granted by evasion and evasion boosting items is the true culprit, then why not fix that or find ways of reducing that? likewise, another possible solution is that dex means little now, make it mean more and thus make it possible for dex to keep up with def dex.
"Dudemus, let me ask you this: do you honestly think what we have right now is preferable to Evasion decay?"
i would prefer a balanced system to the choice between two broken systems actually.
Yes. Because if you *really* wanted to beat Evasion, you'd pimp out a 1H Bladed wepaon, use the new Gloves and Cloak and a BoF/AoL minion.
Plus EC to utilise the AoF penalty. Even if it's base on a MGS wall.
Or you could use UC. Or a AoF junctioned Jig for massive PTH.
Let Evasion Decay, and as Dude said, we;ll have Uber STR Tanks with low PTH and Massive (linear costing) X use PL/TSA batteries to wait out the Evasion.
(I don't like the new Forum layout. :()
the real clincher though is how do you define balance. some say that pumping cash into nw should allow some advantage while others say that balance can only be obtained when there really are no advantages to anyone.
August 6 2008 7:12 PM EDT
There is pumping cash made via normal means.
Such as that gained by fighting, by trading smart, by using the market to ones advantage.
Then there is the other means-USD.
I had thought that ENC was supposed to take care of the USD means.
If it has not, then perhaps that should be changed or tweaked.
But to keep evasion as it currently is ruins the game.
Remember evasion triple dips.
1) Defensive dexterity far above what a tank can get with dexterity. And for those who chat about EC being magnified by the AOF, I say it is not even close. I had 40% of my xp into EC and it was 1/2 the level effective. Then magnify that by the AoF. While evasion is 100% level effective getting magnified. So if the AoF adds 2M to evasion and your EC takes away 1.2M is not the AoF worth it. Not to mention the increase in the level of evasion which has the 2 benefits described below.
2) The total effect of minus PTH. This is raised by the AOF to astronomical levels. Making most weapons PTH moot. This part is likely the more balanced of all the evasion effects.
3) The overage effect. As I understand if your evasion effect on PTH is over the tanks PTH, it gets a negative to any residual dex PTH.
But how can anyone say the system we have now is balanced, or even close to it?
We have less people playing tanks and more people mages. The top characters, those with massive USD weapons, gave up their weapon usage. What is a non-USD spender tank to do?
Again, and yet again and again:
1) ENC was enacted to get rid of the benefits of USD weapons. I personally really liked it. It had problems, especially on multi-minion characters and ROS/AS dependent ones.
2) Tanks now have to worry about all their equipment with ENC.
3) The weapon allowance was cut in half. Further neutering tanks.
4) Tanks can not seriously use a missile AND melee weapon with ENC and hope to hit anyone using a decent evasion. I gave up my missile weapon due to ENC and could not use my DBs due to it.
5) Tanks cannot pump up dex and seriously hope to use a decent weapon due to ENC.
5) BUT NOTHING HAS CHANGED WITH EVASION, especially in MELEE, SINCE ENC WAS BROUGHT INTO THE GAME!!!!!!
Can you hear me????
What is the problem understanding these facts?
August 6 2008 7:18 PM EDT
"from what i understand the consensus is that defensive dex more than the evasion effect is the problem."
It's half the problem. The double dipping of -accuracy into offensive dexterity is another. We could fix that, but I'm afraid it would be too much. The point of Evasion is still to -evade- attacks, not just avoid double hits. This is why I propose the decay thing, because it still allows Evasion to dodge nearly all ranged and some melee attacks, but later attacks are not 100% ineffective. It would still pretty much neuter ranged weapons, as it should.
"then a big range between some attacks getting through and what you are proposing which is wait a bit and then they all get through."
All reasonably accurate attacks, yes, that's what I'm suggesting.
"that would mean that no matter what someone puts into evasion, it will not matter after a certain number of rounds."
Since mages are early offense type minions anyway, I'd say this is fair. We have to live through all of ranged and 5-10 more rounds of melee to even TRY to hit you while you're firing away the whole time? I'd say I'm being more than generous with a 10% decay rate here.
Or would you prefer to sit out the first 8-15 rounds for a change while my Morgul Hammer wails on you? I thought not. But apparently that penalty isn't harsh enough for tanks.
"i would prefer a balanced system to the choice between two broken systems actually."
That's avoiding the question. Do you honestly think we're better off now than with a 10% Evasion decay rate?
"Because if you *really* wanted to beat Evasion, you'd pimp out a 1H Bladed wepaon, use the new Gloves and Cloak and a BoF/AoL minion."
Ranger pointed out the flaws in this argument several times before.
Though you are right that the above strategy should work better vs. Evasion than a clunky old two-handed Morgul Hammer. But, and I repeat myself again, no attack should be reduced by 100% in every single round of combat.
"Let Evasion Decay, and as Dude said, we;ll have Uber STR Tanks with low PTH and Massive (linear costing) X use PL/TSA batteries to wait out the Evasion."
STILL better than what we have right now.
August 6 2008 7:32 PM EDT
"the real clincher though is how do you define balance. some say that pumping cash into nw should allow some advantage while others say that balance can only be obtained when there really are no advantages to anyone."
Ah yes, the old USD argument. Again.
First, balance tweaking should not take into account "legal cheating," or dragging external factors such as real cash spending into the game. Game balance changes should only consider what is internal to the game's own mechanics and economy. Everything extra is, well, extra. If someone is "cheating" by artificially upgrading a weapon far, far higher than any normal, average player would ever be able to do, oh well. Everything around that player shouldn't be changed to nerf that artificially inflated strategy, because it drags the average player using the same yet non-inflated strategy down with him.
Second, the USD problem was solved with Encumbrance. End of story.
"What is the problem understanding these facts?"
I honestly think that some people just don't care. They like they way it is now because they're living the high life, and they're not going to let pesky little things like facts, numbers, and cries for game balance get in the way of their winnings.
August 6 2008 7:34 PM EDT
I really don't see what all the complaining is about. I run a one minion, non mage chara, and I don't have really any problems with mages most of the time. AMF, BloodLust, and VA are awesome for facing Mages. crank up your HP and these skills, and Mages will be cannon fodder for you. Oh, high Dex seems to be really useful against magic too for some reason. I haven't been playing very long, but I'm doing well, and these are the guidelines I follow. I don't see why people complain, instead of trying to just make themselves stronger to eradicate the magic casting cowards
August 6 2008 7:39 PM EDT
Just wait till your more then 10k MPR.
Try 1M or more MPR, things will change quickly for you.
Guys, there's really no need to have 3 separate active threads on evasion going on at the same time. Let's pick one and all post on there. I am really interested in what everyone is writing, it's just kinda a pain in the butt to have to be looking through 3 different topics.
"Ranger pointed out the flaws in this argument several times before."
What Flaws? It didn't work for Ranger, becuase he didn't want to give up his MH. But the option is still there.
"But, and I repeat myself again, no attack should be reduced by 100% in every single round of combat."
Then the whole combat mechanics need to change. This is the way Physical damage works in CB. If you get rid of this, you need the equivalent of multiple damage reduciton layrs that Magic damage has to face.
"STILL better than what we have right now."
Nope. It would be going back to Spid and IWIN. Which is fankly boring. But this is just persoanl opinion on each side here! :P
Joker (I still wish we could edit posts, just highlight what the edit is! :P), i'd be more than happy for the mods to merge a couple of these threads. ;)
August 6 2008 8:01 PM EDT
"What Flaws? It didn't work for Ranger, becuase he didn't want to give up his MH. But the option is still there."
You answer your own question. Just replace "Ranger" with "all tank players" and think about how difficult it would be to lose all that money invested in our old weapons. We might as well just play mages, or spend more USD, but then Dudemus would come to our homes and stab us to death in the night.
"Then the whole combat mechanics need to change. This is the way Physical damage works in CB. If you get rid of this, you need the equivalent of multiple damage reduciton layrs that Magic damage has to face."
Tanks face more AC than mages do, so no, damage reduction is fine. You're acting like this would be an overhaul in the whole damage system. It's not. A decaying Evasion is just getting rid of the "ha ha, no attack for YOU!" penalty that has plagued non-USD pumped tanks since forever, but only for a few late rounds.
"Nope. It would be going back to Spid and IWIN. Which is fankly boring."
That's funny, you know what I find boring?
..against opponents with 1/2 my MPR. I'd be happier with the following:
"You answer your own question. Just replace "Ranger" with "all tank players" and think about how difficult it would be to lose all that money invested in our old weapons. We might as well just play mages, or spend more USD, but then Dudemus would come to our homes and stab us to death in the night."
I know of at least one Tank running (or was running) a VB orientated strat. With the PTH boosting gear....
So no, all tank players is out of line.
"Tanks face more AC than mages do, so no, damage reduction is fine. You're acting like this would be an overhaul in the whole damage system. It's not. A decaying Evasion is just getting rid of the "ha ha, no attack for YOU!" penalty that has plagued non-USD pumped tanks since forever, but only for a few late rounds."
AC is not ok. It's one layer. And there are two weapons to lower it.
We need Cause Fear back, to stack with AC and the SoC. I'm sure I'm missing some layers as well.
August 6 2008 10:47 PM EDT
So the 1 or 2 tank players with the huge VB and PTH boosting gear will survive in the mage world as is CB.
The rest of the tanks just have to ditch their weapon, most likely the MH, and start all over again putting NW into a brand new weapon. Well not entirely starting over as we do get 50% NW back. 50% of 100M is ONLY 50M, should be a pittance for a real tank.
Anyone: What is comical about that argument?
O yes, you in the back row, Lord Bob:
LB: That is just plain STUPID!!!!
August 6 2008 10:50 PM EDT
And this is the reason I keep coming back to the forums:
You cannot buy this sort of laughter.
To think tanks actually have a chance vs mages is one of the funniest things I have read in many years.
All the data is out there, presented and still people cannot believe it.
I guess that is how people are. Some still disbelieve in global warming.
August 6 2008 11:05 PM EDT
Simple solution. Simple almost always means best. Evasion double dips so make it work at 75% effectiveness or whatever. Monitor complaints adjust from there. Unless anyone is actually arguing that it's not that powerful?
Quite simply every single solution someone comes up with completely over complicates things. The only simple-ish one I like is the decaying evasion, but why make things more complicated with the existence of both ENC and Weapon Allowance already confusing new players? Lower the curve. None of this AoF modification (Will make UC people complain), none of this damage reduction (Then why would people spend money on a wall).
Just lower the curve and test. Plain and simple. Oh yeah, and throw in a free retrain so evasion people can decide if it was lowered to much and opt out, and tanks can see test out varying levels of dex.
Come on hurry up with a change here people; I need more dex heavy tanks around for my damage reduction team to pound on.
Ranger. It's totally a theme design issue.
"The rest of the tanks just have to ditch their weapon, most likely the MH"
1 Handed Bladed wepaons to hit, but deal less damage per hit.
2H MH To deal massive damage (especially with a SoC - lol).
Choice *is* yours. Make the decision. Want big numbers poppoing up on screen, use a 2H Morg and accept you won't be hitting those teams that totally set themselves up to dodge you.
Want to hit all the time but cause less damage? Use a 1H Blade with the appropriate gear.
The largest damaging weapons can not hit as well (and the small chance to the base chance to hit, and even the Dex penalty from shields doesn't cut it). It's Balance. It's trade off and strategy.
You made you choice.
Now if someone was using a large VB/BoTH/ELS with a GoM and MC (ignoring being backed by AoL/BF as that can help MH as well...) and they still can't hit Evasion teams of equivalent size, then we have a problem...
August 7 2008 6:58 AM EDT
So it is ok for mages to get a free retrain to change their entire damage focus, while tanks have to adjust and lose all that NW to try to hit.
Another reason tanks are dodos of CB.
One cannot adapt as easily as mages to new changes. Especially when there are free retrains about.
Ranger, this doesn't do you justice.
Please quote exactly where I said the free retrain was good. I'll help. I never have.
Therefore your above post is meaningless in relation to this discussion.
Have you run out of points that you must try to twist the arguement into something I've never said nor supported?
As for adapting, it's a trade off.
You can adapt easily as a Tank. It will just cost you more than changing XP based stats.
The trade off is that items are not lined to characters. So if you decide to start again (with a NCB) like many do (not really an attractive option to the number one charcater, but that doesn't deny this to the rest of CB) you can take all that item based expenditure with you.
All the XP spent on your old character is lost.
You can even Rent, Trade, Sell that expenditure peice meal.
Want to change Strat from the high damage dealing 2H weapon crushing, tot he finese 1H hit more but for less? It's even possible you can find a like minded player to *trade* weapons with.
Not too likely when you own an oversized weapon, but I guess those are the breaks...
the free retrain, with or without a weapon "reink" is a done deal. regardless of how any of us feel about that, we cannot change it.
with that being said, i think all that gl is saying is that whether or not the game is in balance has little to do with one person feeling cheated or betrayed. it may not have worked out the way you wanted it, but that doesn't change the fact that some changes were made that may give melee tanks some viable options even if it wasn't the changes you thought should be made.
is this the only change coming for evasion? none of us know either. without someoen up high switching over and trying it, we are left with waiting for someone to rise through the ranks to find out how well or poorly it works and possibly months of posts such as this.
August 7 2008 9:34 AM EDT
The new items hardly solve anything. So if you use a VB you can get an extra +20, and with the BoF it comes to +35 or so. This means that you'll have people using the items for a large pth, but not training dex because they won't need it, and it won't help much. The new items solved nothing.
and with the cape and gloves as well as training dex that could be boosted greatly.
August 7 2008 12:19 PM EDT
If you don't want to remove the third prong of evasion, the minus to base hit chance, why not turn just that part into an AMF-like curve?
So 100 extra evasion above and beyond PTH would reduce base hit by something less, say ~30.
Except I'd still say the defensive DX would zero it anyways.
August 7 2008 12:39 PM EDT
Well with the cape you cannot use the EC, as evasion minions do.
With the gloves you cannot use the EG or TG. EG for more dex and TG to carry a better weapon.
So using the new "great" PTH items force you to have less dex and/or less strength. Nice choice for tanks.
The BOF are interesting, but good luck keeping the first minion alive long enough vs mages, especially SG ones who in the first or 2nd melee round take your minion wearing it out. Even if they use an AoI.
So how does the new items help exactly? And what about those that have millions in NW invested in their weapons already. We are supposed to just eat the cost of making a new weapon. And have the VB fiasco occur yet again? I do not think anyone wants to lose money on a weapon all of a sudden made obselete.
I guess your answer is "o well, you're so out of luck".
Well an attitude like that, which is what I see, is driving people from the game and driving tanks towards mages.
How about a solution for everyone? Would that not be a novel idea?
And back to your first post.
The AoF is an incredibly powerful amulet. Possibly the most powerful.
It certainly is more powerful then the AoAC, given that amulets nerf reently.
It is more powerful then the AoM for non tanks. Which are more then 75% of the minions out there. Look at evasion minion, UC minions, characters with AS/GA and tell me the AoF is weak. Poppycock!!
The AoL I think most agree is quite useless. Especially when you have to be alive to benefit from it.
But I hope your kidding with your first line :"There are many tool players whine about. Lately it is the AoF. <br>This is more than likely the second weakest of the amulets."
You cannot be serious? Why else were people paying 10M for one if they were useless. It was the most expensive item to buy, if you could find one, in all of CB.
"So using the new "great" PTH items force you to have less dex and/or less strength. Nice choice for tanks."
i thought the problem was not hitting? those items address that and possibly quite well. if you are wanting to hit and hit at maximum damage, then it truly sounds like you do want it all. i think jon may be giving you a choice here, hit for less but hit, or hit harder than hell but not evasion minions. i could be wrong though.
as for the rest of your post, i am not sure who you are quoting/addressing, but it wasn't me.
it would've been great in my mind to have the weapon artist give free "reinks", perhaps then some of our uber strat testers would have tried these things and seen whether they work. that, however, was not done. perhaps it is time to get over it?
"Well with the cape you cannot use the EC, as evasion minions do."
Well RBF ones don't. You know, not being able to use a cloak with a tattoo and all that...
So drop the EC and use a ToA...
"With the gloves you cannot use the EG or TG. EG for more dex and TG to carry a better weapon."
AoM/HoE for all your STR needs. Or ToA. Or TSA. or BoM. Boy do Tanks really have it hard for thier STR boosters...
"So using the new "great" PTH items force you to have less dex and/or less strength. Nice choice for tanks."
Yes, it is. Dude nailed that above.
August 7 2008 3:08 PM EDT
The problem is not hitting.
With no TG's one cannot carry that extra few +'s one needs to hit, offsetting the new gloves.
And yes about the RBF users, if they use the RBF on the evasion minion. Not all do.
But how can I get over something that was so grossly wrong and unfair.
It is very easy to say "get over it", when your the one benefiting from the inaction.
For months now, I was trying to get some help with dealing with evasion. And for months I was told by the community that something has to be done.
I did get over it. I stopped playing. Perhaps we should get back on it for the other tank wannabees out there.
so the new items are a wash? did you actually try all of these items in combination or did you just do the calculations to determine this?
August 7 2008 3:35 PM EDT
I used my MH as a basis. Given the upgrade costs are about the same for the ELS I figured that also.
The VB is actually worse.
The new gloves vs the TGs are basically a wash when/if one uses ENC calculations. That is IF one is at their ENC limit and does not want to go over.
My calc may be incorrect, I hope someone else will do the math as well.
And given that I did not have access to a weapon artist that point would be moot for me.
Given only 1 or 2 have a VB/ELS/BtH high enough, it seems moot in CB for quite a long time.
Unless tanks get some lovin.
with naming bonuses you can get 30 percent increase to pth fairly easily, for a top 100 character anyways. with koy, you were hitting me fairly regularly and winning against one of the higher evasions so wouldn't 30 percent have made a fairly dramatic difference?
actually, i guess it wouldn't have as you were winning anyways! : )
Just to clarify something for those of you who have never used the MenC or the GoM. They do not grant a % bonus but a straight pth bonus. A 30% bonus to pth and 30 pth are quite different. Another thing you wont ever seen 30 from just the gloves and the cape. At the very very highest you might see 25.
nem, i would love to see the numbers on that to find out exactly how those figures were reached. in effect, the plus on the items, pth before and after as well as if the items were named or not.
thanks if ya can provide the data.
You can see it from the post fight info. Fight once with just your wepaons and get your melee PTH. Add in your +5 GoM and watch your PTH increase by 5. ;)
hehe, i don't have the gloves, cape, or the weapon for that matter! that is why i wanted to see the numbers posted along with the stats of the items.
Hmmm.. Just to test, I unequipped my ToA and GoM. My VB is +23. That shows as my Melee Bonus to-Hit post fight.
I equipped my +9 GoM, expecting to see it change from +23 to +32.
No change. The GoM don't effect the VB. Which they should, as the VB (unlike the BoTH and ELS) is classed as short 1H Blade. :(
The GoM don't seem to work with either a Base Katana, or Base Tulwar.
Either they are totally broken, or their benefit isn't shown in the post fight log.
also, both the gloves and the cloak in the wiki use the same terminology:
Each enhancement give 1% Points-to-Hit to Edged Weapons.
if it is truly just 1 pth per enchantment level, then we need to clarify the wiki?
August 7 2008 7:27 PM EDT
I thought it was just pth not a percentage. I know Jon clarified that leadership was just straight pth.
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=002Vgq">Balance to the game</a>