Can we please get 1 thing changed about the exbow? (in General)

No, not yet another rant.

Just a fixing of something I see as a bug of the exbow.

If you look at Aero's post in this thread: http://www.carnageblender.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003FSC you can see my point.

In the picture, he hits Order (character Law) in the first round. In that same round Order fires his ELB and does less than 1k damage a hit.

But if Law attacked Aero, Law would do full ELB damage and then the next round do less than 1k.

This seems very unfair and against how battles typically progress.

If I attack someone and kill a minion in a specific round, that minion gets a full attack before it dies.

In this instance, the minion is completely effected by the exbow drain and its attack is severely effected. Unlike anything else in CB that I can think of.

Am I wrong in wanting this "bug" fixed? To at least let the defender have his attack before getting nuked by the exbow?

How about having the exbow effect take place at the end of the round, along with the TSA regeneration?

Note: When I type about the exbow, I also am including the axbow but nobody in CB should be ever using an axbow IMO.

I kind of agree with this..

But if you look at it like a real world scenario. It's fine how it is because If I shot you with my trusty crossbow and it had poison arrows ;P. Those arrows would poison you immediately, not after you shoot me with your bow.. =D

It's the same deal for multi hitting DDs and other stuff.

The unfairness of CBs allegded, but not quite, simultaneous fight order.

/shrug

Fair enough point.

But then when my bow plugs you with 5 arrows and you have no life left, would you still be able to cast that huge MM spell? Or fire off your bow in return?

In fact, the poison could or could not be immediate acting. Arrows through your chest and head sort of are.

Consistency is what I am looking for.


Can you further explain this? And identify what "other stuff" be?

He means targeting.

Can you again further explain?

Let's say I have 3 Fireball minions and I attack a your character with 1 FB minion and GA.

I attack you:
Round 1
The GA kills 2 of my FB minions.
Your char attacks the FB targets the 1 remaining minion and kills him.
You win.

Your char attacks me:
Round 1:
Your FB targets all three minions, spreading the damage and killing none...
My minions then fire with the same 2 dying due to GA.
Round 2:
You target the one remaining minion and kill him.
My last (now dead) minion gets off his 'death shot' and kills you.
We Draw

Understood.

But still would my suggestion on the exbow not make sense to fix a bit of the problems involved?

I don't know one way or the other.

It is a fight order issue though, so not by any means quick and easy coding (from what I've gathered of CB).

The xbows are the most likely to benefit/suffer from this quirk but the coding has nothing to do with them.

Yeah, this is just how things work at the moment.

I find myself now confused. Why is it important for the Elbow's effect to work at the end of the round, rather than taking effect on its turn like other things in CB?

Right now when I am attacked by an exbow, I get no chance to do damage in my 1/2 of the battle round.

I would like that changed to at least have a chance.

Just like if I attack and kill a minion in my 1/2 of the round. They do have a chance to attack with full ability.

So you want the Exbow to lose their ability to get first effect in the round because you find the effect too strong.

Comparing it to killing a minion is very different, of course. Giving a minion its last shot in the round it dies is different than delaying the effect of a weapon so that it can be ineffective for the round it was fired.

I am slowly remembering a lot of discussions about this a while back. More than 3 years.

IIRC, I think we discussed this and since the defender was getting the advantage, this was sort of acceptable. That the defender should get the benefits if attacked.

In the situation I described the advantage is with the attacker. The opposite situation.

It does make some sense though. Both ranged attacks would presumably be launched before getting hit on each side which also goes along with the quasi-simultaneous turns.

Yes and no. Of course the effect is too strong. But nothing similar in CB occurs. That is the attacker getting such a huge advantage. I would ask for the effect to be done at the end of the round, like the TSA regeneration. So that the defender at least gets to attack in his defensive part of the round. The very next round, the minion hit would have the strength gone.


I do see your point. But why give the attacker an additional advantage of having its effect occur immediately when dying blows occur. So having my minion die would be better than getting hit by the exbow? At least in that case my minion would get to attack with full force.

That's not an additional advantage, though, that's standard. To rephrase your question:

Why take away the attacker's standard advantage to compensate for an overpowered weapon?

If it's broken, it should be fixed. That doesn't mean alter how the weapon works entirely, that simply means fix the problem. What you're suggesting here would be unfair to the exbow user if the exbow was balanced, which is the ideal situation.

In mind, and in my mind only, the weapon is certainly too powerful. However, I understand it will never be properly fixed.

That aside, I am just trying to insert consistency into the weapon to be with all other attacks in CB.

I think Pit stated it very well in his post in this thread.

I do also realize that is the way the weapon is/was/will be designed.

However, in the absence of any real balancing, can we get some consistency in the battle structure?

Just wait till Aero is near done with his NCB. Then we will see how powerful an 100M exbow truly is. Nerfing 500M+ NW weapon and their entire minion.

Did. Not. understand. anything in this topic.. :| to complicated.

Technically it is consistent right now, and changing it would make things inconsistent.

Can you please explain how it is consistent?

It is consistent with other weapon effects. When you drain through VA it adds the HP immediately for example. It doesn't delay until the end of the round.

Certainly it is consistent with other effect. But this is an effect that occurs on the other character.

VA occurs on your character, not your opponents. Negative effects such as death are technically postponed as to let the defender have a chance to attack, at full effect.

The exbow prohibits that full effect counter attack from taking place, giving the attacker a huge benefit.

I think it would be more consistent if we made death instantaneous... no more attacking with less than 1 hp!

Death only occurs at RIP.

Also a very important thing is that the ex/axbow damage, just like other weapon effects are calculated on per hit and dependent on current status of each minion. This means if you push the effect to the end of the round it makes having multiple ex/axbows absolutely useless and it also ruins the meaning of multiple hits other than for damage.

It's like making a 5 tank team that all targets the one 20 hp minion kill slot until its put into negative 25 mil damage or whatever.

Cannot the program calculate the str loss and apply it at the end of the round.

You do not hit different targets in a particular round with the exbow.

Geez, I really did not see that much of a problem trying to give non-exbow users a small chance at defense vs this 1 hit= all strength loss weapon.

I was really mistaken.

Yes you don't hit different targets with the same exbow, but if you have 2 exbows or 2 axbows you'll be stuck hitting the same target whether you want to or not.

Also the amount of drain is dependent on the current stats which means if you don't apply anything until the end you would have say a 20 str PL minion taking all the str drain for a round no matter how many shots you receive.

All I'm saying is that what you are suggesting is not nearly as small or simple as you are thinking and also that right now it is consistent with the other things (these being other weapon effects, targeting and damage aspects as well), but if you change it it would make it not consistent.

So, so apply the str drain but give the minion a chance to counter attack with full strength.

You're still just asking for an unfair advantage over the opponent based on their weapon type. If the weapon's method of calculating STR loss is broken, then that should be fixed, but breaking the weapon itself to compensate isn't the right approach.

I think we both agree the exbow is borked. However, it will never be fixed/changed to be balanced. What I am asking is not breaking the weapon. Just giving those on defense vs it to have 1 round of normal attack before all their strength is gone.

When I attack a mage and kill it, it still gets to attack that round with full DD. How is that 'an unfair advantage'?

Ranger your asking for a change is no different from people saying no.
They're just on the side that wins the argument because we all know that absolutely nothing is going to change.
Until we have someone in here that can change things.It's pointless.
Notice I didn't say they were right.

What you are asking is for the weapon to fail to work for a round. It is essentially the same as delaying it for one. You want to get in an extra round with your 500M ELBow, and I completely understand that.

You are taking what the weapon does - overpowered though it obviously is - and requesting it be disabled until you've finished attacking in that first round. That's the gist of it, am I wrong?

On defense, yes. That is what I am asking.

Just as if I attack you and kill your mage, you still get to attack at full strength.

Should I not be able to attack as well? Or shall we keep the exbow as overpowered as it is?

death =/= str damage

also for the record death only occurs when you see the bold R.I.P.

Let me put this another way. Ranger what you are asking for is for damage, a specific kind of it, to be only applied after the round is over. Normal damage is applied as it happens, so why should this damage be different?

The damage I do not care about.

It is the special ability that matter. Just like the TSA's special ability. I am asking it be applied at a different time. To be just like when you kill a minion, a full attack on defense.

And it is a different type of damage.

I hate to say it, but Ranger, you're building a strawman argument.

Of course you can attack as well. You might do 12 damage, but you get your attack. The Exbow doesn't prevent you from attacking.

You are asking for the Exbow user to lose his weapon's ability for one round simply because you have a huge bow and it makes you sadface that it doesn't do a bajillion damage anymore when it gets hit. Yes, the Exbow is overpowered. I know that, I've said it, you've said it, we get it - but it isn't preventing you from firing, and it is doing what it should be doing. Should its strength reduction be recalculated? I'd say yes, obviously. Does that mean that in the meantime, we should petition to make it not work for a round? No, that's not fair to the Exbow users either, even if they didn't spend a wad of USD on their weapon.

It is only a strawman argument because you say so.

Yes I can attack for 12 damage, but the mage I kill when I attack still casts its 15M CoC or SG.

When I attack and then get hit with the exbow, I do full damage that round. Yet when I defend I do not get a chance to attack for anywhere near full damage. Seems very unfair given how attacks are proposed to be simultaneous.

Given the fact we both know the exbow str is overpowered, would this change just help a little and make things equal to how all other combats occur.

Again, because you disagree with my point, do not make the false accusation of me using a strawman argument. What is next? You using a Hitler reference? In CB we accuse each other of using strawman arguemnts every time we disagree. It is getting very pathetic.

Wikipedia


You

See where he's coming from?

Wait a minute!


A direct quote from OB's latest post.

So, please sir, tell me where I am making a false assumption to back OB's claim of me creating a strawman argument?

Alright, you are right, my mistake. OB does have an tendency to use that word a lot.

And this is one of the reasons we cannot have real debates in the forums.

The "strawman" gets brought up repeatedly in an improper form.

I would love to see OB actually give me an apology.

But back to the exbow, I never thought people would be so against such an equalizing change.

I am sorry for wasting forum space. :)

First, I blame Sutekh for introducing CB to that foul s-word :) I remember when it first appeared here, and it quickly became the almighty argument:

I think A! I think B!
I think A! I think B!
I think A! You're being a strawman
...


The meaning of the word has completely changed on CB to mean simply: disagreement. "You're using a strawman" == "You disagree with me".


Second, this is a curious thread. Ranger and OB have exchanged the exact same sequence of posts half a dozen times:

We can't have A, so how about B? B is wrong, we want A
But we can't have A, so why not B? B is wrong, we want A
But we can't have A, so why not B? B is wrong, we want A
But we can't have A, so why not B? B is wrong, we want A
But we can't have A, so why not B? B is wrong, we want A
But we can't have A, so why not B? B is wrong, we want A
...etc.


Surprisingly, no one has gone Z yet.



Third..... I can understand the argument in the original post, and it's not without merit. There is a great inconsistency across the board in terms of when "Stuff" happens, whether stuff is damage, debilitating effects, death, resurrection, or the cable guy finally showing up. Within each category, things are relatively consistent. It's between categories that things are screwy.

The question posed in this thread would be a lot simpler if there were more concise timelines applied to individual hits, as opposed to individual rounds. Say an exbow and an ELB both fired 3 times in a round. From a purist standpoint, it'd be reasonable to say that the second and third shots from the ELB were weakened.

That kind of resolution is impossible currently. It'd be nicer if it wasn't.

TBH, it'd be nicer if there was no concept of a round to begin with, but more an overall concept of timing. Many games apply refire rates to weapons. For instance, an ELB at a given level might first 4 times a second, while an Exbow might fire twice a second. Essentially, then, a "round" becomes the lowest common denominator of all of the combined firing timings. That would be cool. Talk about a game changer :)

That's because Zenai is off the forums :)

Thank you.


That is not what I am saying. I know full well the exbow will not ever be changed to what I believe is balanced. I finally accept that.

However, OB and I disagree, I think, on the B.

My B is just giving missile users a chance if attacked to have a counter attack like all other things in CB. All things being equal, we give the little benefits to the defender. As per the scenario Loch stated with FB and GA.

In this case the benefit is going to the attacker, while using a weapon that is controversial in CB.

Even if this current method is a design of the exbow, I personally believe it is too powerful and have been very consistent about this particular feature.


Now the question: Do you think my idea has enough merit to accept as a change?

If you say no, then that will be it.

If you say yes, perhaps I and others can help enact it. Or give ideas on what best to do.

Years ago I discussed options of getting rid of 'rounds' and using an Initiative or Speed stat instead. ;)

How much of a nerf are you willing to accept to ELB to hit to compensate for this change?

None

Let me elaborate:

I am asking for the defending character to at least have a chance at a full attack the round he gets hit. Just like when you or I or anyone kills any minion, that minion gets its full attack.

As I and I alone see it, as I cannot type for anyone else, that gives the exbow a spectacular advantage aside from its superb draining ability.

And for those that say "I do not 100% leech in 1 hit", all I can say is "get your exbow to x10k and you will".

Compared to the ELB and MSB out there at over 20k, it is not a huge thing to do.

I was referencing how you turned the issue into "but it's unfair because shouldn't I be able to attack too?" when you can still attack.

In other words, I wasn't accusing you of building a strawman because I disagreed with you, I was accusing you of building a strawman because it looked like you were building a strawman. :p If you can explain how that is not so, then certainly, I'll give you that apology you desire.

Also, I very rarely make the strawman accusation. I much more commonly accuse people of going slippery slope on these forums. :p

Yeah, but by doing that it can lead you to strawman accusations... it's kind of a slip... aw heck, now I'm doing it.

How is that turning someone ELSE'S words into a false assumption.

Perhaps I should be been a bit more clear in that "shouldn't I be able to attack with my normal attack too like every other minion in every other case in the game except for this particular one".

I thought it could be assumed that an attack for 200 damage vs a normal attack of 1M damage is not the same or even in the same category.

Fine, I can be much more specific in each and every post about each and every thing I type, just not to get accused of possibly maybe perhaps sometime starting a strawman argument. Just like I now have to state "in the world of Ranger, according to just only Ranger etc.." to stop Sut from going after me when such things of course should be in the realm of obviousness.

Again, people in CB have little idea of the correct usage of such an argument. Just because we disagree or I fully completely totally not state my exact precise point (which everyone in CB understood except OB) does not mean I am building a strawman argument. To do that I have to twist SOMEONE ELSE'S words around.

From earlier...


i lol'd

You got me OB.

Q did not understand but I think that had to do more with my OP than my statement of not really being able to attack.

However, still does not change the fact you get very quick, when disagreeing with someone to bring up the Strawman slippery slope. Which then leads others and even yourself to then quickly say the slope has progressed to the actual argument.

Okay, I'll indulge you.


You're saying changing the argument here that the Exbow user is being deprived of his weapon effect and losing an attack by saying that if he gets it off, you're not able to attack either, and providing the false dichotomy of "either we can change things where I can attack, or we'll keep the exbow overpowered as it is."

Or at least, that's how I understood it, and that's how it is written. If you meant otherwise, I apologize for the false accusation, but you seriously should grow up about this - if I call you out wrongly on a logical fallacy, just tell me I'm wrong. There's no need to get butthurt about it.

And actually, yeah, an attack in the range of 200 damage is still an attack. There's a very significant difference between saying "I'm not allowed to attack that round" and "I have a much weaker attack because the opponent was able to use their effect that round." But since you were simply exaggerating, and actually meant the latter, I'll let the topic go now.

Can I assume we'll see this change implemented in CB3? :D

I am not the one who started this pissing contest by bringing up the strawman discussion.

The exbow is not losing an attack, I am asking that the defender actually gets his full attack like everything else in CB aside from the exbow.


I fail to see the false dichotomy. We both acknowledge that the exbow is overpowered. I am just asking for a chance, on defense, to have my full attack. By stating not attacking, I was assuming it was understood that an attack for 200 damage was the same as not attacking. I was completely wrong in assuming that was an obvious point. In the future, I will be far more specific on each and every point I make as not to be trapped in another strawman type of discussion.

In the future, if you really want to parse my words and try to find topics to try and call me a liar etc.. please spare me and CB the time. Almost everyone, with possibly Q who did not understand anything in the thread, knew what I meant by my not being able to attack statement.

It was intuitively obvious even to the most casual observer.

Sometimes it seems that you and a few others just like to take the opposite point in any of my posts just to get into a fight with me.

You know OB.

Would it not be far far better to have typed "Hey Ranger, by the statement about not attacking, do you mean not attacking with full strength on defense" instead of going after me and trying to use the strawman fallacy on me?

Instead of attacking other players, how about we try to be nice and find common ground in the future. Because what I thought was a decent suggestion just became a totally futile thread of uselessness.

And to think we even had NS give a very insightful post on the subject, thinking my idea did have some merit.

Obviously it was not, as I am more than a casual observer. You typed something other than what you meant, and now you're mad because I understood it the way you typed it instead of the way you meant it. Stop that, Ranger, if I wanted to learn to read minds I'd just get married. ;)


I honestly do appreciate that.


Let me put it to you this way. If you're a mage and your opponent has a huge Mage Shield that blocks all the damage...then is the correct solution to ask that Mage Shields don't work until after the first round, or to ask for the formula to be adjusted so that they don't destroy that form of damage?


The false dichotomy is that you present two options as though they were the only two. The first option is a non-option under the misunderstanding I had, but even under the way you meant it - low damage attack - there are more options, in the form of DBs to prevent the exbow from hitting, and damage reduction to prevent it from hitting hard enough to drain all your strength. The second option, letting the Exbow remain overpowered, is divided into two forms - a change to the formula so it drains a more appropriate amount, or a change to the way the weapon works entirely so that the exbow user doesn't get his drain until after the first round. There's also the method NS presented of changing the way rounds work, though that's even more unlikely than the two options that we were debating. Hence, false dichotomy.


How so? We discussed this for quite a while before I misunderstood what you typed and you overreacted at my assumption. We were being perfectly civil in our discussion before. In fact, we're still discussing it. Why are you throwing a fit as though the thread cannot go on?

That is a false analogy and you know it. Completely different effects. Nothing a mage does will effect the mage shield. The exbow effects the tank minion. One can say the same about 550 AC, or 1B AMF vs 1M DD.

I was not making a false dichotomy. I was asking for 1 thing and 1 thing only. I was not asking the exbow drain to be change. I was not asking for that weapon to be removed from play. I was asking for the defending minion to have a full attack as all other minions in CB do. DBs, dex etc.. have nothing to do with my initial post. You brought them up. I was not asking or even suggesting rounds be changed.

Again I am asking for 1 thing only. For the defending tank to have a chance at a full attack before the exbow hit drains the strength.

huh? That's not a false analogy, it's an example of your approach to solving the exbow problem. In case you've forgotten, in your initial post, you said:


I'm just telling you that what you are asking for is the Exbow to not work for a round so you can get a hit in. To me, that means you're asking for an advantage. I'm saying that instead of asking for an advantage, we should have the broken part fixed. Fix the drain formula so the Exbow works properly.

I really believe you are misunderstanding my initial post. Either that or I am not explaining it well enough.

I have given up trying to get the exbow fixed. I have given up trying to get the forumula for drain changed. I know it will not.

I am just asking for the same round that the exbow hits, to have the ability to do a normal attack. Just as if a minion dies when being attacked, that minion gets to have his/her full attack.

I used the TSA regeneration as something that occurs at the end of the round. The regeneration itself is not the issue, heck, it could be xxx doing yyy at the end of the round. I just wanted to have the strength drain occur at the end of the round.

Yes, perhaps what I am asking for is an "advantage" over what occurs now. But now, in most battles with an exbow user, I get hit in the first or second round. If hit in the first, I get to hit, yes, for about 100 damage a hit. A far cry from my 1M normal hit.

So the attacker, with the exbow, has a huge additional advantage of never getting hit with my bow for over 100 damage. Nothing in CB leads to that type of phenomena. Even if I were able to kill a mage in the first round of combat, on attack, that mage still gets to hit me with is 10+M DD spell.

And to clarify (to avoid any confusion), by mage I am specifying any minion or familiar with a DD spell.

Now, would I love to see the exbow properly fixed so that 1 hit with a x10k exbow does not do 100% drain? Certainly. Will it ever happen? Of course not and I assume we both know that. But that has nothing to do with my first post.

I am asking for consistency in the ability of the defender to have a proper counterattack. Nothing more. If that is perceived by current exbow users and others as asking for an advantage, then fine. I am just asking equality in counterattacks.

EC and DM

This is getting really frustrating.

I am typing about round to round combat changes. And the fact the defender gets a full attack at the end of every combat round.

As everyone, with the exception of possibly Q, knows EC and DM occurs at the beginning of battle.

Why is it so hard to understand my first post?

And yes, EC can make my ELB do 100 damage. I have no problem with someone investing millions of xp for that effect. But that has been discussed numerous times in the past.

If one have to clarify each and every statement, CB will grind to a complete stop. Some things have to be assumed or at least the poster needs to read the posts earlier in the thread for understanding.

The inconsistency isn't actually a result of how the exbow is treated.

It is a result of how HP is treated. The death test is only done at end of rounds whereas all other tests are done mid round (str, dex, HP for targeting purposes).

So the inconsistent part is getting that death shot (at least in my opinion).

What about what happens in the following:

I attack a character with 4 minions.

My mageseeker kills one and then my IF attacks. The IF attacks the remaining 3 as the 4th is already dead. Most noticeable with 2 minions and 1 dies.

So while CB states the character is RIP at the end of the round, does it not effectively die in the middle of the round, yet still attacks?

i think we have to view the fight order as something that is much less than realistic and more of what jon wanted items to accomplish. this item was created as a counter. he chose the way he wanted it to work for a reason and the fight order is part of that in my mind.

i think this is what nov was getting at with his question and if you truly are willing to give nothing up to lessen the need for the counter then expect to get nothing in return.

To be clear on a few things....

0) I am really amazed at the lack of understanding in this thread.

1) OB, I have yet to see a post from you in this thread that gives a legitimate counter to Ranger's idea. A Mage Shield? Really?

2) Ranger, if this fix when in, and it changed the balance of everything, expect subsequent changes to restore the balance. For instance, let's say that there was a bug preventing BNE from delivering any more damage than a VB. Upon fixing that bug, the BNE would gain a lot of power that didn't exist when everything else was balanced. Something else would have to change to handle that (maybe as simple as changing the base damage, or as complicated as changing the entire damage model (Exaggeration, of course)). This is, I believe, novice's point.

3) There are bigger issues here that are blocking something like this from an infrastructure standpoint of modifying the fight sequence. However, that's an improvement that I want to do anyway.

That is assuming the exbow is really balanced now.

That is a huge point of debate in CB.

Just look at Aero's character. I doubt without the exbow (ab)use he would be gaining MPR as high as possible.

And if your counter to that is "well he will get within 10% of the top MPR", I would say "then the N*B is too low" since you have to use the exbow to get to the top.


Because the exbow works unlike anything in CB. You get hit and you do not get your full counterattack.

I will state this again, just wait till Aero get to the top ranks. I forsee him becoming unbeatable with a 100M exbow.

balance is secondary to this argument

At issue is the exbow's capability as a counter to an extremely powerful setup. There is no better method for a tank to take on another tank at the moment and the change you're proposing (quite reasonably I might add) would change that significantly. The sheer power of the ELB to hit often and hard warrants an effective counter, one that might work from well below (like other powerful counters) an opponents rank. I've no disagreement with the suggestions that further adjustments are warranted, however to claim that the exbow will make someone unbeatable is foolishness.

Look at who he is farming? KW and picasso.. Notice something similar between them? That's right no DB's. If either one of them slapped on anything over +100 I"m willing to bet that would be enough to beat "Aero's Ex-bow".. It's really more sheer ignorance by them two then it is Aero abusing a weapon.

Joel is a whole different story he's farm able super low.. Like most likely as low as 1.5 million MPR if not lower because of his insane Dispel Magic....


This should really say "If you get hit"


I love how in every ex-bow thread you completely ignore the fact it is completely useless against DD's. Any halfway decent DD team destroys exbows.. >.>

And what destroys DD"s? The el-bow of course.

CB has always been a souped up game of rock, paper scissors.. You can't beat everyone.. And in my opinion that's a good thing.

Novice:

That argument has been proven false numerous times in numerous other threads.

Let me yet again dissect it and show its fallacy:


So we should not balance items/spells/skills?


If by "better" you mean cheap/easy/abusive, then you are correct. But should we make things easy when there are quite a few other ways to defeat high NW tanks.

They include:

A) High AC, especially with SS. Look at Dudes or Titan's characters
B) GA especially on a RoS character. Look at King's character
C) UC. Look at MM's character

The exbow uses relatively pitiful NW compared to the "massive" ELBs you state need countering.

I would love a "cheap" item that would let me beat all the 10+M DD users out there. But that would be a "cheap" way to win.


As my last point, there are effective counters. At least 3 very good counters. But why do we need one that works 'from well below'. No other counter to anything in CB acts from well below. Why? We have ENC to prevent smallish characters from using and abusing massive NW items.

Other powerful counters that I and I alone possibly maybe perhaps believe you mean such as a DM or EC sink require actual MPR. And I believe most of CB accepts that fact.


Well? I have been waiting for you to suggest adjustments. I read that you want it adjusted but nothing comes from your side of the equation.


This is the one point you possibly have merit. However, wait for Aero. Right now he 1 hits the largest bow users into doing no damage (by no I mean 100 or less). Once he solves the DD problem (which is going to not be a problem for him), he will easily be tops.

But aside from your arguments, again, why should not the defender have a chance for a full attack on defense? Is the exbow needed that much to do something that is unreplicated in CB?

I have already given you 3 ways to counter high bow users.

Kefeck,

Aero hits me in the first round of combat 75% of the time. With 276 DBs.

And he is still growing very fast.


Actually using the ELB makes my character lost a lot more characters.

The MSB I have does well, however, remember it is beyond huge. And still with 1 hit from a 100M exbow, I get 100 damage out of it.

I have accepted the fact the exbow will not be changed with respect to its drain.

I had no idea that giving the defender a full attack, on defense only, would so alter the dynamics of the exbow. Giving someone who is being hit one round of possible defense would so matter since nothing like it occurs in all of CB.

It is a very special item indeed.

Moon's Spawn shot Mick Taylor [162136]
Mick Taylor looks weaker!

First round of combat.

10M str -----> -1.5M strength

Now if he attacks me and hits, I do 400 damage a hit. For the rest of the battle. Not even 1 round to try to counter.

How is that balanced? Not even 1 round of defense?

To be honest I doubt he hits you 75% of the time. (also 75% is not reliable enough to add to a fight-list even if that is the case).

I had a larger character, More + on my bow, and more dexterity and there were still teams I could not nuke down..

for example F"GoD, TR (When natasha had her), and construct, also your character when you were had the old horror..

Yes, it is 75% now. And remember he is still growing 6+x what I am.

I am sorry this thread is on its way to degeneration to another exbow is overpowered one.

All I asked for in the first post is a chance mind you, just a chance, for the defender to have his/her full attack the round they get hit by the exbow.

I really had no idea that changing it from its current situation would be such a game changer. That giving the defending character a chance to have a full attack on defense would matter so much.

I didn't read everything, but at first skim, I agree with Ranger 100%.

Damage should be immediate: DD, physical blows, etc. (Though, even if they lead to death, the opposition still gets their last up.)

"Effects" (for lack of a better term) should kick in AFTER the round. This would include STR loss from exbow and DEX loss from axbow. This makes the effects attack/defend agnostic, which I believe CB should strive for (and has in the past, IIRC).

I can't really think of any other "effect"-based things that happen dynamically during a battle (enchantments can be considered "effects", but they all kick in before the battle even starts, statically, both sides.)

So, two thumbs up on this idea, and it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to remember what effect to apply, but apply it after everything else in the round transpires, both sides.

Sute, you still have the problem of attackers killing defenders before they get the chance to attack.

Then there's the problem with stat targetting if the drains don't happen as the attack happens.

Too much of CB is worked around the 'not as simultaneous as it should be' attack priorities, that the Exbow is only a tiny portion of this issue.

We could try to rework the entire round structure, but then that discussion would be best served in another thread, and not one that's really centred around a counter to a single item. And to be honest, I feel it's too large a change for CB2.

Maybe if there's ever a CB3...

You do? I thought everyone got to attack, with RIPs coming at the end of the round? Did something change that if an attacker kills an opposing minion in the first round, that minion never fires at all (dang, has it been that long since I last played, or was there a change?)

I understand there are edge effects. DD targeting for one. But that pales in comparison to losing an entire round of (probably massive) damage. While I agree there will always BE edge effects, we should still strive to make them as few and far between as possible. TO go back to DD targeting, that was trickier because maybe one WOULD want to really kill the opposing minion (to make sure they are going to stay dead, and was less of a sticking point because such dilution isn't nearly as outcome-shifting as losing an extra round with a heavy physical hitter.

None of this has anything to do with whether or not the exbow is powered or whether or not archers should be losing that extra round, etc. Those are secondary points. So, folks bringing that into it -- please don't. Those are separate balance issues. This is about consistency. And I feel the more consistent route is to have everyone get their blows in but have effects do their thing after the round -- affecting the NEXT round. Otherwise they feel more like enchantments than blows that are meant to be simultaneous, don't they?

Yeah, GL, really not sure I understand your "killing defenders before they get the chance to attack" comment. Here's a final round of one of my battles, I am the attacker:

MY ATTACK:
Stan takes damage from his own Fireball (44)!
Stan's Fireball hit Conubu [285], Fred Dryer [384], Grace Ryan [121], Old Spice [88]
Conubu's Guardian Angel smote Stan (95)
Fred Dryer's Guardian Angel smote Stan (21)
Grace Ryan's Guardian Angel smote Stan (72)
Old Spice's Guardian Angel smote Stan (52)
R.I.P. Stan, Fred Dryer, Old Spice

DEFENDER'S ATTACK
Conubu's Magic Missile hit Old Spice [115]
Old Spice's Guardian Angel smote Conubu (9)
Conubu cries "Live By The Blade!!"
R.I.P. Conubu


Stan (my minion) FBs Conubu. This blow kills Conubu. Yet, Conubu still fires his MM (gets a kill, too!). Seeing a battle cry and RIP together pretty much proves he can still defend "from the grave". Straight blows still get their fair-ups -- why wouldn't a blow from an exbow'd defender be the same way, delivering full payload until the NEXT round starts? I understand that interpretation of how things should work is subjective, but having everyone get full blows in (the closest to a simultaneous attack we can get) "feels" closer to how things should work. Effects should come after the action, IMO.

To summarize:

ENCHANTMENTS: 100% equal, everyone casts them before the battle even starts
DAMAGE (physical or magical): As equal as possible, both sides should get their fair ups, and the dynamics should be made as attacker/defender agnostic as possible.
EFFECTS (e.g. exbow/axbow weakenings and death itself): Apply after the round, thereby having the result affect the next round (or end the fight, in the case of the ultimate effect, death).

What is your vision of how these things should work that you feel would be more equitable?

Alter the formula on the Exbow. I believe that's what I've been saying all along. Address the problem.

Sigh, the death of literacy.

Minions still fight when they have negative health.

The main issue would be keeping targeting intact which you could work by having a ghost version of your str and dex that it uses to track targeting then implementing it at the end of the round. I still feel this would be a lot of work to not make something balanced.

There are 2 main problems to the ex/axbow, mainly the exbow as I've been using the axbow with this ncb and found it to be overall a much better weapon than the exbow, is 2 parts.

First it is abuseable in that there is a flat % increase when you increase the x which also costs a flat amount for each point. This is a problem because you are taking away the % which means when you hit 100% its all of your strength. This leads it to being fairly easy with enough x in the exbow to draining all strength.

Second it is very hard and not worth the investment at all to hit with the exbow. These combined make it only really useful as an ncb weapon to hit a few very specific teams while growing.

To add here has been my suggestion for the ex/axbow.

1. Remove Archery from the game, including all negative affects associated with not having archery and reduce all bows bth by 40, this means specifically bows that were affected by archery.

2. Remove the % drain increase part from the ex/axbow and instead set it to a flat 75% no matter how large or small the x is. This number was chosen because it happens to be the point where you lower damage by 50%. You also keep the damage modifier where if it does a lower % of hp from the base amount the % drain is smaller and vice versa.

3. Add in a new skill called Sniper, Hawkeye, whatever you would like to call it. This still adds 40 bth to any ranged weapon equipped by the minion when trained to the full amount which is 1/5 of str. (basically this is archery but for all ranged weapons and it has no downside for not using it)

Together what this will do is bring bows in line with other ranged weapons and give the option to focus into ranged weaponry more for all ranged weapons.

They do?

Damn, that's news to me! :P Was this a change, I'm sure they never used to.

So if we're moving all effects to after attacks, then all VA regen comes at the end of the round, as well as all incoming GA damage.

What happens if your opponent (who you kill, but still gets to attack) kills you, but at the end of the round your VA brings you back to life?

Aren't we back to hiding in death? Something we're really trying hard to get rid of with the TSA.

As an aside, is it possible to currently kill yourself on GA damage before you finish all your attacks? Or do you get all your attakcins in regardless?

Heh, I always thought it was the GA that killed in that instance. ;)

You would get all your attacks in, but targeting would be completely messed up.

Well, GA certainly causes some other things, but in the case I posted, the defending minion had a battle cry, so he must have done the mauling.

I used to have a much better feel for what happens when (and GA is definitely one of those things that is sorta damage and sorta "effect"), but have forgotten most of that. But yeah, everyone gets their attack in. Otherwise the only way to have Draws would be GA and friendly fire from Fireball, wouldn't it?

Yeah, I suppose it would. ;)

Also, IIRC the spread of DD damage was fixed, wasn't it?

What you talkin' bout Willis?

Take my character with a bow and and IF.

Used to be that if I killed with my bow (which goes first) the IF then would still have spread based upon the number of minions in the beginning of the round.

Now, it was fixed where if a minion dies, the spread does not include that minion.

In the back of my mind, I'm sure it was fixed. But I can't find any reference to it now. :(

Thank you Ranger.

When did that ever happen?

Nat,

Your suggestions are great, however, realistically they will never be enacted.

What I am at least asking for is a chance for on defense to have a normal attack. Nothing more or less.

And I do not understand your discussion on the axbow being superior to the exbow.

If you can hit with an axbow, you can hit with an exbow. And the exbow nerfs all str, the axbow just nerfs dex. Which means you can do still tons of damage but just not with CTH.

I also thought the ex/axbows were fixed where enchanters cannot do drain. Even with a high x weapon. If that is not the case, then we really have problems.

The difficulty for implementing those suggestions should be about same as the change to making the effect only occur at the end of the round and not break things like multiple hits and targeting while you're at it.

As for why I've found that I've found the axbow is much better is because it reduces the two problems I explained about the exbow by a lot. For one once you start hitting with the axbow it helps you to be able to deal more damage. For another losing all your dex isn't a full game breaker, only hampers your ability to fight be a good amount, it doesn't nuke it entirely or nearly entirely as you can fight back with the SoC.

I do not know about coding but if it is as difficult to make the drain occur at the end of the round, then I take your word that a ghost image cannot be uses/stored until the end of the round, just like the hp/TSA scenarios.

And I understand your discussion on the axbow vs exbow. However, in most cases, especially vs ToA tanks, 2 hits is all you need to completely make their tank useless and take your time killing it. True, the first couple of hits may be though, but once you get there, with a high enough x, you destroy that minion.

And as this thread, you even get the addition added bonus of that minion not even being able to do damage above 1k in the very round you hit it!

What happen?

The DD split (that's been in since the start of CB2) or the fix?

I can't remember when the fix was, but I'm sure it was faily recently.

It would had to have been before the start of 08.

I think it was fixed just recently:

Here:

http://www.carnageblender.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003F6f

4th post in that thread deals with what is described earlier in the thread. Not the TSA hidden in death but the targeting problem.

That's something completely different.

Then perhaps I misunderstand what GL is typing about.

I thought it was the spread of DD not changing if a previous minion in the battle order kills an opposing minion.

That was recently changed along with the TSA hidden in death (at least the part that could be fixed).

What am I not understanding properly?

Just tried to search back through old posts, but can't find anything on it.

Maybe you couldhave a look to see how the game works currently?

The problme is that DD spells 'spread' based on the number of targets at the start of the round, but if any of those are killed before the DD is cast, it doesn't recalculate the number of targets any more.

So you lose a percentage of your damage done becuase of it.

This is compunded if it's a minion that dies, then is bought back to life at the end of the round, as they then still count for the 'spread' at the start of the next.

Only to die before the DD is cast again and reduce it's overall damage.

Now, I'm sure this was fixed. If not, it really needs to be! :P

This is the fix that I show in the last link.

Hmmm, rereading the thread Ranger linked, a problem has just occured to me.

If the targetting is changed so that DD can still damage 'dead' targets (in the case of TSA regen), then you can *never* get the full damage from spread DD, if you face a multi minion team.

Unless the targetting is a little more complex and;

1) Checks to see if regen will potentially bring that target backt o life, in which case your D still spreads to it.

2) If the regen can't bring it back to life, and it will remain perm dead, then the DD stops counting said target for any spreads.

:/

Yes GL,

Both 1 and 2 as per my testing and NS's posts.

Oh you guys are talking about "The Fix." All you had to do was to explain that it was "The Fix." It was never a problem of spread, but only a problem of the definition of "dead." Minions that should of still been targeted due to TSA were not being targeted NS issued a patch first for physical, then for magical. However, it was only a half fix; b/c the redefinition of "dead" has led to a lot of other problems.

Adding a little info into this:

DD spread is calculated based on alive minions. Before the patch, a minion was dead at 0. NS changed it so a minion is dead at 0-regenHP. So, now targeting works a little better, but now TSA can bring back like super zombies... so it still needs tweaked.

Actually I think before the patch it was x minions alive at the beginning of the round, therefore x minions are used to calculate the spread damage.

Now it is x minions alive at the beginning of the round and then rechecks after each minion to see how many are still alive for spread damage.

It was always like the latter, nothing in NS changes were to address inter-round damage changes.

Are you sure?

I noticed during the thread I quoted earlier, my damage with my IF changed significantly when I killed a minion earlier in the round. After NS stated things were fixed.

Titan, I'm 100% sure that DD didn't work like that.

FB and CoC used to base their spread on the number of minions alive at the start of the round, and didn't adjust this if any of those minions died during it, before the DD was cast.

If this is no longer the case, I'm a happy bunny. ;)