Some mage thoughts

Submit and discuss your ideas for the MUD.
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Some mage thoughts

Postby Birile » Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:06 pm

I know some of these thoughts won't be popular, but I have been thinking about some of them for some time now. Mostly, they are considered downgrades for some of the mage classes, apologies in advance. And yeah, I know the melee v. magic rebalancing is coming sometime in the future already and may already involve changes to some or all of the mage classes. Anyway, here goes!

Elementalists

--Downgrade the hp's on the non-fire embodiments. I'm not convinced embodiments should give more hp's than a cleric vit without having to do the uber quest for fire embody. A little too powerful as is, in my opinion.

--Change Ice Layer somehow to make it more useful. I've posted on this topic before, saying I thought it should be an area effect spell akin to earthquake. If that's not possible, then I think something is warranted. Hell, take the spell out completely if needed. Right now it's just kinda silly that it's in the same circle as Ice Tongue which is far more effective.

Invokers

--Keep the damage that all their spells do, get rid of all of the spell procs. This is a damage class and I'm not convinced the spell procs both fit the role of the class AND are needed to make the class useful in a zone. I know there are people who would disagree with one of those thoughts, if not both. But I think spell procs are more appropriate with other mage classes (see below).

--At first I thought upping the hp's they can get would be a good idea, but when I thought about it further, I think it makes sense that they are so fragile while wielding the awesome offensive power they have.

Illusionists

--Lower the damage a tad on some of their higher-end spells. And when I say "tad" I do mean "tad". Nothing drastic!

--Add more spell procs to their spells. This class, above all others, seems to be the most appropriate class to have these sorts of procs. They are illusionists, after all, and illusionists can make you see/feel/experience/etc stuff that may not really be there.

Psionicists

--The only thing I can think of that may be a good idea is to possibly add more procs to their skills. As with illusionists, psionicists can make you see/feel/experience/etc stuff that's really just in your mind.

I can't think of anything to add to or take away from the Enchanter, Necromancer, Lich or priest classes, but I don't know too much about any of them, either.

Just some random thoughts, I don't expect them to be popular. :)
Drache
Sojourner
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Bloomington IN USA

Postby Drache » Sat Dec 04, 2004 5:43 am

I don't know psi's well at all but I didn't see anything like what I'd like them to have: Mindcrush. Basically damage w/chance to feeblemind, except dispel magic won't dispel the feeble since target's mind was dominated so to speak. I also feel strongly that psi's should get invisibility. Their minds are so powerful they could easily pull it off. I have a low level psi and found them to suck even more than an invoker to play as. I was helping a squiddy when the mob switches and he dies in two hits. That's just crazy :P Give squiddy some luvins. (Oh yeah, and rangers too!! <10th circle haste *cough* zippy zippy>

Totally agree with procs for illusionists. They're rather bland and boring.
Elementalist: Dump ice layer. I've yet to see anybody cast it :P
jalahon
Sojourner
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Poland- the forgotten super power

Postby jalahon » Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:57 pm

I agree with birile about lowering the damage on certain spells *tendrils cough cough*. As for spell effects, I think we have a decent variety (unless someone plans on giving us a blinding effect *cackle*).

Illusionists are definately not bland and boring :P
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Sun Dec 05, 2004 2:02 am

i pretty much agree

not sure how much a tad is, but i think tendrils needs to be knocked down at least a tad.

psionicists are pretty good as is... i might trade some of their wierder abilities (rarely used and of marginal benefit although perfectly themed) for something substantive. the only thing specific id really say though is that globe of darkness should be made as effective as earthfog.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
Yarash
Sojourner
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Monterey, CA

Re: Some mage thoughts

Postby Yarash » Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:51 am

Birile wrote:Invokers

--Keep the damage that all their spells do, get rid of all of the spell procs. This is a damage class and I'm not convinced the spell procs both fit the role of the class AND are needed to make the class useful in a zone. I know there are people who would disagree with one of those thoughts, if not both. But I think spell procs are more appropriate with other mage classes (see below).

The procs basically make no difference to an invoker's abilities and has a negligible effect on balance (if any), however, they do add some interest to a class that isn't considered to be very interesting.

- Mike
Sarell
Sojourner
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am
Location: brisbane, australia

Postby Sarell » Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:42 am

I think illusionists are pretty bad ass already without adding more special effects to their spells.

I like the concept for the mindcrush psi ability, fits in well with their theme. Would make them a bit more menacing solo however.

I think invoker damage is a kinda cool way of doing things, but I absolutely agree any way to make them die a little more in zones would be neat, make them into fragile little folk who love big explosions. I think downing AC / HP on items that vokers can use would be the best way to achieve this rather than modifying the class however.
Arishae group-says 'mah sunray brings all the boys to the yard'
Shadow Scream
Yarash
Sojourner
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Monterey, CA

Postby Yarash » Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:35 pm

Sarell wrote:but I absolutely agree any way to make them die a little more in zones would be neat, make them into fragile little folk

They are fragile now and die enough already. The average base hp range seems to be about 160-200 which seems to be less than other mages. With the casting of area spells more so than any other class, the risk of dying increases. Also with the adoption of "invoker runs" as a legitimate zoning strategy in a variety of zones, the deaths have increased and fun factor compromised. Seriously, whoever came up with this idea, I hate you.

I'd like to see other classes become more popular, but making invokers unplayable is not the way to go.

I prefer to play my alts because they die less, but zone leaders usually insist on the invoker. Honestly, I would rather see their damage reduced than die more.

- Mike
Hyldryn
Sojourner
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Maryland

Postby Hyldryn » Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:26 pm

Yarash wrote:Seriously, whoever came up with this idea, I hate you.


I'm sorry.
Drache
Sojourner
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Bloomington IN USA

Postby Drache » Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:38 pm

Yarash wrote:Seriously, whoever came up with this idea, I hate you.



Whoa! That's like the meanest thing Yarash has ever said :P
Sonon
Sojourner
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: San Antonio,Texas
Contact:

Postby Sonon » Sun Dec 05, 2004 9:01 pm

i don't like dying :(
-------------------------------------------------------
Alysia group-says 'Lilen immolates a terrified squirrel to a charred crisp with his devastating inferno!'
-------------------------------------------------------
Lilen group-says 'where are all da trolls i was promised'
Lilen has left the group.
Tilandal
Sojourner
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Tilandal » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:12 am

Would make them a bit more menacing solo however.


When was the last time you saw a squid solo?
Of any class the only one that is harder to solo with MIGHT be an invoker.
Yes a squid can have up to 15 pets but frankly you cant really use 15 level 25 mobs to kill 1 level 45 mob. Ive tried and its just not worth it.

As things stand squids are a very nich class. They get invited cuase wormhole is a great convenience and the general lack of evils. They are usefull for silence fights and if your fighting psiconic mobs but not particularly usefull otherwise.

The one break they do get is ultrablast has no feedback. If you managed to make a group of say 2 warriors cleric shaman enchanter and 10 squids it would lead to an interesting time.

Well back on track if you are going to give squids something id suggest making synaptic static have a chance to interrupt spells. Currently its pretty useless. It has 2 rounds of lag. Does no damage. Doesnt seem to affect casting as far as I can tell.

The other thing they could use is a single target skill that goes through mindblank and effects wraithform mobs. As it stands if you have a wraithform with mindblank and you cant damage it at all.
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Postby Ambar » Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:21 pm

hrrm when i was an active evil we used squids for EVERY zone.. not only as transport, but as the globe of darkness freak and decent damage .. guess since more mage classes have a darkening spell, makes squids less useful?

*ponder*
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:02 pm

Ambar wrote:hrrm when i was an active evil we used squids for EVERY zone.. not only as transport, but as the globe of darkness freak and decent damage .. guess since more mage classes have a darkening spell, makes squids less useful?

*ponder*


I don't lead ebils in outdoor zones without a squid, nor does any other ebil zone leader I'm very familiar with, for that matter. *shrug*
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:17 pm

Ambar wrote:hrrm when i was an active evil we used squids for EVERY zone.. not only as transport, but as the globe of darkness freak and decent damage .. guess since more mage classes have a darkening spell, makes squids less useful?

*ponder*


It doesn't.

The other classes having a darken just means you can do some rares !squid, and when the squid dies someone can still darken and prevent total spank.

Birile, did you forget to talk about enchanters?

As for invokers loosing side effects on spells. *shrug* I guess if you want. They aren't a reliable part of the class. It's just a bonus effect that happens every now and then to be honest. It they were taken away, it wouldn't really make a difference, kinda like if you were to take away an enchanters damage spells. Whoopie doo. Seems to be more of a hit on soloability more then anything else.
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'
Targsk group-says 'sexedse'
mount dragon
You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.
You have learned something new about mount!
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Mon Dec 06, 2004 8:02 pm

Sesexe wrote:Birile, did you forget to talk about enchanters?


Nah, I couldn't think of anything that needed drastic changing for them, honestly. Did you have anything in mind, Sexy?
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:43 pm

Birile wrote:
Sesexe wrote:Birile, did you forget to talk about enchanters?


Nah, I couldn't think of anything that needed drastic changing for them, honestly. Did you have anything in mind, Sexy?


Nope. Neither drastic nor minor. :)
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:06 pm

enchanters could lose blur

necros and lichs could gain room preserve... after soul binding a room full of corpses you need to preserve those damn things.

necro vampiric touch can be changed so it overwrites cold/fire shield. its a quest spell that is pretty much worthless except as a plevel tool at the moment since it can't land if the mob has fire/cold shield up and thats the first spell mobs cast if they can.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
Drache
Sojourner
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Bloomington IN USA

Postby Drache » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:41 am

Room preserve. That warrants a 'Hell Yeah!'
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:20 am

kiryan wrote:necro vampiric touch can be changed so it overwrites cold/fire shield. its a quest spell that is pretty much worthless except as a plevel tool at the moment since it can't land if the mob has fire/cold shield up and thats the first spell mobs cast if they can.


To clarify, you mean Vampiric Curse.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:14 pm

Its required that I make this post at least once in every discussion about the mage classes... so ignore the rest if you know whats coming.

Remove invokers entirely and increase melee damage to compensate.

Take away dragonscales from enchanters, increase their spell damage a bit, and give warriors better tanking skills to compensate.

This is all.

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
Lenefir
Sojourner
Posts: 198
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2002 5:01 am
Contact:

Postby Lenefir » Thu Dec 09, 2004 4:37 pm

You forgot merge mage classes into sorcerors, bring back monks and remove displace and blur :P
"Being God isn't easy. If you do too much, people get dependent on you; and if you do nothing, they lose hope. You have to use a light touch [...]. When you do things right, people won't be sure you have done anything at all"
--Futurama
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:16 pm

Lenefir:

I would only bring back monks and sorcerors to the extent that I would make some of the existing classes look more like them. Leave enchanters in, but balance them more like sorcerors. Leave monks out, but give rangers and rogues some damn good hitting prowess.

I would definately get rid of blur. Displace I would leave but downgrade it heartily.

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:13 pm

Corth wrote:Lenefir:

I would only bring back monks and sorcerors to the extent that I would make some of the existing classes look more like them. Leave enchanters in, but balance them more like sorcerors. Leave monks out, but give rangers and rogues some damn good hitting prowess.

I would definately get rid of blur. Displace I would leave but downgrade it heartily.

Corth


Actually, if I were to suggest a change to enchanters at all, it would be to make them LESS offensive than they are. Yeah, I know, they're not very offensive as is... but Constriction is actually better than some of the shamans' best spells and I think that's just wrong, lol. Fact of the matter is, enchanters rock, the only thing they lack is some sort of healing. I've seen the likes of Lenefir in action and it's pretty amazing. So... balance them? Heh, they're already balanced. I think they're fine as is. Making them more akin to sorcerors is silly, so is merging some of the mage classes into the sorceror class.

Getting rid of blur is fine, or leaving it in is fine. *shrug* I think it's a pretty powerful spell, especially when combined with dragonscales. Downgrading displacement is fine, or leaving it as it already is is also fine.

I won't comment on Monks 'cause this is a mage thread and I know the guy who started it wouldn't want the thread hijacked! :lol:
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:09 pm

Birile wrote:
Actually, if I were to suggest a change to enchanters at all, it would be to make them LESS offensive than they are. Yeah, I know, they're not very offensive as is... but Constriction is actually better than some of the shamans' best spells and I think that's just wrong, lol. Fact of the matter is, enchanters rock, the only thing they lack is some sort of healing. I've seen the likes of Lenefir in action and it's pretty amazing. So... balance them? Heh, they're already balanced. I think they're fine as is. Making them more akin to sorcerors is silly, so is merging some of the mage classes into the sorceror class.

Getting rid of blur is fine, or leaving it in is fine. *shrug* I think it's a pretty powerful spell, especially when combined with dragonscales. Downgrading displacement is fine, or leaving it as it already is is also fine.

I won't comment on Monks 'cause this is a mage thread and I know the guy who started it wouldn't want the thread hijacked! :lol:


While you can compare the damage between constriction and spirit wrack... they are very close. You still can't really compare the two spells. Constriction is a nice spell, but spirit wrack is 90% of the time a much better spell and is designed near perfect for soloing. When a mob is stunned, it tends not to re-engage you flee out and come back in and chant a spell without getting hit or bashed.

I agree that enchanters could have their damage decreased further however, this would hurt their soloability more than anything else. Not exactly earth shattering compared to elementalist soloability.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:50 pm

Birile,

There is now doubt that enchanters are powerful. Whether they are fun to play, and whether they are good for the mud, is an entirely different question. I would agree that they need no upgrade on top of what they presently have. If you take away blur and dragonscales, however, some additional offense, particularly using enchantment effects appropriate for the class, could be easily justified.

Fact of the matter is that there has been a problem for a long time on this mud with hitting classes such as rangers being essentially useless in zone groups, and with tanking classes being nothing more than high hp meatshields. The best way to fix this problem, as far as i can tell, is to increase the offensive output of hitters, and give more defensive skills to tanks. The only way to do this without unbalancing the entire mud is to take away an appropriate amount of offensive and defensive skills and spells from other classes. That is why i have been proposing for some time that invokers, dragonscales, and blur be removed. I wouldn't worry about it actually happening. See xis's quote by shev.

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:14 pm

I'm pretty sure that the majority of players and Imms on this Mud agree that there is a serious discrepancy between melee damage v. magic damage here, and agree that something should be done to bring the two more into balance with each other... and I can definitely understand the argument for getting rid of blur. I'm not completely convinced that getting rid of dragonscales is altogether fair, or necessary, however. Nor do I think giving enchanters offensive damage as a tradeoff is all that necessary, either.

Nor do I believe getting rid of invokers is justified. I do think they need to be tweaked a little bit downwards (emphasis on the words "little bit" and NOT the word "downwards"), which is one of the reasons why I suggested taking away the procs that come along with several of their spells. Take away the procs and it makes other classes work a little harder to land that blind or that silence or that (insert bonus invoker proc here) that those classes don't have to continue trying to land once an invoker gets lucky and lands the proc--from spells that have high damage relative to other classes to begin with. At the same time, this isn't a huge downgrade to the class. Frankly, there's no need for invokers to have procs on their spells. They're a cut-and-dry damage spell class, there's no need to add frills to their amazing damage to make invokers an "interesting" class. They're not supposed to necessarily be "interesting" because their damage output is a large draw to begin with. "Interesting" is saved for--or, rather, should be saved for--other classes that aren't in the core warrior/cleric/enchanter/invoker cookiecutter mold. But taking away the class entirely doesn't seem necessary or warranted.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Thu Dec 09, 2004 10:03 pm

So basically, Birile, you would suggest that invokers spam off spells during battle. Period. The only thought they should put into the matter is whether to go area or single target. After making that decision they can mindlessly just spam off spells going from most damage to least damage (because no other factor besides damage applies). Doesn't sound very fun (not to mention interesting) does it? And this suggestion would modify a class which is almost universally regarded as the least challenging to play at the higher levels.

At the same time you have failed to discuss how melee damage can be upped without unbalancing the mud. If invokers continue to be the damage dealers of this mud, what should the melee classes be?

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:51 pm

Corth wrote:So basically, Birile, you would suggest that invokers spam off spells during battle. Period. The only thought they should put into the matter is whether to go area or single target. After making that decision they can mindlessly just spam off spells going from most damage to least damage (because no other factor besides damage applies). Doesn't sound very fun (not to mention interesting) does it? And this suggestion would modify a class which is almost universally regarded as the least challenging to play at the higher levels.
Corth


Two things you've said here, and I'd like to address them both.

First Point is about removing the invoker procs. I agree. You have a very good point.

Second Point is about invokers being regarded as the least challenging to play at higher levels. I dissagree. Invokers are the easiest CASTER class to play, but are most certainly NOT the easiest class to play on the mud out of them all. I wish people would stop saying it.

I could try to count the number of warrior and rogue bots I know, but I'd run out of fingers and toes. I don't know any invokers who can bot thru a zone. It's this repeateded statement about "Invokers being the easiest class on the mud" that's lead to the popular misconception that's leading many newly leveled invokers to think all they have to do is nuke. It's so bad, I'm actually in the process of writing a document about the different kinds of invokers (player skill wise) to address it.

Why? Because I'm tired of people thinking this is the easiest class that's just about casting damage spells, and as a result, seeing both evilrace AND goodie race invokers (I have one of both and zone with both mind you):
- healing mobs with spells, from not paying attention, or cuz they want to clear the slot by casting it instead of forgetting it
- not casting any spells of 6th level or below on globed mobs, thinking it doesn't do anything
- watching their spells fizzle underwater
- always being the last one done memming, instead of one of the first
- thinking they are the only damage, and not letting alt casters and melee grind out the worthless mobs (hello mr. banedead.)
- aborting offensive spells bc they started casting force missile on an awful mob
- not having their major nukes ready when a major mob walks in and spanks the group cuz they are 'tapped out'
- not having the god given sense to cast thunderblast on 3+ wraithform/giant size mobs with only one silencer in the group
- GETTING ZAPPED repeatedly
- not knowing that a hopping char who's spamming consent on you wants dispel magic
- who don't di/dm melee chars
- casting high level area spells on single mobs when lower level singles are just dandy
- not aborting area spells when the last mob died, and instead waiting for that failed qc spell to end just so they can be the last one to start meming, and then of course be the last one done memming again
- and most often just NOT READING the mud scroll and adapting to the situation

Now that I've got that out, I'd like to respond to a third point from one of you earlier posts.

Third Point
You'd like to have invokers removed. I dissagree with this and it's not because I play the class. I do not dissagree that they do too much damage. Removing them will solve nothing, bc then you'll just have some melee class that pops up and takes their place. Dawn of the Melee Invoker (you know.. Monks of the past). Instead, why not down ALL spell damage above certain circles to all Player (key word there, player) casters accross the board? This way, Invoker still has a roll as a damage caster, and his damage will still be proportionaly more then then others (securing his roll), but now it would be more in line with melee damage and not so grossly out of balance?
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
selerial
Sojourner
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:42 pm
Location: Allston, MA
Contact:

Postby selerial » Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:55 pm

I've always found the overall design of the mud to be just a tad on the silly side.

Consider: Ages ago (Soj2) I was a ~40 warrior, fairly well armored, big axe, etc, spellcasters to back me up. We're on the docked ship in HP, fighting the dude with the twisty bracelet. Looking at his desc, you don't see heavy weapons or heavy armor. I think I had around 4-500hps, and with just a couple crits I was dead (about 2-3 combat rounds). I believe I was even stone skinned. So, a naval officer, probably in leather at best, but most likely cloth, who happens to be a "higher level" than I am, can kill me with a couple clean blows through heavy plate and mail, but when I'm slashing him with my weapon, it probably takes about 1-200 slashes before he dies.

The point of this story is that PCs have low hps and low physical damage, where mobs have (extremely) high hps and (fairly) high damage capacities. Why? Because mobs are (usually) stupid and PCs are (usually) smart, and a smarter PC will be able to take down a dumb, but physically fat, mob.

How does this relate to a discussion about mages? Well, I think that the main thrust of posts such as Birile's is to attempt to suggest ways to "balance" the mud.. but I think that almost everything people talk about is always either things that make the players either more, or (more often) less, powerful. There is another facet to game balance, namely - the targets of us PCs - the mobs themselves. As far as suggestions to make mobs smarter, well.. that's something that I can't really offer much thought on. However, Corth's comments about the purpose of melee and his "removal of vokers" riff made me think about it from the other side.. what if there was some way to make the mobs a bit smarter and chop 90% of their health off? That'd still probably leave the average mob with 2k hps at higher levels, still much stronger than a PC..

After all, how healthy do you think you'd be if a fireball hit you squarely, if your very blood was turned to dirt, if your throat was being magically constricted? Mobs answer: few scratches, maybe. Oh, and punch punch.. ok one more punch, and the pc mage is dead.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Fri Dec 10, 2004 12:11 am

Sesexe.

Point well taken. Though most of the things you list that an invoker should think about while playing are very basic, its true that saying invokers simply spam out nukes is an over-simplification. On the other hand, invokers still are among the less challenging classes to play, overall, if not the least challenging. In making my point, I was addressing Birile's assertion that non-damage effects should be removed from invokers. I think if your going to keep them, the least you should do is make the class at least semi-interesting. On the other hand, removing invokers entirely sure would create a lot of possibilities in doling out damage dealing skills and spells to the remaining classes, right?

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Sonon
Sojourner
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: San Antonio,Texas
Contact:

Postby Sonon » Fri Dec 10, 2004 12:20 am

come on don't take out vokers til atleast i get to fifty i am not even thirty yet
-------------------------------------------------------

Alysia group-says 'Lilen immolates a terrified squirrel to a charred crisp with his devastating inferno!'

-------------------------------------------------------

Lilen group-says 'where are all da trolls i was promised'

Lilen has left the group.
Yarash
Sojourner
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Monterey, CA

Postby Yarash » Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:02 am

Birile wrote:They're not supposed to necessarily be "interesting"

I disagree. I think this game should be fun to play. Corth sums up my feelings on this in his post.

Don't make the class more boring, unplayable, or deleted. If magical damage is a problem, sesexe's idea of reducing it across the board should be implemented. This could be coded very easily too if done right.

- Mike
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:44 pm

Yarash wrote:
Birile wrote:They're not supposed to necessarily be "interesting"

I disagree. I think this game should be fun to play. Corth sums up my feelings on this in his post.

Don't make the class more boring, unplayable, or deleted. If magical damage is a problem, sesexe's idea of reducing it across the board should be implemented. This could be coded very easily too if done right.

- Mike


I'm not completely convinced that invokers need to have an "interesting" aspect to them along the lines of proc bonuses to their spells in order to be fun to play. Most invokers I've spoken to (or who have just piped up of their own volition) get highly excited that they dole out the sheer damage that they do--NOT that their damage spells also proc. When asked why someone rolled an invoker, the fact that some of their damage spells also proc is not generally one of the main reasons. While I'm sure the procs are fun, I don't see them as necessary and certainly not a deal-breaker in playing the class. There will still be scads of invokers around. Thus, I find it highly unlikely that someone would toss their 'voker character if procs were taken away. The fun for this class lies mainly in the damage dealt, not the procs that are added on top of said damage.

The same can be said about the other core classes. There are still a very large amount of warriors, there are still clerics, there are still enchanters--and they don't have near the variety of procs that an invoker has, nor do they have the sheer damage output--and those classes don't really complain about not having them, either.

Bonus procs are not a defining characteristic of the invoker class, nor are they essential to people wanting to play the class. However, they do make the game easier, and unnecessarily so.

As for suggestions to changing melee, Corth, as I mentioned before, this is a mage thread, why in hell would I discuss melee in great length? While you could argue that it would add to the discussion, it's not a necessary element to having a fruitful discussion on the mage class changes I suggested earlier.
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:19 pm

Corth wrote: removing invokers entirely sure would create a lot of possibilities in doling out damage dealing skills and spells to the remaining classes, right?


Yes it would. And equally true would be the amount of time and code needed to address all the remaining classes, because this sounds like not just tweaking existing spells, but needing to add more (so new code and balance considerations). That's a long fix. Don't you think? Where as just taking existing numbers and reducing them by the same percentage accross the board, would be a lot faster and easier, and equally as effective.


The reason I can't see pulling the class, is they serve a purpose, and cater to certain types of players. Invokers are like players who like to use rocket launchers and miniguns/chainguns in FPS games. How many FPS games would suck if there weren't super weapons/classes using super weapons, to play with? How many folks would have never finished say Halo if the only weapons they had were a pistol/magnum and needler? The problem with Invokers here isn't their role, it's their insane damage capabilities that's out of wack. They can pump out damage entirely too fast.

How fast?

A single Invoker has the ability to outdamage any single mob's healing ability in the game. Not many people realize this or are aware of it. The majority of the time evils zone, and I'm there, I'm almost always the only Invoker in the group. Not cuz other people don't have them to zone with, but because they aren't necessary. One skilled invoker is all any group needs right now. If things go to hell in a fight, all I need is a scaler and a healer (or just an elementalist with the right embodiments) and I can do runs on whatever is left until it's dead.

That's how pathetic the damage is right now. If doing say Imix, a group spanks, if I have an elementalist I can do solo runs on imix and kill him off (as long as he's within the condition where the code makes him heal himself). Even standing there casting full heal on himself, I'll outdamage him. In and out. One spell at a time. Making my quickchants. Med'n my spells back as fast as possible. As long as no melee classes go in and engage him to start casting areas, I can do 1 spell runs on him til dead. (I've done this a couple of times, so this is speaking directly from experience. It's also how I know I can solo-run the final DK vault fight too. I'll outdamage the dragon's healing on the golems).

That is what is wrong with invoker spell damage. The damage is too intense. One invoker should not be able to out damage the healing rate of any mob in the game. That's just silly. No class in the mud should have this luxury. It completely negates the reason to bring a group. Give me a scaler who knows how to blind, and a cleric, what else do I need?

Now if you nuke invoker damage, then the class becomes pointless, because their damage then isn't much more effective then other classes. They loose their role. They loose their purpose. But, if you reduce all spell damage above say (6th circle) to all caster classes, you keep the need/desire/role for invokers (instead of just AN invoker), while opening up the possibility for melee invoker-like classes at the same time.

See what I'm seeing?

EDIT: Also Corth, removing a class entirely from the game is about as receptive and controversial as a pwipe. Because in a lot of ways, that's what you're doing.
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:29 pm

Birile,

You cannot discuss changing any class without considering the effect it would have on other classes and balance as a whole.

There is a very compelling reason to link melee classes to invokers. They are all here to do damage. When they aren't balanced against each other, you end up having a bit of a problem. Rangers who are basically useless in groups. We've had this problem for a really long time.

I would further suggest that not only should the goal be to balance these classes and make them 'useful', but rather, we should also try to make them 'engaging' (see Gurns' thread). If anything, we should be adding more effects, and offseting this by lowering damage.

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:33 pm

Corth wrote:You cannot discuss changing any class without considering the effect it would have on other classes and balance as a whole.


Birs, he's right. Ya can't just inspect one aspect of the game without taking its effect on everything else into consideration. It's like dominoes (not the pizza~! ;))
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:39 pm

Sesexe wrote:
Corth wrote:You cannot discuss changing any class without considering the effect it would have on other classes and balance as a whole.


Birs, he's right. Ya can't just inspect one aspect of the game without taking its effect on everything else into consideration. It's like dominoes (not the pizza~! ;))


If you will take note, I said there's no need to discuss melee changes in great length. I'm fully aware that changes to mages affect the melee classes as well, and I also stated earlier that I agreed that the discrepancy between melee damage and magic damage needs to be addressed.

That being said, I would just love to hear reasoning as to why switching procs from invoker spells to illusionist/psi spells (as I suggested in my initial post) would greatly impact melee classes enough to warrant discussing them here. :lol:
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:02 pm

Birile wrote:The same can be said about the other core classes. There are still a very large amount of warriors, there are still clerics, there are still enchanters--and they don't have near the variety of procs that an invoker has, nor do they have the sheer damage output--and those classes don't really complain about not having them, either.

Bonus procs are not a defining characteristic of the invoker class, nor are they essential to people wanting to play the class. However, they do make the game easier, and unnecessarily so.


First Point, Every melee class in this game has more procs then invokers. Invokers have 5 procs: blind, silence person, slow, stun, and major para (I only list this one for completeness, because it's very rare I'm casting fell frost). Think of all the weapons out there that proc. That's a side effect besides just doing dice damage. Now take them all away. How many happy melee players do you have left? No more glaive procs either. How fun is your class now?

Second Point, Procs are not a defining characteristic of the class, this is true, but that doesn't mean they aren't a highlight of it that makes it interesting and fun by adding a bonus random aspects to the class. I derive pleasure from landing procs with invoker spells. They are so undependable, that when they actually do land, it reinforces my happiness with playing the class. Running around and doing insane damage on everything, is not what makes me happy about playing the class. It's the rare times I'm able to contribute BEYOND raw damage. It's the fact that an invoker's casting job is normally so easy, they can contribute to helping the group in many other ways, and give invoker players the freedom to read and pay attention to mud scroll, instead of being bored and oblivious.
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:32 pm

Sesexe wrote:First Point, Every melee class in this game has more procs then invokers. Invokers have 5 procs: blind, silence person, slow, stun, and major para (I only list this one for completeness, because it's very rare I'm casting fell frost). Think of all the weapons out there that proc. That's a side effect besides just doing dice damage. Now take them all away. How many happy melee players do you have left? No more glaive procs either. How fun is your class now?


:roll: If you're going to mention weapon procs, you seem to have forgotten the weapons an invoker can wield that have some pretty sweet procs... you know--for completeness' sake. *yawn* And, for the record, I loved my class before I got a new weapon and even before my class was overhauled to have a couple song procs. My class is _very_ fun, procs or no. :D

Sesexe wrote:Second Point, Procs are not a defining characteristic of the class, this is true, but that doesn't mean they aren't a highlight of it that makes it interesting and fun by adding a bonus random aspects to the class. I derive pleasure from landing procs with invoker spells. They are so undependable, that when they actually do land, it reinforces my happiness with playing the class. Running around and doing insane damage on everything, is not what makes me happy about playing the class. It's the rare times I'm able to contribute BEYOND raw damage. It's the fact that an invoker's casting job is normally so easy, they can contribute to helping the group in many other ways, and give invoker players the freedom to read and pay attention to mud scroll, instead of being bored and oblivious.


As for an Invoker's procs, a couple things: 1) Perhaps you didn't notice, but an Invoker's spells proc quite often. That they don't proc with every casting or even in every fight does not mean they don't proc often. And, too, procs by definition are supposed to be *gasp* undependable. Now, I suppose you could point out that a lot of melee weapons proc in just about each and every fight. That's true, but those weapons don't do near the damage that an invoker's spells do, and it takes a LOT of hits per fight to get melee weapons to proc a couple of times, if at all. 2) I would hardly call an Invoker's procs a "highlight" of the class--more like icing on the cake... with a cherry on top. I think you're being slightly overdramatic. Question: did you roll your invokers because of the procs invokers get? Another question: if you never had procs along with your invoker spells would you even miss them or even think to ask for them and give a viable reason to have them?

Compare an invoker's spell procs to the spell procs for the illusionist and psionicist classes--two classes whose skills are more based on manipulation and deceit and would seem to be able to cause a %chance to do X effect. Yet they don't have the proc power of an Invoker, NOR the damage output. Yes, of course, they have other abilities, but shifting procs like blind, silence, major para, etc. (btw, I've seen MANY invokers use fell frost a LOT) does not seem like such a detriment to invokers.
Yarash
Sojourner
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Monterey, CA

Postby Yarash » Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:31 pm

Birile wrote:I would hardly call an Invoker's procs a "highlight" of the class... Question: did you roll your invokers because of the procs invokers get? Another question: if you never had procs along with your invoker spells would you even miss them or even think to ask for them and give a viable reason to have them?

You make a compelling argument. Warriors mostly use rescue/bash, so headbutt is not really a highlight. Bards primarily use heal/haste so travel isn't really a highlight. Hrm, you could streamline every class this way.

- Mike
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:39 pm

Birile wrote: :roll: If you're going to mention weapon procs, you seem to have forgotten the weapons an invoker can wield


I'm not currently aware of many weapons an invoker can realisticly use to proc during zone battle. (I'd probably be using one right now if there was an one I could use realistically). The only thing I can think of are weapons that proc via command word (which I'm drawling a blank on atm, oh and the Airship Invoker staff), because weapons that proc on attacks.. wait, is that what you're thinking?


Birile wrote:As for an Invoker's procs, a couple things: 1) Perhaps you didn't notice, but an Invoker's spells proc quite often.


I've done smoke as an invoker for 25+ levels worth of exp. In that time, and combined with zones I was doing when not dong exp, have casted over 50,000 single target (invoker proc) spells probably to date. What I see is an approx average of every 6 casts of sandblast on a mob, I might silence, or blind it, and maybe 1/20 times both. (Going ONLY by successful qc spellcast times, cuz all these melee times would be DOUBLE if I failed qc) In melee terms, that's like going 18 rounds to land a sword proc that blinds or silences (my ebony usually procs 1/5 rounds), or 60 rounds to do a double proc both. Fell frost doing a major para or slow? Maybe 1/5 casts I'll slow, which in melee terms would be every 2-10 rounds (fell is 2 round cast with qc). Major para off a fell frost, lands about 1/10-15 casts (20-30 melee rounds).

I'm not talking about if the proc landed or not, I'm just talking in terms of the proc going off during a cast.

Was playing my warrior again last night, my proc weapons didn't appear to take so long to proc. In fact weapons like my gythka proc'd between every 2-5 rounds. All it seemed to take to make this happen was bumping up my hitroll to 30+ *shrug*


Birile wrote:That they don't proc with every casting or even in every fight does not mean they don't proc often. And, too, procs by definition are supposed to be *gasp* undependable.


Weapon procs in melee hands proc drastically more often when compared in ratio to invoker spell procs, let alone wielded weapon procs. I'm not being hypothetical here, I'm speaking directly from experience playing both.

Birile wrote:Now, I suppose you could point out that a lot of melee weapons proc in just about each and every fight. That's true, but those weapons don't do near the damage that an invoker's spells do, and it takes a LOT of hits per fight to get melee weapons to proc a couple of times, if at all.


Fights? (Ebony blind vs Sandblast blind) If a warrior doesn't proc blind with his ebony in an encounter that lasts long enough for an invoker to cast 4 sandstorms, there's something strange going on. I see warriors proc their blind so fast, they then switch out to wield different proc'n weapons in fights like that day in and day out.

The important thing is how many ROUNDS does it take to proc a weapon off. Can weapon procs have multiple procs in a round? Yes. Can Invoker spells. No. Can an invoker cast 1 spell every round that has a proc. No. You can't compare individual melee attack proc ratio to individual spell proc ratio's, unless spells are as quick as melee attacks, which they aren't. You are comparing things way out of context. The only way you could compare tic for tac is if I could cast as many spells in the a round as a melee class I was being compred to got in natural attacks.

Furthermore weapon procs are so much more frequent then invoker procs that this is exactly why so many warriors have aliases to swap out weapons as they land the procs during battle for example.

Birile wrote:2) I would hardly call an Invoker's procs a "highlight" of the class--more like icing on the cake... with a cherry on top. I think you're being slightly overdramatic.


Oh come on now, that's the same thing. Highlight, Icing, cherry, same thing.

Birile wrote:Question: did you roll your invokers because of the procs invokers get?

I roll and play invokers because they fit my style of play, and allow me to pay attention to events during comat. In essence, Invoker allows me to read the scroll and respond to what is going on, instead of spamming the same group command or glance aliases over and over. I like to watch the battle as a whole as it applies to everyone in the group, and the mobs, not just how the same few individuals are doing. I stay invoker because the procs make it interesting and enjoyable instead of static boring damage over and over.

Birile wrote:Another question: if you never had procs along with your invoker spells would you even miss them or even think to ask for them and give a viable reason to have them?

Yes I'd miss them. Would I have asked for them in the first place? With some of them, yes probably, because of what the spell does and it's description. Sandblast is described as something that sounds like it could blind or choke you. Fell frost sounds like it is something that could slow you down or freeze you totally.

But Birile. You know me. I'm big on that whole idea thinking outside the box thing. I'd rather have all the current procs from spells (except thunderblast, that's all it's useful for) taken from invokers, and have them given additional damage procs that only go off when combined with other invoker spells, which are even more damaging when cast in unison with other invokers. I'd like to see when mobs are under the influence of certain damage spell effects, that when they are combined with other damage spell effects, can cause additional damage proc effects. (Yes this means more damage from invokers, but remember, I aleady want all spell damage including invokers chopped).

Birile wrote:Compare an invoker's spell procs to the spell procs for the illusionist and psionicist classes--two classes whose skills are more based on manipulation and deceit and would seem to be able to cause a %chance to do X effect. Yet they don't have the proc power of an Invoker, NOR the damage output. Yes, of course, they have other abilities, but shifting procs like blind, silence, major para, etc. (btw, I've seen MANY invokers use fell frost a LOT) does not seem like such a detriment to invokers.


Sandblast blinds not because it's an illusion or fooling your mind. It blinds and chokes you bc tornado like winds are throwing sand in your face. Invokers invoke extreme element conditions sometimes, and these can cause side effects. You'll notice minute doesn't have a side effect. Force missile doesn't. Bigby's doesn't. Swarm doesn't. Inferno doesn't. Ball lightning doesn't. Cloud doesn't. Etc. It's just a few that make sense to do this.

Go ahead and give illusionists and psionics some proc effects, even the same ones invokers have if the skills that cause these make sense. I got nothing against that. I just don't understand why you are raging so hard against taking them from invokers when you haven't indicated you've played as one yourself. *shrug* (It's your amount of motivation I'm questioning towards this, not really your ideas or suggestions. I just don't get it.)
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
Vahok
Sojourner
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 6:01 am
Location: guelph,ontario,canada

Postby Vahok » Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:24 am

Inferno shatters coldshield Sesexe.

And comparing procs on a warrior's weapon and invoker damage isn't quite fair. Most warrior weapons that proc fairly regularly are mainly the damage ones. The only utility one that procs often is the ebony, but the fact it is only blind (which how many different classes have?) and it is a very short blind at that. Plus, ebony isn't the strongest of melee weapons, but the weapon swapping is common of course. I mean, basically, I'd trade the proc on every weapon I own for a quarter of invoker damage :)

Personally, I kinda agree with most people here. The procs on invoker spells isn't the problem, the damage is. I don't really think illusionists need any additional effects to their spells, they seem pretty balanced to me. Psi...shrug, don't know much about them really so no comment except I like sushi...

Carry on!
Meatshield
Sonon
Sojourner
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: San Antonio,Texas
Contact:

Postby Sonon » Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:56 am

why do you all rag on vokers? we are happy the way we are leave us alone rag on something else like rangers or something but leave vokers alone.
-------------------------------------------------------

Alysia group-says 'Lilen immolates a terrified squirrel to a charred crisp with his devastating inferno!'

-------------------------------------------------------

Lilen group-says 'where are all da trolls i was promised'

Lilen has left the group.
Vena
Sojourner
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jun 22, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Flagstaff, AZ, USA
Contact:

Postby Vena » Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:17 pm

is the gap between top end melee and spells still so disparate?

Khanjari raised the bar quite a bit, and redicing of arrows has brought archery damage up.... EQ changes have pushed damrolls up 10 or so...
Yarash
Sojourner
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Monterey, CA

Postby Yarash » Sun Dec 12, 2004 12:12 am

Vahok wrote:And comparing procs on a warrior's weapon and invoker damage isn't quite fair. Most warrior weapons that proc fairly regularly are mainly the damage ones. The only utility one that procs often is the ebony, but the fact it is only blind (which how many different classes have?) and it is a very short blind at that.

The comparison is between procs, not spell damage. Warriors have more procs available to them through weapons. Many of these procs are damage, but many do other things. The number of non-damage procs available to warriors through weapons outnumbers those used by invokers.

The argument that invoker procs are overpowered is weak, and here's why.

blind - Useful but low duration. A common ability. Also seems to take longer to proc than ebony or bard glaive.
slow - Sort of useful.
major paralysis - Very useful but mob must be slowed first, by then fell frosts are usually all used up. Also the damage of the spell is low so it is not cast as much. Not an uncommon ability (gythka, poisons, earthblood, pris, etc).
silence - Very useful, but the mob must be blinded first. With the low duration of invoker blind this makes it harder to land. Also, it becomes a danger when fighting dragons, and the spell is one of invokers two main damage spells which often requires it to be cast in dragon fights.
remove coldshield - Useful in zoning environments.

I guess that's something most non-invokers don't understand. For silence and major paralysis to work, the mob must be blind first (for silence) or slowed first (for major paralysis). With the low duration for invoker procs, you'd better land BOTH procs right away. If I don't have areas memmed, I'll have 4 sandblasts and 3 fell frosts. It would not be uncommon for blind and slow to land, but having blind and silence or slow and major paralysis both land is uncommon.

Also, in most zoning environments, areas are considered better than targetted spells. Most invoker spell procs are off of single target spells. If you look at the area procs of other mages, it is clear that those availabel to invokers are not as powerful.

- Mike
Sesexe
Sojourner
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:13 am

Postby Sesexe » Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:30 am

Well said Yarash.
Asup group-says 'who needs sex ed when you got sesexe.'

Targsk group-says 'sexedse'

mount dragon

You climb on and ride Tocx'enth'orix, the elder black dragon.

You have learned something new about mount!
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:27 pm

Yarash wrote:The comparison is between procs, not spell damage. Warriors have more procs available to them through weapons. Many of these procs are damage, but many do other things. The number of non-damage procs available to warriors through weapons outnumbers those used by invokers.


Actually, the comparison is between melee damage and procs taken as a whole with invoker damage and procs taken as a whole.

Yarash wrote:The argument that invoker procs are overpowered is weak


Who argued that?
kitze
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 6:01 am

Postby kitze » Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:48 pm

i think invoker procs should be left in, they aren't all that common and do add some flavor to the most boring class in the game. they're pretty much a zone only class, which is sort of lame but necessary given some of the newer zones out there. the procs just give them slight happiness when exping :p

i don't think illusionists need new procs at all, and definitely tendril damage needs to be downed. illusionists are strong enough as is.

fire embody is already _significantly_ stronger than the rest of the embodiments, i don't think there's a need to nerf the non-quest ones. ice layer does suck though, i agree. make it an area effect!
Yarash
Sojourner
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Monterey, CA

Postby Yarash » Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:52 am

Birile wrote:Actually, the comparison is between melee damage and...

Then this thread has been a waste of our time.

- Mike
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:49 pm

Yarash wrote:
Birile wrote:Actually, the comparison is between melee damage and...

Then this thread has been a waste of our time.

- Mike


No.

If you read closely, you would see that the reason I argued that invoker procs should be taken out is that their magic damage is so high in comparison to other classes. Sesexe argued that weapons procced so much more than invoker spell procs did without taking into account the amount of damage that invoker spells do along with the procs. It's folly to say that invoker procs should be left in simply by using the argument that weapons proc more during fights without taking into account the disparity in the damage dealt as well.

A waste of time to compare the two, then? Hardly.

Return to “T2 Ideas Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests