Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
ReplyLike "Spirit Strike" this preps for one stronger swing but instead of AS it focuses power in the elemental weighting. I'm not sure how mechanics work for designing spells behind the scenes but would imagine something like crit weighting or super flare. This is like the Super Flares idea I posted about a while ago but might be a better way to do it or a completely alternate spell. If it WERE to stack new AS instead of new 'ES' (like "Elemental Strength") then it could be like Jesh's old blade which was based on level.
Spell Store has a function but if that slot were more useful this way, then the way it could be implemented is with Spell Ranks to increase power before stacking lore.
>Spell Store has a function but if that slot were more useful this way, then the way it could be implemented is with Spell Ranks to increase power before stacking lore.
Spell Store was replaced last year with Chromatic Circle.
https://gswiki.play.net/Chromatic_Circle_(502)
And it doesn't sound like the complaints from Wizards is that they aren't doing enough damage/strong enough crits...
...it's that they can only hit a (potentially) lethal area about half the time, due to bolt/ball spells' randomness.
(i.e. They are currently able to (for example) easily generate a rank7-9 crit; being able to guarantee a rank9 crit is only so useful. The problem lies in how likely they are to the the hand or arm or leg [6 places that even a rank9 won't kill it], instead of the eyes or head or neck or chest or abs or back [7 places where a rank9--or even a rank7--quite well could kill it]. The hits are hard enough. They're just in the wrong place(s).)
...it's that they can only hit a (potentially) lethal area about half the time, due to bolt/ball spells' randomness.
(i.e. They are currently able to (for example) easily generate a rank7-9 crit; being able to guarantee a rank9 crit is only so useful. The problem lies in how likely they are to the the hand or arm or leg [6 places that even a rank9 won't kill it], instead of the eyes or head or neck or chest or abs or back [7 places where a rank9--or even a rank7--quite well could kill it]. The hits are hard enough. They're just in the wrong place(s).)
The inability to aim causes a good chance of even a huge endroll not killing. If a high level wizard doesn't kill his/her first shot, there is too high of a chance of dying by the critter. If I could ensure that I was not going to die in the 10 seconds it took to cast three spells, I wouldn't mind it taking 3 spells to kill a critter...
>>If a high level wizard doesn't kill his/her first shot, there is too high of a chance of dying by the critter. If I could ensure that I was not going to die in the 10 seconds it took to cast three spells, I wouldn't mind it taking 3 spells to kill a critter...
A genuine curiosity question, not prejudging.
Seems like those two sentences (two comments, if you will) would indicate a position that death shouldn't be an outcome (0% chance). Might be considered an extreme, but that is how I'm choosing to recast the 'ensure that I was not going to die' portion of that comment.
Is that really fair / fun?
Doug
A genuine curiosity question, not prejudging.
Seems like those two sentences (two comments, if you will) would indicate a position that death shouldn't be an outcome (0% chance). Might be considered an extreme, but that is how I'm choosing to recast the 'ensure that I was not going to die' portion of that comment.
Is that really fair / fun?
Doug
Yeah, I hear (read?) you, Robert.
And, it's even more complicated. Questions about 'survival rate' one-on-one are different than in-mob, or exploring new areas, etc., etc. And I personally enjoy working my characters to a minimum risk footprint. I don't pursue 'zero chance', though - but that's just me. I have my reasons, but don't want to poison the well as it were.
At the top level, 'no death' being fun is what I'm interested in hearing about. Ambushers are an interesting facet, for sure.
Doug
And, it's even more complicated. Questions about 'survival rate' one-on-one are different than in-mob, or exploring new areas, etc., etc. And I personally enjoy working my characters to a minimum risk footprint. I don't pursue 'zero chance', though - but that's just me. I have my reasons, but don't want to poison the well as it were.
At the top level, 'no death' being fun is what I'm interested in hearing about. Ambushers are an interesting facet, for sure.
Doug
Besides bandits, very few critters in the game hide and ambush. If this was a 1-in-10 critter in every hunting ground, people might rethink the lethality of ambushing. Mechanics that PCs can use but critters can't (or don't) are the ones that players tend to exploit first, in any game. Lots of spells work this way. In some games, PC spells aren't used by critters, so they all work this way. The crit system in GS4 is good but it's not well balanced. I can think of a few games that implement a "critical hit" system that applies only to PCs. The rationale is that dying too often isn't fun, even when (as is the case here) it's a staple part of the in-game economy for PCs to die so that empaths can heal them and clerics can raise them. Instead, plinking away at PCs until they have to retreat and recover is preferred. That isn't so much the case here.
Doesn't solve the problem, either way. While all PCs can train to hide and ambush, it's only feasible for a few professions. The others should have a way to gradually improve their powers to the point where they can be just as consistently deadly. Fleurs has been championing this for a long time, and while she has a valid point I also suspect it is a difficult point to fix. The concept of automatic kill seems like a tragedy in a game like this. (More people would recognize it as tragic if they got auto-killed more often -- and I'm not talking about lucky crits here, but instant death.) I'd also observe that spells, especially the non-bolting kind, are at least as deadly when cast at PCs by critters as when cast by PCs at critters, if you remove the benefits of gear, spells, stance, signs, etc. Critters are generally coded to attack first. All this creates sort of a paradox, which is currently solved by critters spawning with deadly spells prepared to cast (or maneuvers, or whatever). What is a better solution?
Doesn't solve the problem, either way. While all PCs can train to hide and ambush, it's only feasible for a few professions. The others should have a way to gradually improve their powers to the point where they can be just as consistently deadly. Fleurs has been championing this for a long time, and while she has a valid point I also suspect it is a difficult point to fix. The concept of automatic kill seems like a tragedy in a game like this. (More people would recognize it as tragic if they got auto-killed more often -- and I'm not talking about lucky crits here, but instant death.) I'd also observe that spells, especially the non-bolting kind, are at least as deadly when cast at PCs by critters as when cast by PCs at critters, if you remove the benefits of gear, spells, stance, signs, etc. Critters are generally coded to attack first. All this creates sort of a paradox, which is currently solved by critters spawning with deadly spells prepared to cast (or maneuvers, or whatever). What is a better solution?
I think there are a couple points there I'm not fully in alignment with.
Perhaps most importantly, I don't believe I've ever read anything from Fleurs that suggests PCs need to be equal to NPCs, in terms of capabilities. All of the points I've seen seem to be focused on parity between professions from her perspective. And quite frankly, if the ratio of PC deaths approached that of NPC deaths (parity), that might be just a bit much. Not sure even I, fringe though I may appear sometimes, could support that!
All of which gets us back to - do we have an expectation of adventuring into the lands while experiencing zero possibility of demise. There may be reasons between professions to support death (clerics everywhere, rejoice). But from the individual gamer perspective?
I'll even lay out this question - if the game didn't have the challenge of demise, what would be left?
Doug
Perhaps most importantly, I don't believe I've ever read anything from Fleurs that suggests PCs need to be equal to NPCs, in terms of capabilities. All of the points I've seen seem to be focused on parity between professions from her perspective. And quite frankly, if the ratio of PC deaths approached that of NPC deaths (parity), that might be just a bit much. Not sure even I, fringe though I may appear sometimes, could support that!
All of which gets us back to - do we have an expectation of adventuring into the lands while experiencing zero possibility of demise. There may be reasons between professions to support death (clerics everywhere, rejoice). But from the individual gamer perspective?
I'll even lay out this question - if the game didn't have the challenge of demise, what would be left?
Doug
>> All of which gets us back to - do we have an expectation of adventuring into the lands while experiencing zero possibility of demise.
The risk of death is needed, however low it might be. I generally find the risk for most of my characters to be on the lighter side but for increased risk I'd also want to see increased reward!
Along those lines... the effects of death have been softened up so much that even death isn't even much of a penalty any more (except when you are a member of the frequent death club or something).
-- Robert
A powerful whirlpool is suddenly overtaken by a windy vortex!
The risk of death is needed, however low it might be. I generally find the risk for most of my characters to be on the lighter side but for increased risk I'd also want to see increased reward!
Along those lines... the effects of death have been softened up so much that even death isn't even much of a penalty any more (except when you are a member of the frequent death club or something).
-- Robert
A powerful whirlpool is suddenly overtaken by a windy vortex!
Doug is correct that I've never suggested that PCs need to be equal to NPCs, ever. In fact, the entire discussion around the ELR shortcomings and the secret nerfs that resulted from it makes it all the more important that development considerations take creature abilities into account. It's especially appreciated that for the first time, on all levels, the implementation of Mage Armor and the restriction of abilities to creatures was done properly.
All my points have been focused on offensive parity between professions at the post-cap level. I don't believe this is a hopeless cause either, as every other profession can achieve that offensive lethality on a single target basis that I'm hoping wizards will get again one day.
I don't have an expectation of experiencing zero possibility of demise. I hate to die, but I hate not being able to reliably and instantly kill even more. The offensive part of the game is where I find the fun. Survival, in my view, is where post-cap goals lie. I certainly didn't continue to try to gain experience or buy toys at pay events so I could continue to struggle along as if everything was the same as if I were freshly capped.
When people say the game has become too easy for them, I suggest powering down and creating your own challenges rather than making the game frustrating and tedious for those who don't min-max. Nobody's forcing anyone to layer on every spell in the book at mass spell events, stack on enhancives, or use SimuCoin store items. By trying to balance the new norm to require uber gear, every outside spell in the book, and being tens of millions of experience post-cap, all that's doing is regressing to GS3 levels of item/outside spell dependence with none of the uber offensive fun associated with GS3.
Tl, dr: Hunting grounds and development do not require nerfing everything and resetting the clock to make things "fun". I feel that the Scatter is ideally balanced for challenge and fun by making survival, largely post-cap abilities, a key aspect. If only it didn't take ten light years to travel there if one is not in Voln.
As for what's left, what isn't fun about repetitive capped hunting is not the ease of hunting or the ability to hunt safely and efficiently. It's the fact that loot continues to be nerfed and nerfed (see enhancive changes) until it's not even worth the bother to venture out in most instances vs. just doing the lazy bandits on the road. The treasure system is the thing that needs the biggest overhaul, not constantly tearing down professions and gear to try to misguidedly reset the clock, which just makes paying customers feel they've wasted their time and money.
All my points have been focused on offensive parity between professions at the post-cap level. I don't believe this is a hopeless cause either, as every other profession can achieve that offensive lethality on a single target basis that I'm hoping wizards will get again one day.
I don't have an expectation of experiencing zero possibility of demise. I hate to die, but I hate not being able to reliably and instantly kill even more. The offensive part of the game is where I find the fun. Survival, in my view, is where post-cap goals lie. I certainly didn't continue to try to gain experience or buy toys at pay events so I could continue to struggle along as if everything was the same as if I were freshly capped.
When people say the game has become too easy for them, I suggest powering down and creating your own challenges rather than making the game frustrating and tedious for those who don't min-max. Nobody's forcing anyone to layer on every spell in the book at mass spell events, stack on enhancives, or use SimuCoin store items. By trying to balance the new norm to require uber gear, every outside spell in the book, and being tens of millions of experience post-cap, all that's doing is regressing to GS3 levels of item/outside spell dependence with none of the uber offensive fun associated with GS3.
Tl, dr: Hunting grounds and development do not require nerfing everything and resetting the clock to make things "fun". I feel that the Scatter is ideally balanced for challenge and fun by making survival, largely post-cap abilities, a key aspect. If only it didn't take ten light years to travel there if one is not in Voln.
As for what's left, what isn't fun about repetitive capped hunting is not the ease of hunting or the ability to hunt safely and efficiently. It's the fact that loot continues to be nerfed and nerfed (see enhancive changes) until it's not even worth the bother to venture out in most instances vs. just doing the lazy bandits on the road. The treasure system is the thing that needs the biggest overhaul, not constantly tearing down professions and gear to try to misguidedly reset the clock, which just makes paying customers feel they've wasted their time and money.
>A genuine curiosity question, not prejudging.
>Seems like those two sentences (two comments, if you will) would indicate a position that death shouldn't be an outcome (0% chance). Might be considered an extreme, but that is how I'm choosing to recast the 'ensure that I was not going to die' portion of that comment.
>Is that really fair / fun?
I think you're reading too much into their post and finding an argument that they're not trying to make.
I'm pretty sure they're referring to a disproportionally higher chance of dying that their character is facing if they don't kill on the first cast, as opposed to "I should never die!"
>When people say the game has become too easy for them, I suggest powering down and creating your own challenges rather than making the game frustrating and tedious for those who don't min-max. Nobody's forcing anyone to layer on every spell in the book at mass spell events, stack on enhancives, or use SimuCoin store items. By trying to balance the new norm to require uber gear, every outside spell in the book, and being tens of millions of experience post-cap, all that's doing is regressing to GS3 levels of item/outside spell dependence with none of the uber offensive fun associated with GS3.
[Doom - E1M1]
You're in the middle of playing the 1993 revolutionary first person shooter, Doom! There are enemies all over the place trying to kill you!
Also here: shotgun guy, imp, shotgun guy, shotgun guy, imp
>IDDQD
>IDKFA
>IDSPISPOPD
"Doom is such an easy game, this game presents no challenge at all. It's like I don't ever take damage or run out of ammo! I can just run through walls even, this game is a joke!"
~ Methais
>Seems like those two sentences (two comments, if you will) would indicate a position that death shouldn't be an outcome (0% chance). Might be considered an extreme, but that is how I'm choosing to recast the 'ensure that I was not going to die' portion of that comment.
>Is that really fair / fun?
I think you're reading too much into their post and finding an argument that they're not trying to make.
I'm pretty sure they're referring to a disproportionally higher chance of dying that their character is facing if they don't kill on the first cast, as opposed to "I should never die!"
>When people say the game has become too easy for them, I suggest powering down and creating your own challenges rather than making the game frustrating and tedious for those who don't min-max. Nobody's forcing anyone to layer on every spell in the book at mass spell events, stack on enhancives, or use SimuCoin store items. By trying to balance the new norm to require uber gear, every outside spell in the book, and being tens of millions of experience post-cap, all that's doing is regressing to GS3 levels of item/outside spell dependence with none of the uber offensive fun associated with GS3.
[Doom - E1M1]
You're in the middle of playing the 1993 revolutionary first person shooter, Doom! There are enemies all over the place trying to kill you!
Also here: shotgun guy, imp, shotgun guy, shotgun guy, imp
>IDDQD
>IDKFA
>IDSPISPOPD
"Doom is such an easy game, this game presents no challenge at all. It's like I don't ever take damage or run out of ammo! I can just run through walls even, this game is a joke!"
~ Methais
The PC vs. NPC discussion was about risks: why critters spawn with killer spells and maneuvers already prepared, why PCs have to do likewise, and other things that we players sometimes take for granted like ambushing mechanics. Parity was just for illustration, not a suggestion.
As far as rewards and tedium, it's possible the road to cap IS the reward. The risk vs. reward ratio is best somewhere around level 15-25, then generally increases throughout the game until it peaks at cap: very high risk, very low reward, and certainly repetitive. I've always felt that was a rather clever design, and intentional. Once you get to cap, the game allows you to continue to advance post-cap, but doesn't encourage you onward. Rather, it encourages you to try it again a different way. It'd be nice if there was something else you could do with the character, though. There have been a number of pretty good suggestions over the years for ways to burn down experience for added powers, dual classing or prestige classes, etc. once you get to cap.
As far as rewards and tedium, it's possible the road to cap IS the reward. The risk vs. reward ratio is best somewhere around level 15-25, then generally increases throughout the game until it peaks at cap: very high risk, very low reward, and certainly repetitive. I've always felt that was a rather clever design, and intentional. Once you get to cap, the game allows you to continue to advance post-cap, but doesn't encourage you onward. Rather, it encourages you to try it again a different way. It'd be nice if there was something else you could do with the character, though. There have been a number of pretty good suggestions over the years for ways to burn down experience for added powers, dual classing or prestige classes, etc. once you get to cap.
>>I think you're reading too much into their post and finding an argument
Naaww, that's not my thing.
>>As far as rewards and tedium, it's possible the road to cap IS the reward. [. . .] There have been a number of pretty good suggestions over the years for ways to burn down experience for added powers, dual classing or prestige classes, etc. once you get to cap.
Ok, Pup needs to move over, we have a new mayor in town.
Doug
Naaww, that's not my thing.
>>As far as rewards and tedium, it's possible the road to cap IS the reward. [. . .] There have been a number of pretty good suggestions over the years for ways to burn down experience for added powers, dual classing or prestige classes, etc. once you get to cap.
Ok, Pup needs to move over, we have a new mayor in town.
Doug
>>Seems like those two sentences (two comments, if you will) would indicate a position that death shouldn't be an outcome (0% chance). Might be considered an extreme, but that is how I'm choosing to recast the 'ensure that I was not going to die' portion of that comment.
Well, My point is that we mages have such a squishy nature, we are glass cannons. one hit tends to stun me long enough to kill me. Maneuver and special critter attacks are pretty darn common lat game. When i hunted, i mostly hunted in the Minotaur area. There gore maneuvers were nearly a death sentence, if it was allowed to gore. I'm guessing a 60-70% rate of the time, if they got one off, i died. So my goal was to stun/knockdown the Minotaur before it ever got the chance. With rapid fire, it was not an issue, i killed them left and right. now, I died about 1/4 hunts. That is not an acceptable level to me, so I stopped hunting them. Actually, I stopped hunting.
The new 520 armor padding should make a difference for you. Also consider having puncture resistance added to your armor by a warrior. Between those two things I would expect that you find your survival rate goes up quite a bit.
-- Robert aka Faulkil
A powerful whirlpool is suddenly overtaken by a windy vortex!
-- Robert aka Faulkil
A powerful whirlpool is suddenly overtaken by a windy vortex!
>> now, I died about 1/4 hunts.
Yep, I'd be right there with you - 25% (or even feeling like it was 25%) would be too high for me, as well. I don't know if you were already doing what Robert advised. If not, I'd give that a try.
My usual advice is to join up with others, too. It's kind of a 'share the love' approach.
Thanks for putting up the thought - I would say 1 in 50 is about my personal tolerance level and when I don't meet that, I usually take action.
Doug
Yep, I'd be right there with you - 25% (or even feeling like it was 25%) would be too high for me, as well. I don't know if you were already doing what Robert advised. If not, I'd give that a try.
My usual advice is to join up with others, too. It's kind of a 'share the love' approach.
Thanks for putting up the thought - I would say 1 in 50 is about my personal tolerance level and when I don't meet that, I usually take action.
Doug
>Well, My point is that we mages have such a squishy nature, we are glass cannons. one hit tends to stun me long enough to kill me. Maneuver and special critter attacks are pretty darn common lat game. When i hunted, i mostly hunted in the Minotaur area. There gore maneuvers were nearly a death sentence, if it was allowed to gore. I'm guessing a 60-70% rate of the time, if they got one off, i died. So my goal was to stun/knockdown the Minotaur before it ever got the chance. With rapid fire, it was not an issue, i killed them left and right. now, I died about 1/4 hunts. That is not an acceptable level to me, so I stopped hunting them. Actually, I stopped hunting.
Why aren't you using Rapid Fire (off cooldown at least) now if that made it cake before?
~ Methais
Why aren't you using Rapid Fire (off cooldown at least) now if that made it cake before?
~ Methais
