blitzcraig wrote:I'm mostly referring to damage being reduced by enemy dex in pvm as it is in pvp... and I'll briefly explain why - I've been allowed to have a lot of input on the stats of several monsters (and currently working on a few more) and here's what I run in to... no matter what stats I look at, mage is always the best against any monster type... for example - blitzbee or pharaoh spider are good for sword, but bad for everybody else... except mage is best against them - - death is best for archer... except for mage - - many are best for grinding with dwarf... except for mage is still best (see the problem here?) there is no way to limit a mage's power against monsters right now. if damage from flow spell was reduced by dex, suddenly the whole pvm game becomes much, much more balanced
Rather than reworking everything to go against mages, how about we just introduce some monters with magic resistance. Such as like some could be the 10% and harder ones like 40%.
blitzcraig wrote:I'm mostly referring to damage being reduced by enemy dex in pvm as it is in pvp... and I'll briefly explain why - I've been allowed to have a lot of input on the stats of several monsters (and currently working on a few more) and here's what I run in to... no matter what stats I look at, mage is always the best against any monster type... for example - blitzbee or pharaoh spider are good for sword, but bad for everybody else... except mage is best against them - - death is best for archer... except for mage - - many are best for grinding with dwarf... except for mage is still best (see the problem here?) there is no way to limit a mage's power against monsters right now. if damage from flow spell was reduced by dex, suddenly the whole pvm game becomes much, much more balanced
Rather than reworking everything to go against mages, how about we just introduce some monters with magic resistance. Such as like some could be the 10% and harder ones like 40%.
I think that is a really good idea, and maybe better than dex. Because the other problem I would see is developers just using high-dex thinking "I want to make this harder for mages." but I've demonstrated in several other posts how a monster can literally go from impossible to equal match just on Dex.
I think people are overlooking that the damage is divided b/w monsters in range as well. so 2x monster = 1/2 damage already. as long as its 1 v 1 sure...you drop the hammer relatively quick. I've seen this problem in another game as well, someone min-max, plus use a race (we have multiples) that got bonus for spells, and once they were at the higher levels they were uber-strong - way stronger than other classes of higher level. Magic is tough to balance w/o some real foresight in the combat system and code, or you can always be hurting lower mages, or having death-machines at higher level.
yeah, I (and at least a couple others) had tried pushing for a straight Magic resistance factor on each enemy at one point also - - the nice thing is that you could tailor each one individually, and really make some nice variety. the down side is that the monsters with 0 resistance still give too much advantage to mages... so to balance you would have to really make some resistant ones very tough. overall, I still prefer this idea too, but kinda gave up on it.. maybe we should add it back into the mix of suggestions /requests
Strange discussion ...at start everyone has right to choice a character , mage, archer,swardman, ogre and dwarf.... should thing about what are you choising then
Hello wrote:Strange discussion ...at start everyone has right to choice a character , mage, archer,swardman, ogre and dwarf.... should thing about what are you choising then
not realy because its about lv300+ mages.
and 1000+
u can choose a mage at start but if u havent lots of money you never reach that.
Hello wrote:Strange discussion ...at start everyone has right to choice a character , mage, archer,swardman, ogre and dwarf.... should thing about what are you choising then
my problem with this is that if we don't strive for balance, everybody would simply be a mage... and that's boring :p
Whether you use mage for PvM or PvP, playing mage has never been a piece of cake, from social, tactical, and technical point of view! Socially you are isolated; technically, you need a smooth net connection and a good device; tactically, a mage does not win pvp just because it is a mage, it's the experienced player who wins.
However, I do not intend to deny the fact that mages are over-powered, it just depend upon the player in part.
Am with you
Mostly of mages who people tells overpowered they plays game years(experience)
Already saw big lvl mages dieing for archers just because they new
dinoponte2 wrote:Am with you
Mostly of mages who people tells overpowered they plays game years(experience)
Already saw big lvl mages dieing for archers just because they new
I must agree, it seems mage is chosen most often at high levels is because experienced players know how to use them and there slight advantage if you know how to use them. Otherwise I remember not so long ago archers were #1, seems to switch around, but there is always going to be strife between those who deem each class unequal when all have there advantages and downfall. Mage if used right can deal good dmg, but at same time, around any monsters or a smart archer we die. Then why not nerf archers? Since if played right is better than mage and even a crappy archer over powers any melee char. Clearly OP.
If any 1 char is nerferd, all must be revamped, because simply massively nerfing a misunderstood charter does not do just to the fact that then, archers (who is already OP) will then be even more OP themselves.
