Berston vs Ivesianna

[Unknown Criminal]

Anything 'auto' should have a toggle, what was once perceived as an incredible bonus can get you killed vs some classes these days.

[Ulmusdorn]

Im fairly certain this is high on the agenda to be looked at for a possible change.

 

 

[f0xx]

21 hours ago, Unknown Criminal said:

Anything 'auto' should have a toggle, what wasn't once perceived as an incredible bonus can get you killed vs some classes these days.

It has a toggle. 

It goes auto, for a certain period of time, only after you use it.

If you are fighting one enemy, and there is a chance a BLM might engage you, then once again, do not toggle it.

Next we will have Nexus people wanting "Call Void" to bypass spellkill and snakespeed.

A gladiator has 2 options to counter the prediction - either do not use melee, or make the blademaster predict something else.

A blademaster already takes a huge risk by predicting dirt, exposing himself to being bashed. It's a fair trade IMO.

[edit] Also, you can't ask for balance changes because there is a chance you might fight multiple enemies.

If you fight a warrior and there is a chance to get blackjacked, then you have to poison yourself if you want to avoid it. You don't ask for a toggle on the poison once you've already gulped the brew.

[Unknown Criminal]

I didnt say 'that skill' didnt have a toggle, I said 'anything auto' should have one...

 

[Anonymous]

Call Void already bypasses snakespeed and spellkill, what are you talking about.

Can you name any other Trusted cabal skill that not only is countered by blademasters but results in twin counters potentially every round?

The whole RP behind melee is that you are such a proficient fighter that you can use moves when your opponent doesn't see it coming, hence the dirt kicks, disarms, groin kicks etc...

It is a bit counter intuitive that blademasters can predict and counter something they aren't supposed to see coming.

And to suggest that a gladiator shouldn't use melee if a blademaster is online is just silly. That is a staple buff for them that gets destroyed by an interaction that probably wasn't even considered when blademasters were created.

I don't think it is a lot to ask that a gladiator can decide when they do or do not melee. Casters can cancel spells they don't want, they can also choose when and which spells to cast at any time. This is ONE quazi broken interaction that is being addressed rightfully. You say just dont use it but again that is a terrible solution IMO.

-Berston

Anonymous poster hash: a71d5...7f7

[Anonymous]

If a blademaster predicts trip when fighting a slith, should the slith just log off or RP cutting his tail off? How does that interaction work?

-Berston

Anonymous poster hash: a71d5...7f7

[f0xx]

39 minutes ago, Anonymous said:

If a blademaster predicts trip when fighting a slith, should the slith just log off or RP cutting his tail off? How does that interaction work?

-Berston

Predict used to intercept slith trip before, but this has been changed. The difference here is that a slith can not stop the autotrip, while a WM can decide not to use melee.

 

49 minutes ago, Anonymous said:

You say just dont use it but again that is a terrible solution IMO.

It is not. This is like fighting a destruction PSI. You can decide to fly and risk taking the extra damage from singularity, or you can decide to not fly, and risk being triplocked by a third party.

And lastly, lets not try to justify a balance change with RP. We can all come up with different RP reasons of why something should, or should not happen, RP wise. This is merely a matter of balance. Making melee togle-able will be a hit on BLMs and a buff on Gladiators vs them. Is this needed? BLMs have been getting nerf after nerf to the point where there's hardly anyone playing them.

That being siad, I think gladiator Leader should have his melee able to bypass predict. Just because the Glad L skill sucks, compared to what other cabals get, plus it will make sense - the L skill will basically improve the two T skills.

[aaa]

Make melee a toggle but you dont regen with it on. It's an extremely strong skill with basically no down side besides being predicted, which you want to change.

Spear form is also an option if you need to blind.

 

[Ulmusdorn]

1 hour ago, f0xx said:

It is not. This is like fighting a destruction PSI. You can decide to fly and risk taking the extra damage from singularity, or you can decide to not fly, and risk being triplocked by a third party

False. There is a 'land' command even if you are flying. Thus it is toggleable. 

[Ulmusdorn]

25 minutes ago, Wade said:

Make melee a toggle but you dont regen with it on. It's an extremely strong skill with basically no down side besides being predicted, which you want to change.

Spear form is also an option if you need to blind.

 

Regen is already difficult on a WM glad due to dropping outta stance. 

 

Just fight on water and use a spear ffs. 

[f0xx]

51 minutes ago, Ulmusdorn said:

False. There is a 'land' command even if you are flying. Thus it is toggleable. 

Completely forgot about that, it's quite recent.

Well then, if that's so, then perhaps melee should be toggleable too, to keep things uniform?

[English lad]

I think making Melee Toggleable is a good fix.

Yes it means Blademasters don't get the easy predicts - but the Gladiator misses out on more than just one skill by toggling it off.

Also given that Glads tend to be Mana Hungry, they aren't going to be toggling it on and off at random, as it will be difficult to maintain mana for other things.

[Fridge]

The only two parties affected by this change would be gladiators and blademasters. Is this match up completely imbalanced at the moment? Is one side winning each battle by a significant margin? If not, then there probably doesn't need to be a change.

[Lexi]

I think it's a great thing if even minor combat changes can be enacted if they make combat more fair and balanced. While each individual change may seem insignificant, the cumulative effect over time should not be overlooked in making combat more engaging. Basically, if the criteria for change becomes 'is one side winning each battle by a signicant margin?', the game will start to stagnate.

[English lad]

6 hours ago, Lexi said:

I think it's a great thing if even minor combat changes can be enacted if they make combat more fair and balanced. While each individual change may seem insignificant, the cumulative effect over time should not be overlooked in making combat more engaging. Basically, if the criteria for change becomes 'is one side winning each battle by a signicant margin?', the game will start to stagnate.

Precisely - if something is badly balanced, or has an unexpected outcome that is away from design, it should be changed.  Of course Imp time is limited, so stuff goes on a list and gets worked on it when it can - but not changing broken things because 'eh not effecting many people' is the wrong approach, and is the slope that leads Muds into stagnation and eventual loss of players.