1) If I can damage you down as a summoner, no amount of spamming purify is going to save you.
2) If I'm a damage summoner, my capacity to dish out afflictions is shit. Purify can stalemate my offense.
3) Affliction summoners don't transition into damage well. They already don't get enough 'taint' so purify would just deny that even more so.
4) People will spam purify all day, erry day, because they're bad. There's nothing tactical about this. dsl dsl bulwark purify bulwark purify
You should really play the class and/or look up the word linear. Summoner is not linear. If you play summoner correctly it's not linear. I can cash in my taint for extra effects at 20. Every time I hit 20. When I hit 60 I have access to 6 new skills which apply to most of my spells. The strategy is knowing when to use intensify, duplicate, strengthen, blast, hasten, and instant. Throwing in some bonehead skill that is "spammable taint removable" directly controverts this in such a fashion that's pretty one sided. You know how to avoid taint generation? AB TATTOOS SHIELD. AB CHIVALRY/BRUTALITY BULWARK, HELP SECT RITUALS PROTECTIVE (AURA), ARTIFACT LIST LYRE. Someone beat you to this circa 1998.
When is the next classlead round starting, anyways? Probably after they release that new area? I have a couple ideas I would like to get out as reports for the consideration of those who don't really follow the forums.
Anyways, like I was saying in a ring earlier, Imperian PvP has long been a "linear" game, but there is nothing that mechanically requires this to be a linear game. Randomness in games can be good, so long as it's under partial control by the player.
This is something I've realized after playing XCom for the last six months or longer, a really popular game where the RNG can permanently kill your guy from full health, but people still enjoy playing it because they have partial control over the RNG. Decision making is at the heart of any kind of strategy and randomness keeps things from being predictable.
XCOM is also not against other players. RNG would dissuade people from fighting when someone can 1-shot you with RNG. Something you were complaining about 2-3 weeks ago?
1) If I can damage you down as a summoner, no amount of spamming purify is going to save you.
2) If I'm a damage summoner, my capacity to dish out afflictions is shit. Purify can stalemate my offense.
3) Affliction summoners don't transition into damage well. They already don't get enough 'taint' so purify would just deny that even more so.
4) People will spam purify all day, erry day, because they're bad. There's nothing tactical about this. dsl dsl bulwark purify bulwark purify
You should really play the class and/or look up the word linear. Summoner is not linear. If you play summoner correctly it's not linear. I can cash in my taint for extra effects at 20. Every time I hit 20. When I hit 60 I have access to 6 new skills which apply to most of my spells. The strategy is knowing when to use intensify, duplicate, strengthen, blast, hasten, and instant. Throwing in some bonehead skill that is "spammable taint removable" directly controverts this in such a fashion that's pretty one sided. You know how to avoid taint generation? AB TATTOOS SHIELD. AB CHIVALRY/BRUTALITY BULWARK, HELP SECT RITUALS PROTECTIVE (AURA), ARTIFACT LIST LYRE. Someone beat you to this circa 1998.
Please forgive my triple posting guys, I just noticed that Ahkan edited in a real response, so I will take this because I think that some kind of controlled randomness might be a good thing to implement here.
1) I hope people realize that this is a silly criticism, because once you have the formula for intensified noctu damage spells that kill someone a single time, then the summoner class is already like this. Yes, if someone can kill you with straight damage attacks, that's an issue. That is basically the issue here. After you have theorycrafted the right formula that will kill someone, you just use that formula again and they are guaranteed to die. This means that most classes have no reason to ever fight a summoner who has their number down. I think that's a problem.
2) I don't know about this, extra afflictions are pretty potent. It's true that an affliction summoner would gain more from a mechanic like purify, but then affliction summoners need it more too, whereas damage summoners are too linear and to put it simply, they may just be too good.
3) One of the great things about the summoner class is that once you have taint, you can use it to give afflictions as well, for example with an instant and intensified equilibrium spell, followed by a tarot combination, so the threat of damage isn't even strictly necessary to give someone a reason to purify off taint. Also, something could just be added that improves an affliction noctu's ability to do damage, provided that a chance at actually sticking sensitivity and justice doesn't prove to be enough.
4) It would be great if people spammed purify 3x in a row. That would be 3-6 mental afflictions added which would actually constitute an affliction threat, even to Garrynbot, if someone followed it up with afflictions.
Now, something that angry combat nerd types never seem to accept, is that this entire idea is open to change. Mage crystals let you replenish the crystal at an increasing cost depending on how often you do it (that entire class is great, since you have to choose between curing afflictions and curing elemental affinity, and can power yourself up at a cost through the crystal. If I didn't like people on demonic I would be playing a mage, probably), if purify spam were to be seen as an issue, then it could potentially work in a similar way, where the more you use the ability within a given time frame the greater the cost becomes. This isn't an idea that has to be implemented exactly as I've presented it. I don't think though that anyone is going to be spamming themselves with 1-2 afflictions per use with impunity. The fact that people can shield is not relevant because everyone can shield and this ruins the offense of almost every class in 1v1, that's not a bad thing, shield means you have stopped attacking yourself, so you are also ruining your own offense.
Finally, the whole shield concept further illustrates the point I've decided to make. When someone shields, it ruins their offense, not just the opponent's offense. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but "shield spam" has more to do with the linear nature of the game than it does with people being scared of fighting at all, since if they are scared of attacking to begin with, they probably won't be fighting. If people wanted to get rid of shield or something, which would be silly, that would be one thing, but the existence of shield is never a reason to not implement something new because shield effects almost everything in the same manner.
This is what I want to see for monks right now: Give me a skill with a ~4s channel that lets me heal my limbs. Now Brishi can't run away to heal without my getting a chance to heal up too. And now I can run away and actually heal as opposed to having to evade for a minute to keep the counter rolling.
I also, possibly, want to see changes made to back damage and the triple-BBT. Right now it's way way way too easy to do.
@Iriaen : Also, XCOM is a single player game. Imperian is not. That makes the two of them incredibly different. It's one thing to lose a character in to the AI in a single-player game. It is a completely different thing to lose fights to somebody like Kliko or Menoch because the RNG swings his way. That kind of thing actually discourages 1v1 because people go "Oh, that's not a demonstration of skill. You just throw attacks at each other until somebody gets lucky."
The skilled players lose their desire to 1v1, because it's no longer reflective of their skill. They'll win more than they lose, but people will mark that up to RNG and luck, and their losses will piss them off because they'll know that the RNG screwed them out of a win.
The only people this encourages to 1v1 are the mediocre-to-bad players who think that they're better than they actually are. Kliko, Ressnik, etc. These people are encouraged because they're used to losing all the time; this means that every loss is, well, par for the course. They'll like the new 1v1 system because they're used to losing all the time and this will up their win rate and every win the RNG gives them over somebody who used to beat them bloody becomes a vindication of their high opinion of themselves and a validation of their non-existant skill.
There is a reason we have systematically stripped the RNG loss conditions out of Imperian combat over the past decade or so. We do not need to go add them back in.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Maybe I will go through this more later... one more thing... consider that currently the 1-2 afflictions given by most noctu spells are completely useless, but with this kind of mechanic, they would actually integrate perfectly towards a segway to an affliction strategy since they are using up curing time without actually pressuring it.
1) I hope people realize that this is a silly criticism, because once you have the formula for intensified noctu damage spells that kill someone a single time, then the summoner class is already like this. Yes, if someone can kill you with straight damage attacks, that's an issue. That is basically the issue here. After you have theorycrafted the right formula that will kill someone, you just use that formula again and they are guaranteed to die. This means that most classes have no reason to ever fight a summoner who has their number down. I think that's a problem.
This is how every class in Imperian works. It is how they have always worked.
Please go learn how Summoner works and how fighting in general works before you come here with sweeping revamp ideas designed to solve non-existent problems.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
This is what I want to see for monks right now: Give me a skill with a ~4s channel that lets me heal my limbs. Now Brishi can't run away to heal without my getting a chance to heal up too. And now I can run away and actually heal as opposed to having to evade for a minute to keep the counter rolling.
I also, possibly, want to see changes made to back damage and the triple-BBT. Right now it's way way way too easy to do.
I wouldn't hold my breath. It's either not enough complaints (haha) or something something selective hearing. Also Iriaen, try and enlighten me as Clever. (No, not the <80% combo) (or Fast, w/e). You'll realize there are far bigger problems than damage summoner being boring.
Anyways, like I was saying in a ring earlier, Imperian PvP has long been a "linear" game, but there is nothing that mechanically requires this to be a linear game. Randomness in games can be good, so long as it's under partial control by the player.
This is something I've realized after playing XCom for the last six months or longer, a really popular game where the RNG can permanently kill your guy from full health, but people still enjoy playing it because they have partial control over the RNG. Decision making is at the heart of any kind of strategy and randomness keeps things from being predictable.
RNG for the sake of 'non-linearity' is one of the many reasons Lusternia was a mess. Without reliability in your class kit, your fights basically last until somebody 'outskills' another person by getting a lucky string of RNG favorability. No thanks. I am more comfortable losing because I was actually outplayed, rather than outrolled at a dice table.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
Even if there was an issue with taint (there's not in my opinion), your solution wouldn't work. As Ahkan's already said, bad people would hold this down and laugh at your damage summoners inaffective attempts to capitalise off of afflictions from it, and everyone else would never use it because you can get the exact same benefit from holding down your shield macro for free.
Wish they'd go back to taint being shared, that way everyone had to fight with strategy and not roll summoner x5. As well, like to see quicken among other skills weakened with too much taint generation, forcing them to use it up instead of spamming one/two skill(s). And finally, summoner doesn't need a way to apply sip malus.
You'd end up with someone getting blown up really fast (taint being generated fast) or idiots throwing away the work that someone else did (see: having any monk/pred/ranger that isn't Ozreas or Septus hitting your target).
Or, it's like letting Priests share fanatism on a target rather than generating their own.
Or, it's like having non-coordinating Defilers screwing over other Defilers' roots/seeds.
In the last 2 instances, it's usually best to kill the teammates that fall in that category before attempting to kill the enemy.
1. Asking for taint to be shared is asking for it to become like your resonance (which you hate). You want resonance un-shared. Push harder. Lionas/other peeps asked for taint to be un-shared and got it.
2. Quicken got changed, Math. We're still spamming one skill (it almost doesn't matter which) because the differentiation between skills is almost zero, that is, choosing the most damage or choosing the most potent affliction means choosing the same spell. Unless the spells are radically changed to reflect conditional adaption to different circumstances, this will remain the same. We will still spam spell A. Or spell B. Or spell C.
3. I don't understand your argument for sip malus.
At this point, the only real problem with Summoner is that infused Noctu doesn't generate enough taint and that certain Noctu spells don't do any damage at all.
Wish they'd go back to taint being shared, that way everyone had to fight with strategy and not roll summoner x5. As well, like to see quicken among other skills weakened with too much taint generation, forcing them to use it up instead of spamming one/two skill(s). And finally, summoner doesn't need a way to apply sip malus.
Summoner is in a pretty decent place now, as far as damage classes go. Their burst takes longer, and if you're going to invest in something like incinerate you do so at the exclusion of other alternatives.
That said, a damage class with damage artifacts is still going to wreck you if you allow them to attack with no attempt at pacing. This is true of every single 'damage class' in the game, including yours.
RNG for the sake of 'non-linearity' is one of the many reasons Lusternia was a mess. Without reliability in your class kit, your fights basically last until somebody 'outskills' another person by getting a lucky string of RNG favorability. No thanks. I am more comfortable losing because I was actually outplayed, rather than outrolled at a dice table.
All randomness is not the same. Regarding Lusternia, their randomness was things like "you can't control which affliction you are passively giving" and then they combined this with moon tarot and a race with level 3 resistances or something, so of course it was pretty bad at first. This is more an example of how Eris didn't know what he was doing and not that all random factors in a game are bad.
I wouldn't hold my breath. It's either not enough complaints (haha) or something something selective hearing.
You are being somewhat unfair here. Limb damage is an incredibly difficult thing to fix. Substantial changes to limb damage would include virtual revamps of the Warden, Predator, and Monk classes, and moderate-to-large changes made to all three Knight subclasses, Outriders, and Defilers. I have yet to see you make any substantive suggestion as to how you would go about fixing the problem, and you are almost certainly a more knowledgeable combatant than anybody in the administration. The classlead system exists so that we, the more experienced combatants, can provide feedback on the combat system from the perspective of people who use it constantly, and we have managed to provide absolutely zero solutions to the limb damage problem aside from "revamp every class that uses limb damage to make it not use limb damage" which would easily be the largest change the game has ever seen.
Furthermore... it honestly isn't a major deal. It bugs the hell out of the people who care about 1v1, and it's of moderate importance to other serious fighters, yes. Yet I'd argue that the majority of the game doesn't even know that there's a problem with limb damage because they just don't care about it or fight enough outside of teams to be exposed to it. They can't work on just combat fixes, because those people need attention, too.
That aside, I am confident that I could get a classlead report like my suggestion approved.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Wish they'd go back to taint being shared, that way everyone had to fight with strategy and not roll summoner x5. As well, like to see quicken among other skills weakened with too much taint generation, forcing them to use it up instead of spamming one/two skill(s). And finally, summoner doesn't need a way to apply sip malus.
This kind of thing is how I know you don't think these things through very well. Iluv and Lionas didn't like shared taint because they were planning fancy affliction bullshit and the like. Let me tell you how my shared taint combat doctrine would work.
Ario and Ladaia and I would mash out high taint throughput attacks while spending zero taint.
Eldreth would hammer you flat with a barrage of L3 artifact-boosted taint-infused attacks, because we would be generating taint on you faster than he could burn it. Every single attack he made would be taint-infused and you would freaking melt. Inside of a week you'd be posting about how shared taint was overpowered and that it needed to be tracked individually.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
1. Have no resonance gain on Yoth when Ta is used with the combo, since it does not affect it. Example: hum ta yoth target shaite target gives 2 resonance, when it should only give 1 due to only affecting shaite. Chi and We would stay the same.
2. Raise the resonance ceiling to 25-30.
3. Make resonance separate for each bard attacking the same target, allowing the bottleneck to be widened greatly so three attacks at the target doesn't cause full resonance in 1-3.seconds.
My view in taint was stupid and barely comparable. I do apologize about that. It was merely one of the skills I could relate to that used a collective pool between players.
I'm unsure on the resonance ceiling request, but I actually did not know that Yoth-Ta counted towards resonance penalty despite giving no benefit. That sounds more like a bug than an intended decision of design. Have you asked @Garryn about it?
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
I'm unsure on the resonance ceiling request, but I actually did not know that Yoth-Ta counted towards resonance penalty despite giving no benefit. That sounds more like a bug than an intended decision of design. Have you asked @Garryn about it?
I bugged it yestetday. if I don't hear anything in a few days, I'll be messaging Garryn.
Hoping that it can apply to daemos and kiyan as well, since they are also unaffected by Ta.
Comments
You should really play the class and/or look up the word linear. Summoner is not linear. If you play summoner correctly it's not linear. I can cash in my taint for extra effects at 20. Every time I hit 20. When I hit 60 I have access to 6 new skills which apply to most of my spells. The strategy is knowing when to use intensify, duplicate, strengthen, blast, hasten, and instant. Throwing in some bonehead skill that is "spammable taint removable" directly controverts this in such a fashion that's pretty one sided. You know how to avoid taint generation? AB TATTOOS SHIELD. AB CHIVALRY/BRUTALITY BULWARK, HELP SECT RITUALS PROTECTIVE (AURA), ARTIFACT LIST LYRE. Someone beat you to this circa 1998.
This is what I want to see for monks right now: Give me a skill with a ~4s channel that lets me heal my limbs. Now Brishi can't run away to heal without my getting a chance to heal up too. And now I can run away and actually heal as opposed to having to evade for a minute to keep the counter rolling.
I also, possibly, want to see changes made to back damage and the triple-BBT. Right now it's way way way too easy to do.
@Iriaen :
Also, XCOM is a single player game. Imperian is not. That makes the two of them incredibly different. It's one thing to lose a character in to the AI in a single-player game. It is a completely different thing to lose fights to somebody like Kliko or Menoch because the RNG swings his way. That kind of thing actually discourages 1v1 because people go "Oh, that's not a demonstration of skill. You just throw attacks at each other until somebody gets lucky."
The skilled players lose their desire to 1v1, because it's no longer reflective of their skill. They'll win more than they lose, but people will mark that up to RNG and luck, and their losses will piss them off because they'll know that the RNG screwed them out of a win.
The only people this encourages to 1v1 are the mediocre-to-bad players who think that they're better than they actually are. Kliko, Ressnik, etc. These people are encouraged because they're used to losing all the time; this means that every loss is, well, par for the course. They'll like the new 1v1 system because they're used to losing all the time and this will up their win rate and every win the RNG gives them over somebody who used to beat them bloody becomes a vindication of their high opinion of themselves and a validation of their non-existant skill.
There is a reason we have systematically stripped the RNG loss conditions out of Imperian combat over the past decade or so. We do not need to go add them back in.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
This is how every class in Imperian works. It is how they have always worked.
Please go learn how Summoner works and how fighting in general works before you come here with sweeping revamp ideas designed to solve non-existent problems.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
This kind of thing is how I know you don't think these things through very well. Iluv and Lionas didn't like shared taint because they were planning fancy affliction bullshit and the like. Let me tell you how my shared taint combat doctrine would work.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
1. Have no resonance gain on Yoth when Ta is used with the combo, since it does not affect it. Example: hum ta yoth target shaite target gives 2 resonance, when it should only give 1 due to only affecting shaite. Chi and We would stay the same.
2. Raise the resonance ceiling to 25-30.
3. Make resonance separate for each bard attacking the same target, allowing the bottleneck to be widened greatly so three attacks at the target doesn't cause full resonance in 1-3.seconds.
My view in taint was stupid and barely comparable. I do apologize about that. It was merely one of the skills I could relate to that used a collective pool between players.
Hoping that it can apply to daemos and kiyan as well, since they are also unaffected by Ta.