-
~~@Xavis:~~
> Oh, and Jazz, I can't believe you forgot the most important spell in any Necromancer's resume. CORPSE EXPLOSION!@#
Now that one Vermonard suggested but I thought it might be too grossed. Then again….you know what would be better is being able to booby-trap corpses.
-
I think the balance issues between necros and wizards have been grossly overstated. I do support a reworking of necromancer to make them more death focused, but I can't agree with much of what's been suggested. The balance implications of almost any of those suggestions being imp'd would be…disastrous. If you can't say something nice, say nothing....*silence*
-
Change the kill spell back to how it used to be. :) Oh, and how about making lore a global skill where you can use it to look at items your level or lower, and use identify to lore items above your level.
-
How would that be disastrous? All the spells I came up with are not that far off from the current ones Wizards have right now. All I did was add a Necro taste and made a few differences. Currently Wizards have at least 2 spells that should be Remort Archmage spells because they are too powerful those are Afterburn and Starflare. And yes I have used those spells and seen them in action. They also control all the gate and teleport spells as well as most of the room effect spells.
I didn't set what I suggested in stone I would like to see it mulled over and something come out of this. These are only a start. Look at what wizards now have and you will see what is missing for the other mage classes. I would suggest you do as I have an make a alt Necro and see what I'm talking about here. Right now when I play my wizard even though they are small they are cleaning up. That is not right.
I don't think it's grossly overstated in the least in fact I think it's understated. Just 6 Necro spells compared to 22 Wizard? I don't think that shows a balance do you?
-
I also think wizards should lose starflare and afterburner and archmages should get it :P
I would think Archmages would be the battle mages of all the offensive spell casting classes.
-
I either don't know what exorcise does, or don't know the point of it. And Syn, that explanation of Turn Undead didn't help (me, at least) at all.
-
A couple of your responses to my post didn't seem to fit. Since I am completely inept, I will try to quote these as best I can.
>Ertai wrote:
>I like Siphon. Might need to make it do a lot more damage than it >heals the necro, however, because you can charm a level 120 >mob and never have to regen hp
>I have never been able to charm a level 120 mob. If there is a >level limit for charming then there is no problem here. This is more >an idea for a Necro to be able to keep their hp/mana up durning >a fight.
I have a mort that could charm level 105 mobs from level 105 and let me tell you, they have a LOT of hp to siphon away
>Ertai wrote:
>Petrify looks alright, but it should probably cost a moonstone. 2 >rounds of spell free combat would give anyone time to do >SERIOUS damage.
>Please note Web does NOT require a moonstone. This spell is a >total vs to web. I figured it would have to be tweeked but >remember requiring a moonstone and not the same for Web >defeats the purpose totally. Also the web spell goes for more >rounds than I said here.
How does 2 rounds of no casting even compare with however long it takes you to dispel before you can flee? I can survive a fight without having to flee (as long as it is a close fight) whereas in the same fight, if I had 2 rounds that I was incapacitated I would be destroyed. Think of it in player aspects since this would rarely be used on mobs. Have you ever fought a player that was close to your level/skill level where you have gone for 2 whole rounds without casting any spells? Only in instances where circle would be more helpful and there was no sense of urgency.
I think that a couple of these spells (with more restrictions) would not be detremental to the balance, but again, I have very little knowledge about either class besides what is documented. However, more than that would just cause more problems (and some of these suggestions would put one class over the top even if they were the only ones imp'd)
eRT
-
Shadow Walk - I say limit it to the same area you are in, or drain the movement of the necromancer to 1\. Maybe require a moonstone to go between areas.
Tomb Lock & Siphon- I agree, those are a bit much.
Wane - sounds like something ice storm should do (or does).
–----------
Ok, here are more idea for necros:
Soul drain - the necromancer strips the soul from a mob corpse, giving the necro a shield of ethereal energy. With each drain, the shield strengthens, upto the level of the necromancer. The duration of the spell affect should be proportional to the necro's level. Maybe allow this in restricted PK situations, possibly adding one minute to the dead player's death timer.
As an alternative, this could be used to strengthen the existing "shield" spell to a certain degree higher than the caster's level (not the spell affect's level since someone 3x your level could have put shield on you).
Shadow Veil - A flee technique that operates like a flash "momentary darkness" that conceals the direction the necro fled and hides them from "where" for atmost a tick. Makes them (Hidden) for that time as well and doesn't wear off if they move, although anyone with "detect hidden" can see them. Can only be done during combat. All these affects are not guaranteed either. If they recall/gohome/gohall, these affects are canceled immediately.
Feign - yes, remember that? Why not allow necros to feign as any mobs in the area, provided they've been in the area long enough.
-
@Ertai:
> A couple of your responses to my post didn't seem to fit. Since I am completely inept, I will try to quote these as best I can.
>
> >Ertai wrote:
>
> I have a mort that could charm level 105 mobs from level 105 and let me tell you, they have a LOT of hp to siphon away
>
> –---------------
>
> Well the best I have done charm wise is a level 90 mob. Dont' know why it is really. Confusion here I think I'm talking "Animate Dead" - Charm here not "Charm Person" spell that's different and is currently with all Mage classes. Also it's limited to undead only and I would not hav it go over level 90 mobs anyway. Does that help?
>
> Wtih Animate Dead if you try to charm and animate a corps over level 80 it will tell you it's too hard for your skill level. I can animate all mobs except for the mapdemon on level 1 POA. When I look at the group none of them go over level 70\. We're only talking 20 more levels here not the whole range.
>
> ------------------
>
> >Ertai wrote:
>
> >Petrify looks alright, but it should probably cost a moonstone. 2 >rounds of spell free combat would give anyone time to do >SERIOUS damage.
>
> >Please note Web does NOT require a moonstone. This spell is a >total vs to web. I figured it would have to be tweeked but >remember requiring a moonstone and not the same for Web >defeats the purpose totally. Also the web spell goes for more >rounds than I said here.
>
> >Have you ever fought a player that was close to your level/skill level where you have gone for 2 whole rounds without casting any spells?
>
> --------------------
>
> All the time when I get nailed. Most of the time they fix it so I can't caste a damn thing for well over 2 rounds. So been there done that hate it. Still I was just trying to make it not "Same as Web" peg a different spell to it. The idea was something to vs web.
>
> ------------------
>
> I think that a couple of these spells (with more restrictions) would not be detremental to the balance, but again, I have very little knowledge about either class besides what is documented. However, more than that would just cause more problems (and some of these suggestions would put one class over the top even if they were the only ones imp'd)
>
> -----------------------
>
> One Class is already over the top that is Wizard. Please look over what they have it is already over powering. When I started as a Necro there was a balance. I pretty much flipped a coin over having Engery Drain or Channel. That was pretty much the difference at the time between Necro and Wizard but now the gap has grown.
>
> Then many of the spells were moved around and Wizards had a ton added. There was talk of coming up with new spells for Necro but it didn't happen instead more was added to Wizards.
>
> There was talk about the Necro Kill spell vs Slit throat and in the end the spell was made less affective. Really Ertai please look over the Wizards and the Necro spells and talk to those of us who are both. There is a big difference and inbalance. In fact look how many players are Necro compared to Wizards. I only know of a few who are Necro right now.
-
I'm still up for adding timers to spells instead of reagants to control the balance issue. For example.
Everyone was complaining that you can easily spam heal twice a round. Then they made the casting time twice as long. Now everyone bitches that it takes too long to cast (which it does imo :P). If spells had recovery timers on them, You could cast heal as fast as you could before, but not as often as before. lemme try to do a diagram here…
Legend: R=Round *=casting time "=downtime H=Heal @=spell completion -=time in between rounds.
..R1-------------------R2-------------------R3
...H****@''''''''''''''''''''H*****@'''''''''''''''''
This solves the spam issue and the length issue as well.
-
Very tricky, Xavis… subtle but different. I like this idea from a mortal standpoint because it does keep people from spamming heal, but allows them to have a chance at attacks within each round. Not sure how it would be coded, but I like it
eRT
-
The heal cast time is just fine as is, it was an excellent change. It's nonsense to have the most potent healing spell also have a short casting time. PvP is best when there is a rhythm to it. Frantic casting due to super short cast times only disrupts this rhythm and encourages spamming. With Xavis' suggestion both people would be doing the same thing every round, casting heal and then using an offensive spell/skill. Do we really want to create a system that encourages this? I don't think many people would find it fun, trying to keep up with that pace. I thought the revamp of pk was to make it more appealing, as well as more balanced.
-
I guess I was under the impression that you couldn't use another skill/spell but it would give you a chance to get in your standard attacks. I don't believe we should be able to heal and circle in the same round, but I liked the idea when you could heal, finish the spell, and sit for the rest of the round (disabilitated aside from standard attacks)
Maybe this is exactly what you're talking about, Inimical…?
eRT
-
on the issue of a spell then circle. I dont think you should be able to circle directly after a dispel either, especially the way dispel is. Dispel should get some kind of lag added to it as well, until the sanctuary issue is fixed, imo.
-
Well hey, that's the beauty of the system Spunky. You can put the recharge time as long as need to compensate for balancing purposes. Heal can still be casted at the quick speed, but it could take you two rounds of combat to recharge it so you can cast again.
And another example I can use to fortify this idea is the kill spell. If the kill spell was revert to it's original strength (cast it when target has no sanc = death, no questions asked) but lengthened the recharge so you could hypothetically only use the spell once per pk battle would be bloody awesome.
-
What I'm trying to come by is with a recharge system we can strengthen spells to a level of awesome usefulness, but also restrict them in a way that we don't become **dependant** on them. I.E. Blind, Dispel, Slow.
-
You can still fit heal between rounds, but it's not so quick casting that you can do it twice. I must be missing the point or something, because what everyone seems to want is in fact how it is. Not spammable, still usable, I don't see the problem. Let's all take a minute to reflect upon the words of the eminent Thoreau: simplify, simplify, simplify. Complex systems become exponentially more difficult to balance with each new component.
-
I really don't see any simple way to deal with balance issues with spells. As of right now, attack spells are nearly useless in a PvP situation. You also have to factor in that this is a text based game. Unlike the MMORPGs where you can factor in distance, objects in the way and all the bells and whistles, we have to compensate using other means necessary.
If we just lengthen the casting time so that it spans over one round and you lose 4 or 5 potential hits, rarely will someone use it. If we shorten the time for casting, people will begin spamming the shizzy out of the spell and it'll probably end up with the damage nerfed to hell making it useless again.
The words of Thoreau: simplify, simplify, simplify. I recall when they catorgorized all things on this earth as (correct me if I'm wrong) Animal, Innanimate and Green. Nice and simple eh? But what about the insects shaped like leaves? What about the plants that eat insects?
What I'm trying to get at is simplicity isn't always the best solution.
-
What I don't understand is why do Warlords get almost as many spells as the remort mage and cleric classes. They're a fighter class. They shouldn't get spells!!
-
A few people have suggested to me an idea i like concerning skills. I've talked with Inimical a little bit about this : have skill and spell proficiency groups which boost your proficiency in the skills and spells in that group. so for exampel there would be 6 groups per class, and out of those you could choose 2 of them.
This would encourage diversity amongst characters a great deal I think, as people could choose to specialize in certain skills and spells. There is also a lot of opporotunity to screw things up, so we are going to think about really damn well before we actually implement anything. Just thought I'd give you a sneak peek at the future. We're also going to remove skills and spells from people who shouldn't have them, probably not next game update but the update after that; also, the dispel magic and sanctuary issue will also be resolved, possibly next reboot.
