More variety in offensive mage armors?


	Home \| Login \| Register \| Help \| Play

More variety in offensive mage armors?

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest] >> AdventureQuest General Discussion >> More variety in offensive mage armors?

Forum Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

6/5/2021 15:41:09

Zennistrad
Member

As someone who's primarily an FO mage main, one thing that's been bothering me a lot lately with regards to my current character setup is the lack of variety with regards to available options for offensive mages. There are certainly a lot of armors available that can be used effectively by mages, even more so if you invest into CHA for the odd Bard of War release, but there's one particular thing that I've noticed that somewhat bothers me.

Outside of the Bloodmage Armors and the Vampire subrace armors, there are exceptionally few armors in existence that are meant exclusively for mages. What I mean is, armors that have skills which primarily use MP as their resource, rather than SP.

This strikes me as fairly odd, considering the ability to have an expansive MP pool — one that typically regenerates every two battles, unlike SP — is one of the primary advantages that mages have over non-INT builds. Outside of the now-defunct spellcaster lean, very few armors seem built to take advantage of this.

Now, I'm not asking for more armors that are powerful enough the Bloodmages (thought I suspect the Necromancer revamp and upcoming Archmage revamp might be), but I do think it would be interesting to have more offensive armors that are specifically meant to make use of MP for their effects. As it stands, most mage armors are entirely focused on either boosting spell damage or hitting your foe with powerful skills, and little else outside of that. Offensive armors with more varied and interesting effects, such as DoT stacking, stunning, or inflicting elevuln are almost entirely built to use SP so that warriors can take advantage of their effects as well.

For the sake of variety, I'd personally like to see more mage-focused armors that can make use of the mage's primary resource for effects other than simply hitting harder. Maybe have an armor with a weapon-based skill that costs MP instead of SP that's far less powerful but is also far more efficient. Maybe a toggle that can add additional MP cost to spells you cast to add a powerful burn effect, or a skill that's not powerful on its own but can inflict stun or petrification. There's a lot of design space here that I feel could be explored more, and I'm hoping the upcoming class revamps will shift focus away from pure nuke builds for mage armors into something more mechanically interesting

Post #: 1

6/5/2021 22:41:12

Sapphire
Member

I think the evolved vampire that not only uses SP, but MP to become more powerful is something that can be implemented on some stuff. Also, I would like to see more miscs that use MP as upkeep.

But I also like the idea of new "leans". I saw an armor suggestion where they put in "flying" lean I think. I thought this was a great idea. I submitted the "awe" lean in an Awe refresh.

I think,like you said, the Necro refresh and Archmage releases will help.

But at the end of the day, as with all things, this idea and everyone else's...., time, manpower, engine capability, and other resources we may not understand are all finite. We probably just need patience.

Post #: 2

6/6/2021 22:21:38

Mr. Roguish
Banned

I don't know to what degree you mean when you mention "'exclusively' for mages" as technically all armors can be used by any character, it's the degree of effectiveness that is debatable. Though I agree with the notion of having stuff that other builds can't just easily pick up and use to the same effectiveness and/or efficiency. If AQ ever gets around to giving rogues/ninjas/assassins the love that warriors/mages/beastmasters have gotten, I would be slightly disappointed if the gear was overly generically made that people wouldn't have to actually invest in corresponding stats to the build or other equipment. I will admit that it is a selfish way of thinking, but it's more founded on the struggle that I've been enduring while everyone else has been eating like royalty.

Currently, there are other builds that suffer much more from a lack of equipment on aesthetic basis, let alone actual functionality relevant to their play-style:
• Out of all armors that exist, I did a deep scrub months ago and could only find maybe 9 armors (many of which overlapping the same element(s)) relevant to the aesthetic of the rogue/ninja/assassin play-style with only maybe 3-4 having any skills or effects relevant to the play-style itself.
• Currently rangers only really have the luna neko armors. However they are extremely effective as well as at the very least, covers all 8 elements which is more than can be said for most
• Beastmasters along with rangers recently got the neko armors (in this case the sol versions) which also cover all 8 elements which being dual element armors like the rangers, allow them to have an additional 3 armors. The only other thing they have is the Bard of war armors which are somewhat becoming more encompassing, however they are all GGB's so it's not like they are readily accessible.

While there is nothing wrong with addressing something you feel is an issue, I don't think what you're referencing isn't analyzed or extrapolated enough. The fundamental thing about playing a mage compared to the other play-styles and more than anything is the spells. For Warriors/Rogues/Rangers to be fully effective, you need at least one weapon for each of the 8 elements (Beastmasters would be split between pets and guests) which the player by default has the precise inventory space for. However, mages primarily would need the equivalent in spells versus a weapon which would be more of a "finishing off tool" versus primary mean. Though you might want to replace an elemental damaging spell for a more utility spell like Purple Rain or a harm damage. However, then you can have tomes that act as additional spell inventories (which usually has 4 spells in them) and additionally might additionally boost spell damage and a lot of them have a spell that inflicts some DoT status inflictions. So now you have 36 spells (primary means) where a Warriors/Rogues/Rangers would only have 8 primary means and BM's have 16; additionally, you can have even more coverage as a mage with element seeking spells.

With armors being referenced utilizing more MP than SP, this would actually be a nerf. As SP auto regens one could swap between a casting an MP spell and their armor's SP spell to conserve and preserve MP so that one does not have to initiate turns to regen MP and can get to the full heal.

All in all, the primary means of a mage isn't in the armor in the first place; the armor wouldn't need to do anything more than just protect the wearer from damage, an SP effect is just extra. All a mage's means to do everything that you're referencing are in spells that already currently exist (which mages have plenty of space to get virtually anything they need); Warriors/Rogues/Rangers rely more on armors due to a lack of effective utilization of spells. Having more mage specific armors with inherent:

quote:

DoT stacking, stunning, or inflicting elevuln

Would make current mages even more OP than they already are, I don't think this would balance anything out, save for nerf of not being able to offload resource use on SP. I think initially this would have been a better way to go when they initially were buffed. DoT and stunning would have compensated for a warrior/beastmaster's ability to engender consistent damage, while the mage would regen MP. Elemental vulnerability would have been good so that a base spell damage increase wouldn't put them on the ridiculous level they are currently on, especially with it's eventual implementation later, but given that it just hadn't been invented yet, can't really fault.

< Message edited by Mr. Roguish -- 6/6/2021 23:25:13 >

Post #: 3

6/7/2021 2:31:15

Zennistrad
Member

I find your analysis unconvincing. There are two key thing you've gotten extremely wrong here.

quote:

The fundamental thing about playing a mage compared to the other play-styles and more than anything is the spells.

This might have been the case years ago, but it's definitely not now. With the spells available from the Warriors' Tower, melee-focused builds now have full access to a range of offensive for every element. Each passing year we also tend to get additional SP spells that further expand what warriors can do with their spell slots, including both offensive and status spells, and I fully expect that trend will continue in the future.

quote:

All in all, the primary means of a mage isn't in the armor in the first place; the armor wouldn't need to do anything more than just protect the wearer from damage

This is exactly the opposite of true for most FO mage builds. Due to the massive increase in power that elecomp bonuses grant to spell-based armor skills, most FO mages (myself included), will rely primarily on armor skills to do damage. Even Destruction Burst and its various premium variants, despite still being the mechanically strongest offensive spells in the game, do far less damage compared to almost any non-weapon-based armor skill in the entire game.

Because of this, a lot of FO mages will tend to stack their spell slots full of utility spells like Purple Rain, pet/guest summons, Archmage Research, Moonwalker's Grace, etc. And as more utility spells get released the role of the standard eight spell slots in the meta is increasingly leaning towards support, with both damage and status infliction becoming less important for spell usage

And with the ease of obtaining celerity via Shadowfeeder Pendant and the ability to use shields and miscs, the elemental resistances of armor are not necessarily the primary consideration in what armor to use any longer. Simply put, there's no reason not to use an armor skill over a spell whenever possible.

Post #: 4

6/7/2021 17:12:43

Mr. Roguish
Banned

quote:

This might have been the case years ago, but it's definitely not now. With the spells available from the Warriors' Tower, melee-focused builds now have full access to a range of offensive for every element. Each passing year we also tend to get additional SP spells that further expand what warriors can do with their spell slots, including both offensive and status spells, and I fully expect that trend will continue in the future.

The issue is, is you're referencing the way that most players play as the whole but aren't acknowledging that those things exist. I refer to things (outside of misc and guest drain) that use SP as skills and subsequently things that use MP as spells. The purpose of this distinction is for the fact of when we say "Warriors using spells" we are not referring to the use of MP, pure builds that aren't mage cannot effectively use things that use MP due to the lack of stat points allocated to INT (without quadforce misc).

quote:

This is exactly the opposite of true for most FO mage builds. Due to the massive increase in power that elecomp bonuses grant to spell-based armor skills, most FO mages (myself included), will rely primarily on armor skills to do damage. Even Destruction Burst and its various premium variants, despite still being the mechanically strongest offensive spells in the game, do far less damage compared to almost any non-weapon-based armor skill in the entire game.

Again, you are looking at what is commonly practiced currently because of the convenience/effectiveness and existence of the current gear and treating it as a whole. If the bloodmage and etc. armors cease to exist, are there no longer mages? If you take away those armors, you still have the capabilities that you referenced, just via spells like they currently are, pure warriors and rangers don't have access to those spells feasibly as mentioned earlier, thus proving my point.

quote:

Because of this, a lot of FO mages will tend to stack their spell slots full of utility spells like Purple Rain, pet/guest summons, Archmage Research, Moonwalker's Grace, etc. And as more utility spells get released the role of the standard eight spell slots in the meta is increasingly leaning towards support, with both damage and status infliction becoming less important for spell usage

The simple fact that you can have a bunch of utility spells and have a plethora of spells via other means and still be effective, means what you're referring to already exists for mages, just not in armor form because that was never fundamentally where mages get their capabilities from.

quote:

And with the ease of obtaining celerity via Shadowfeeder Pendant and the ability to use shields and miscs, the elemental resistances of armor are not necessarily the primary consideration in what armor to use any longer. Simply put, there's no reason not to use an armor skill over a spell whenever possible

I agree, there is no reason not to use the armor skills as I referenced when I said:

quote:

With armors being referenced utilizing more MP than SP, this would actually be a nerf. As SP auto regens one could swap between a casting an MP spell and their armor's SP spell to conserve and preserve MP so that one does not have to initiate turns to regen MP and can get to the full heal.

< Message edited by Mr. Roguish -- 6/7/2021 17:45:44 >

Post #: 5

6/7/2021 17:48:35

J9408
Member

What your asking for is Tome-Spell like Armors?

Like the tome Paladin Legacy, but in armor form right? Choose between three spells etc.

Post #: 6

6/7/2021 19:19:08

Mr. Roguish
Banned

My understanding, is that Zenn is asking for armors with spells inside of them like bloodmage, but instead of just a really powerful spell or the ability to make spells stronger, a spell that has some form of status infliction not a bunch of spells like a tome.

Post #: 7

6/7/2021 19:30:40

J9408
Member

In other words "Debuffing" type armors. But they use MP for the spells.

I suppose mages could use that. But there has to be heavy compensation.

What is stopping a Bloodmage from debuffing the enemy then finishing them with a powerful spell?

Status Infliction only-armors would be quite nice from a Role Playing perspective though.

Post #: 8

6/7/2021 19:42:20

Mr. Roguish
Banned

I agree that with the initial buff years ago, that would have been preferable if that was the direction taken. But given the current equipment already available would make them even more OP than they already are BECAUSE they already have those capabilities outside of armors via spells that no other purebuilds really have access to. If they do have access it's via SP which a mage has equal access to.

It used to be that the compensation was that you could only have so many spells, thus having to sacrifice pure damage spells for those status effect spells. However with tomes and miscs, you can have more than 36 spells at one time with the tomes themselves having spells with those same status effect spells and maybe an additional buff to spell damage by themselves. This already allows mages to have their entire spell inventory full of utility spells, pure damage spells, and status effect spells.

Heck you can go overload a sunray or moonray and get an extra spell for virtually free of a powerful healing spell.

Am I absolutely against the idea of mages ever having these armors? No, but I personally dont think it's a priority given they already have these capabilities via a resource that the other pure builds don't feasibly have access to. Therefore would be more appropriate in a suggestions thread. Also given the current meta, there is no need to make mages any more OP than they already are without some nerf.
I respect the desire to not want to abuse the ridiculousness of the current meta and forge your own unique way.

< Message edited by Mr. Roguish -- 6/7/2021 20:11:49 >

Post #: 9

6/11/2021 10:04:11

Zennistrad
Member

quote:

I agree, there is no reason not to use the armor skills as I referenced when I said:

quote:

With armors being referenced utilizing more MP than SP, this would actually be a nerf. As SP auto regens one could swap between a casting an MP spell and their armor's SP spell to conserve and preserve MP so that one does not have to initiate turns to regen MP and can get to the full heal.

I also find this extremely unconvincing. The "auto regen" of SP is very slow without the use of miscs like Essence Orb, and we know for a fact that Essence Orb is going to be severely nerfed sometime in the future so that it can only be used twice per turn (I believe either Kamui or Cray has personally confirmed this.) That's about 178 SP from Essence Orb per turn, plus the 98 SP gained at the start of the turn, for 276 SP in total. That means once you run out of SP, it will take two full turns to regenerate enough SP to use even a single armor skill due to the increased SP cost for mages.

And because most mages will likely be having a misc equipped during that entire time, that rate of SP regeneration is probably going to be even slower. SP is — as intended — not supposed to be reliable enough for mages to consistently use. That's supposed to be the primary advantage of Warrior builds, they require far less setup and are able to use what resources they do have far more efficiently than mages do, being able to spam elecomp-discounted weapon skills that do more damage than weapon skills for mages because Melee and Ranged weapons are inherently stronger than their Magic equivalents.

The reason that MP regenerates every two battles rather than constantly regenerating is that it's supposed to force you to strategically decide when and how to use that resource, rather than giving you a steady stream that you that allows that you to use small amounts of that resource continuously. This is because the general philosophy of AQ's twenty-turn-two-battles model is that mages are supposed to be able to deal higher amounts of burst damage, but be far worse at dealing sustained damage, only being expected to cast four spells every two battles, while warriors can just keep attacking for minimal SP costs. This "nerf" here isn't a nerf at all, it's how, in theory, mages are supposed to play.

AQ	Post #: 10

6/12/2021 10:29:13

CH4OT1C!
Member

I rarely get involved in these types of debates on the forums anymore but, given the subject matter, I felt compelled. My character is a FO mage.

To preface my post, I don't believe there's any sort of shortage with FO Mage armours. If anything, they're probably the most well-equipped build out there. With that said, I wish to address some of the points being raised.

quote:

Outside of the Bloodmage Armors and the Vampire subrace armors, there are exceptionally few armors in existence that are meant exclusively for mages. What I mean is, armors that have skills which primarily use MP as their resource, rather than SP.

I think your "Mage exclusive" term is very misleading. For example, Warriors, Rangers and other builds can get Bloodmage's boost by using spell-type skills e.g. Iron Maiden. With Vampire, 6/10 skills can be used without any sort of MP cost, including a skill that regenerates a small amount of MP. Neither of these armours have abilities that only benefit mages. Instead of "exclusive", it's that these armours have included MP skills. That is a totally separate (and MUCH less controversial) argument than the title implies. As an addendum, spellcaster lean was always defunct

quote:

Currently, there are other builds that suffer much more from a lack of equipment on aesthetic basis, let alone actual functionality relevant to their play-style:
• Out of all armors that exist, I did a deep scrub months ago and could only find maybe 9 armors (many of which overlapping the same element(s)) relevant to the aesthetic of the rogue/ninja/assassin play-style with only maybe 3-4 having any skills or effects relevant to the play-style itself.

You have brought this up in the past, and it's pretty much entirely irrelevant to this discussion, which focuses on filling gaps in builds mechanically, not aesthetically.

quote:

• Currently rangers only really have the luna neko armors. However they are extremely effective as well as at the very least, covers all 8 elements which is more than can be said for most

Firstly, rangers aren't just FD. Secondly, they have more variety for the same point raised above.

quote:

The fundamental thing about playing a mage compared to the other play-styles and more than anything is the spells. For Warriors/Rogues/Rangers to be fully effective, you need at least one weapon for each of the 8 elements (Beastmasters would be split between pets and guests) which the player by default has the precise inventory space for. However, mages primarily would need the equivalent in spells versus a weapon which would be more of a "finishing off tool" versus primary mean.

Whilst I agree that a feature which distinguishes Mage from other builds is spells, this analysis is based upon an imbalance in the current player turn model rather than being inherent to the design of mages. Typical assumptions would actually assume the opposite - in order to win 2 battles in 20 turns, Mages would need to spend 4 turns spellcasting and 16 turns with a weapon to deal the same damage as a warrior. This would result in the same overall damage, but forcing mages to use 8 additional slots [Note that there are complicating factors such as SP]. Of course, as you rightly point out, this can also give mages additional options to play around with e.g. Tomes (for which there isn't an equivalent for other builds, though I think there should be). However, the fundamental assumptions are very different from what you portray. With regards to:

quote:

This might have been the case years ago, but it's definitely not now. With the spells available from the Warriors' Tower, melee-focused builds now have full access to a range of offensive for every element. Each passing year we also tend to get additional SP spells that further expand what warriors can do with their spell slots, including both offensive and status spells, and I fully expect that trend will continue in the future.

... this would make the implicit assumptions that Skills and Spells have an identical function. They deal the same damage, but are different parts of the player turn formula. SP and MP are different resources that function differently. Whilst I would love to get into that, it would move well away from the topic of the thread. For this same reason, I'm not going to attempt to involve myself with the debate around SP regeneration being very slow - they're different resources. However, I will say:

quote:

And because most mages will likely be having a misc equipped during that entire time, that rate of SP regeneration is probably going to be even slower. SP is — as intended — not supposed to be reliable enough for mages to consistently use. That's supposed to be the primary advantage of Warrior builds, they require far less setup and are able to use what resources they do have far more efficiently than mages do, being able to spam elecomp-discounted weapon skills that do more damage than weapon skills for mages because Melee and Ranged weapons are inherently stronger than their Magic equivalents.

This is wrong. SP is universal. There is some positive discrimination towards giving non-mages more options for SP regeneration given mage's dominant place in the current game. However, it is intentionally Universal (though, as I'm sure a certain someone will post in response, that wasn't the original intentional, only the current one).

quote:

With armors being referenced utilizing more MP than SP, this would actually be a nerf. As SP auto regens one could swap between a casting an MP spell and their armor's SP spell to conserve and preserve MP so that one does not have to initiate turns to regen MP and can get to the full heal.

Uh... ok? There are a multitude of assumptions and caveats with this point that are completely skipped. I'll mention a couple:
i). Right now, Spells tend to top the power rankings for nukes
ii). MP regeneration options are better than SP
A better argument would have been the limited versatility of spells as compared to weapon based skills
Regarding what an armour does: Zennistrad said it well - Elecomp is very important to FO mages.

quote:

All in all, the primary means of a mage isn't in the armor in the first place; the armor wouldn't need to do anything more than just protect the wearer from damage

This is pointless, as it also applies to every builds. Functionally, that's all an armour is. The skill/spell integrated within it is treated as a compressed item, or a second piece of equipment in the same slot. We could just remove all skills/spells from every armour and this would also ring true. You can use the spell slots for skills (albeit with limited variety, but even that is a caveat, see my points above).

I think you're both wrong:
Zennistrad: You're arguing for the wrong thing. Your point of contention isn't the highly charged "More mage armours". Neither should it be - mage is probably the best equipped build out there. Instead, you should be arguing for more MP skills/spells on armours. That can be addressed far more easily than you may think. For example, most skills today have a component that decides ranged/magic damage based on stats. Why not just have the cost vary in the same way? MP if magic, SP if warrior/ranger etc. It doesn't even have to be on all armours, to allow mages some resource variety.
Mr Rogueish: Whilst I am broadly agreeing with you that there's no shortage, I would advise you to take the same advice that you gave Zennistrad: "I don't think what you're referencing isn't analyzed or extrapolated enough". It's painfully obvious you're using the thread as an excuse to reiterate your long-term aim of talking about more rogue aesthetic gear. As a result, I managed to find (and point out above) a number of points you overlooked when discussing game mechanics. A better way forward for all of this would have been to discuss ways of including MP skill/spell options that didn't involve restricting it only to mages. A way for both sides to benefit.

< Message edited by CH4OT1C! -- 6/12/2021 10:33:53 >

AQ	Post #: 11

6/12/2021 16:37:07

Digital X

Beep Beep! ArchKnight AQ / ED

I am going to nip this in the bud before it escalates.

Please keep this thread on topic. While I appreciate a majority of the replies are on topic there are several that are not. This thread is for the discussion regarding the variety of armours for offensive based Mages. If you wish to discus Rogues/Assassins and the like you are more than welcome to start another thread on those.

Whilst it's fine to disagree with one another on the subject please make sure to do so in a respective manner. It's a good idea and practice to set an example for other forum goers as well as new ones who may come across the thread.

I don't mean to sound like the bad guy but please understand where I am coming from. Just take a minute to think whilst posting in order to deescalate any further disagreements you may have.

Disagreements are fine, but make the sure the manner in which you handle them comes across polite.

Thank you.

AQW

Epic

Post #: 12

6/13/2021 19:37:34

Mr. Roguish
Banned

@Zennistrad

While I would respond in kind with my argument against, ultimately as everyone else has pointed out, this isn't really on the topic on the priority of needing more "mage exclusive" armors. You're debating with me the feasibility of something I have experience in preforming as if it is not feasibly nor possible.

@CH4OT1C!

I won't present my counter arguments on the things you quoted me because ultimately we agree on the same overall premise as well as such sub-discussions have been pointed out as "off-topic", however I will make a statement on a few things that were said that question my intention/integrity/etc.:

quote:

It's painfully obvious you're using the thread as an excuse to reiterate your long-term aim of talking about more rogue aesthetic gear. As a result, I managed to find (and point out above) a number of points you overlooked when discussing game mechanics. A better way forward for all of this would have been to discuss ways of including MP skill/spell options that didn't involve restricting it only to mages. A way for both sides to benefit.

I find this to be a very disrespectful assumption; I don't believe you've truly understood anything I've said and approached this discussion with some implied bias.

The topic of this thread is that there is a lack in variety in offensive mage armors. This being brought up for discussion should suggest that this is an outstanding issue, the only way it could be outstanding is in comparison to all other builds (which doesn't equate to that the others don't also have issues themselves), as the implied statement "all builds suffer from a lack of equipment" is redundant. I never said that offensive mages should not ever get more of a variety in offensive in mage armors, so this fundamentally the premise is a comparison to the other builds.
Since I have actually taken the time to research almost every armor in existence in this game in my effort to find all the rogue aligned armors via mechanically effective, aesthetically relevant, non-rare, etc., I have acquired a lot of knowledge of what does and doesn't exist for ALL builds.
I use that knowledge to support my claims instead of the gas lighting that was done to my when I tried to address the issue with the rogues. What you're a basically trying to say is that I can't use things that I've spent an extensive time looking up as examples for other things; which is disingenuous. The comparison to the other builds is the only comment on this thread actually addressing the underlying premise of the topic itself, if there is an acknowledgement that it isn't so under equipped in comparison then there is no need to address the proposed issue more than it is already being addressed. In fact, getting new mage armors (like warriors) isn't even an infrequent thing; it's the other builds that have way less frequent build specific items/equipment being released weekly as referenced when I went in to Beastmasters and Rangers in addition to rogues.

The comments I've made about the spells in comparison to the armors is the argument to the idea that there even is a lack of the capability of what is being identified as a deficiency.

quote:

A better way forward for all of this would have been to discuss ways of including MP skill/spell options that didn't involve restricting it only to mages. A way for both sides to benefit.

I'm not trying to "benefit" from this in the first place, I am merely explaining my reasoning why there isn't an outstanding issue, please genuinely read what I have to say instead of making assumptions. When I mentioned the nerf, I was saying that what was being suggested with the SP would be weaker than what mages are already capable of, not that I was advocating for or against it. A more of "be careful for what you wish for" statement. Additionally, "ways of including MP skill/spell options that didn't involve restricting it only to mages" would be a separate topic and should have it's own thread. The topic at hand is that there should be "more variety in offensive mage armors" as a whole, and as the author extrapolated, exclusive for mages.

While I do not mean to escalate this further, I find this very disingenuous that people get to slander me, their comment(s) get to stand for everyone to read and then I'm the one told to be polite when I'm the one being attacked.

< Message edited by Mr. Roguish -- 6/13/2021 20:00:38 >

Post #: 13

6/14/2021 16:04:52

Sapphire
Member

The game could use a lot of warrior, hybrid, mage, beastmaster etc etc exclusive stuff. It should be things here and there. I think theyr'e actually trying to go this route somewhat to be honest.

Before the subrace updates, and before the bloodmage releases, and before the most recent musclemage release...what was there?

So they're actually trying. This doesn't mean you can't be a warrior in vampire armors or a non hybrid in werepyre armors. They're just a bit better for specific builds. And IDK if it is a great idea to make armors specific to a build type where the armor is completely useless to another build, though I wouldn't be completely against it.

Like I said in the beginning, time and other resources should provide for all.

At the end of the day, this is all a matter of opinion anyway. Personally, I would love to see spell boosting stuff. I like using spells. I saw someone say more and more that the quick cast utility stuff might be starting to take a front seat to regular spells. Perhaps for some, that's so. I have several of these, but I find I am using the overcharged spells. I personally find using "tricks" ie quick cast and shadowfeeder and purpole rain to buff up like crazy to fight isn't fun for me. I use essence orb and shadowfeeder and Ive stored all the quick cast nonsense. I dont want to spend 2 minutes doing that. Other's might love that.

I also prefer pets that inflict stuns (paralyze/petrify/freeze/etc) over damage or even DoT (burn, bleed, poison, etc). Others may just go for damage.

I saw someone ask about armors that act like a tome. IDK how that would fly but if staff could incorporate it and somehow not make weapon usage 100% unusable, then ok lets try it out. I personally hate tomes and think all tomes should have a 100% proc regular attack, though obviously much weaker than regular wands. But others may love tomes.

Its all preference, and it's all going to take time. So sit back, relax, and enjoy the game as it stands and things will happen as they are planned to .

Post #: 14

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest] >> AdventureQuest General Discussion >> More variety in offensive mage armors?

Jump to:

Icon Legend

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Forum Content Copyright © 2018 Artix Entertainment, LLC.

"AdventureQuest", "DragonFable", "MechQuest", "EpicDuel", "BattleOn.com", "AdventureQuest Worlds", "Artix Entertainment"
and all game character names are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Artix Entertainment, LLC. All rights are reserved.
PRIVACY POLICY