|
Stabilis -> RE: Damage Range Display (1/14/2013 11:51:33)
|
quote:
Anyhow, if a player is unsure of whether he can kill another, he will either take a blind risk, take the time to calculate or ensure his own safety before attacking, therefore potentially missing opportunities. This will take two of those options and simply being able to choose yes or no.
A careless action vs a contemplated action? This already happens, so how does this argue against a damage display?
quote:
I thought epicduel was about stringing together the best combo of attacks to kill most efficiently. Not knowin how muh damage you do leads to leaving someone with 1-6 hp and the people who think they're so good going WTF lucky noob. I much prefer it like this.
I thought EpicDuel was a sci-fi PVP meant to have fun, be entertained. [:-] Winning a battle is accomplished by strategy, stringing combos to kill can be your strategy, but there are others like IA survival. On the "1-6 health" example, I am not even about to comment how figurative that is... what you prefer is not what everyone needs. Some people like to sort their skills by effects like myself and if using attacks compare their damages. Having to click skill trees for 5-10 seconds is completely time-consuming and could end my turn if I was not fast enough at doing that. Then there are 8, 10, 12 year old kids trying to do the same thing comparing attacks, it is only more difficult for them, and is why you see them spamming as few skills as possible.
quote:
If you add this feature then if someone's hp is caught between damage range, it will simply be a matter of luck.
This contradicts your "preference" in the "1-6 health" example, so make up your mind, pro-randomness or anti-randomness. If you say pro-randomness, this feature still pertains.
quote:
If you add this feature then if someone's hp is caught between damage range, it will simply be a matter of luck. I have no problems with the luck ATM but RELYING on it results in a low win rate. Having something solid to base you're attacks requires much less thinking
Shining smokes Arthropleura, you do not have to rely on luck in a wide-range situation. If this feature was implemented I would always rely on minimal effects. That is to say, if for a reasonable example my opponent had 34 health, and my best attack had a damage range of 30-36 damage, first of all I would say "no, my attack does not have the minimal damage to kill", and secondly the majority of that attack's damage range compared to his/her health lies between 30-33, so I would be UNLIKELY to damage for a KO blow. "Having something solid to base your attacks on requires much less thinking". What?! The one point you can argue is that the thinking involved in achieving "something solid" is pre-completed. But is it a stupid thing to do? Have the number crunching pre-programmed without giving away what WILL happen (like the possible critical strike or block or deflection), allows more time to make tactical decisions rather than calculated estimates, which would be smart for whoever number-crunched.
quote:
Oh and btw ur example on field medic: that is preschool maths. What you are suggesting is elementary school maths, therefore replacing something of higher difficulty than your example
Technically that was not purely math, that was conditional calculating like you see in computer science. If this condition is true, do this, if that condition is false, do that. "Therefore replacing something of higher difficulty than your example". Excuse me, what?
|
|
|
|
