RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST

RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [Oversoul] >> Oversoul General Discussion

Message

bladezen aqw -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (8/15/2013 17:46:39)
I would LOVE to be able to sell my characters. also, seeing some dage orientated characters would be baws =D

Gorillo Titan -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (8/19/2013 11:26:51)
How about a feature in are friends list that lets us know how long since a friend has last logged on so we can have an idea if a player has stopped playing or some thing since my friends list has been filled for a while and Idk who I should remove.

The Jop -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (8/20/2013 0:44:32)
This not really a feature, but the game needs more moderation. More than half the time I enter the lobby some rude and inconsiderate conversation is going on, and no matter how many times I report people with offensive usernames I keep seeing them day after day. The same person I reported in November with an offensive username is still playing under that name, for example.

Tower Knight -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/1/2013 18:40:27)
How about a certain long/ short-term punishment for those that disconnect from a PvP match, ESPECIALLY when it is evident that they "might" lose. I've encountered so many players that just give up. Oh and a few observational Mods that have the time to address the issues of such things as inappropriate names, harassment, etc. I know Nulgath is as busy as it is but some of these reports need to be addressed otherwise who knows what could occur if these certain things get out of hand?

The Stranger -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/1/2013 19:04:52)
I DO NOT want to see any of those music events ... those are just awwwwfull.. seriously .. better just go on a holiday for 2 weeks then one of those ..

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 4:31:01)
Now that Incinerate has been nerfed, I think that it should be able to be applied on cards like Meteorite or Fireball. 10 for 1600 or 14 for 2100 isn't that overpowered, really.

Redingard -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 5:27:18)
@Kiazz Yes it is. Incinerate is still too powerful.

The Jop -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 5:35:46)
@Red I agree. With cards like Death Flow that do 1500 damage for 15 energy, incinerate is still quite powerful.

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 6:51:22)
@Red In what way? It's like an empower with a cost and an extra hundred for it. Now, Immolate would've been too powerful. @Jop I think death flow is just right, due to the ease neutral decks get energy with neutralize; it's all in the context. Poison, in shadow, has a 1200 for 6 energy, being even more powerful. However, it's over 4 turns, but it also has life drains and shields to survive for the fulfillment of those turns. Fire has a energy-hungry deck, and relies on incinerate to deal damage with fireballs/meteorites/fire whirl to soak up extra energy from the efficiency. Allowing incinerate to be applied on to a fireball/meteorite has no real effect in the long run due to the abundance of attack cards, but it just makes life easier for fire characters in my opinion.

The Jop -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 6:56:47)
I disagree, what else can I say? Fire is not an energy efficient element yet it's still better than neutral at direct damage dealing. It needs no buffs.

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 7:21:50)
Like, oh, I don't know, Corruption? 10 for 2000 with iron hides, shields, and counters to drag out the fight? Like, I said, context: Neutral deck-neutralize. Does direct damage really matter over the course of a high-leveled battle? Maybe it it's too powerful with less hp in the equation, but over the course of a 5300 hp battle? It's not a buffs, rather it's a utility. I never expressed anything about buffing incinerate. Rather, I'd like it to work on fireballs for sheer ease.

The Jop -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 7:40:03)
I meant direct damage as in "instant", not over a few turns. Adding it to spells would hardly make a difference though, there aren't many times fire characters are without an attack card to add damage to. I think Nulgath was planning to have incinerate work on spells according to earlier design notes anyway. Making it work on more cards counts as a buff, no?

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 7:53:27)
Unlike cards that give out free charges with limitations as to which cards it can discard, no it should not be counted as a buff. Like I said, it also works on attack cards, which are plentiful. I addressed that, it's all in the context of the deck. Neutral has stalling cards, as mentioned previously, while fire has instant-damage ones which essentially serve the same purpose; victory. Corruption and poison are more efficient, no? In context of their respective decks, yes. Have you ever seen a defensive fire character? Also, that is exactly my point. I want Nulgath to remember that plan, which is why I'm posting on this thread; I would like to see it implemented. Exactly, hardly a difference.

Megadragonknight -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 8:00:16)
Erm guys, sorry to bug in but if you want to discuss combo/mechanism/buffing cards, you should post it at the mechanism/combo thread instead over here. @kiazz Just to add some point that having incinerate to add bonus to spell cards like fireball or meteorite will be a big disastrous especially meteorite since it will deal 2100 damage if you use incinerate along with meteorite towards opponents which is OP. Although fire's main skill involve pure damage instead of defence and do remember that each element have their own skills. If you want to discuss more, discuss over at the mechanism/combo thread.

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 8:04:49)
I know about that thread, but I was just addressing the arguments made against what I wished to see implemented in the game. @mega Disastrous? It would be 2100 damage for 14 energy, which is not unlike neutral's corruption: 2000 for 10. Exactly, pure damage with high costs, unlike neutral's neutralize+stalling.

Megadragonknight -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 8:10:37)
@kiazz About the cost is true but there is one thing you never thought about and that is the turn. Unlike corruption which will took 4 turn to deal 2000 damage, meteorite plus incinerate took just 1 turn to deal 2100 damage which is why its more disastrous than even corruption. The opponent can still survive with few more HP and try to use their opportunity to finish the battle.

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 8:37:43)
Have you not read my previous posts? Or should I write tl:drs for you? Let me say it again;: I took turns into full consideration in regards to the deck. The entrie neutral deck is pretty much mostly defense-oriented, with powerful stalling moves like iron hides and counter attacks which lengthen turns almost indefinitely. Disastrous? No, an opponent would not be able to kill something that spams an iron hide every turn and gets back energy for more corruptions through neutralize. Like I said, context. Instant damage is nothing in front of the monster that is corruption, iron hide, and neutralize.

Megadragonknight -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 9:18:38)
@kiazz It would be OP to have neutral characters getting iron hide, corruption and neutralize in many turns. Oh man, no point in discussing anymore, all I just want to say is that each element have their weak point such as fire having to focus mainly on pure power while neutral focus mainly on defence while attacking in many turns. Fire will have problems against neutral with its skills. Even if incinerate add bonus to meteorite, it won't truly be a wise choice to do against neutral when it have counter strike, shield and iron hide with it. Also, it will cost too much energy for it to use such high damage which is risky especially against neutral. But it still depend on how the players use the elements' skill, if they use it the correct way, they can overcome many challenges ahead. That's all I can say.

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 10:05:13)
You just proved my point. Corruption goes over many turns, and iron hide covers many turns. Searching for neutralize takes time as well. What do you mean "oh man"? Exactly. Like I said, it really does nothing, I just want ease and efficiency in fire decks. The fact that fireball and meteorite are not 5 hit combo attacks makes it obviously more eligible for boosting with cards like that. No, it's not even a buff. As mentioned before, its hardly a difference. I still don't understand where you're going at with fire v.s. neutral. How does that relate to this in any way, shape, or form? Oh and like you said, is incinerate on a fire ball not a part of the focus on "pure power"? I think fireballs and meteorites should count as attack cards, due to the cost and efficiency that matches those of having their respective number of 500 Attack cards. The card is already present in many decks and in CC, it's not a buff, and unlike cards that give you back energy which requires limitations, it doesn't matter with the low amount of cost-efficiency going on with incinerate. And, if argued in that context, it would take up three cards for this effect, as well as whole lot of energy anyway. Also, the presence of more cards that can not be incinerated reduces the effectiveness of fire characters. Like the situational card, inferno. Thus, I think that Incinerate should be able to be applied on cards such as Fireball and Meteorite. Think of it this way, 2 500 Attacks+1 Incinerate or 3 500 Attacks+1 Incinerate do the same thing. Just more card space taken.

Mondez -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 10:23:16)
Before we go for any balance changes at the moment I would like to see how stats and ER affect balance when they are released so we can determine what needs buffing and nerfing. Incinerate was nerfed due to its superiority over Empower and it completely was dominant element, but I feel the cost should have been 3 instead of 2.

Megadragonknight -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 10:36:14)
Let me just state in a short and simple term which you can comprehend, fire is not the element that deal with addition damage but rather it used the spell/special cards to deal many damage without incinerate. It is not energy efficient element like what The Jop said. Energy is the element suitable for that. If you wish to discuss more, why not discuss at the general discussion? Edit: What Mondez said, we should just wait and see just how ER and stats will affect the balance. So I think we should stop this discussion now.

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 10:52:14)
@Mondez Sure, if it's applicable to the damage cards, yes. Empower should work on these cards too. Like I said, incinerate does not need a buff. @Mega It's called the Card combos, mechanics thread, you mentioned it earlier. What are you talking about? Without energy-efficiency, it would not be able to play on par with any character with it. Like the other elements. I'm only defending what I want to see in OS and why it needs to be implemented. I did not actually want to talk about the mechanics here, but I was all for it. "Short and simple term," okay, what? It's a damage focused element, and it would be irrelevant if it did not have the energy efficiency to match that and/or overpower that of shielding or healing cards. Like 5 for 1000, or 6 for 1000 as examples. Energy isn't really all that efficient either, it depends on full hands and a lot of similar factors. Lightning never strikes the same place twice, eh? Even with a full hand of attacks and super charged, it would do 2 for 500 each at most. Kinda like the 0 for 300 of empower. Efficiency, like I said. Back to this; fire is power hungry, yes I agree, but I think that the incinerate makes it relevant. I still stand by my initial petition for incinerate being applicable to fireballs and/or meteorites due to how little it actually affects the gameplay and how much easier it'd be with all the card discarding going on. You don't really understand what I'm saying, do you? The very reason as to why incinerate should be the center of every fire deck lies in what a majority of you call "too powerful." Fireballs/Meteorites, or spell-cards, as you will, are basically attack cards melded into one card. You can argue that they should be the focus of fire, but the sheer efficiency of incinerate overrides any use they would have, other than swallowing energy and doing quick damage. Now, putting incinerate on to these cards would actually make the "spell/special cards" more useful and used more often in addition to incinerating attack cards. We should have the choice to do this.

Megadragonknight -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 11:00:47)
I don't feel like arguing anymore but have it your way, if you want to have incinerate added with meteorite and fireball, go ahead but it will be OP and fire will just be the most OP elements. I am not going to say much, if you feel you are truly correct, I respect that although my whole point of debating is about balance. Just a question, how long did it took you to write such long sentences?

Kiazz -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 11:06:21)
@ mega Unlike you, I try my best to read every point you make and create my own counter point. No, it still would not. I have spent this whole discussion telling you why it would not. I am not arguing, I am simply trying to get my point across. Instead of making ambiguous statements as to the nature of "OP", could you actually explain why? I've tried addressing every point critically, but you do not seem to understand.

Cyber doom5 -> RE: =OS= What would YOU like to see? III - READ THE FIRST POST (9/2/2013 11:10:38)
i want to see fuly lit dungeons and multiple floor dungeons with mini bosses for the half way point on each floor and a minor boss at the end of each floor all leading up to one mega boss and the further you get into the dungeon the higher the level difference is between you and your enemies so like FL1: your level Mini Boss: a some what rare encounter with a better ai Boss:Special character with increased ai and a rare card FL2: 1lvl Higher then your level Mini Boss: Higher level rare card better ai Boss: Rare encounter from outside the dungeon FL3: 2lvls higher then you Mini Boss: one of the two bosses from the previous floors Final Boss: Legendary character better ai and two rare cards Like Example of a Dungeons Ver's Passage Random encounters: various light characters Mini Bosses: Arch Priest of Ver, Princess Agea Bosses: Sentry Lord, Templar Final Boss: Seraphim of Ver, Queen Agea, or founder champion(unpossesable)

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition

0.125