RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (Full Version)

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



Message

Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/7/2014 15:04:03)

Just noticed that DoT passive charges are no longer reset upon target change. Very useful. :o

This is interesting if we compare to necromancer:
- Death knight's aura can only affect 1 target at once due to its 1 turn duration, however the charges are never lost.
- Necromancer's aura can be applied to all targets due to its 99 turn duration, however the charges are individually tracked per target and will be lost upon its demise.

It makes sense if we look it from a lore standpoint: One aura is based on your "presence" that shifts between your targets and/or yourself, while the other aura is based on "fear" which is something individual for each entity.



133spider -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/10/2014 20:43:44)

As much as I love the new DK revamp look
Can we get the old DK items (preferably the helmet) to be upgradeable all the way to level 80?
I'm not really digging the new revamped DK helmet



Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/10/2014 20:45:12)

The NDA items use the old (but recolored) artwork.

You could just use the show feature to override it



133spider -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/10/2014 20:49:41)

@Mr G W

I'm kind of getting tired logging on and equipping/showing my helmets over and over (especially with quests that dequip all your items)


I would be kind of happy if Orb of Saving supported the show/hide feature



black knight 1234567 -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/11/2014 5:09:12)

Dumb, dumb question but can anyone link a screenshot to the revamped appearance?



Dracojan -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/11/2014 13:07:43)

here!one!!11!



VJ -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 6:41:05)

I am gone for a year and comeback to a new skin for the DK and I am not liking it at all.
it does not feel 'right' to me.

don't get me wrong I am glad they haven't forgotten about the armor but still I think they should have given us the option to keep the old skin or use the new one.
The DA holders with the wardrobe should be allowed to use it to access The old armor skin(Without needing to pay for it).

shouldn't be all that hard As I am sure they kept the old skin on file and adding it to the list like they did the four types of the DLA.

heck it doesn't even fit any of the old gear.

anyways with that out of the way, I agree with those that had been talking about the increase of hp restored.

the idea of making Potions harmful to the player was flawed as there would be no point to having them and might as well locking out the potions as well.
also the 200 idea for all elements makes it way over powered for a non-DA armor.

just increasing the amount of HP recovery would be better.



Drop_Bear -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 7:02:08)

@VJ What do you mean by the potions not healing? Because they work as normal. Also the death knight armor does not have a 200 to all resists as you mentioned as that would be op, I agree on that.

As for needing more healing the current coil now named dark rite did lose 5% healing from 30% > 25% however it gained an 8% heal on another move and the passive can be used for healing. TBH thats all the healing it needs as both healing moves also do good damage.



Ash -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 11:46:37)

quote:

shouldn't be all that hard As I am sure they kept the old skin on file and adding it to the list like they did the four types of the DLA.

heck it doesn't even fit any of the old gear.

Two things, I still have the old armor appearance. Just like all the other revamps the old art is still around we just aren't using it anymore. Secondly, there are matching items for the armor now if you speak to Sir Malifact where you actually train the armor.

quote:

the idea of making Potions harmful to the player was flawed as there would be no point to having them and might as well locking out the potions as well.
also the 200 idea for all elements makes it way over powered for a non-DA armor.

Where are you seeing either of those on the actual armor?

I would read through the entire thread, look at the stats I gave for the revamp on page 12 of this thread, look at what was added to Sir Malifact's dialog in the Necropolis, and then come back and make a post. Without doing all of that, and posting wrong information, it looks like you haven't even done anything with the armor at all.



rater202 -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 18:26:56)

Okay, I'm only on page 9 of the Thread, but I'd like it if somebody could confirm my understanding of the upgrade shop.

The bear minimum resources to acquire and upgrade all six items is 54 for the standard and 78 for the DA versions.

However, if a character were to get the items at level 40(is) and wanted to continue to use Deathknight to its' fullest extent as they leveled up, they'd have to get the basic items again, and upgrade them again, increasing the over all amount of resources required significantly.

By my (possibly flawed) math, for level 40ish character to fully upgrade the DA version of the set, it would take 1170 resources using the current method.

It's possible that I did my math wrong,but it still seems like it takes more resources for a lower level character to upgrade as he goes than it does for an 80 to upgrade all in one go.

Now, I could be over thinking this, but doesn't that seem just a bit unfair for the lower level players?

If this has already been adressed, please ignore.



Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 18:58:35)

You need 60 essences to get the level 50, 60, 70 and 80 versions. (6 + 12 + 18 + 24 respectively)

That is not TOO bad actually, i actually farmed a total of 54 essences to get the level 60, 70 and 80 versions.

Takes about 5-6 hours to get all that if you are fully focused.



rater202 -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 19:11:13)

but each essence is made of 2-3 other resources, so that's not 6 it's 120-180

Also, a player who is upgrading as he goes has to sell his current set and acquire an other, so that's 6*4=24 additional resources, for a total of 144-204.

Compared to a level 80 upgrading all in one go, who needs 24 essences, each made of 2-3 other resources, + the initial 6 badges needed for each item, for a total of 54-78 resources.

Not as bad as I thought it was (Thanks for correcting my math) but it still means that lower level players upgrading as they go are doing more work.



Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 19:17:01)

Well if you can survive getting from level 70 to 80, then getting 24*3 essences won't be too bad.



Ash -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 23:02:27)

Quoting or, as you just did with the @, would be better then in the future to differentiate posts. Without doing so there was no way to tell who or what you were referring to as any conversations were pages back.

quote:

Not as bad as I thought it was (Thanks for correcting my math) but it still means that lower level players upgrading as they go are doing more work.

I was trying something new and as the feedback isn't good, I won't be doing it again. Everyone keeps wanting new things so we do experiment from time to time in new ways to do things. Sometimes the feedback is good and other times it's not.



VJ -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/12/2014 23:09:57)

Edit: been playing with the DK armor and it has grown on me and I will admit I actually like it.. sometimes change is hard but in the end its good to have change.
the armor is well done, the gear actually looks nice, and the fact that you can still get the old gear is also nice.

over all beautifully done and well thought out but what really did seal the deal for the armor was the skills which was nicely done.




Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 15:32:06)

I know i'm is late for this but i just remembered this...

Since the passive issues are fixed and do not break anymore, i wonder if the "requires a successful attack" restriction can now be removed without causing issues?

I've managed to bypass the restriction by using trinkets and nothing broke when i swapped the passive (though nothing happened since the passive hadn't been applied).

Removing the restriction would be very useful for boss battles as you could start the battle with a shield and swap to heals on turn 2. Since the shield applies the passive, it should work.



Ash -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 15:38:05)

The same issue is there, and is right in what you said. You have to hit the enemy to apply anything, trinkets/potions/etc don't count as a hit because they don't have the passive coding on them. So, as you stated, the switch did nothing. That's not going to be able to be changed. The shield, and any other skills that don't *look* like they hit, still do. Without something there to tell it to apply the passive it's not going to, there is NO way around that.



Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 15:50:48)

The issue is not the trinkets/potions not applying the passive. I'm aware since they're not class specific they lack the passive's code, and thus making the switch do nothing.

What i was asking was if it was possible to remove the "need a successful hit" to swap the passive.

Since the shields and healers DO apply the passive, but don't actually attack the opponent then the restriction doesn't seem to be doing anything other than hindering strategies...



Ash -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 17:56:23)

Let me phrase it this way. No, because the skill can't FUNCTION without doing it the way it is. The reason the skill grays out and is unusable on the second turn if you used a potion or a trinket the very first turn is because there is no count for it to recognize to be able to switch. There is literally nothing there to tell it to do something. What you're asking for is not possible as I've already said. There's nothing TO fix to make it work because it CAN'T be made to work like you want.

And yes, the shield and other hits that don't *look* like they hit actually DO hit, as I already said. Using them as a reason is flawed.



Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 18:06:52)

quote:

. The reason the skill grays out and is unusable on the second turn if you used a potion or a trinket the very first turn is because there is no count for it to recognize to be able to switch.


Actually what happens is the opposite - The skill only grays out when i use a attack misses or if i haven't attacked at all.

Successful attacks will make it available. Trinket attacks included.

Blocked attacks will make it not available. Blocked trinket attacks as well.

Potions/Shields/Heals will not affect its state (if its available it remains available, likewise if its unavailable it remains that way)

Here are some examples:

- Turn 1 shield + applies passive, turn 2 can't switch passive. The passive is active, but switch is grayed out.

- Turn 1 blocked attack + applies passive, turn 2 can't switch passive. The passive is active, but switch is grayed out.

- Turn 1 trinket attack, turn 2 can switch passive (though it won't do anything since it is not applied). The passive is NOT active, but switch is available.

- Turn 1 attack/trinket/skill/anything that damages the enemy, turn 2 shield + applies passive, turn 3 CAN switch passive.

What i'm trying to say: The problem lies on example 1 and 2, not on 3. Of course it won't switch something that does not exist. But when it DOES exist i can't switch.

All i am asking is that the "must hit the opponent" requirement to be removed so the switch can be used even if my attack was blocked

Sorry for being a nuisance and pestering about this, but i'm just trying to give feedback about something that could *possibly* be improved.



Melissa4Bella -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 18:27:13)

Ash has answered the question in a few different ways now. He's explained the what's, the why's, the how's. Just because a player doesn't like the answer doesn't mean that the answer is wrong. I think that's enough.

Fixed a typo



Zeldax -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 18:44:50)

You know, you could have told Ash about this when it was still in testing phase. But even if you did that, he won't do it. He already posted why.



Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 18:51:51)

I only noticed the issue now, which is why i'm posting about it now. I think it is better late than never though.



Ash -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 19:04:47)

I'm not tinkering/altering/changing/adjusting/messing/fiddling with the passive. It works, it's not glitching out anymore, and it's doing what it's supposed to be doing. There's protection coding in place to make sure no one can, intentionally or not, do something that might cause glitches. I'm not going to spend another week re-writing it to make it work a little bit better, when it's not necessary. Unless it's breaking it's not getting changed. I understand that you want to get that extra .2% out of it, I'm still not going to go adjusting it.



Mr G W -> RE: =DF= DeathKnight Discussion Thread (10/15/2014 19:13:36)

Fair enough, even a small change like this can cause mountains of trouble. Not really worth it.



Page: <<   < prev  18 19 20 [21] 22   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.125