RE: Guests (Full Version)

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



Message

Mooselim -> RE: Guests (2/24/2020 14:46:14)

@The_element
quote:

If it's not very good, then I guess you won't mind pet dragon and baby chimera being changed, such that their shields cannot be used in a single battle.

I don't understand why you're bringing up Pet Dragon's shield when talking about Baby Chimera specifically, nor do I understand the logic here.

quote:

Surely you can see the similarity between pets with manual pet actions and guests, right? At this point, pets are essentially unhittable guests.

Sorry, I don't see this similarity? For one, guests are much more powerful than pets. You seem to be thinking of them as equal in power level and that the fact that pets can't be hit is a bonus towards them, when if anything it's the opposite. A huge part of the problem with guests that people have mentioned yet, has seemingly gone ignored, is the targeting. The fact that they take damage off the player while providing A. damage and B. utility.




The_element -> RE: Guests (2/24/2020 15:05:01)

@Mooselim

quote:

I don't understand why you're bringing up Pet Dragon's shield when talking about Baby Chimera specifically, nor do I understand the logic here.


I'm talking about using both pet dragon's shield and baby chimera's shield in a single battle, to give the player a lot of survivability. This should be changed, such that their respective shields cannot both be used in a single battle, for example:

a) if you use pet dragon's shield, you cannot use baby chimera's shield (gives +0 b/p/d)
b) if you use baby chimera's shield, you cannot use pet dragon's shield (gives +0 m/p/m)

quote:

Sorry, I don't see this similarity? For one, guests are much more powerful than pets. You seem to be thinking of them as equal in power level and that the fact that pets can't be hit is a bonus towards them, when if anything it's the opposite. A huge part of the problem with guests that people have mentioned yet, has seemingly gone ignored, is the targeting. The fact that they take damage off the player while providing A. damage and B. utility.


I mentioned a possible solution to guests, which was to code the Pandora Ex fight and possibly subsequent fights so they focus only on the player. As mentioned by ErosionSeeker, you could also add more AoE attacks in future inn challenges to make them punish guests more.



Ultima29 -> RE: Guests (2/24/2020 16:24:00)

This thread is about guests...

Why are you trying to divert attention away from how unfair guests are by complaining about chimera and dragon shields in a fight. Those 2 things are not even on the same scale of strength

Also how can you understand that if pandora only targets you and not guests then your guest can hammer away at her while you have defenses up and are doing dumb things like pirate blinds

If all these various players that are more skilled are offering their valid comments why do you keep ignoring them and saying irrelevant things



The_element -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 8:04:20)

@Ultima29

quote:

Also how can you understand that if pandora only targets you and not guests then your guest can hammer away at her while you have defenses up and are doing dumb things like pirate blinds


Have you tried using a blind on Pandora Ex whilst she's inverted?

quote:

If all these various players that are more skilled are offering their valid comments why do you keep ignoring them and saying irrelevant things


I only ignore them if they say ridiculous things like using a blind on Pandora Ex



BluuHorseOfficial -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 9:33:49)

If you map out a rotation for her you will notice that she spends two turns reverted and 3 turns inverted. You can blind her on two of the reverted turns and shield on the first inverted turn (its only +70 BtH) or just facetank it.

Besides, the Pirate Guests (if enemies only target you) point is extremely valid for any challenge that does not invert statuses or increase their own BtH. Guests only targeting the player would likely bring about its own set of problems such as unkillable sources of high damage in the form of Artix, Nythera, Aegis, and Leon, or an impenetrable wall of defense in the form of Rhubarb, Mazurek, or, again, Aegis. While Pets are also unkillable sources of damage, their damage is usually negligible in the grand scheme of things, and the only place where the strongest offensive pet (200 Fighting/Magic Dragon) is viable is to complement a bad class with a low damage output,otherwise you just use them as an extra source of statuses. Keep in mind that the best status applying pets are either obtained through hard Inn Challenges (Baby Chimera and Hacked Magi Drone) or through an obnoxious daily in feeding your Dragon (which is a whole other issue I have with the game due to how unfair it can be to NDC players, yes, contrary to popular belief I do actually care a lot about people without as many resources as I do and have argued about this in the past, but that's a whole other topic) so it's not as if "broken" pets are running around the place either.

Also, I really didn't want to fuel this fire, but something that is not overpowered and is either balanced or underpowered should not be nerfed. It will affect nobody's playstyle if something underpowered was nerfed; and nobody would mind it all that much, really, but is that really an excuse for making a bad thing worse? Does something that doesn't even break the game deserve to be nerfed? The answer is no, it doesn't, and the Chimera shield does not deserve to be nerfed as it is only somewhat decent by magnitude and affects the BPD Stat, which is the worse defensive Stat, and it's existence is really not tipping the scales in your favor.

Also you have ignored everything we said so far and used your initial statements as "arguments" to counter the logical claims we provided to debunk your gaping logical fallacies.



ballistik -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 9:45:37)

@The_element - At least you admit you ignore arguments. And you've proven you have no idea what you're talking about. Blinds are a very viable strategy for Pandora EX. Example:
Pandora has 3 inversion attacks and then 2 reversion. A lot of classes' blinds are 3 turns (baby dragon is 2 turn). If you use the blind on the 3rd inversion attack, yes that attack will have +bth but the next 2 reversion attacks will have -bth. So you sacrifice 1 turn of being dmg-ed, for 2 of pandora missing most attacks (especially if you combine with high mpm, she can miss everything). Additionally, if the 3rd inversion attack is the cube, you'll have sacrificed nothing, since the cube attack is guaranteed to hit. So you've actually gained 2 -bth reversion turns for free.

Since you've already posted a video of my channel, maybe you can go to check the latest videos of Pandora EX done with NDC classes and get educated on how to use blinds for that fight.

Anyway, the reason Pirate Guests are not used for that fight is because the stun guests were a much more reliable strategy in this special case. However, pirate guests are very reliable for bosses that do not have constant +bth or inversion turns.

Please stop spreading misinformation.



Ultima29 -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 9:54:17)

You can't just set up a strawman and ignore the use of pirates for everything else and focus on pandora ex only just to help get a single point that you somehow think is valid. Pandora being an example in that case doesn't invalidate pirate blinds on other fights such as ancient duo. That ain't it chief...

Here's the definition of a strawman btw.

"an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument."



dawnchere -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 10:21:11)

quote:

I only ignore them if they say ridiculous things like using a blind on Pandora Ex


Now you're just cherrypicking things to fit your argument. Other than one instance by Ultima, who only just joined the thread (and whom ballistik has explained how blinds can work in Pandora EX), no one else in the entire thread mentioned blinds on Pandora EX but usage of blinds at the inn in general. Yet you continue to ignore what they have to say, giving input when you yourself mentioned that you're unsure how they actually work (re: pirate blinds in post #56), straight up ignoring how blinds/shields make the player untargetable and stating how an increase in damage is sufficient to "balance" things out (post #75; it doesn't matter how much extra damage bringing guests along does if the enemy doesn't get to hit you).

The point of the thread from the beginning has been about inn challenges in general and how guests have been bringing an unfair advantage to the table. Singling out Pandora EX as a fight where blinds may not be as viable a strategy doesn't mean that blinds are no longer overpowered in other instances. In addition to ignoring this fact, throughout the thread you even deviate from the main point by bringing up how

quote:

I reckon in the future, people will ask for a pet dragon shield nerf, because you can use baby chimera and pet dragon shields consecutively.


in post #35, and then somehow be the very first one to digress and advocate (post #51) banning the usage of dragon and chimera in the same fight even when others have brought up that it is in fact not an OP strategy. What it seems to me is that you have chosen to navigate the conversation in a way that suits your own narrative, while turning a blind eye to the numerous other input given by other players.

At the end of the day I'm not here to convince or change your mind. It is obvious that you are going to stick to your guns no matter what happens and find justify your statements. And that's fine, because everyone is allowed to have their own opinion. But just some food for thought: if what everyone else brings up seems to be "wrong", maybe it might be worth taking a step back and consider that you might have accidentally gotten something mistaken somewhere?



Kiyofriend -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 11:41:41)

Not of my like to reply to this kind of cesspool, so here we go. Guests are overpowered? Yeah, they are for most if not every fight and ruin part if not all of the fun, nobody that fights in the inn for the pleasure of winning uses guests, myself included. Does this mean Guests should straigtht up be banned from the Inn? Probably not, let us go back to when Guests actually increased both DMG and Health, in those times nobody used guests because they made the fight harder, not easier. Verly saw this and in both, and attempt to make Guests more useful for the inn and to make CHA as a stat a more appealing choice, he reworked the increment of DMG and HP of the enemies, and it was a sucesses. Guests did become viable for the inn. But.... that let us here.

First, let me make something clear, Guests are part of the game, so are clases, so are food, so are potions, is a resource. What would you guys do if Verly realesed a fight that quite much *forces* the use of Guests as a resource given the difficulty of it, just like much of the other fights forces the use of specific resourses? Is hipotetically of course, I'm not saying verly is going to do that whatsoever, is just to put in contrasts that at the end of the day, Guests are a resource.

Then, what's the ideal answer here? Guests may indeed, need a complete rework that doesn't need to be a "Increases the HP and DMG of the enemy!" as too much of that and Guests become useless, too little and they become OP. A real rework in how they behave, its skills and how they can alter the fight, so they become a Resource just like Food, extra potions, and quite much everything else is. Now, the controversial part here is that Guests.... need to make the fight a little easier, that's the point of a resource after all, nobody would use a resource that makes the fight harder. But it needs to be done in a way that feels satisfying for everyone. It doesn't sound easy at all, and is probably something that will take time to be done, but that's the best answer in the long run.



The_element -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 11:50:49)

@Blue

quote:

If you map out a rotation for her you will notice that she spends two turns reverted and 3 turns inverted. You can blind her on two of the reverted turns and shield on the first inverted turn (its only +70 BtH) or just facetank it.


I don't think you realise that when she reverts effects, the reverted effects last longer than the original debuff. I tried what you just said in your quote above, and here's the results

1st attack: Pandora reverted. Does 220% damage due to guests, has -70 bth, +70 crit, total bth and crit are -52 and 91 respectively
2nd attack: Pandora reverted. Does 220% damage due to guests, has -70 bth, +70 crit, total bth and crit are -52 and 91 respectively
3rd attack: Pandora inverted. Does 220% damage due to guests, has +70 bth, +70 crit, total bth and crit are 88 and 91 respectively, heals from attacks that connect
4th attack: Pandora inverted. Does 220% damage due to guests, has +140 bth, 0 crit, total bth and crit are 158 and 21 respectively, heal from attacks that connect

If you don't believe me feel free to test this out yourself, also note that Pandora has a passive +18 bth and +21 crit as well. You'd probably agree with me that pirate blinds aren't very good for Pandora Ex, due to the extra damage, extra bonus, extra crit and extra healing. Also as Pandora starts with Lust she gets +100 bth and will probably kill pirate guests very quickly. I think someone would be better off showing Au'Bacon Mace than using pirate guests.

quote:

Besides, the Pirate Guests (if enemies only target you) point is extremely valid for any challenge that does not invert statuses or increase their own BtH


A lot of the harder challenges have bosses that can increase their own bth

quote:

Also, I really didn't want to fuel this fire, but something that is not overpowered and is either balanced or underpowered should not be nerfed. It will affect nobody's playstyle if something underpowered was nerfed; and nobody would mind it all that much, really, but is that really an excuse for making a bad thing worse? Does something that doesn't even break the game deserve to be nerfed? The answer is no, it doesn't, and the Chimera shield does not deserve to be nerfed as it is only somewhat decent by magnitude and affects the BPD Stat, which is the worse defensive Stat, and it's existence is really not tipping the scales in your favor.


I'm not saying baby chimera when isolated is broken, it's the fact you can use both, baby chimera and pet dragon, in a single battle. Here's a quote from one of my previous posts (post 77):

quote:

I'm talking about using both pet dragon's shield and baby chimera's shield in a single battle, to give the player a lot of survivability. This should be changed, such that their respective shields cannot both be used in a single battle, for example:

a) if you use pet dragon's shield, you cannot use baby chimera's shield (gives +0 b/p/d)
b) if you use baby chimera's shield, you cannot use pet dragon's shield (gives +0 m/p/m)


------

quote:

Also you have ignored everything we said so far and used your initial statements as "arguments" to counter the logical claims we provided to debunk your gaping logical fallacies.


I've pretty much responded to everything you've said and your arguments in my previous posts. I even used direct quotes lol

@ballistik

quote:

@The_element - At least you admit you ignore arguments. And you've proven you have no idea what you're talking about. Blinds are a very viable strategy for Pandora EX. Example:
Pandora has 3 inversion attacks and then 2 reversion. A lot of classes' blinds are 3 turns (baby dragon is 2 turn). If you use the blind on the 3rd inversion attack, yes that attack will have +bth but the next 2 reversion attacks will have -bth. So you sacrifice 1 turn of being dmg-ed, for 2 of pandora missing most attacks (especially if you combine with high mpm, she can miss everything). Additionally, if the 3rd inversion attack is the cube, you'll have sacrificed nothing, since the cube attack is guaranteed to hit. So you've actually gained 2 -bth reversion turns for free.


I'm not sure if you're purposely being disingenuous as you've constantly misquoted me throughout this thread, my response was to ultima who even mentioned 'doing dumb things like pirate blinds'. I even quoted him and put the words pirate blinds in bold, so it was obvious post 79 was in reference to him and to pirate blinds. You've misquoted or misinterpreted my posts so many times, it almost feels like you have to do this in order to make your arguments seem stronger lol

@Ultima- Here's a quote from one of your posts (post 78)

quote:

Also how can you understand that if pandora only targets you and not guests then your guest can hammer away at her while you have defenses up and are doing dumb things like pirate blinds


I literally responded to your quote, let's just agree that pirate blinds aren't a great idea for Pandora Ex.


@dawnchere

quote:

Now you're just cherrypicking things to fit your argument. Other than one instance by Ultima, who only just joined the thread (and whom ballistik has explained how blinds can work in Pandora EX), no one else in the entire thread mentioned blinds on Pandora EX but usage of blinds at the inn in general.


My response was to ultima who even mentioned 'doing dumb things like pirate blinds'. I even quoted him and put the words pirate blinds in bold, so it was obvious post 79 was in reference to him, pandora and to pirate blinds.

quote:

in post #35, and then somehow be the very first one to digress and advocate (post #51) banning the usage of dragon and chimera in the same fight even when others have brought up that it is in fact not an OP strategy. What it seems to me is that you have chosen to navigate the conversation in a way that suits your own narrative, while turning a blind eye to the numerous other input given by other players.


Pets using manual pet actions and guest are very similar and throughout this thread I've responded to most of the comments of other people, I've even directly quoted them from the most part. Using both pet dragon and baby chimera in the same battle is OP and I even explained how it was OP in one of my previous posts. Here's a direct quote from one of my previous posts (post 64)

quote:

Pet swapping was being abused hence why Verlyrus added 'Waking Up' 1-turn pet stun effect in the game. A lot of players, especially on the discord, love using both baby chimera and pet dragon to get that free 5 turns of defence or sometimes 9 turns of defence to unleash their combos and do massive damage. This is overpowered and it's obvious that Verlyrus hasn't gone far enough in punishing use of both baby chimera and pet dragon. By doing the following:

Class shield ---> Chimera shield ---> Class shield again ---> Pet dragon shield

That's 9 turns of defence, not including any other stuff like blinds, debuffs or zardburger. I think wasting a few pet turns to get many, many turns of defence is worth it. What's the point of balancing the game if this is allowed to continue lol







ballistik -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 12:08:53)

@The_element - You're again ignoring most of what is said and just repeating your things.

This is your quote "I only ignore them if they say ridiculous things like using a blind on Pandora Ex". This is not talking about pirate blinds, this says "a blind". That's what I was responding to. Your statement that it's ridiculous to use A BLIND on Pandora EX is false. You can spin it however you want to fit your narrative.


Anyway I'll try to finalize this, since there is no hope. The only reason people kept responding to you is because you're spreading misinformation. But I'll try to speak on behalf of the discord community that has been an active part of this discussion. Your goal-posting, misinformation and intentional ignorance of arguments is absurd. We won't bother to respond to you anymore as it's clear that you are not able to take an ounce of self-reflection and criticism.



The_element -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 12:25:46)

@ballstik

My response was to ultima who even mentioned 'doing dumb things like pirate blinds'. I even quoted him and put the words pirate blinds in bold, so it was obvious post 79 was in reference to him, pandora and to pirate blinds. Maybe it's a coincidence that I replied to someone, and even quoted them, mentioning pirate blinds in the pandora ex fight. Again you're taking something I said out of context and being disingenuous to make your arguments seem stronger.

Here's the direct quote from Ultima (post 78) I was referencing btw:

quote:

Also how can you understand that if pandora only targets you and not guests then your guest can hammer away at her while you have defenses up and are doing dumb things like pirate blinds



BluuHorseOfficial -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 12:37:33)

@The_element, Talking to you is hopeless.



On a more constructive note, I agree with Kiyo's points, guests do have to be reworked to some degree to be able to be made interesting as increasing the enemy health pool will revert us back to older times when guests were as great or used as often (they were still used for Undead Duo iirc when it came out). The issue with this is that it would be complex and would require a considerable amount of time and effort to implement and as the OP of this thread, I don't want to be the reason that more workload is added to the devs' plates as there are few and they have other priorities. Besides aforementioned solutions to remedy the random targeting RNG meatshield issue, one potential solution would be to make stronger guest effects scale off of CHA somehow; so that for a better output from guests you would have to sacrifice a stat to make room for CHA, and as a result, either your own offensive power or survivability would be compromised to enhance your guests. This will make the player assess if the loss in survivability of the player can be made up for by the effects applied by the guests: for example, if the Pirate guests' blinds were 10 base and could be increased to 70 with CHA or ally shields starting at 40 and could be increased to 140 or something in that general direction then you would have an incentive to use CHA. As for Guest Stuns, making them uniform, such as making all of them a 1 turn stun on a large cooldowns which could be decreased with CHA similar to the Pet Dragon or having stuns inflict +Immo to the enemy to discourage chain stunning could be a remedy for stun guest strategies.

Of course, these are just things that came into my mind, feel free to point out any flaws you find with my ideas or any suggestions to make them better.



Ultima29 -> RE: Guests (2/25/2020 12:57:20)

That was a single example of pirate blinds, I could've easily just brought up ancient duo or any other fight that pirates help carry. Stop straw-manning my point. Have some self reflection and think about what's being said instead of saying irrelevant comments to shift the discussion away from the obvious strength of guests...

On another note I feel that maybe guests could be locked to specific fights where the guest is given to the player for that. That would be easier to balance while still having that aspect of gameplay. It could also add flavor thematically.



Frogger -> RE: Guests (3/2/2020 5:04:24)

Generally I don't bother with the Inn, and I generally don't weigh in on discussions in the Forums.

While, yes, the Inn is intended as a challenge for endgame players, it is still available for any player of almost any level to have a go at, if they so choose.
By making the Inn available to such an eclectic mix of player levels and player types, it's inevitable that there will be disagreements about the "best way" to go about the Inn challenges.

What difference does it make to you, as a player, if someone uses guests? If I want to take Artix and Rolith to the Inn and smash out some challenges, how in any way does that affect any of you?
Exactly, it doesn't. If your ego is fragile enough to be threatened by people completing the Inn "illegitimately", then lobby for the Inn to be an endgame-only challenge. Restricted to level 85+, no guests.
How someone beats the Inn is none of your business - if you want to go through the Inn solo and really test your knowledge of DragonFable, then go ahead! No one is stopping you. Equally, no one is stopping level 5 Jim with Artix and Rolith from cranking out a few Inn challenges. Sure, it isn't the same as beating the Inn solo and without guests, but what difference does it make to you? What real, tangible difference? None at all.
Personally, I object to DoomKnight V1 being banned from the Inn - after all, I've paid (a ridiculous fee) for it, so why can't I use it in the challenges? I got the class because I like the game, and I paid a large sum of money to obtain the class, so surely I should be able to use it in the Inn? But I'm not. I personally can't be bothered to go out and train up a class when I've already paid for objectively the best class in the game, so why shouldn't I be able to use it in the Inn? Same principle with using guests for the Inn fights. It's part of the game, therefore I should be able to use it if I want to. No one is stopping you from putting restrictions, such as a solo-only run, in place to make your victories at the Inn more satisfying for you.
If you lot want to spend your time finding strategies to solo it, then go ahead. No one is stopping you.

But guests are a feature of the game, and shouldn't be banned from the Inn while lower-level players are still able to fight at the Inn. If you want the Inn to be endgame only, then restrict it to endgame levels.
Life isn't fair, and not everyone wants to play through the Inn and find the best strategy. Get used to it and stop moaning because you feel like it removes value from your solo run of the Inn. It doesn't.



ProbablyCallum -> RE: Guests (3/2/2020 5:32:38)

Ok v1 main who's account was made in 2007 yet somehow is only level 33 and doesnt even have most classes trained, you definitely know what you are talking about and are qualified have a place in this discussion. Thank you for your input.



Frogger -> RE: Guests (3/2/2020 6:20:29)

Any need for the aggression?

I've played on and off with a mainly story-driven character, and don't have time to grind up to level 90 considering I'm in the final year of my degree, so I don't have time to do much other than login and catch up on the releases I want to catch up on.
The odd thing about having 6 character slots available is that I might also have other characters who may be more suited to the Inn, and it's not unlikely that I've simply linked my main, oldest, and favourite character.

Does that invalidate my opinion? No. I play the game too, so my input is as valid as yours.


quote:

Ok v1 main who's account was made in 2007 yet somehow is only level 33 and doesnt even have most classes trained, you definitely know what you are talking about and are qualified have a place in this discussion. Thank you for your input.


Furthers the point I made earlier about fragile egos feeling invalidated by someone else doing it differently to you...
(Also, it's whose, not who's. The account belongs to, and is associated with, me.)



ProbablyCallum -> RE: Guests (3/2/2020 6:52:50)

quote:

Does that invalidate my opinion

It does. If you're a story player then the only thing you're qualified to speak about is the story, You have no place talking about inn balance and you've clearly got no concept or knowledge of anything on the gameplay side of things other than facerolling story quests as V1.
quote:

bUt WhO sAiD iT's My OnLy AcCoUnT tHoUgH

By all means post your level 90 alts then.
This thread has pretty much exhausted all valid points by now but feel free to keep posting. Your "I hurled 80 dollars at df so i should get a free win button for things that are supposed to require thought put into them and anyone that thinks thats bad is an egotist" argument is really putting players like you in a charming light. Maybe you'd be more suited to mobile games or aqw.



Frogger -> RE: Guests (3/2/2020 7:08:37)

You've not answered the questions from my original post.
I've asked how the use of guests by other people affects your experience of the game. My account, my characters, don't have any bearing on your experience of DF. Just because my opinion differs from "guests bad Inn endgame only" doesn't invalidate my opinion - nor does it mean that:
quote:

If you're a story player then the only thing you're qualified to speak about is the story, You have no place talking about inn balance and you've clearly got no concept or knowledge of anything on the gameplay side of things other than facerolling story quests as V1.


I'd just like to point out that I originally said:
quote:

I've played on and off with a mainly story-driven character, and don't have time to grind up to level 90 considering I'm in the final year of my degree, so I don't have time to do much other than login and catch up on the releases I want to catch up on.

Does that mean that Circelgan is for story use only? Nope. I said I mainly play for the story, but also "catch up on releases I want to catch up on". If that means I crack out an Inn challenge using DmKV2 or basic Warrior, does that have any bearing on your choice to solo the Inn?

No, it doesn't.
You still get the bragging right of "I beat the Inn solo". For those who care about that, that's great.
I don't. I like playing the game in leisure time, and there's no reason why I shouldn't be able to play any aspect of it if I so choose.
If that means I take a full party of guests and my baby dragon in my DmKV2 armour, then that still has no bearing on your experience of the game.

If the Inn was truly meant to be an endgame-only challenge (instead of only being recommended as one), then it should be level-restricted to the highest levels of the game and have guests stripped from it.

The DmKV1 argument isn't relevant to the thread; I used it as an example of how tackling the Inn challenges should, in my opinion, be at the discretion of the player.

If Verlyrus and Dove want to make a real endgame challenge and restrict it to level 85+, then I just have to accept the fact that I can't play through the Inn with Circelgan. Until then, people can and will use guests in the Inn; it makes no difference to how you experience the game, and constant whinging on the forums about how it devalues the achievement of the Inn is meaningless as long as the Inn remains open to sub-endgame levels.



BluuHorseOfficial -> RE: Guests (3/2/2020 7:42:56)

quote:

While, yes, the Inn is intended as a challenge for endgame players, it is still available for any player of almost any level to have a go at, if they so choose.
By making the Inn available to such an eclectic mix of player levels and player types, it's inevitable that there will be disagreements about the "best way" to go about the Inn challenges.
Endgame by definition refers to content that is played after one beats a game (or in DF's case, completes the story so far and grinds to level 90) and as a result is balanced around players who are at level 90. It is still available for players of any level to go to it in case they want a challenge even at the low levels; and challenges such as the Dragon and Nefarious Challenges, as well as a few others, can very well be beaten by low-level players with good enough knowledge of the game. However, it is not exactly designed to be played by them and as such, newer/less experienced players should stay away from the Inn at low levels.

quote:

What difference does it make to you, as a player, if someone uses guests? If I want to take Artix and Rolith to the Inn and smash out some challenges, how in any way does that affect any of you?
Exactly, it doesn't. If your ego is fragile enough to be threatened by people completing the Inn "illegitimately", then lobby for the Inn to be an endgame-only challenge. Restricted to level 85+, no guests.
How someone beats the Inn is none of your business - if you want to go through the Inn solo and really test your knowledge of DragonFable, then go ahead! No one is stopping you. Equally, no one is stopping level 5 Jim with Artix and Rolith from cranking out a few Inn challenges. Sure, it isn't the same as beating the Inn solo and without guests, but what difference does it make to you? What real, tangible difference? None at all.
This question references the topic of balance and is in the same vein as the "single-player game" comment, which has been countered earlier. Game Balance is something the developers care highly about. For example, as Marthe said, ChaosWeaver had an extensive testing period and underwent 9 iterations so as to come out with a well-balanced class. Monthly reimaginations and buffs to older classes such as Pirate and Technomancer as well as nerfs to unfair Challenges such as old Failed Doom and old Beginning and End are more than evidence of the fact that Verlyrus wants the game to be balanced and well-designed and the single-player comment is highly disrespectful to his efforts.

Furthermore, there are players who try their best to figure out the boss' mechanics even on release night and keep bashing their heads against the wall until it breaks. It's honestly very demotivating when you find out that all that effort you poured into carefully mapping out a strategy, insisting on trial-and-error until finally executing it successfully is completely unnecessary when you could simply just "take Artix and Rolith to the Inn and smash out some challenges" and get their rewards, no sweat.

And before you argue with the classic "If you don't like them, don't use them" comment, I would like to counterargue that ignoring a glaring issue doesn't make it go away. It's still a wrench in the gears of game design and balance.

quote:

Personally, I object to DoomKnight V1 being banned from the Inn - after all, I've paid (a ridiculous fee) for it, so why can't I use it in the challenges? I got the class because I like the game, and I paid a large sum of money to obtain the class, so surely I should be able to use it in the Inn? But I'm not. I personally can't be bothered to go out and train up a class when I've already paid for objectively the best class in the game, so why shouldn't I be able to use it in the Inn? Same principle with using guests for the Inn fights. It's part of the game, therefore I should be able to use it if I want to. No one is stopping you from putting restrictions, such as a solo-only run, in place to make your victories at the Inn more satisfying for you.
If you lot want to spend your time finding strategies to solo it, then go ahead. No one is stopping you.
Just because you paid 80$ doesn't make you the king of the game. You already have the literal best questing, farming, and warring class in the game and can already trivialize one of the hardest solo challenges in the game-Yllmar, the Maw of the Deep. It literally has a button that steals 15% of the enemy's HP and gives it to you, why would it be allowed in an endgame arena where you're supposed to use your brain instead of braindead-spamming a button until you inevitably win? How would you even find this satisfying, or for that matter, consider it fair that others have to struggle to do what you did in 15 turns at max? Why do you think this broken armor with so many broken features such as -100 Darkness Resistance, halved Mana Costs on a Mana-Hungry Class, 800% damage Blood Rite, with Life Carve being the cherry on top of the cake was pretty much made inaccessible for those that don't already have it?

Also, you have access to DoomKnight v2, which is the next strongest class in the game, and you are allowed to use that for 90% of challenges (it's banned from Exemperor, Exraveler, and triggers a special damage boost on Sepulchure). That's the strongest non-rare class in the game which is also not insanely broken and performs well against several challenges. I also have to ask, do you consider if fair that, if v1 was allowed in the Inn, people who paid 80$ similarly to you wouldn't get to use the same class that you use to trivialize challenges?

Also, in my honest opinion, if you can be least bothered to train classes and get gear to beat Inn Challenges, you don't even come close to deserving the rewards.

quote:

But guests are a feature of the game, and shouldn't be banned from the Inn while lower-level players are still able to fight at the Inn. If you want the Inn to be endgame only, then restrict it to endgame levels.
Life isn't fair, and not everyone wants to play through the Inn and find the best strategy. Get used to it and stop moaning because you feel like it removes value from your solo run of the Inn. It doesn't.
And they won't be banned from the Inn. I have said this before. Verlyrus doesn't want to blanket ban them from the Inn and wants to make them interesting and not stinky cheese. We don't want them to be banned anymore, we just want them to not be disgusting and game-breaking.

quote:

(Also, it's whose, not who's. The account belongs to, and is associated with, me.)
Sure, by all means, pretend to not understand someone and patronize them over grammar because you have no valid points left to make.

quote:

I've played on and off with a mainly story-driven character, and don't have time to grind up to level 90 considering I'm in the final year of my degree, so I don't have time to do much other than login and catch up on the releases I want to catch up on.
The odd thing about having 6 character slots available is that I might also have other characters who may be more suited to the Inn, and it's not unlikely that I've simply linked my main, oldest, and favorite character.
Then you have full right to talk about the story and add in whatever you want to add in, in regards to that. But you don't touch the Inn because of real-life forces and really don't know what you're talking about so it's best you don't.

quote:

Furthers the point I made earlier about fragile egos feeling invalidated by someone else doing it differently to you...
There are several ways to do a fight differently than just guests, such as different classes, builds, dragon and trinket skills, etc. The issue is when a strategy used is blatantly unbalanced.

quote:

Does that mean that Circelgan is for story use only? Nope. I said I mainly play for the story, but also "catch up on releases I want to catch up on". If that means I crack out an Inn challenge using DmKV2 or basic Warrior, does that have any bearing on your choice to solo the Inn?
He never said that, he said that you never used Circlegan or any of your characters for the Inn so you don't know what you're talking about and don't exactly have an informed opinion when it comes to the Inn.

quote:

If the Inn was truly meant to be an endgame-only challenge (instead of only being recommended as one), then it should be level-restricted to the highest levels of the game and have guests stripped from it.
It is balanced around level 90 players and will obviously be too difficult for players below, say, level 80. And yes, it is only recommended as an endgame arena due to its difficulty but that doesn't mean that anyone at any level should be able to trivialize challenges with guests or any other broken devices with no thought put into the game. Again, people have managed to beat the early boards at low levels also.

quote:

If Verlyrus and Dove want to make a real endgame challenge and restrict it to level 85+, then I just have to accept the fact that I can't play through the Inn with Circelgan. Until then, people can and will use guests in the Inn; it makes no difference to how you experience the game, and constant whinging on the forums about how it devalues the achievement of the Inn is meaningless as long as the Inn remains open to sub-endgame levels.
I fail to see how these two are even connected. Guests are blatantly broken and overpowered because of enemy random targeting and that's why they should be changed.



Vikken101 -> RE: Guests (3/2/2020 7:54:10)

@frogger
quote:

Until then, people can and will use guests in the Inn; it makes no difference to how you experience the game, and constant whinging on the forums about how it devalues the achievement of the Inn is meaningless as long as the Inn remains open to sub-endgame levels.


All right, if thats what you have gotten out of this thread, after reading all the arguments people have put forth, then i have to reply.

Firstly, you have a right to give your opinion on the Inn however, we are discussing Game Balancing in a challenge area. The reason the inn most likely is not locked at lv.85+ is probably because would complain of being locked out of content. Which is why players below it can still have a go at them, even though besides the original two challenge boards, they are not really at all balanced for sub-endgame lv player.

Secondly, the Inn' originals purpose for endgame players to have something to sink their teeth into while they wait for other releases. Which is where the challenge aspect comes in. Fights are suppose to be time consuming, so you can make the proper rotations, learn the bosses mechanics and rotations and ultimately beat the challenges. If you don't personally have the time to do that, then so be it. Especially when your character is not nearly at endgame lv's, it does not seem fair for you to cast judgment on guest balancing if you just want to beat then the most cheesy and fastest way possible and move on. I'm no trying to sound elitist, but some times wins should not just be handed to you.

Thirdly, while how you win does not impact my experience, you seems to have ignored legitimate guest criticism many of us has put forth, about how they invalidate quite a few challenges. Even the person that makes and balances the challenges, wants guests to help in legitimate creative strategies, not not cheesy rng health sponges. Like whats the point of doing them in the most cheesy way possible, just for the sake of beating them? The rewards you get dont matter, since guests makes up for you not having gear from the inn of time to beat future challenges and the lore you get from a lot of them is minimal. So yeah, invalidating reasons for game balancing based on not having the time, or it not affecting other players is a mute point in my book, since it does in my opinion not bring anything to the discussion.

Finally, Boiling down this entire thread to "Whinging" and complaints seems very ignorant to what actually happening here. What originally started this thread, the most difficult challenge in the game being invalidate by guest, has been expanded to a lot of interesting points and new ideas for guest changes. And its nice to see Verlyrus seeing this thread, and starting to make some meaningful changes to guests in relation to the Inn of Time, which i personally immensely appreciate.



FMan -> RE: Guests (3/3/2020 0:10:16)

Im just gotta point out 2 things, and add an answer to a fellow player here, still supporting guests.

1. Why some people care that guests help in some challanges?
First, must say its not breaks the challange, breaking a challange is making a player attack carelessly, without being at risk, which doesn't happen, but Ill go with your thought of saying it makes challanges " cheese " and you feel frustrated cause some put a lot of thought to beat a challange. Why do you care that it helps them? It doesn't effect the players who put a lot of thought, who find it fun, and some get some extra help, and find it fun to claim the rewards.


2. About deserving rewards- its not a test in a degree/ job salary, it's a game, Im not sure those who pick the easiest way they can find to win challanges, read mechanics and come up with a plan don't deserve rewards. That's supposed to be for fun ( personally I read about Pride, Warth, Leorila, etc etc before facing them, cause didn't want to waste time about do X, it responds with Y, that's not my fun, my fun is to come up with an effective way to win the challanges, pretty sure there are others like me, or some who just want the rewards, and it makes them feel good to see strong gears on their chars / just those who think that if they win anyhow- that's their achievement, and don't mind the way.


To Basilik- Idk about the guests in Egomaniacs, Im telling you from my personal experience that they get in the way , even with fire resist gears, the one who did it without fire resists gears probablly used a strategy to take advantage of their low bonus/stun resist etc, and that strategizing, not breaking a challange ( also gotta finish it fast cause of the field damage, and guests take time, not the best strategy to use after all I guess). Ill add ancient duo then/ weird duo ( duos and trios in overall, especially high dmg ones ) / verly ( add bosses of high deff we might get in the future, they do 0 damage to the boss, paper tankers and make the boss do x3, so yea, they also can make it harder, depends on the enemy, and at challanges they make it easier, you gotta pick guests which fit to the strategy, and to do that you gotta know who's your opponent, mechanics ) . Doesnt matter what spesific challange they make it harder, they do make it harder sometimes, and the fact that we will consider which guests to use against which enemy proves that guests are part of the strategy, and you still gotta think your way towards the win and know the mechanics.



xelessarx -> RE: Guests (3/3/2020 4:34:45)

^You can just mimic one of the many strategies on youtube to instawin most of the challenges without ever thinking about the challenge already. If a person doesn't give any care about the challenge they would just do that to insta-win instead of playing with guests. So I don't think that is what most people's concern with the guests is. And if it is I'd just lol to their faces.

Main concern as far as I am aware is dodging how the fights' mechanics should work. Like some debuffs from enemy targeting not you but your allies etc. It breaks how the boss mechanics are supposed to work.



BluuHorseOfficial -> RE: Guests (3/3/2020 7:05:20)

The entire point of the thread was to highlight how enemy random targeting making enemies having a 66% chance of not attacking the player causes the bosses' devastating debuffs or effects to not affect or their skills to not damage the player, who, in the meanwhile, can set up as much as they want without repercussions and demolish a challenge. This causes you to completely overlook the enemy's mechanics. No strategy is required, you just have to pray you don't get hit. Not getting hit becomes easier when your guests can shield you or blind the enemy, so that, more often than not, the enemies won't even target you, and when they do, they won't hit you. Stuns were also a part of this issue but they seem to be somewhat balanced now.

But the entire purpose of the thread was to highlight how the enemy random targeting gives the player a very unfair advantage over the challenges while also bringing up the issues with guest effects which aid in this. While the initial few posts were composed of constructive discussion and even pointed out counter-arguments to common arguments that were expected to be (and also were) seen in this thread, but the thread has since been diminished to people arguing with the same arguments that were already refuted and completely derailed to off-topic semantic arguments about YouTube Videos being "not big brain" and Chimera Shield "being broken" and has exhausted any and all relevant points to the discussion. At this point, we're going in circles and Verlyrus is probably not gonna want to read this going on and on and on and providing nothing new to the thread topic while he's already working on making guests much less disgusting but still a viable alternative to solo strategies/builds. There is no point to further this discussion and to any mods reading this, I request this thread to be locked. It's been an unpleasant ride.



The_element -> RE: Guests (3/3/2020 10:35:16)

quote:

While the initial few posts were composed of constructive discussion and even pointed out counter-arguments to common arguments that were expected to be (and also were) seen in this thread, but the thread has since been diminished to people arguing with the same arguments that were already refuted and completely derailed to off-topic semantic arguments about YouTube Videos being "not big brain" and Chimera Shield "being broken" and has exhausted any and all relevant points to the discussion


Part of the problem with this thread was that certain individuals were being disingenuous by constantly misquoting and purposely misinterpreting posts of other users throughout this thread. For example, here's a quote of mine from post 85:


quote:

I'm not saying baby chimera when isolated is broken, it's the fact you can use both, baby chimera and pet dragon, in a single battle. Here's a quote from one of my previous posts (post 77):

quote:


I'm talking about using both pet dragon's shield and baby chimera's shield in a single battle, to give the player a lot of survivability. This should be changed, such that their respective shields cannot both be used in a single battle, for example:

a) if you use pet dragon's shield, you cannot use baby chimera's shield (gives +0 b/p/d)
b) if you use baby chimera's shield, you cannot use pet dragon's shield (gives +0 m/p/m)



Notice how the word 'both' is in italics twice, it implies that when using both pet dragon and pet chimera shield, the player gets a massive unfair amount of survivability. Here's a quote (post 64):

quote:

Pet swapping was being abused hence why Verlyrus added 'Waking Up' 1-turn pet stun effect in the game. A lot of players, especially on the discord, love using both baby chimera and pet dragon to get that free 5 turns of defence or sometimes 9 turns of defence to unleash their combos and do massive damage. This is overpowered and it's obvious that Verlyrus hasn't gone far enough in punishing use of both baby chimera and pet dragon. By doing the following:

Class shield ---> Chimera shield ---> Class shield again ---> Pet dragon shield

That's 9 turns of defence, not including any other stuff like blinds, debuffs or zardburger. I think wasting a few pet turns to get many, many turns of defence is worth it. What's the point of balancing the game if this is allowed to continue lol


Many people on this thread have misquoted or misinterpreted my posts so many times, it almost feels like they have to do this in order to make their arguments seem stronger



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.1728516