Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

RE: =OS= Balance Discussion Thread

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [Oversoul] >> Oversoul General Discussion >> RE: =OS= Balance Discussion Thread
Page 4 of 22«<23456>»
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
7/25/2013 12:41:52   
necro rouge
Member

@hakunin
Fresh start doesn't give max mana, that i can agree with. But if you're only getting 1 or 2 charges every time you're using it, you are using it wrong.
AQW  Post #: 76
7/25/2013 12:50:11   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

quote:


Neutral is not cost effiient, so it gets 10 energy from energy card.
Water is cost efficient, so it gets on average 7-8 energy from energy card.


Lower costs for lower benefits doesn't mean better cost efficiency. Water has no card as cost efficient as Corruption.
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 77
7/25/2013 13:00:42   
Mondez
Member

@TFP
The thing is you can't spam Corruption easily as water's regen cards. Lower costs for lower benefits can be very beneficial in battle. Again you are thinking along the lines of better the damage and benefits equal the better card, but problem is that they come in a hefty price whereas lower the cost better the stack.

Plus before CC, players who knew how to play water the way they were specialized in take the longest to duel as dueling ice because they can both shield and heal easily with their card costs.

Comparing a card Corruption to the cards of water is like comparing acid to chloride. Both are different in texture and material, but in this case it would be usage and efficiency.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 7/25/2013 13:05:38 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 78
7/25/2013 13:21:23   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

Corruption is basically 2 stacks of Shatter in that both cost 10 energy and after 4 turns will have done 2000 damage, except that Corruption is better because it only takes up one card slot and does damage every turn before the fourth turn when Shatter has the weakness of not always being able to connect at all in time.

Corruption doesn't need to be easily stackable because it's essentially stacks of lower proportioned cards (such as my example with Shatter) within a single card. Not that stacking Corruption is even all that difficult, especially with Neutralize.

What I don't get is why Fresh Start is more costly than Neutralize when it still wouldn't as be as effective in Water's strategies as Neutralize even if it had the same cost.
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 79
7/25/2013 13:27:53   
Mondez
Member

@TFP
As it was stated before Neutral characters have high card costs while Water have low card costs plus with Fresh Start I can easily heal 2k+ of health and shields also deal 3k+ damage with 2 Powerflows and still gain shields or healing within the 3rd to 4th turn is what is not registering with you. I said compare both card types with each element and you should already know a big difference. I've beaten opponents with Quaztk who used Neutral characters and had Corruption because with Fresh Start and spamming of Refresh, Healing Spring, Shields, and occasionally Powerflow.

Please I battle Scherzo's Founder Champ with Orc Chieftan and I had 2 Corruptions in my deck that was easily defeated by the combination of both Shields and heals. Corruption may seem strong, but do remember that the damage is dealt over time giving you enough incentive to block most of the damage plus your opponent is suffering from a loss of energy.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 7/25/2013 13:31:31 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 80
7/25/2013 13:31:30   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

But just because Water has low card costs doesn't mean it could get more out of a card like Fresh Start, quite the reverse actually...
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 81
7/25/2013 13:33:59   
Mondez
Member

@TFP
The discards are appropriate to the cost since a empty hand is a dangerous hand. What you want an energy cost to Fresh Start? That would defeat the purpose. Both cards are different and they are suitable to the elements that they were assigned.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 82
7/25/2013 13:39:48   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

No I don't want an energy cost that would be silly of course, what I'm looking for is its cost reduced to 1 card, same as Neutralize.

Another way of looking at the issue of stackability is how Burn may be more stackable than Poison with its lower cost, but Poison offers valuable compression and essentially would be the equal of two stacks of Burn, but it takes the penalty of taking an extra turn to run its course in recognition of its ability to essentially compress stacks of multiple lower-proportioned cards into one card.

< Message edited by The Finnish Phoenix -- 7/25/2013 13:40:53 >
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 83
7/25/2013 13:44:11   
Mondez
Member

@TFP
Fresh Start is fine as it is reducing it to one would make Water too efficient against other characters meaning they'll spam their cards a lot more easier than before.

Poison is also fine because it was literally OP in its previous form plus nerfing it again by increasing turn and lessening damage over time gives too much initiative to other elements in a battle.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 7/25/2013 13:51:27 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 84
7/25/2013 13:51:00   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

I don't think it would though because Water is currently underpowered and Neutral is one of the best elements.

I wasn't suggesting that Poison should take an extra turn, I was pointing out why it currently takes 1 more turn than Burn. It's because its damage and energy cost are the same as 2 Burns combined but it only takes 1 card, so it's penalized by taking an extra turn to run its course.

This connects back to Incinerate, which people have argued is effectively Empower + Might, but the problem is that it compresses both into one card and so you only have to have 1 target, itself, and 1 discard (3 cards) whereas with Empower + Might you would need 2 targets, themselves, and 1 discard. 5 cards. This, of course, makes Incinerate better than Empower + Might and could cost an extra energy point as a penalty.
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 85
7/25/2013 13:56:35   
Mondez
Member

@TFP
Reason why Water is UP is because they are not offensive type cards and they are more like healers. Not enough cards have been released for Water which contributes to their UP'ness, but that doesn't mean Water is totally UP.

I see where you are coming from with Poison, but your solution causes Shadow to lose their main damage point which would cripple them severely since additional conditions would be crippling. Reason why burn is weak is because it is Fire's only DoT card that is sufficient in energy while the rest of their cards have high costs.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 7/25/2013 14:02:58 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 86
7/25/2013 14:02:14   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

I wasn't suggesting any solution for Poison, I'm saying Poison used to be 2 Burns compressed when it took 3 turns, but now it's been made to take 4, that's what I was saying. Fire Whirl is a better example. 2 Burns does 1200 damage over 3 turns for 6 energy, Fire Whirl does 1200 damage over 3 turns for 7 energy, and Poison does 1200 damage over 4 turns for 6 energy. Both Poison and Fire Whirl have penalties built into them when compared to 2 stacks of Burn because 2 stacks of Burn uses 2 cards, which is a penalty in of itself.

Since we can acknowledge that Water is UP then by putting Fresh Start at 1 discard shouldn't automatically be so significant as to make Water OP right?
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 87
7/25/2013 14:07:10   
Mondez
Member

@TFP
I'm not acknowledging the issue of Fresh Start since Water is still strong with the double discards, but decreasing the double creates more mobility plus increasing their advantage. I'm saying Water needs either more offensive type cards or a shield type card. Water at the moment is pretty good depending on the setup given to the character.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 7/25/2013 14:08:36 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 88
7/25/2013 14:11:36   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

If Fresh Start absolutely has to use 2 discards, which it shouldn't, then making Neutralize cost 2 cards too would at least make it even. Since Neutral's individual cards have such high energy costs its characters should theoretically have more cards that they'd be able to do away with in any give situation anyway...

Didn't Neutralize used to cost 3 cards?

< Message edited by The Finnish Phoenix -- 7/25/2013 14:12:26 >
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 89
7/25/2013 14:14:28   
The Jop
Member

Water's main characteristic is its healing, so a legendary card that is more effective than Greater Heal should help it, since light characters have more offensive cards than water characters they shouldn't also be better at healing. Spamming renews is less effective than spamming ice walls, so they need a new and more powerful card.

@Phoenix
Yes, Neutralize used to cost 3 cards but it was changed because of how much it weakened dual-element characters with neutralize. I don't think neutral characters with Neutralize needed its cost to be reduced to 1 card.

< Message edited by The Jop -- 7/25/2013 14:17:12 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 90
7/25/2013 14:16:55   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

That could work too. :) Especially for something like Quaztk Lord, it seems a shame that something like it that costs 100k + 20 Levels + 5 SG's is weaker than Aqueous which just costs 100k.
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 91
7/25/2013 14:17:22   
Mondez
Member

@TFP
Yes it did. Did you take into fact another reason why Neutralize was nerfed was because we have dual element characters like Queen Aegis and Skexis? Making Neutralize 2 discards would cripple Neutral characters and dual energy characters. Trying to make cards similar to each other won't help because remember what Sage typed about how each element is different.

*Edit: ninja'ed by the Jop.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 7/25/2013 14:19:08 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 92
7/25/2013 17:50:57   
The Finnish Phoenix
Member

Cripple is so unmusical a word. It would be a mild irritant for Neutral and dual-elemental characters, something not entirely undeserved considering how good they are. That being said, I'd much rather it be Frest Start to 1 than Neutralize to 2, but their having such different costs for the exact same effect just isn't cool or justifiable.

< Message edited by The Finnish Phoenix -- 7/25/2013 22:15:03 >
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 93
7/25/2013 19:15:09   
Jmagician
Member

I have been irritated by the Fresh Start/Neutralize comparisons for a while now. Make Fresh Start 1 card discard or set a fancier cost to it. I have almost always discarded a card I needed simply because I needed the energy more and losing that one card bites me in the back. It is too much.
AQW  Post #: 94
7/25/2013 19:21:21   
Mondez
Member

Well I set my bargaining chips on the table and you guys set yours. I would like to hear the opinions from the other players, the testers, and the AKs on the Neutralize vs Fresh Start balance because stating based opinions and reasoning won't get us anywhere with this issue. If majority agree Fresh Start should have 1 discard, I'll step down on my stance of keeping it the way it is.

My reason why Fresh Start should stay is because Water has cost efficient cards hence the sacrifice of the cards must be greater by using Fresh Start.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 7/25/2013 19:26:10 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 95
7/25/2013 19:30:43   
The Jop
Member

@Mondez
That's true, and was probably the developers' reasoning behind the cost, but I don't think Water is powerful enough that they need to balance it by making its cards worse.

< Message edited by The Jop -- 7/25/2013 19:31:08 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 96
7/25/2013 19:31:36   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 My view is that cards are balanced first and foremost by how they synergize within their own element. Look at Crush and Snow Orb. They both turn shield into damage but one is completely free. Why? Because Ice can stack shields better than Earth can and they can do it more reliably. Their Freeze gives them an extra turn to stack shields compared to Petrify. You HAVE to balance cards within the same element first. Then you balance the entire element against other elements. You're not going to get very far in terms of diversity and fun if every element is the same as the other one.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 97
7/25/2013 19:36:31   
Mondez
Member

@The Jop
Hence why Water needs more offensive cards or greater HP regen cards in its ranks for it to be on par with the other elements which I stated on this page or a previous page ago. If Fresh Start gains a cost like Neutralize then you should also change Energize as well if you think that card is unfair.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 98
7/25/2013 19:48:03   
The Jop
Member

@Mondez
I agree. I also said earlier in the thread that Water deserves a better health regeneration card, possibly at the legendary rank, since its cards are worse than Greater Heal.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 99
7/25/2013 21:10:00   
TheSage
Member

Please try comparing the regen cards to heal, or penance and not against the only legend healing card. Comparing them to Greater Heal at this point is useless, use the other healing cards for a comparison instead.

Water is a defensive type, Neutral is an average of defense and offense.
Water has more cards that are less than 5mana, Neutral has more cards that are 5mana or more.
Fresh Start is only in Water decks, Neutralize is in Neutral and other elemental decks.
(Wonders why nobody is even mentioning Energize's cost to play and are only complaining about Fresh Start)
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [Oversoul] >> Oversoul General Discussion >> RE: =OS= Balance Discussion Thread
Page 4 of 22«<23456>»
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


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition