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 7 of 22«<56789>»
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
9/3/2013 18:00:33   
Mondez
Member

@Kiazz
I have to agree on Redingard on this because taking a look at the math with 3 Holy Strikes that cost 7 each which equals 2100 for a cost of 21 energy is perfectly liable in the arguement that Meteor + Incinerate would be OP. Even Deathflow with another card combination like a 500 + Empower or Surge has a high cost.

< Message edited by Mondez -- 9/3/2013 18:05:27 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 151
9/3/2013 18:58:53   
Kiazz
Member

@red Psh, jerk? You were the one who insisted on putting it in"context" for me. Well then, you disagree but I still think the decks matter in this case.
@Mon I've stated all I wanted to say, if you disagree on the basis of "power" okay. But as for the holy strike argument, there's a reason why normal attack cards should never match the efficiency of a boosted card. I'd have thought this was the case with "boost. " Like I said, 3 Attack cards plus 1 Incinerate, just one card more. How much of a difference is that, with the amount of energy lost? 14 for 2100 on an offensive deck sounds perfectly fine to me. Breaking stuff like shields require a higher efficiency than the shield should cost.
Post #: 152
9/3/2013 19:10:59   
Mondez
Member

@Kiazz
I respect your opinion, but I don't think it is the right time to make changes to Incinerate because buffing it once more to increase spell power at this stage may cause a another demand to nerf it plus I can imagine if we get another main tournament majority of the players will be using Fire characters again because of their high damage.

I'm not saying you are wrong on your opinion, but it might be a bit risky on this decision judging that majority of damage to reach 2100 or above costs more than 14 energy.

If Incinerate costs 3 instead of 2 which I've been stating should have been then I would support your idea.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 153
9/3/2013 19:26:15   
Kiazz
Member

@Mon I understand what you're saying, but incinerate is already what it is; it exists and has the mechanics it has now. Applying it that stuff would not make fire any more or less op, just for the sake of ease. If it's the first one to have such parameters, so be it. Like I said, fire needs it especially against all the elements we have now.
Post #: 154
9/3/2013 19:36:45   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 Incinerate isn't being changed back to affecting spells unless it gets nerfed. It takes 12 charges to get 2k shield and only 14 to blow all the way through it. A full shield break should never happen by anything other than Ice Orb or DOTs
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 155
9/3/2013 23:50:32   
Kiazz
Member

Should it? Why shouldn't a full shield break be possible for it? It's probably one of the only things fire has going for it; offense, that is.
Post #: 156
9/4/2013 0:22:03   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 It's already hard to stack shields to last against Fire if you're Ice. A full shield break shouldn't be possible in one turn because it defeats the purpose of having shields in the first place. They're still going to be highly offensive, even if they don't have Incinerate on spells.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 157
9/4/2013 3:47:07   
Kiazz
Member

Really? I can cite a case, already, where shields are completely destroyed; lightning. However, does it render defends useless? It costs a lot, so it does a lot. I'm repeating here; I'm not suggesting a buff for incinerate. I'm simply requesting for something that's already here, attack cards and the current mechanics of incinerate already exist. It's not really a buff, rather, it increases fire's efficiency. Also, ice also has freeze, which would need either burst damage or DoTs to efficiently combat. I'm suggesting that fire should be able to do quicker burst damage with less fear of useless hands, like ones with only incinerates and "spell cards"due to the amount of defense and stall-ability it has.
Post #: 158
9/4/2013 4:22:46   
Megadragonknight
Member

@kiazz
One thing I can tell you is that there will be new element cards that can be more helpful or better than incinerate on spells. Even if Nulgath never use incinerate to increase damage to meteorite, at least you can hope to see new cards in the future that can help combat against like what you said "ice also has freeze which would need either burst damage or DoTs to efficiently combat." I know its not related to your point but I am typing to assure you that there will be possible future cards that can be better than incinerate on spells. Not to disagree with your point. Don't misunderstood me.
Post #: 159
9/4/2013 8:23:57   
Resk
Member

At mallet,

I disagree that a full shield break should never happen, and I disagree with the argument over a full shield break would make shields pointless, as they just stopped the full shield break worth of damage from hitting you.

I do however agree that incinerate shouldn't be able to be used upon Spells, due to the easier ability to draw into that combination of cards compared to 2* 5/4 + 1* incinerate,

As a counter point though, would it be feasible do you think, for their to be a.. say 4/2 or 5/2 booster for -just spells- as that makes it more limited,

-Resk

Edit:

@Someone idr which, Though for instant damage, 2 quakes is 24 for 16mp, which is a full shield break,

-Resk

< Message edited by Resk -- 9/4/2013 8:29:14 >
AQW Epic  Post #: 160
9/4/2013 9:22:03   
Kiazz
Member

Ah, 2 required+1 unrequired v.s. 4 required+1 unrequired or 3 required+1 unrequired. I hadn't taken into consideration the drawing and rng, so thank you for that. I still don't completely agree with it, what with the majority of most decks being attack cards and the fact that incinerate is cc-able, but this makes sense. How about incinerate on inferno, though? Would it be balanced, or not?
Post #: 161
9/4/2013 9:27:48   
Mondez
Member

Judging on the specs it might be okay since the amount of damage you can do with Inferno + Incinerate is close to Blessed Strike + 500 attack although I could be off on that. Even with CC would anyone find Inferno appealing in a deck. (Due of the mass majority thinking that better the damage is the better card)
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 162
9/4/2013 9:48:36   
Kiazz
Member

I was surprised that Evil Jim had any infernos as a fire legendary; he has two. By itself, it's a pretty niche card, only to be used when you don't have incinerate and a pierce for finishing people off. And I thought Nulgath would've improved inferno during the fire cc release; all it got was new animation. Should it be something like, say, taser?
Post #: 163
9/4/2013 9:52:30   
Mondez
Member

Fire is more break your shields type if strategy majority of why is is pretty much full front damage instead of it relying too much on DoTs and piercing. I kinda don't want to see fire gain a 500 piercing card since I think it'll break the element a little so that's why Inferno was set in compared to Tazer, Ice Needle, and Stone Strike.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 164
9/4/2013 9:53:09   
Megadragonknight
Member

I am with inferno with incinerate. It will still be balanced with the cost and damage. But there is a problem, inferno is a fire spell card, if incinerate have the capability to add bonus/extra damage to fire spell card, wouldn't fireball, meteorite and fire whirl be affected too unless incinerate only can just add bonus to inferno and other fire spell card won't be affected? Just to point that out.
Post #: 165
9/4/2013 9:59:46   
Kiazz
Member

More programming, i guess. You can't break an element that hasn't fully formed yet, quoting you, " I would like to see how stats and ER affect balance when they are released so we can determine what needs buffing and nerfing." Energy's whole strategy was kinda changed with the introduction of super-charged, making it another way to play it. If one card can do that, I don't see why fire chars can't get any other game changers to vary their styles/strategies involved in play. But eh, I think settling for having incinerate on a normal inferno would be more realistic.
Post #: 166
9/4/2013 10:11:44   
ND Mallet
Legendary AK!!!


 Like I said, shield breaks can happen, they just shouldn't be done without the usage of DoTs like Shatter, Poison, Corruption, Mountain Strike or so on. The only exception to that would be Energy's super combo which is rare and hard to pull off. You need 4 cards and 20 energy to pull that combo off and chances are you're going to end up with dead hands if you try and stack your deck to make it more likely to happen or waste turns charging up for it.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 167
9/4/2013 10:16:33   
Megadragonknight
Member

Some elements have the same category or rather skills in battle.

Energy focus on energy sufficient which would mean charging every attack cards to a higher damage though I never see it boosting on energy special card like storm. Also, it increase the cost by 10 which will give more cost to use more cards to deal damage.

Fire focus on dealing high damage with their own special cards like meteorite, fireball without a need to boost.

Shadow focus on DoT while dealing more damage by sacrificing their lives.

Light focus on healing to survive the battle while continuing to deal damage to opponents until the end of the battle.

Earth deal huge damage which include stunning their opponent while dealing high damage with earthquake and mountain strike. They also have stone strike which is also their advantage.

Neutral focus on both defence and offensive as that they have counter attack, shield and iron hide while dealing damage towards opponent and they have neutralize which can be very helpful.

Water is the combination of light and energy such that they heal, gaining more energy to survive the battle while dealing damage.

Ice is similar to neutral such that they always defend themselves while dealing DoT and also freeze them which is a killer. Also they can use their total number of defence to deal damage though its always use before the end of the battle.

Edit: What is the shield break I have been hearing about?
No matter what strong point each opponent have, every element will have weakness but most important is the player's ability to play the game with the cards they need to win.

< Message edited by Megadragonknight -- 9/4/2013 10:17:17 >
Post #: 168
9/4/2013 10:23:36   
Resk
Member

@ Megadragon

Shield breaking is dealing 20+ damage for the same-ish cost as 20 shield, in 1 turn

Also, my jim uses 7 fire whirls :3

-Resk


AQW Epic  Post #: 169
9/4/2013 10:28:36   
Megadragonknight
Member

@resk
Oh, I see. Thx for the info.
Post #: 170
9/23/2013 12:00:04   
The Jop
Member

CC Burn should be reduced from 936 to something around 650 damage over three turns. Regular burn is only 600 damage over three turns. No other card series card is as imbalanced as this.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 171
9/23/2013 12:10:34   
Megadragonknight
Member

Agreeable, CC burn should deal 632 damage over 3 turn instead of 932 damage over 3 turns. Other CC DoT cards like poison, mark of death deal nearly the same damage as the original DoT cards except it deal an extra damage. like +15/+25 So, if the original burn deal 600 damage over 3 turn, CC Burn should deal 600 plus damage and not 900 plus damage.
Post #: 172
9/23/2013 12:26:11   
Axel459
The Void Calls


 @The Jop and Mega CC burn only does 624 dmg over 3 turns 208 dmg per turn
AQ DF MQ AQW  Post #: 173
9/23/2013 12:28:06   
The Jop
Member

Then the Wikis have to be updated.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 174
9/23/2013 12:33:55   
Megadragonknight
Member

That was what the wiki stated about CC burn. I guess someone put up the info by mistake. Someone need to correct the info about CC burn.
Post #: 175
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [Oversoul] >> Oversoul General Discussion >> RE: =OS= Balance Discussion Thread
Page 7 of 22«<56789>»
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