Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

Energy Parasite

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> Energy Parasite
Page 1 of 212>
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
3/10/2014 20:26:42   
veneeria
Member

http://epicduelwiki.com/images/epicduelwiki.com/thumb/b/b3/EnergyParasite.png/75px-EnergyParasite.png
< Information about it >

Is there even a reason for why there is an support requirement on this?

I mean, the amount it regenerates is .. among the worse.

It requires you to sacrifice an turn to cast it/use it, you can be blocked and it doesn't deal near as much damage as your "normal strike".



And even if the above problems weren't enough convince you, because it is an ability that steals an % of energy each turn, enemies can counter it by wasting all the their energy before it drains, making the skill completely and utterly useless.


So i am pretty much left to ask, why wasn't there an buff or actual fix to this skill?
At least... get rid of that nasty support requirement, it is just silly.

Other relevant topics about this (realized while i was writing this) :
- http://forums2.battleon.com/f/tm.asp?m=21622643
- http://forums2.battleon.com/f/tm.asp?m=21622934

IMG Tags removed. ~Mecha

< Message edited by Mecha Mario -- 3/12/2014 23:37:08 >
AQ AQW Epic  Post #: 1
3/11/2014 4:55:24   
dfo99
Member
 

 the players argument for not remove the suport req is:

- will made a build limitation
- will made str builds op

both are not rational arguments because battery pick up not have suport and any req, and assimilation and static charge work better with str. anyway the parasite is the single bm mana skill.
Post #: 2
3/11/2014 9:58:06   
kosmo
Member
 

 supported.

this skill doesn t need much, just remove requirment or buff initail dmg;
it would be nice to add bm to the playable classes, this would also grant some class jumping, which alwaise helps the game.
Epic  Post #: 3
3/11/2014 10:01:04   
Ranloth
Banned


 ^ I'd keep the requirement, but lower it to max of around 34 at L10, nothing else. It's only there for Strength build, but 42 is a bit of an overkill... And buffing initial damage to 85% - which further justifies keeping the requirement.
AQ Epic  Post #: 4
3/11/2014 10:29:04   
kosmo
Member
 

 yeah that would be even better, a buff to dmg is needed or the skill risks to be a waste of a turn.
Epic  Post #: 5
3/11/2014 12:34:26   
dfo99
Member
 
quote:

It's only there for Strength build


this damn sup req also no allow any bm use the super dex build to made the overload and plasma rain great skills. this req force the players use the focus 5 build, that not have much synergy with mark of blood.

everybody also forgot that not use suport cost a big price for bms, because have 3 other skill that is improved with suport (shield, dex boost and intimidate) unlike the tm that have 2 (matrix and malf)

< Message edited by dfo99 -- 3/11/2014 12:40:21 >
Post #: 6
3/11/2014 12:42:25   
Ranloth
Banned


 That's why I'm for lowering it, but not removal. If you don't max it out, it will be in high 20's, which is sufficient enough. Say it starts at 16 Support, and goes up by +2 Support, for up to 34 Support at L10 - you could have it at L5 (10% of current Energy) and requirement of only 24 Support. Ain't that much, considering base Support for BMs is 18 - you need to add +6 Support, which is very little.
AQ Epic  Post #: 7
3/11/2014 12:59:10   
dfo99
Member
 

 man, i am sure that deal 85% or 100% of dmg and have no sup req not will made the bms better than tms (maybe reach the ch), 15% still is low and the enemy still will can spent fast the mana. the skill will work more like the frostshards (being annoying) than battery pick up (giving a huge mana back).
Post #: 8
3/11/2014 13:29:09   
Ranloth
Banned


 BMs aren't meant to be better than any class. Perfect balance assumes classes being roughly on par with each other, but some minor imbalance in a PvP-based game will always occur.

You're missing the point - 100% damage + effect + no cost will be abused by Strength build. Assimilation is already being abused, despite the 85% damage. Its effect works on the turn - instead of needing 3 turns like Parasite - but it's still abused, and has no requirement.

BMs can pull off pretty good Strength build: Bludgeon, your version of Parasite, MoB, and rest in Heal/Intimidate. No requirements to stop them (but Tech, on Heal), blockable attacks but powerful + stacking with BloodLust. What's not to love?

Make big change to Parasite and you may end up overpowering the skill. Then it'll be nerfed and possible overshot. Fine example of a buff is old SC + introducing PA for CHs. SC got nerfed into oblivion due to PA being waaaaaay too strong at the time. Small steps at the time. If it needed another buff (on top of lesser Support requirement + 85% damage), then it would get another one. It's better to have buff + buff, than buff + nerf (that may be overshot).
AQ Epic  Post #: 9
3/11/2014 14:15:20   
dfo99
Member
 
quote:

Bludgeon, your version of Parasite, MoB, and rest in Heal/Intimidate


not looks too op, and you argument is basicly that the devs can't balance correctly the game. we dont know how they will behave about this.

< Message edited by dfo99 -- 3/11/2014 14:22:47 >
Post #: 10
3/11/2014 14:44:53   
Ranloth
Banned
quote:

not looks too op

Neither do Str TMs, yet they are currently dominating as the most overused build. Only difference is, they don't have MoB and have Assimilation. With overshot buff to Parasite, BMs may be able to overpower that and BMs would be due in for a nerf.
quote:

you argument is basicly that the devs can't balance correctly the game

Partially yes, but also the simple fact it's better to play it safe. Overpower something -> players switch to the said class -> nerf happens -> players jump to another class -> Devs accused of doing it purposely. And overshotting a buff ruins the balance as a whole, whilst double buff is better solution - prevents imbalance, and players are more keen to see two buffs than buff and a nerf (psychological effect).

Y'know, if Devs could balance the game properly, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't ask for feedback from players nor make any balance changes. And players wouldn't be complaining. <.<
AQ Epic  Post #: 11
3/11/2014 15:10:28   
dfo99
Member
 

 you have some examples of skills that receive a double buff?

my reason to ask for 100% and no req is for 100% of dmg be a compensation for parasite be the single mana skill of class and no req a compensation for 3 skills improved with suport + the fact of the parasite be the unique mana skill in the game that the oponent moves can reduce the effect after use. i dont understand why this sugest is overshot, in my opnion will only repair not observed problems. anyway bms is too overnerfed that is frequently see threads in balance section like this. so the risk of overshot looks little.
Post #: 12
3/11/2014 15:28:14   
Ranloth
Banned


 Yeah, I have an example of a triple buff even. Static Charge - buff in its %'s, then another buff to its %'s and lastly yet another buff to its %'s + making it unblockable. It's happened in Omega.

Before you reply with the same thing, do read with understanding, because I've covered why undershotting a buff is better than overshotting. Very simple logic.
AQ Epic  Post #: 13
3/11/2014 16:09:41   
dfo99
Member
 

 good example, static charge is a skill that receive a very high buff and not is current overpowered, my suggest not is a very high buff

< Message edited by dfo99 -- 3/11/2014 16:10:34 >
Post #: 14
3/11/2014 16:22:30   
Ranloth
Banned


 No. It shows that it's better to undershot a buff and receive another buff afterwards, than buff and then nerf.*

If you can't even comprehend simple logic, I'd advise you to not get mixed up around balance discussions. Feedback shouldn't be partial and preferably justified - not "i think this is not op, therefore its ok".

* An example of this is CHs receiving Plasma Armor, and then two nerfs to Static Charge which was rendered almost useless afterwards.
AQ Epic  Post #: 15
3/11/2014 19:09:30   
Darkforce832
Member

If they make the support stat on par with the other stats, then I don't believe Energy Parasite needs any changes.
Post #: 16
3/11/2014 20:20:46   
edwardvulture
Member

All stat reqs will eventually be removed.
in some ways, static charge is still underpowered. It is bad to use in a high dex Ch build and somewhat overpowered for strength build with no dex.i do not think it is adjusted right still.
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 17
3/12/2014 3:53:57   
dfo99
Member
 

 my feedback not was partial and i said that "think" that not is op because not was possible say with perfect matematic precision what will happens if this buff be implemented.

i understand you simple logic, but this way to solve the problem is too slow.

Edit: I forgot to say that remove the suport requeriment not means only "delete". not have sense any class not have skills with suport requeriment, then switch the suport req with other skill (superchage dexterity for example) also can be effective.

Posts merge. Please don't double post. ~Mecha

< Message edited by Mecha Mario -- 3/12/2014 23:38:12 >
Post #: 18
3/12/2014 20:10:58   
veneeria
Member

quote:

^ I'd keep the requirement, but lower it to max of around 34 at L10, nothing else. It's only there for Strength build, but 42 is a bit of an overkill... And buffing initial damage to 85% - which further justifies keeping the requirement.


Well, fair enough. Although you should reconsider re-reading what i am talking about here, the problem isn't really just having that support requirement blocking up a bunch of possible builds.

The skill itself, the energy it takes, the requirements, the damage you deal with it..

It is the one and only energy manipulation active skill we've got and it is hamburger level awful! (and that doesn't even make sense!)

You can effectively counter it by depleting your own energy pool, making our "regeneration" of energy useless and our turn wasted in vain.
And even if you manage to actuality make it work, by the time you get your energy, you might either be dead or not really need it.



Can you now see the flaw on it?
But i sure as hell can.


If your concerns are with strength builds, well i regret to tell you that you can accomplish an successful STR build regardless.

This requirement, everything.. about it.. that is wrong.
Only hurts build variety. NOT Overpowered builds


Oh also.
Compare the skill with the equivalents :

Battery Backup
Static Grenade
Static Charge
Assimilation
Static Smash


It creates an huge unbalance in energy manipulation between classes.

< Message edited by veneeria -- 3/12/2014 20:11:47 >
AQ AQW Epic  Post #: 19
3/12/2014 20:49:55   
Ranloth
Banned


 You can always change it to work off total Energy. Keep the %'s as they are too. That still doesn't change the concern with Strength builds abusing it, whether it works off total or current Energy - it'd be a bit more viable skill, and effective if used visely (with 85-100% damage and lower requirement).

Static Smash + Assimilation have weapon requirements. Parasite has stat requirement instead, but weapon requirement means you get less damage and stats overall - stat requirement limits some builds instead. I've honestly found Parasite useful on numerous occassions, where even its current %'s and the way it works would be beneficial, but the damage held me back. It may be pitiful when it comes to the drain, but it returs 150% Energy drained, which is significantly more.
The main emphasis is on the return, not necessarily the drain. BMs never had an EP drain skill, and their flaw was lack of EP returning one. Parasite is designed to do the latter, and partially the former. If you look at Static Grenade, it's the other way round - emphasis on the drain, and very little return. On the other hand, Static Smash is more like Parasite but in one go., whilst Assimilation is in-between the two and weaker at that, to compensate for dealing 85% damage.

Lastly, that's what you believe is wrong with the skill. My only concern is its pitiful damage and a bit high Support requirement. I don't find the "current Energy" concept to be bad, nor holding back the skill greatly. Requiring strategy to use - if buffed - doesn't make it a bad skill, only because other classes have it easier. (Static Grenade/Static Smash)
AQ Epic  Post #: 20
3/12/2014 21:45:50   
edwardvulture
Member

Here's my take on it.
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 21
3/13/2014 7:56:06   
dfo99
Member
 
quote:

Requiring strategy to use


are you calling the current bloodmages of noobs? i am a stupid bloodmage that not know how use the energy parasite in you opinion?
Post #: 22
3/13/2014 8:34:21   
Ranloth
Banned


 Energy Parasite in its current state is a very strategical move, because of how weak it is and having to time it precisely without getting yourself killed over 50'ish damage.

quote:

Requiring strategy to use - if buffed - doesn't make it a bad skill, only because other classes have it easier.

That was directed at Ven, and it was my reply to her statement about how Energy Parasite working off the current Energy may be the big flaw of the skill.

Next time, quote the rest of the sentence, and don't take words out of context just to try and troll. Balance should be taken a bit more seriously - it's not a playground.

< Message edited by Trans -- 3/13/2014 8:35:17 >
AQ Epic  Post #: 23
3/13/2014 8:41:55   
dfo99
Member
 

 i forgot to quote also this:

quote:

I've honestly found Parasite useful on numerous occassions


i am not trolling, what you say also can be understanted that we not know how be strategists bloodmages, and that the problem not is in skill, the true problem is the players that not know how to use

i understand correctly?

< Message edited by dfo99 -- 3/13/2014 9:40:29 >
Post #: 24
3/13/2014 9:38:32   
Ranloth
Banned


 Once again, quote the whole sentence:
quote:

I've honestly found Parasite useful on numerous occassions, where even its current %'s and the way it works would be beneficial, but the damage held me back.

That doesn't mean I've used it... It would give me an advantage if I used it (in terms of Energy drained/returned), but the damage loss would set me at a disadvantage - which is why I've justified the "current Energy" system being alright, just the damage holding it back.

Read the whole sentence/paragraph, before you quote random bits and try to get back at me. You're going in circles repeating the same thing and trying to use my own opinion against me, which is really pointless and not on topic.
AQ Epic  Post #: 25
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> Energy Parasite
Page 1 of 212>
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