Discussing Balance

[Critical Gaming]

@Bleak

I am a Siege PvPer since 2005, and I also have been PvPing on insurance-based shards since 2009.

You guys already created the *perfect* system to create enjoyable combat on Siege Perilous, however you took out the thing that perfected it!!!! (VvV wearable artifacts)

Reasons why Siege needs them:

1) Crafters complain that it is too difficult/resource intensive to meet the demands of modern day templates for PvP.
* With VvV wearables, all the hard work is done. Crafters can sell suits based around those core pieces that the VvV system offers.

2) Since towns are announced globally, the allure of farming wearable gear would concentrate players in an area to create more interaction.
* As-is, the only real reason to farm VvV is for the deco. No wearable artifacts are available, period.
* VvV fights are literally planned, and coordinated. They have "VvV sunday" with no looting. Why must the players create rules and honor them to make PvP possible?

3) VvV would be continuously farmed due to no insurance - this is why VvV is PERFECT for Siege. There will always be a need for gear, and to be able to spend time at a GLOBALLY ANNOUNCED town to earn it is one of the best things that could happen to Siege for new players or players who meet their demise often.

4) We've had several polls on it that resulted in ~50/50 ties, and one leaning in favor. Reasoning against VvV was based on the fact that Faction artifacts (available pre-SA) were creating a large gear gap which is no longer the case with buffed loot and imbuing.

5) Players who come to Siege to PvP discover that their only avenue to a starter suit is gone, so they log off in frustration.


I honestly cannot think of a single reason why someone would want to take VvV artifacts away, besides the fact that the current playerbase (besides my guild) is old people who like to farm all day without being killed and looted by PKs (they're the ones who voted them off...)

 

[virem]

The devs completely screwed up what they did with the necro focus thing. They didn't ask anyone, they just did it.

They realized necro needed a buff which is good (and true). But, the way they did it is stupid. Corpse skin as a spell should just have been buffed for ALL necros.

What they created is a niche character that is really only effective in groups bigger than 2-3 and has a completely over powered interaction with curse and stupid archers.

Revert that change and have corpse skin as a spell lower to 55/55 like it's supposed to, for all necros.

 

[drcossack]

I decided Pure mages spell damage should be reduced back to 15, they shouldn't be running around because of focused spec. I'm open to arguments against focused mages on why they shouldn't have 15 sdi

How is this comparable? Corpse Skin's description: "Turns the victim's skin dry and corpse like. This temporarily decreases the target's fire and poison resists (Fire and Poison resist decreased by 15 each), while increasing resistance to cold and physical damage (increasing both by 10 each)."

I am asking FOR A BUFF for Corpse Skin, in particular on hybrid characters. Instead of letting only Focused Spec necro characters do it, the dropped Resist cap should be for all characters. If you have reasons why it should remain the way it is for non-Focused Necromancers (where it's completely useless, especially when modern suits can be overcapped on all 5 resists), let's hear them.

This is 2016, not 2004. Assuming equal skill, 15 SDI isn't anywhere NEAR enough for a pure mage to actually kill anyone.

 

[ansyears]

Right now we are seeing a few necros because corpse and curse stack. You people honestly believe if corpse skin was buffed for all necros we would start seeing some necro mages just so they could lower fire by an extra 5? No just stop.

 

[Critical Gaming]

Right now we are seeing a few necros because corpse and curse stack. You people honestly believe if corpse skin was buffed for all necros we would start seeing some necro mages just so they could lower fire by an extra 5? No just stop.

Actually yea lol 5 fire resist is a big deal.

I ran a shield bash necro mage with 60 necro and changed it because of the low DMG output. 5 less fire would have been sweet.

 

[drcossack]

Right now we are seeing a few necros because corpse and curse stack. You people honestly believe if corpse skin was buffed for all necros we would start seeing some necro mages just so they could lower fire by an extra 5? No just stop.

Is it possible that it happens? Yes. A couple points lower in resist makes a big difference. But, as it is now, the spell is useless unless you're Focused Spec.

 

[ansyears]

Actually yea lol 5 fire resist is a big deal.

I ran a shield bash necro mage with 60 necro and changed it because of the low DMG output. 5 less fire would have been sweet.

That person who wants to run necro to lower an extra 5 fire resist is better off playing a 30 sdi pure mage

30 sdi mage with shield bash > 15 sdi necro mage with shield bash

 

[Critical Gaming]

Oath spike and omen are no fail at 60. That's the allure.

Just curious, do you PvP??

 

[ansyears]

Oath spike and omen are no fail at 60. That's the allure.

lol a 30 sdi mage is still better.

 

[Critical Gaming]

lol a 30 sdi mage is still better.

With 55 fire it would be worth it though. Corpse skin is no fail at 60 too.

 

[ansyears]

With 55 fire it would be worth it though. Corpse skin is no fail at 60 too.

No it wouldn't be worth it because 30 sdi beats sometimes having 55 fire. Can you fit alchemy too?

 

[Critical Gaming]

Added benefit of omen and oath man. Those are clutch.

I could if I removed parry

 

[CovenantX]

No it wouldn't be worth it because 30 sdi beats sometimes having 55 fire. Can you fit alchemy too?

an Alchemy-necro-mage? you absolutely can fit that, one of my guildies has one... it's ridiculous with the damage it does, but people aren't willing to drop parry for it.

Alchemy has it's own problems that (from the looks of it) may possibly be addressed in an upcoming publish.

 

[ansyears]

Added benefit of omen and oath man. Those are clutch.

I could if I removed parry

So you don't even have alchemy ?? DO you pvp?

 

[ansyears]

an Alchemy-necro-mage? you absolutely can fit that, one of my guildies has one... it's ridiculous with the damage it does, but people aren't willing to drop parry for it.

Alchemy has it's own problems that (from the looks of it) may possibly be addressed in an upcoming publish.

Follow the convo man he is talking about his parry necro mage.

 

[CovenantX]

Follow the convo man he is talking about his parry necro mage.

Hrmm, maybe you should re-read the conversation. he said pretty much exactly what I said... here incase it's too difficult for you..

Added benefit of omen and oath man. Those are clutch.

I could if I removed parry

"I could if I removed parry"

an Alchemy-necro-mage? you absolutely can fit that, one of my guildies has one... it's ridiculous with the damage it does, but people aren't willing to drop parry for it.

Alchemy has it's own problems that (from the looks of it) may possibly be addressed in an upcoming publish.

 

[ansyears]

Hrmm, maybe you should re-read the conversation. he said pretty much exactly what I said... here incase it's too difficult for you..



"I could if I removed parry"

I asked if he had alchemy on his shield bash necro mage, the answer is no he does not, if he took off parry he wouldn't be a shield bash necro mage now would he? LoL i can't believe i had to explain that to you, just wow.

 

[CovenantX]

I asked if he had alchemy on his shield bash necro mage, the answer is no he does not, if he took off parry he wouldn't be a shield bash necro mage now would he? LoL i can't believe i had to explain that to you, just wow.

He wouldn't need alchemy.... you brought alchemy into it btw. I'd have no reason to respond to it, other than that.

... and your argument started by defending curse + corpse skin stacking... what does parry have to do with that? Alchemy has more to do with it than parry (which is I assume why you brought it up, perhaps I'm giving you too much credit). because the damage done via alchemy = fire... now, explain to me why I had to explain that to you?

People that read any of my posts know what I think about curse + corpse stacking, alchemy, archery, parry, and many more things.

 

[ansyears]

He wouldn't need alchemy.... you brought alchemy into it btw. I'd have no reason to respond to it, other than that.

... and your argument started by defending curse + corpse skin stacking... what does parry have to do with that? Alchemy has more to do with it than parry (which is I assume why you brought it up, perhaps I'm giving you too much credit). because the damage done via alchemy = fire... now, explain to me why I had to explain that to you?

People that read any of my posts know what I think about curse + corpse stacking, alchemy, archery, parry, and many more things.

You really can't follow a convo can you? I brought alchemy into it because he started to add benefits a necro has like blood oath. but he doesn't have alchemy like a 30 sdi mage would

He brought up parry not me again why is it so hard for you to follow this convo?

 

[CovenantX]

You really can't follow a convo can you? I brought alchemy into it because he started to add benefits a necro has like blood oath. but he doesn't have alchemy like a 30 sdi mage would

He brought up parry not me again why is it so hard for you to follow this convo?

You have answered your own question within the series of posts you've made.

he was pointing out things that make necromancy viable without factoring in specifics with other skills against your argument saying that if curse & corpse should stack which you say necros will "go back into the closet" ....

I think you need to learn some more reading skills bud.
get back to me when you can bring something to the table that supports your argument instead of disagreeing with something because you can. and not state a valid reason as to why.

I'll leave it open for you to take that how you want to.

 

[ansyears]

You have answered your own question within the series of posts you've made.

he was pointing out things that make necromancy viable without factoring in specifics with other skills against your argument saying that if curse & corpse should stack which you say necros will "go back into the closet" ....

I think you need to learn some more reading skills bud.
get back to me when you can bring something to the table that supports your argument instead of disagreeing with something because you can. and not state a valid reason as to why.

I'll leave it open for you to take that how you want to.

So you understood that he was pointing out things that made necromancy viable but you couldn't understand i was pointing out things that made a 30 sdi mage better? Hmm that is too bad.

Please don't ask me to support my arguments when you don't support yours. You must think liking peoples posts that disagree with me counts as supporting your argument.

 

[CovenantX]

So you understood that he was pointing out things that made necromancy viable but you couldn't understand i was pointing out things that made a 30 sdi mage better? Hmm that is too bad.

Please don't ask me to support my arguments when you don't support yours. You must think liking peoples posts that disagree with me counts as supporting your argument.

Where did I say 30% SDI mages were better or worse?
I said, necromancers do not need Curse, Corpse, or a combination of the two, (referring to the "focus necro" template) which suggests that it should NOT stack.

read the rest of my posts in this thread and say this:

Please don't ask me to support my arguments when you don't support yours. You must think liking peoples posts that disagree with me counts as supporting your argument.

with a straight face.

 

[ansyears]

Where did I say 30% SDI mages were better or worse?
I said, necromancers do not need Curse, Corpse, or a combination of the two, (referring to the "focus necro" template) which suggests that it should NOT stack.

read the rest of my posts in this thread and say this:

with a straight face.

huhlol? I never said you said 30 sdi mages were better or worse

Since you already have it typed, just copy paste the part where you support the argument on why corpse and curse shouldn't drop fire and poison to 50.

 

[CovenantX]

huhlol? I never said you said 30 sdi mages were better or worse

Since you already have it typed, just copy paste the part where you support the argument on why corpse and curse shouldn't drop fire and poison to 50.

I don't support the idea of curse + corpse dropping resistances below 55 in fire/poison actually, where did you get 50 from? maybe it's a typo on my part, I've repeated myself more than I should have to throughout pretty much every pvp-related thread.

 

[CovenantX]

So you understood that he was pointing out things that made necromancy viable but you couldn't understand i was pointing out things that made a 30 sdi mage better? Hmm that is too bad..

for argument sake, this is where you said 30% SDI mages were "better".

if you're trying to present something and defend it, don't contradict yourself. besides, it's not me you need to convince on whether or not you think something should be a certain way.
but I'll say, if you want Curse + Corpse to remain as is, it's an uphill battle.

 

[ansyears]

I don't support the idea of curse + corpse dropping resistances below 55 in fire/poison actually, where did you get 50 from? maybe it's a typo on my part, I've repeated myself more than I should have to throughout pretty much every pvp-related thread.

I'm still waiting for you to copy paste why they shouldn't stack

if you're trying to present something and defend it, don't contradict yourself. besides, it's not me you need to convince on whether or not you think something should be a certain way.
but I'll say, if you want Curse + Corpse to remain as is, it's an uphill battle.

How did I contradict myself?

 

[OREOGL]

I don't support the idea of curse + corpse dropping resistances below 55 in fire/poison actually, where did you get 50 from? maybe it's a typo on my part, I've repeated myself more than I should have to throughout pretty much every pvp-related thread.

Ansyear proposed the 50. He asking you to copy and paste the reason why they shouldn't stack (to 50).

Pretty simple answer, the damage output becomes too high even at 50 resists.

 

[ansyears]

Finally someone that can follow a conversation

Ok and I say that as it is now if corpse and curse don't stack people won't play necros, people started to play necros because they stack.

 

[drcossack]

I'm still waiting for you to copy paste why they shouldn't stack

Since @CovenantX & I agree on it, although I probably phrase it differently than he would:

Corpse + Curse: Hard cap of 55, even with both on the affected person, whether or not they have focused spec. 55 is manageable, but 45 is too extreme a reduction in resists. That much a reduction takes player skill completely out the window and completely turns it into a game of chicken if you're by yourself, even if it's a 1v1 fight. If you get hit (and you will), it's going to HURT. About a week ago, I was fighting a group of focused spec necro dexers. There were no mages present in the group (that I knew of, although I didn't pay close attention), and I have no doubt I could have (eventually) killed them all. If they had stacked the two spells, there's no chance I'd have survived. In other games, even one resist debuff (corpse skin) would have been the catalyst for a quick death.

45 is one point higher than "naked" resist (assuming 120 in resist spells skill.) A dexer can, even with 55 fire/poison resist, do a ridiculous amount of damage. 55 in resists is manageable. 45 resist isn't, and completely takes player skill out of the window - if you get hit (assuming dexers), it's going to take off quite a bit of health - when I did it with mage spell testing on TC1, I took off 79% of my HP with Explosion/Flamestrike (27 SDI, 140 HP without a Str Pot.)

tl;dr: if you're fighting with 45 fire resist, you're forced to be on the defensive for the whole fight. If it's 1v1, you MIGHT be able to survive & kill, but chances aren't good for it happening.

Finally someone that can follow a conversation

Ok and I say that as it is now if corpse and curse don't stack people won't play necros, people started to play necros because they stack.

That's not why. It's because they discovered the new flavor of the month template, but likely can't use it properly.

 

[CovenantX]

I'm still waiting for you to copy paste why they shouldn't stack

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

I'm sure that's not all of it... hope you enjoy the read.

How did I contradict myself?

I quoted your "self-contradiction". if you don't see it, that's on you.

 

[ansyears]

Since @CovenantX & I agree on it, although I probably phrase it differently than he would:



45 is one point higher than "naked" resist (assuming 120 in resist spells skill.) A dexer can, even with 55 fire/poison resist, do a ridiculous amount of damage. 55 in resists is manageable. 45 resist isn't, and completely takes player skill out of the window - if you get hit (assuming dexers), it's going to take off quite a bit of health - when I did it with mage spell testing on TC1, I took off 79% of my HP with Explosion/Flamestrike (27 SDI, 140 HP without a Str Pot.)

tl;dr: if you're fighting with 45 fire resist, you're forced to be on the defensive for the whole fight. If it's 1v1, you MIGHT be able to survive & kill, but chances aren't good for it happening.



That's not why. It's because they discovered the new flavor of the month template, but likely can't use it properly.

Ok you say 45 is too low I say 55 isn't low enough, this why i'm throwing the 50 around. In a group fight there are apples, chivalry and mystics there for you to use against corpse skin. In a 1v1, you should not die to a focused necro.

Yes that is why, people started to play them when they discovered corpse and curse STACK

 

[ansyears]

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

Discussing Balance

I'm sure that's not all of it... hope you enjoy the read.

I quoted your "self-contradiction". if you don't see it, that's on you.

"Focused Necro Corpse Skin is pretty balanced with Curse, it is not balanced when it can stack."
"should have an overlapping effect instead of an additive stack"

Just from your first two links, No support backing any of this up ,nada just your own one liner opinion that it shouldn't stack.

There was no contradiction there.

 

[drcossack]

Ok you say 45 is too low I say 55 isn't low enough, this why i'm throwing the 50 around. In a group fight there are apples, chivalry and mystics there for you to use against corpse skin. In a 1v1, you should not die to a focused necro.

Yes that is why, people started to play them when they discovered corpse and curse STACK

And they discovered it through people complaining here. I don't know when it would have happened otherwise, although it would have. After all, Holy Fist was initially thought to be garbage, purely because people were testing it without high Karma. Also, 55 is just fine...if you know how to take advantage of it, anyway. The people currently using the template, like HOT (who is the group I referred to in my quoted post) DON'T know how to use it properly, so they're not good with it. Whether or not people like that are able to reduce resists to 45 or 55 won't make a difference in their ability to get kills. Getting the stack isn't even hard, fwiw, and any human character can do it with ease. It even lasts long enough for it to actually matter.

 

[CovenantX]

Ansyear proposed the 50. He asking you to copy and paste the reason why they shouldn't stack (to 50).

Pretty simple answer, the damage output becomes too high even at 50 resists.

My argument to that would be the same as it stands. 55% is low enough, and I (as someone who has played the template before the latest corpse skin changes) am against it, because lowering resistances that low (lower than 55) makes one take too much damage from anything that hits those resistance types. not a big difference between 50/55% but keep in mind you need to go full 100+ in both necro/spirit speak to reach the possible -15% fire/poison maximum reduction.

I'm not the only one saying lowering resists down to 45 (with the current stack) is overpowering, its too much of a resistance drop for any template to be subject to that much of an increase in damage taken. It matters not at all how many people it takes to accomplish the stack.

EDIT: If you don't think it's overpowered now, wait until Pets get revamped (if they stick with the current method), a 60 damage pet fire-breath will be 125 damage against 50 fire resist + evil-omen. not facting the extra possible damage the actual player is adding to that equation.

 

[CovenantX]

"Focused Necro Corpse Skin is pretty balanced with Curse, it is not balanced when it can stack."
"should have an overlapping effect instead of an additive stack"

Just from your first two links, No support backing any of this up ,nada just your own one liner opinion that it shouldn't stack.

There was no contradiction there.

I'm against an additive stack, you said it in this quote... how do I point this out to someone as blind as you seem to be? Read.... the.... posts.

 

[leet]

HCI penalty or not, getting hit from two moving shots for a combined 80+ damage in 2.5 seconds is stupid. RNG will always be stronger than an HCI penalty.

I love how you insist that running shots do 45 damage. An average running shot is like 18-22 damage. Oh you got cursed? okay probably by ANOTHER player, oh you are cursed and corpsed? okay probably by 2 other players. lets talked about you being cursed and corpsed and a flamestrike hitting you for 70 damage is that fair also? If you are going to sit here and blab blab blab about running shots doing 45 damage, at least state the fact that there was MANY other factors involved that made them do that high (and 45 is more of a heavy crossbow range) so you are telling me you cant gheal in between that 2 second swing? You are making it seem like you are out there 1vs1 archers and they are hitting you for 45 damage a running shot. That. Isnt. Happening.

People hate running shot so much because they die while they are RUNNING AWAY

 

[ansyears]

I'm against an additive stack, you said it in this quote... how do I point this out to someone as blind as you seem to be? Read.... the.... posts.

i'll be you for a second. I'm for additive stacks, Can you read?

 

[ansyears]

And they discovered it through people complaining here. I don't know when it would have happened otherwise, although it would have. After all, Holy Fist was initially thought to be garbage, purely because people were testing it without high Karma. Also, 55 is just fine...if you know how to take advantage of it, anyway. The people currently using the template, like HOT (who is the group I referred to in my quoted post) DON'T know how to use it properly, so they're not good with it. Whether or not people like that are able to reduce resists to 45 or 55 won't make a difference in their ability to get kills. Getting the stack isn't even hard, fwiw, and any human character can do it with ease. It even lasts long enough for it to actually matter.

So now you agree that people are playing necros because they stack? No 55 isn't fine 50 is fine. Have you tried using curse scrolls on a focused necro 1v1? it is not that easy, you disarm your wep and can be fizzled if you decide to run off screen and cast it, your enemy can run off screen and wait the few seconds and rinse repeat.

 

[drcossack]

So now you agree that people are playing necros because they stack? No 55 isn't fine 50 is fine. Have you tried using curse scrolls on a focused necro 1v1? it is not that easy, you disarm your wep and can be fizzled if you decide to run off screen and cast it, your enemy can run off screen and wait the few seconds and rinse repeat.

The group I was fighting didn't stack the two spells. So no, that's not why. They're playing it because of the increased damage that results from 55 fire resist, but they're apparently unaware of the template's maximum potential. Archery isn't it. I'll give you a hint: look @ weapon specials.

 

[CovenantX]

i'll be you for a second. I'm for additive stacks, Can you read?

lol...derp..., we know this (your first post said it), fail more?. say something that makes people think it's not overpowered.

 

[Lythos-]

I didn't necessarily say it was "OP" but, the problem with allowing Death Strike to do 50 damage with only 120 ninjitsu is the same thing that what's going on with alchemy (less scale because of how avoidable most of DS's damage is) but, every single dexer would have ninjitsu if that change is made, much like every single parry-mage has alchemy. it's not overpowered in the sense that "anyone can use it" but then again, nothing else would be either...

Besides, just saying that Deathstrike should be this good without hiding or stealth, just says that 120.0 Ninjitsu is worth having for Deathstrike alone -You don't see any problems with that?
right now - Every dexer is "better" with Archery (or ranged weapons)... every template is "better" with Alchemy- if that change goes through, everything is better with ninjitsu. not just better though, you're penalized for picking anything other than ninjitsu because of how much you get.


I do want more diversity but I don't want it to change from what we have into two different templates that are the better than what we have now if you do just the ninjitsu change more templates will come out, but they will have common factors- which will be ninjitsu, that doesn't really fix the problem, it shifts it

I sort of see where you're coming from but it's not making any sense to me.

For example, I can take a melee with less skill points and chain AI + hit spell for 42-44 damage. You're wanting tactics removed so there's even less skill points for an AI. The ninja would have more skill points and a chance of failing on top of standard melee disadvantages of missing and getting disarmed. Then if the victim doesn't move then you've just wasted mana for half the damage of a supernova. I think that's an excellent tradeoff.

I never mentioned any damage value for a standalone ninja. In fact I would rather it be hardcapped and standalone. 35 seems to be the standard value.

It will only be useful for 1 tile melee. Mages will lose focus and be at 15sdi. Ranged weapons currently lose half deathstrike damage which is fine. You would only be adding variety to an easily countered melee class. Even if we only see 1 new template, that's 1 more option than we have now and it's still nowhere near the firepower of the parry mage or archer.

Yes maybe I was mistaken on the bush mage. It has been 11/12 years ago after all. I honestly do not remember every having parry on a mage pre last year but maybe I did. Things have been nerfed so much it's gotten hard to remember.

 

[CovenantX]

I sort of see where you're coming from but it's not making any sense to me.

For example, I can take a melee with less skill points and chain AI + hit spell for 42-44 damage. You're wanting tactics removed so there's even less skill points for an AI. The ninja would have more skill points and a chance of failing on top of standard melee disadvantages of missing and getting disarmed. Then if the victim doesn't move then you've just wasted mana for half the damage of a supernova. I think that's an excellent tradeoff.

I never mentioned any damage value for a standalone ninja. In fact I would rather it be hardcapped and standalone. 35 seems to be the standard value.

It will only be useful for 1 tile melee. Mages will lose focus and be at 15sdi. Ranged weapons currently lose half deathstrike damage which is fine. You would only be adding variety to an easily countered melee class. Even if we only see 1 new template, that's 1 more option than we have now and it's still nowhere near the firepower of the parry mage or archer.

Yes maybe I was mistaken on the bush mage. It has been 11/12 years ago after all. I honestly do not remember every having parry on a mage pre last year but maybe I did. Things have been nerfed so much it's gotten hard to remember.

The stance I have with NS/DS (basically the only form of Ninja-dexer) that reaches max DS damage, doesn't need tactics. they use a bokuto tactics at 120.0 would make damage go from ~30 (without tactics) to about ~38ish (with tactics) with a Nervestrike, deathstrike has absolutely nothing to do with what type of weapon you use to DS with (the damage is lowered to 1).

as far as the damage values for DS removing Hiding/Stealth from that, (I acknowledge that you also said adjust damage caps if necessary (something to that extent)) I assume, you mean that 120.0 ninja allows for up to 50 damage (or less) DS while also not factoring evil-omen. the template is possible now, some people use it... giving those players up to 220 skill to re-allocate in other skills aside from hiding/stealth, just opens doors for potentially more overpowering templates, where as removing tactics would essentially do the same thing but to a lesser extent (the difference is in the amount of skill points being opened up), Examples: 90-120.0 (just tactics) or 100 & 80-120 = 180-220.0 (hiding & stealth) Obviously if both changes are made it would be even worse. freeing up to 340.0 skill.

I don't necessarily disagree, but I do think that's too much of a drastic change to be made all at once.

 

[ansyears]

I'm against an additive stack, you said it in this quote... how do I point this out to someone as blind as you seem to be? Read.... the.... posts.

I asked you to copy paste *WHY* they shouldn't stack instead you just sent me to links where you said they shouldn't stack. Reading too hard.

 

[CovenantX]

I asked you to copy paste *WHY* they shouldn't stack instead you just sent me to links where you said they shouldn't stack. Reading too hard.

I didn't have to copy/paste why, because I said reducing resistances below 55% is too much of an increase in damage taken, other people have posted more numbers that says "why" if you need more specific reasons.
I'm asking you to say. "why it's NOT" overpowered to allow it to remain stack-able. -you won't do it because you know it's overpowered, otherwise you would have stated more specifically as to why. instead of this pure stupidity that we're engaging in right now.

Reading is hard when you explain to people who think they know what they're talking about when they don't (if you need more help... that would be you).

You claim the template would be useless if it's not allowed to stack curse + corpse or even reach the 50% resistance level, I've played the template longer than anyone, I'm telling you it doesn't need to be made better than it was. currently it IS better than it was. is 65-70 damage weapon hits not enough damage you need curse & corpse to stack to make you hit for more than 65-70? ... ridiculous.

Why do the work when someone else has done the work for you?
might as well get to work so you can provide an argument that makes sense.

 

[ansyears]

I didn't have to copy/paste why, because I said reducing resistances below 55% is too much of an increase in damage taken, other people have posted more numbers that says "why" if you need more specific reasons.
I'm asking you to say. "why it's NOT" overpowered to allow it to remain stack-able. -you won't do it because you know it's overpowered, otherwise you would have stated more specifically as to why. instead of this pure stupidity that we're engaging in right now.

Reading is hard when you explain to people who think they know what they're talking about when they don't (if you need more help... that would be you).

You claim the template would be useless if it's not allowed to stack curse + corpse or even reach the 50% resistance level, I've played the template longer than anyone, I'm telling you it doesn't need to be made better than it was. currently it IS better than it was. is 65-70 damage weapon hits not enough damage you need curse & corpse to stack to make you hit for more than 65-70? ... ridiculous.

Why do the work when someone else has done the work for you?
might as well get to work so you can provide an argument that makes sense.

So what was the point of posting those links? You said i don't support my disagreements , then i said you don't and if you have then post them and you post links but its only a disagreement lol! Why is this so hard for you??

50 stacked is not over powered because dun dun dun it would be balanced damage and continues there to be a reason for necros to be running around. This reason is as good as your "its too much damage".

Please stop with these dumb claims like you have played the template longer than anyone or you have killed everyone on atlantic. No one believes you and everyone just laughs at you.

 

[CovenantX]

So what was the point of posting those links? You said i don't support my disagreements , then i said you don't and if you have then post them and you post links but its only a disagreement lol! Why is this so hard for you??

Umm, how long did it take you to find out it was a disagreement about Curse & Corpse stack? News flash, I'm against it stacking how it does... you're just now coming to this conclusion?
*sigh* do you know what you're saying?

50 stacked is not over powered because dun dun dun it would be balanced damage and continues there to be a reason for necros to be running around. This reason is as good as your "its too much damage".

Please stop with these dumb claims like you have played the template longer than anyone or you have killed everyone on atlantic. No one believes you and everyone just laughs at you.

Hehe, I have some proof to back-up some of what I said. not literally against "everyone" but those I have fought... and I'm laughing at you if you "need" the extra resistance reduction to consider the viability of the template in question. Considering you guys got the template from me and or the only other person that has played (my guildy) it in the last 3-4 years, I couldn't careless.

I'd be surprised if you either A) aren't Cazador, or B) in the same guild he is. Either of those would explain your lack of pvp & game mechanic knowledge. - I'll save you the embarrassment though.

 

[PaithanTheElf]

As far as corpse skin and curse goes- I think 45 is way too low.

I think a good change would be to give ALL necros the ability to corpse and not be able to overcap armor. I.e. all necros can corpse down to 55 fire/poison. Would not be overpowering, but would most certainly give them a boost and viability in the field. Also, to that note- I don't think there should be a 240 skill point investment. It should take the normal 60 necro and then spirit speak should determine the length of the debuff- like it always has been.

 

[PaithanTheElf]

Considering you guys got the template from me and or the only other person that has played (my guildy) it in the last 3-4 years, I couldn't careless.

I am just curious what template you created and people stole from you.

 

[CovenantX]

I am just curious what template you created and people stole from you.

Human...
Fencing
Tactics
Resisting spells
Necromancy
Healing +/-
Anatomy
Spiritspeak

people didn't steal it, they copied variations of it. obviously most are going to use it with archery instead because well.... everything is better with archery.

 

[Feanaro]

As far as corpse skin and curse goes- I think 45 is way too low.

I think a good change would be to give ALL necros the ability to corpse and not be able to overcap armor. I.e. all necros can corpse down to 55 fire/poison. Would not be overpowering, but would most certainly give them a boost and viability in the field. Also, to that note- I don't think there should be a 240 skill point investment. It should take the normal 60 necro and then spirit speak should determine the length of the debuff- like it always has been.

^ This @Bleak