Jump to content

Epsilon Rose

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Epsilon Rose

  1. I just wish the defense things didn't feel so pointless. You get nothing from them, not even loot, since the scene resets right after you beat them.
  2. Given their dearth of active abilities, I'm not sure combining two of their primary actives and then reducing them to once per encounter (or twice with a talent) is a good idea. When the flames/hands are out, the paladin loses a lot of its flavor and even a large boost to attack will lose it's relevance, at later levels, when compared to abilities that can be used more frequently and/or against more targets.
  3. Which is why it can't be generalized to other parts of game play. All you have shown is that you can kill an ogre without being hit when using interrupts. You have not shown what happens without interrupts, though you have asserted it many times, nor have you shown what it likely to happen in other situations. No I/they wouldn't. We're talking about wolves here. They'd disintegrate on first contact and, even if they didn't, most of the classes have plenty of per encounter abilities I'd use long before spells. That was the second set of tests from AFTER you complained about him using
  4. We already know from ruminate's testing and general experience that the 100% won't hold up. Your incredibly brief "test" does nothing to show otherwise. You have yet to produce a single screenshot that shows what you need to and that is a comparison of situations, not you simply killing a single enemy. I could kill a pair of wolves and show there's absolutely no difference between interrupts or no interrupts and that wouldn't be compelling either, but it would be the exact same as what you're doing. Actually, not only did I read them, but I double checked them before posting
  5. How does going from 100% to 17% not matter? First, none of those effect attack speed, which is not d100 based, and that's all we care about. Second, if you run enough tests random variables smooth out. That's basic statistics. Third, the quote is cute, but not terribly relevant seeing that you have yet to prove it works in practice. A large enough stat change will easily override the d100. If any result, from 1 to 100, results in an interrupt than the d100 doesn't matter. Also, I'm not sure where you got that he was changing all of his stats, but it's patently false. He listed the s
  6. A) Showing that you can interrupt something and kill it before it gets an attack is not useful because it doesn't give us information on how many attacks it would get without that interrupt. This is incredibly important information that you don't seem capable of comprehending. Allow me to illustrate: Lets say, without you interrupting, an enemy can normally get in 1 attack for every 5 of yours. With constant interrupts it gets 1 attack for every 6 of yours. That's an improvement, but over the course of a long fight it's only ~17% less incoming damage. However, if you can kill your test monster
  7. That would be a good test. You'd need to be able to ensure that you don't die in the first test or kill it in the second and both trials would need to go on for a substantial amount of time.
  8. Interrupt isn't lock down. That's not how it works in this game. It just adds a very small delay to attacks. That is what it is, a delay and you posted screenshots of it acting as a delay. They key detail is how much of a delay it is. It could be that you only prevented one attack from the ogre, you'd have seen just as many interrupt messages either way, but a single extra attack probably wouldn't have been a terrible drain on your resources. For someone who was railing on about the scientific method and controlled variables, you are doing a terrible job of constructing your proofs. A single s
  9. Ok? That doesn't really tell us anything though, because we can't see what would have happened if you didn't interrupt him. All you've shown is that you can somewhat reliably interrupt an ogre. If interrupts represented a full reset or cancellation of actions (where you would have stopped 6 attacks), that would be pretty impressive, but that's not how interrupts work in this game, so it's not at all persuasive.
  10. Uh? He wasn't interrupting the bear indefinitely in either of those scenarios. It was still getting in hits, it was just missing. Doesn't the 97-point swing favor the half of the experiment you support? Also, in this experiment the 97-point swing IS the independent variable (i.e. the variable you change for the experiment) and the only effect it would have in this encounter is changing the rate of interrupts.
  11. That would likely help to make the amount of power a mage can bring to bear in a single fight more predictable. That said, I'd think it would be REALLY hard to balance properly, to the point that you'd be better off losing the "HP" portion of it and just making it a per encounter limiter.
  12. This is precisely the type of trade-off that must be avoided in a well-designed game, in line with what I mentioned above. With the current game design, players are being put in a lose-lose situation, while developers are unable to balance encounters properly due to their inability to anticipate how rested the party is. I know. You'll find I've stated both points several times, possibly in this thread.
  13. Actually, I don't think that addresses any of the problems with rest. You still have a rest mechanic that has you trading out-of game frustration for in-game power, still does not actually constrain you, still discourages using many of your more interesting abilities, still asks you to plan on the per rest timescale but doesn't give you anything to effect that scale, and still doesn't really have the wide breadth of powerful abilities that can pretend to warrant it.
  14. Hmm. I've heard Monks attack really quickly and barbs hit everything around them. I wonder how a monk+barb team-up focused on interrupts would work out. Maybe throw in a a rogue with an arbalist to support them.
  15. I don't think this will give you much information beyond "Who does auto attack better if that's all they're doing", because it ignores all of their other abilities and ignores how they interact with the rest of the party, both of which are incredibly important.
  16. I agree with most of your points, but I have a problem with this one. Death and dismemberment should never be the domain of the RNG. What you are describing is not an RPG, but a simple slot machine: Put adventure in and out comes riches... or you've wasted your buy-in. Either way, there's no strategy involved on your end.
  17. I think the suggested table is still too sharp, and in some regards it's even worse from a balance, for example, you actually end up even crazier than now (with 2/e of 3rd Rank spells). But the idea of it starting earlier is good, I just think it should be much, much slower, and certainly not at the point of having two full spell ranks at level 12 at 4/e (and definitely not three and a half spell ranks). I also want it to work differently between the spellcasting classes, where their "extra progressions" work differently. Per-Encounter spell slots for wizards, Deity-specific spells for
  18. Interesting, thank you for that information. I also thought you couldn't use Holy Radiance out of combat anymore since the 1.03 patchnotes, but someone brought it up earlier and I thought I was therefor mistaken. Oh well, thanks again for rectifying this. we noted earlier about stacking of paladin aura. is good to see you have finally come around... if belatedly so. That might have been their goal, but it doesn't make it a good one. The paladin's chassis just isn't set up to be good at support. You have to burn to many talents to get the support abilities set up properly and the other
  19. Health as a per rest resource gets brought up in nearly every game with a per rest mechanic, but it's not really the same. For starters, health is a single value, rather than a collection of abilities with different effects. Second, health has a very clear optimization strategy: lose as little health as possible. Also, the idea that you can use Stealth to gauge the difficulty of a battle before it begins and, thus, properly plan out your spell uses is somewhat erogenous. You can figure out the difficulty of the next battle, sure, but you also need to know the difficulty and number of eve
  20. In rpg parlance, a spell that requires you to use a resurrection scroll is save or lose or save or die. The difference is whether it kills you instantly or gives you know way to stop the enemy from killing you in short order.
  21. That might have been their goal, but it doesn't make it a good one. The paladin's chassis just isn't set up to be good at support. You have to burn to many talents to get the support abilities set up properly and the other support classes still do it better. The chanter even fills the passive aura support niche already. Paladins need to find their own niche or a niche that's worth doubling up on.
  22. Leaving aside any IE game bagage, because I've never played one, I think designating the paladin a buff class is a bit silly, largely because there are already several classes that can fill that roll better. There's the priest, the Chanter, the wizard would do an excellent job if a few of his buffs could actually target useful characters.The chanter even does the always on aura buffs better, since they can just pick a single chant to always keep up and it'll have a bigger range (I think, the paladin's buff doesn't seem to show a range circle for some dev forsaken reason) and larger effects a
  23. I don't want to install a mod, or use console commands that probably lock achievements, to get basic functionality? Because it would be a fun thing to have in game and would provide a better use for the stronghold than some of it's current functions? Because I should have to go out of my way to correct basic flaws in a game I payed for? Should I go on?
  24. It would be nice if someone official would at least drop in to comment on this and let people know it's actually been seen and is being worked on.
  • Create New...