Target (All): Creature Diversity & Creature Upgrade Value

[Ary Endleg]

 

Again : it seems that you are upset that there are players with more stats then you (and / or more money).

There is nothing we can do for you then to advise you to play harder or to pay more.

 

Oh, I remembered : there is a book for you ( I forgot its name) that it would give you some +/- 1m attack/def (if I am not mistaken). Someone , please share this book with our friend Ary here.

 

Your narrow sighted speculations are becoming insultive. You should get your facts straight about me before making such statement. Basically you are against people with low stats to speak about flaws of system because your short minded perspective is only capable of seeing that when people talk about flaws of system it's because they ain't doing well in such system. Something that isn't true in this case. You should refrain from making such insultive "comments", it's quite in the range of cyber bullying, you are just trolling the topic and asking for actions from mods.

 

Back on discussion.

 

 

It seems that you have a perception issue.

So, I agree with the list as a list of creatures using "All" as target but I disagree with changing their ability.

Windy, rusty, rein, bloodpact, pimped grasan are paid (shop) creatures or even more a rare gift (drachorn) and they are supposed (as a mandatory feature) to be stronger. If you can afford to have 6 of each it doesn't make them common but it makes you richer. They are supposed to give you an edge in battles, it is a commonly known fact.

 

All that remains is the grasan and the chaos. They both have their weakness and it seems that they are well balanced against the other creatures like LR archer , knator, and whatever is there for the damage.

 

They are supposed to be stronger as you say it, but can't such strength be at more acceptable level? Can there be some way to counter that strength? Can it have some sort of weakness or disadvantage? 

Lets assume scenario where we have stats, tokens, everything same, except creatures. You are packed with target all damagers, while I got something else, while everything else is same. Now tell me No one, why in this system I'm only allowed to out-hit you with higher stats or bust you in with luck on freezes. Why am I not allowed to OUTSMART you by making cunning choice of creatures/abilities that would exploit weakness in your ritual. Currently you can make ritual without tactical weaknesses, that's where I think the problem is.

 

I could even go further to prove it, lets imagine that stats don't exist, everybody has 0. Moreover lets say ALL creatures have same stats, same attack, defense, power, luck, regen and ve. Also lets remove auras and tokens for this test environment. Only thing differing are their abilities. In such environment ritual packed with target All creatures would still reign supreme with no remedy. I simply don't agree that this type of ultimate tactical advantage should exist.

 

You keep saying that they have edge, sure let them have edge over others but leave some weak spot.

No grasan and chaos aren't balanced with knator and lore archer. They might look balanced stat-vise, but their superior target all ability wins the day and also has much greater scalability with stats.

[Chewett]

if im not mistaken the book is currently held by Zyrxae, who is inactive

I have one of them.

I won it in a quest.

[Burns]

 

Lets assume scenario where we have stats, tokens, everything same, except creatures. You are packed with target all damagers, while I got something else, while everything else is same. Now tell me No one, why in this system I'm only allowed to out-hit you with higher stats or bust you in with luck on freezes. Why am I not allowed to OUTSMART you by making cunning choice of creatures/abilities that would exploit weakness in your ritual. Currently you can make ritual without tactical weaknesses, that's where I think the problem is.

 

I could even go further to prove it, lets imagine that stats don't exist, everybody has 0. Moreover lets say ALL creatures have same stats, same attack, defense, power, luck, regen and ve. Also lets remove auras and tokens for this test environment. Only thing differing are their abilities. In such environment ritual packed with target All creatures would still reign supreme with no remedy. I simply don't agree that this type of ultimate tactical advantage should exist.

 

This is not a valid test scenario. If i can make the rules, i might as well say that all stats are 0, except defense, which is 200. Suddenly, the only valid abilites are aimed hit and lifesteal.

 

The point about all-hitters is that they have nothing else. They don't do anything fancy, they just hit them all. There are plenty of answers to that, depending on the setting. You can go with a single hard hitter and invest all your stats in it, you can freeze them out, if they have a lot of health you can go for lifesteal and win in a short battle, and if you have a lot of health yourself you can burn them away.

All is the most viable way to get your stats on the ground, that's all. When one guy has a severe stat-advantage over the other, he should have a way to add this advantage to the battle, no?

 

I agree that there shouldn't be a perfect ritual, but 'all' isn't the thing that makes it so invincible. It's the combination of freeze, anti-freeze, and pure brawn. If that one boosted drachorn had single for targeting, all that would change is that he needs 6 rounds to demolish you, because you still have no reasonable answer to the stats on him.

 

Also, just for reference, in your 'all stats are 0 and auras don't exist'-scenario, your all hitters would lose to a bunch of water daimons and trees. Just as example.

[No one]

[spoiler]

 

Your narrow sighted speculations are becoming insultive. You should get your facts straight about me before making such statement. Basically you are against people with low stats to speak about flaws of system because your short minded perspective is only capable of seeing that when people talk about flaws of system it's because they ain't doing well in such system. Something that isn't true in this case. You should refrain from making such insultive "comments", it's quite in the range of cyber bullying, you are just trolling the topic and asking for actions from mods.

 

Back on discussion.

 

 

They are supposed to be stronger as you say it, but can't such strength be at more acceptable level? Can there be some way to counter that strength? Can it have some sort of weakness or disadvantage? 

Lets assume scenario where we have stats, tokens, everything same, except creatures. You are packed with target all damagers, while I got something else, while everything else is same. Now tell me No one, why in this system I'm only allowed to out-hit you with higher stats or bust you in with luck on freezes. Why am I not allowed to OUTSMART you by making cunning choice of creatures/abilities that would exploit weakness in your ritual. Currently you can make ritual without tactical weaknesses, that's where I think the problem is.

 

I could even go further to prove it, lets imagine that stats don't exist, everybody has 0. Moreover lets say ALL creatures have same stats, same attack, defense, power, luck, regen and ve. Also lets remove auras and tokens for this test environment. Only thing differing are their abilities. In such environment ritual packed with target All creatures would still reign supreme with no remedy. I simply don't agree that this type of ultimate tactical advantage should exist.

 

You keep saying that they have edge, sure let them have edge over others but leave some weak spot.

No grasan and chaos aren't balanced with knator and lore archer. They might look balanced stat-vise, but their superior target all ability wins the day and also has much greater scalability with stats.

[/spoiler]

Thank you for sharing my "narrow sighted" ability.

 

Feel free to feel insulted while insulting others. Also feel free to make the report on me if you feel like it. It is still your choice.

 

In the mean time, please tell me : would you pay for junk bludgeon  or for an ultimate weapon ? Because all you propose is to convert the payed ultimated weapons (a.k.a. Rein Drachors) to pure junk.

 

 

 

Why am I not allowed to OUTSMART you by making cunning choice of creatures/abilities that would exploit weakness in your ritual. Currently you can make ritual without tactical weaknesses, that's where I think the problem is.

Oh, but this is still possible. Try some fights with no premium creatures, no tokens, no spells. Why did I exclude all these ? because they are hard worked / payed for.

You are simply trying to imply that you cannot fight the vets or rich players. That is dumb even for MD's history of dumb. And if you said it like that it shows that you are not targeting to "OUTSMART" them but to make them weaker.

 

 

 

I could even go further to prove it, lets imagine that stats don't exist, everybody has 0. Moreover lets say ALL creatures have same stats, same attack, defense, power, luck, regen and ve. Also lets remove auras and tokens for this test environment. Only thing differing are their abilities. In such environment ritual packed with target All creatures would still reign supreme with no remedy. I simply don't agree that this type of ultimate tactical advantage should exist.

Same thing : exclude bought features & creatures and you'll have a nice old MD fight and there you can put your whits to work for really nice outcome.

Again, be upset on the old players and / or the ones that payed and / or the ones that won some quests for some advantages or do your best and outwork them.

Also, do remember that the game's stats were thought for low stats a.k.a below 100. Chewett can confirm this.

 

 

 

 

No grasan and chaos aren't balanced with knator and lore archer. They might look balanced stat-vise, but their superior target all ability wins the day and also has much greater scalability with stats

Thank you, o mighty smart one for your insight. Please try one clean fight  grasan vs LR Archer and you will see the outcome.

Please share with me the outcome of the tests  for 0 stats to ... a high stats fight, in an alliance fight and outside of it (I am lacking the experience of the fight these past years, but I still bet on the Archer).

 

 

--------------------------

 

 

@Ary: Try the "Mammon's Book". See if you like it. But first you have to be lucky.

 

@DD: if you have something to say , please do.

------------------------

Oh, I always wanted one spell that could change my status points with the one of another willing player. Maybe like that you'd know how I feel in battles. (as I said, I cannot currently access MD to check your stats)

If you are too weak and you feed discouraged, you should try it from my lvl to see how it feels.

Edited September 22, 2014 by Burns
request

[Ary Endleg]

 

This is not a valid test scenario. If i can make the rules, i might as well say that all stats are 0, except defense, which is 200. Suddenly, the only valid abilites are aimed hit and lifesteal.

 

Pretty much true. I made such an "invalid" scenario for a purpose of displaying supremacy of target all against other targeting mechanisms for damage ability only, since it was discussed. It's obvious that this is not a real environment. my purpose was to create equal ground to show that chaos/grasan isn't balanced to lore/knator, they merely have different purposes, yet nobody is using knators. In my example I said all sides start with equal VE, for damage purpose that's all it matters. I can go nitpicking too, you know. If I was to depict your example in same manner, equal ve wouldn't be enough of descriptor because if it's low enough, damagers would still win the day against lifestealers, while against aimed hit that defense would still be not enough to stop maxed drach from eating that archer due to enough superior attack stat and higher level. Also you're forgetting weaken defense something that almost all damagers come with and what will stack into negative and make your lifestealer and archer cry. So no, target all is still superior even in your "invalid" example.

 

The point about all-hitters is that they have nothing else. They don't do anything fancy, they just hit them all. There are plenty of answers to that, depending on the setting. You can go with a single hard hitter and invest all your stats in it, you can freeze them out, if they have a lot of health you can go for lifesteal and win in a short battle, and if you have a lot of health yourself you can burn them away.

All is the most viable way to get your stats on the ground, that's all. When one guy has a severe stat-advantage over the other, he should have a way to add this advantage to the battle, no?

 

I agree with stats.

Well this "nothing else" is still magically more powerful than everything else. As for your scenarios, your argument would be valid if one was forbidden to combine all that into single ritual. Where is the weakness to exploit in this scenario?

Oppoenent has twice amount of your ve and stats, he's using 8 freezes drach ritual. How do you counter it and win?

 

I agree that there shouldn't be a perfect ritual, but 'all' isn't the thing that makes it so invincible. It's the combination of freeze, anti-freeze, and pure brawn. If that one boosted drachorn had single for targeting, all that would change is that he needs 6 rounds to demolish you, because you still have no reasonable answer to the stats on him.

 

This makes a hell lot of a difference. Many things can happen in 6 rounds, you at least get to ACT, with target all it's simply Round 0: Drach kills everything, game over. Other side gets to do nothing. Yes I agree freezes are bigger problem, if for example freezes would be removed, it would "allow multiple" rituals to be made on top level, it would be dance about which and how many creatures should do weaken and which and how many should do damage. Of course only problem is that 1-crit rituals would have all stats stuffed and it would still be wipe for opponent. One creature shouldn't be allowed to kill everything before other player gets to do anything at all. That's my problem. What if target all forbids creature to act in Round 0?

 

Also, just for reference, in your 'all stats are 0 and auras don't exist'-scenario, your all hitters would lose to a bunch of water daimons and trees. Just as example.

 

Not really, weaken defense and damage, it falls down to how much ve is in play too, if there aren't huge amounts of ve in play, target all weaken will apply more weaken than your trees would boost def, also you would be burning down that ve for boosting def, also lifestealers can't kill. It would have to be over 100k ve in such fight for you to win, if less you would die. But if you null all stats it should also mean that VE is nulled. Only creature ve won't be enough for you to win in such fight.

 

@No one. IF you weren't narrow sighted on that matter then tell me how come the only scenario you came up with is that "I'm weak crybaby" and hence I want change, really out of all possibilities you saw only that one and built insults upon. So yes narrow sighted.

 

If you are too weak and you feed discouraged, you should try it from my lvl to see how it feels.

 

Weak, pretty much, discouraged, not.

 

 

Thank you, o mighty smart one for your insight. Please try one clean fight  grasan vs LR Archer and you will see the outcome.

Please share with me the outcome of the tests  for 0 stats to ... a high stats fight, in an alliance fight and outside of it (I am lacking the experience of the fight these past years, but I still bet on the Archer).

 

Thanks for pointing it out, I wasn't clear in my previous post. I was implying in there 6 creat ritual on both sides, chaos/grasan mix on one side and lore/knator on other.

 

Oh, but this is still possible. Try some fights with no premium creatures, no tokens, no spells. Why did I exclude all these ? because they are hard worked / payed for.

 

This is irrelevant. All you mention should only give advantage and shouldn't provide autowin. No matter how hard one works and how much invests irl, even if he doesn't do single mistake ever, others still have ability and opportunity to outsmart him and bring him down, eventually somebody will. MD as game has dark future in matters of combat.

 

We are going offtopic now but still I'll say it. In each and every "free" game (All those games eventually failed their existance in quite short term.) that has combat like MD where there is no cap and where spending a lot of money and having years of "veterancy" gives one ultimate edge. This edge goes so far that others can't touch said person. This is wrong, because players will see that the only way they can catch up is to invest two thousand dollars and grind for 5 years, something that turns fun from game into frustration. Such system supports only "whales" and is built upon them. Life of game is dependent on people who are high up in combat and are spending tons of cash to stay there, also known as "whales". Their gaming experience is based on either bashing the weaker players or helping them with their superiority. Such behavior from game makers isn't moral, they drain up on those few individuals. Such concept is unsustainable in game development. Of course there are few of those donators who donate and don't fight, simply because they want to support the game. Combat like this provides zero player retention, grinders could eventually get bored and quite or show up only here and there, "weaklings" see it as no point so they quit on it. This leads to RP and friends being the only thing that keeps players inside the game. If this game lacked RP that it has, because of how combat is working, MD would stop existing years ago. Yet monetization from RP part is existent, while people rarely fight. Sure we can stay with combat as it is, I don't mind really. I just feel it's a waste that most complex and vast thing in whole game is barely used in comparison to some other, way simpler things.

 

Sure you can argue how paying to have ultimate weapon is fair just like working for it for 10 years. But such thing is bad for newcomers. Setting proper tutorial is first step, to make more players properly introduced and interested about game. Eventually they will learn how fighting works and be repulsed by combat. Combat offers next to no player retention. If you market the game as free2play yet have such an important part of game as pay2win, you are essentially telling half-truths. I see that you No one are very grateful to all those people who donate a lot and keep the game up and running. Yet you too mostly retreat yourself to your activity of resource gathering. Is it asking that they lower themselves from "ultimate supreme" to just "superior" too much? Is it ethically correct towards donors that they keep donating piles of cash and reaping rewards from it just for their combat activity, while other people are mostly playing other part of game?

 

 

would you pay for junk bludgeon  or for an ultimate weapon ? Because all you propose is to convert the payed ultimated weapons (a.k.a. Rein Drachors) to pure junk.

 

I haven't yet made any solid proposal for change, I've just said that how it currently works is bad. This whole time I'm see you resisting to any kind of change, rather than any specific suggestion other than Rophs'. Basically what you are saying currently is that any kind of change would turn all those creatures into absolute junk, worse than lvl1 aramor. If you are simply against any kind of change then say so, rather than saying "all you propose..". If not then maybe try making suggestion on how to add some weakness to it while still keeping it on top of food chain, that is something I'm trying to do in here, yet you keep undermining my efforts.

 

Oh, but this is still possible. Try some fights with no premium creatures, no tokens, no spells. Why did I exclude all these ? because they are hard worked / payed for.

You are simply trying to imply that you cannot fight the vets or rich players. That is dumb even for MD's history of dumb. And if you said it like that it shows that you are not targeting to "OUTSMART" them but to make them weaker.

 

Reply to this should be covered somewhere above.

 

Same thing : exclude bought features & creatures and you'll have a nice old MD fight and there you can put your whits to work for really nice outcome.

Again, be upset on the old players and / or the ones that payed and / or the ones that won some quests for some advantages or do your best and outwork them.

 

Again, I'm not upset on anyone, you keep making false speculations about my motives.

 

Also, do remember that the game's stats were thought for low stats a.k.a below 100. Chewett can confirm this.

 

Yes and? This just points out and supports the fact that current system is bad and that nothing was done about it to restrain it back to how it was meant to be.

[Ungod]

I am going to side with Ary on this one :)

 

I think his argumentation on why the current system needs to be changed is valid. 

 

 

Edit: not on the ”all” ability, I dont really understand who is right there, but what he says from We are going offtopic now but still I'll say it. on is correct, imo.

Edited September 22, 2014 by TheRichMerchant

[Burns]

Regardsless of where you put your balance screws, and personally i'm sure that the big thing gone wrong is stats, not the 'all'-option, you'll have a very hard time.

Mur didn't mean for us to grind stats, as No one said, but it turned out to be unavoidable. All the fancy seriously superior crits, starting from the rustgold drachorn, were implemented because MD couldn't pay for its servers. Winning in combat is the one thing Mur could sell on a larger scale.

 

Yes, we handled Rustgold after a while. Then people got many rustgolds in a rit, and it got considerably harder to handle. And still, the servers need money every month, and you can only sell so many rustgolds to each player. So, add tokens, add statboosters, add reindrachs (not sure about the order), and if you mix all that together, the little advantages you can sell pile up into a sort of ultimate fighter.

 

I would definitely love to see a balanced solution to this dilemma, where paying players get their advantages and grinding players get their fun, and strategists still can win, but it has yet to appear. Take away our stats, and you'll see the grinders leaving. Which leads to the payers not needing fresh paid features anymore. Take away the advantage of paid features in itself, and you don't need them anymore per se. But if you leave all options semi-viable, you will end up with a grinder who knows his tactics and also uses paid features, and that guy will rule the battlefields supremely.

[Ary Endleg]

I agree in here. We can't go back and fix the mistakes done for sake of survival, we can't take away those paid stats and creatures, we could however somehow rework the system to make it suit for everybody, still letting payers have advantages but reducing them to manageable level. In scenarios imagined in past of 100 stats being almost unreachable, target all probably isn't an issue, but we don't have that now. So introducing some smart, well though, reviewed change to system is best option. If not changing target all, and by saying that stats are issue, what else can be done? Removing stats would be bad, introducing some sort of relative/logarithmic value to stats? I'm not sure how would that work. Sooner or later something will have to get changed or else this will always be game for 50 players where 40 do RP.

 

 

But if you leave all options semi-viable, you will end up with a grinder who knows his tactics and also uses paid features, and that guy will rule the battlefields supremely.

 

Yes sort of. But it would be good thing because this guy wouldn't have 100% win/success on everything, we would still need to read opponent and apply according ritual. Giving "weaklings" a chance of like 5% to win against such player by their tactical skills (and some effort, rather than just freeze-luck with creats that are still super rare) is super great achievement and great motivator. This can fare great lengths of beneficial outcomes for game. That guy would still be both beatable and yet he would be supreme player.

[No one]

Yea, I may be so (narrow sighted ~ without the ability to view the wider picture). What can I do but ask more questions.

But before we go further, please consider that experiment with The book.

 

[spoiler]

 

Pretty much true. I made such an "invalid" scenario for a purpose of displaying supremacy of target all against other targeting mechanisms for damage ability only, since it was discussed. It's obvious that this is not a real environment. my purpose was to create equal ground to show that chaos/grasan isn't balanced to lore/knator, they merely have different purposes, yet nobody is using knators. In my example I said all sides start with equal VE, for damage purpose that's all it matters. I can go nitpicking too, you know. If I was to depict your example in same manner, equal ve wouldn't be enough of descriptor because if it's low enough, damagers would still win the day against lifestealers, while against aimed hit that defense would still be not enough to stop maxed drach from eating that archer due to enough superior attack stat and higher level. Also you're forgetting weaken defense something that almost all damagers come with and what will stack into negative and make your lifestealer and archer cry. So no, target all is still superior even in your "invalid" example.

 

 

I agree with stats.

Well this "nothing else" is still magically more powerful than everything else. As for your scenarios, your argument would be valid if one was forbidden to combine all that into single ritual. Where is the weakness to exploit in this scenario?

Oppoenent has twice amount of your ve and stats, he's using 8 freezes drach ritual. How do you counter it and win?

 

 

This makes a hell lot of a difference. Many things can happen in 6 rounds, you at least get to ACT, with target all it's simply Round 0: Drach kills everything, game over. Other side gets to do nothing. Yes I agree freezes are bigger problem, if for example freezes would be removed, it would "allow multiple" rituals to be made on top level, it would be dance about which and how many creatures should do weaken and which and how many should do damage. Of course only problem is that 1-crit rituals would have all stats stuffed and it would still be wipe for opponent. One creature shouldn't be allowed to kill everything before other player gets to do anything at all. That's my problem. What if target all forbids creature to act in Round 0?

 

 

Not really, weaken defense and damage, it falls down to how much ve is in play too, if there aren't huge amounts of ve in play, target all weaken will apply more weaken than your trees would boost def, also you would be burning down that ve for boosting def, also lifestealers can't kill. It would have to be over 100k ve in such fight for you to win, if less you would die. But if you null all stats it should also mean that VE is nulled. Only creature ve won't be enough for you to win in such fight.

 

@No one. IF you weren't narrow sighted on that matter then tell me how come the only scenario you came up with is that "I'm weak crybaby" and hence I want change, really out of all possibilities you saw only that one and built insults upon. So yes narrow sighted.

 

 

Weak, pretty much, discouraged, not.

 

 

Thanks for pointing it out, I wasn't clear in my previous post. I was implying in there 6 creat ritual on both sides, chaos/grasan mix on one side and lore/knator on other.

 

 

This is irrelevant. All you mention should only give advantage and shouldn't provide autowin. No matter how hard one works and how much invests irl, even if he doesn't do single mistake ever, others still have ability and opportunity to outsmart him and bring him down, eventually somebody will. MD as game has dark future in matters of combat.

 

We are going offtopic now but still I'll say it. In each and every "free" game (All those games eventually failed their existance in quite short term.) that has combat like MD where there is no cap and where spending a lot of money and having years of "veterancy" gives one ultimate edge. This edge goes so far that others can't touch said person. This is wrong, because players will see that the only way they can catch up is to invest two thousand dollars and grind for 5 years, something that turns fun from game into frustration. Such system supports only "whales" and is built upon them. Life of game is dependent on people who are high up in combat and are spending tons of cash to stay there, also known as "whales". Their gaming experience is based on either bashing the weaker players or helping them with their superiority. Such behavior from game makers isn't moral, they drain up on those few individuals. Such concept is unsustainable in game development. Of course there are few of those donators who donate and don't fight, simply because they want to support the game. Combat like this provides zero player retention, grinders could eventually get bored and quite or show up only here and there, "weaklings" see it as no point so they quit on it. This leads to RP and friends being the only thing that keeps players inside the game. If this game lacked RP that it has, because of how combat is working, MD would stop existing years ago. Yet monetization from RP part is existent, while people rarely fight. Sure we can stay with combat as it is, I don't mind really. I just feel it's a waste that most complex and vast thing in whole game is barely used in comparison to some other, way simpler things.

 

Sure you can argue how paying to have ultimate weapon is fair just like working for it for 10 years. But such thing is bad for newcomers. Setting proper tutorial is first step, to make more players properly introduced and interested about game. Eventually they will learn how fighting works and be repulsed by combat. Combat offers next to no player retention. If you market the game as free2play yet have such an important part of game as pay2win, you are essentially telling half-truths. I see that you No one are very grateful to all those people who donate a lot and keep the game up and running. Yet you too mostly retreat yourself to your activity of resource gathering. Is it asking that they lower themselves from "ultimate supreme" to just "superior" too much? Is it ethically correct towards donors that they keep donating piles of cash and reaping rewards from it just for their combat activity, while other people are mostly playing other part of game?

 

 

I haven't yet made any solid proposal for change, I've just said that how it currently works is bad. This whole time I'm see you resisting to any kind of change, rather than any specific suggestion other than Rophs'. Basically what you are saying currently is that any kind of change would turn all those creatures into absolute junk, worse than lvl1 aramor. If you are simply against any kind of change then say so, rather than saying "all you propose..". If not then maybe try making suggestion on how to add some weakness to it while still keeping it on top of food chain, that is something I'm trying to do in here, yet you keep undermining my efforts.

 

 

Reply to this should be covered somewhere above.

 

 

Again, I'm not upset on anyone, you keep making false speculations about my motives.

 

 

Yes and? This just points out and supports the fact that current system is bad and that nothing was done about it to restrain it back to how it was meant to be.

[/spoiler]

So, pretty much now you finally said what bothered you:

 

 - "and having years of "veterancy" gives one ultimate edge. This edge goes so far that others can't touch said person. This is wrong, because players will see that the only way they can catch up is to invest two thousand dollars" - I know, that's exactly what I said, I am glad that you could rephrase it to your own words and Burns explained more thoroughly why it came to this

 

 - "current system is bad and that nothing was done about it to restrain it back to how it was meant to be" - actually we all would like to know how it was meant to be. Do you know it ? Because Mur didn't considered it this far.

 

 - "how it currently works is bad" - we all knew this, and it is not an easy solution for this nor a pleasant one

 

 - "Eventually they will learn how fighting works and be repulsed by combat." & "Combat offers next to no player retention" - yes, I knew this since, about 2009 - 2010, when the new features started coming in and, as you so kindly noticed, I retired to my harvesting . Does that bother you ?

 

 - "Basically what you are saying currently is that any kind of change would turn all those creatures into absolute junk, worse than lvl1 aramor." - not a lvl 1 aramor but more like a lvl 2 grasan

 

 - "If you are simply against any kind of change then say so, rather than saying "all you propose..". If not then maybe try making suggestion on how to add some weakness to it while still keeping it on top of food chain, that is something I'm trying to do in here, yet you keep undermining my efforts." -  I simply consider this solution a bad one (as many more solutions before it) and I want to show its bad parts before you convince someone to implement it (as some thought "brilliant" features were in the past).

 

And the more personal ones:

 - "I haven't yet made any solid proposal for change" - nobody said he has one quick fix, nor there is one in sight that will accommodate all current features and players

 - "Again, I'm not upset on anyone, you keep making false speculations about my motives." - we'd like to know your motives.

 

 

To answer to what really bothers you ... it would be not impossible but difficult to make the game manageable again. But the change you proposed, I am sorry, it is not as related to the problem as you initially explained it or as you finally pointed it out. If you don't trust me, please accept the challenge with the "Mammon's Book". This topic can wait for one month.

 

You may very well propose the "reset" of game but , as Burns also pointed it out, if the grinders stay, they "will rule the battlefields supremely". (you will not even have that 5% chance in defeating them)

 

What I will support are simple solutions that can be written in one phrase that is also easy to read and understand. That way, the battles can be understood by all (new and old) quite fast and will not grant advantages to only those very experienced that learned all the tricks.

Until you come up with such a solution, I cannot support your ideas. I can amend it but I may never agree with it.

 

 

 

--------------------

And I accept the challenge ("in there 6 creat ritual on both sides, chaos/grasan mix on one side and lore/knator on other") what is the outcome ? ( I still bet on LR)

 

 

--------------------

Again : it seems that you are upset that there are players with more stats then you (and / or more money).

And I still don't understand: why am I not correct ? the players with more money will always kick your ass and you still seem upset about it

[Rophs]

Having a set of design goals around which to base future propositions of change to the combat system would do wonders in preventing needless bickering.

 

Let's make some design goals.

[Ary Endleg]

- "how it currently works is bad" - we all knew this, and it is not an easy solution for this nor a pleasant one

 

Pretty much.

 

 

 - "Eventually they will learn how fighting works and be repulsed by combat." & "Combat offers next to no player retention" - yes, I knew this since, about 2009 - 2010, when the new features started coming in and, as you so kindly noticed, I retired to my harvesting . Does that bother you ?

 

It doesn't bother me that you went to harvesting. I was just very surprised that you defend status quo this much while your actions show disinterest. Nothing special.

 

 - "Basically what you are saying currently is that any kind of change would turn all those creatures into absolute junk, worse than lvl1 aramor." - not a lvl 1 aramor but more like a lvl 2 grasan

 

So regardless what it be done, drachs would become lvl2 grasans? When I say any kind of change, I'm referring to infinite possibilities :p not just the brainstormed ideas present in this topic.

 

I simply consider this solution a bad one (as many more solutions before it) and I want to show its bad parts before you convince someone to implement it (as some thought "brilliant" features were in the past).

 

Well there is no solid solution made yet, there is critic about current workings and there are brainstormed ideas. Sure showing their bad parts are welcome, that's what is going on in here, brainstorming some ideas/drafts for possible changes, speaking them up, seeing what others think, what can be improved, is there better idea around, etc. Nobody is yet convincing anyone, I'm mainly rising the awareness of rotten parts of system and trying to find ways to solve the problem, while actually coming up with real solution for implementation is very distant, but if we manage it would be welcoming thing. So far your initial yelling "this is junk, this sucks" wasn't too much helpful, hopefully it becomes more constructive as it seems it will.

 

nobody said he has one quick fix, nor there is one in sight that will accommodate all current features and players

 

First each feature has to be broken down individually and properly inspected, then possible remedies are to be sought for it, then it should be incorporated to big picture canvas along with other features and their remedies. Only then we will know what really should get changed and in what way. That's why we went to this multiple topic split from Combat Talk, currently there are only 2 but more topics are inbound.

 

we'd like to know your motives.

 

Two posts above (my big post) where it says: "We are going offtopic..." from that you can see my motives. In short, betterment of the game.

 

 

You may very well propose the "reset" of game but

 

I'm well aware that such things won't solve anything, reset would, in best scenario only repeat everything that has happened so far, in worst, it would purge the game of players. Everything inbetween would be one big crawl of misery.

 

What I will support are simple solutions that can be written in one phrase that is also easy to read and understand. That way, the battles can be understood by all (new and old) quite fast and will not grant advantages to only those very experienced that learned all the tricks.

 

I would love so much if I could come up with something as such from out of the blue. This is ultimate goal, it takes a lot of discussions and analyzing. Additional difficulty is that we are attempting to come up with tweek of an already existing system rather than new one.

 

And I accept the challenge ("in there 6 creat ritual on both sides, chaos/grasan mix on one side and lore/knator on other") what is the outcome ? ( I still bet on LR)

 

I'll hopefully test this out.

 

And I still don't understand: why am I not correct ? the players with more money will always kick your ass and you still seem upset about it

 

I'm upset on what you seem to think is the reason for me talking about this changes, my butt getting kicked, it's not. Explained above.

 

I'm not sure how would that book item help me with anything, I'm not equipped with damagers at the moment so that 1m attack wouldn't help me, feel free to elaborate your point around the book, I don't plan on growing damagers before xmas.

 

What is this change of mine that is so bad which you keep indirectly referring to? I only recall saying that target all should get nerfed, didn't specified any change yet. I did comment on some by other players, I also did point out some possible ideas asking for comments on them, but not anything properly written. For example Rophs made elaborate proposal which didn't go good. Hence I have to conclude that you are saying that idea of changing target all in any way is terrible thing, or?

 

Rophs that sounds good, but if it's going outside the bounds of this topic (which it should), it should have topic of it's own upon which all new ideas would be based. It would be good start to nail down root MD's combat concepts, such as balance and so on.

 

Sidenote, I wanted to again address why I still think that target all is problem rather than how Burns puts it "combination of freezes and stats", but I forgot what I wanted to say :/

[Azthor]

The discussion seems to have developed sufficiently for an interlude:
 

I - Would any dispute that those creatures with Target: All, drachorns included, ought to maintain the advantage they derive strictly from Target: All, whether due to to their position in the combat hierarchy, availability or premium status, if such advantage were not further compounded by other others? 

 

II - Furthermore, and in spite of the answer to I, would any dispute that, while drachorns are meant to be among the foremost desirable creatures in the game, the compounding of Target: All with Freeze, Antifreeze and Creature Boost Auras lends to an undesirably exaggerated outcome?

 

III - If II holds true, would further limiting the maximum that can be placed in a ritual provide a sufficient reduction in the ultimately compounding, or would changes to the templates themselves, if not something else, be required?

 

IV - To a potentially lesser extent, I believe the questions in II and III could be extended to Bloodpacts, tying in to Burns' original suggestion, which also pertained to the limit on archers; what is the general view on such?

Edited September 23, 2014 by Azthor

[Rophs]

If bloodpacts get creatureboost then pimps should also get creatureboost.

[DARK DEMON]

If bloodpacts get creatureboost then pimps should also get creatureboost.

 

BPs already have creatureboost :)

 

 

III - If II holds true, would further limiting the maximum that can be placed in a ritual provide a sufficient reduction in the ultimately compounding, or would changes to the templates themselves, if not something else, be required?

 

Hmm we might only find that out once further limiting place, and then observing + deciding whether more reduction still needs to take place or not.

Edited September 23, 2014 by DARK DEMON

[Rophs]

 

BPs already have creatureboost :)

Yes, I am aware.

 

 

Hmm we might only find that out once further limiting place, and then observing + deciding whether more reduction still needs to take place or not.

Soon™

 

Not much is being said about the Morale aura held by imps. Is it useful? If it isn't useful then it should be useful.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Rophs

[Ary Endleg]

Rophs was trying to say that why are pimps without creatureboost since all other premium damagers have it. I agree pimp is by itself very insignificant upgrade in world of high stats and tokens, besides they have shop stock of 4! That's just too much of supply, further devaluing them.

 

I - debatable of all other "pending" changes on whole combat system. Currently I would still dispute it, many would disagree with me.

II - Yes

III - Unsure, probably changes to the templates in my current opinion, but generally I still do think that regardless of I and II it should be limited as Burns suggested.

IV - This is very problematic thing, because by lowering the amount of archer in ritual it would affect LR archers too because they are same family. Lore archers are in my opinion doing fine with limit of 4, lowering archers to 3 would for lores be bad nerf. Might be better to lower the value of creatboost on bloodpacts.

 

Morale is quite nice thing actually. I'm not sure anymore if works only on normal aramors, if yes then it's useless, but if it applies to all creatures in ritual, it's a very nice thing. However using 4 slots for imps just means you will succumb to freezes, hence not used.

[powle]

i think moralebonus works on all creatures that are of equal or lower level (i'm not really sure about equal, maybe it haas to be lower) than the imp providing the aura. And that is pretty low considering imp's max level is 3 (the only 2 creatures beside aramors that i can think of with max lv 3 are grassans and jokers and creatures with max levels higher than 3 will probably benefit more from leveling up than by being boosted by imps (not to mention you can still boost them with some other boosters at higher levels)).

[Rophs]

Discussing morale etc is getting us offtopic...

 

My ideas so far on targets:

 

All should be nerfed with the n*m**(n-1) formulum and a value for m needs to be determined

 

Multiple should hit 3-6, so that a ritual consisting of two creatures cannot be hit.

 

Single target creatures should be able to deal more damage to a single target, the imp does this well with his attackboost auras, the Sharpter does this well with aimedhit and creatureboost.

[Ary Endleg]

As far as I know, imps moraleaura isn't limited by creature level, while imps attackboost aura works on all creatures that are higher(?) level than imp. Hopefully I have that right...

 

I'm not so sure about change on multiple, currently it hits 2-4.

[DARK DEMON]

Multiple should hit 3-6, so that a ritual consisting of two creatures cannot be hit.

 

Why not...?

[Rophs]

Keep multirandom as is.

 

Make moraleaura affect other creatures (it currently only affects the imp)

Keep its attackboost the same

[Rophs]

We haven't yet addressed levelscare. Change it? Remove it? Keep it as it is?

[Ary Endleg]

Levelscare is pretty fine in my opinion.

[Azthor]

Please, refer to http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/15716-aurasbonuses-creature-boost-skill-drain-vitality-drain-freeze-antifreeze-tokens-availability-order-opportunity-value/ in directly discussing auras and bonuses such as Creature Boost, Moraleaura and Levelscare, as to maintain the topics relatively sectioned; while I recognize some measure of overlapping may prove unavoidable, the present situation is not one such a case.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Azthor

[Azthor]

Based on Tal's tests (http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/15733-unit-limits-angiens-drachorns-archers/) and those uses inherent to life stealers, in spite of their damage potential (...)

 

While the excessive compounding of other abilities on top of Target: All has been agreed by some to be an issue, would it be agreed, currently, that Target: All - as a base template - might be maintained without significant loss to the overall balance between those creatures often used as the backbone of a ritual, their different advantages taken in consideration?

 

All opening posts have been updated.