Revolution

[Skalier]

The same can be done with spells of healing, or at least reduce the range of all ranged attacks and healing spells by 50%.

this isnt even a shitpost

Why? Are you afraid you would have to show some skill to get a good result, and not just clicking on someone a mouse and pressing the buttons 1,2,3,4?

[shaggyboomboom]

The same can be done with spells of healing, or at least reduce the range of all ranged attacks and healing spells by 50%.

this isnt even a shitpost

Why? Are you afraid you would have to show some skill to get a good result, and not just clicking on someone a mouse and pressing the buttons 1,2,3,4?

how does that equal a skillful game?

[wargrimnir]

No reason to argue in the thread. The point is generally to throw out ideas despite how weird or unlikely they might be. Doesn't mean they're going to be used, and if you have the mental giantism to point out fairly obvious flaws, you might expect devs to do the same.

[dansari]

I'll trade you 50% of my range for 50% damage

[Dabbart]

^^^1,2,3,4 takes no skill.

Add in an Alt, Ctrl, Shift, a few mouse buttons and an early onset of Carpal Tunnel makes Skill.

Spoiler:

...

So you want there to be no ranged dps in the game?

Is that a serious question? Ofc we want RDPS. We just want them to hit for 10% damage, lose all kiting tactics, and remain as squishy... Don't you read the forums bra?

/sarcasm

1.) Yes, giving all of them at once for a week, to see how the meta and such shifts. Its rr40,50,60,70 - the one you have in mind at 80 was Sov and other sets granting mastery points.
2.) I don't think guard is too strong, no - you can strip it just fine if you deploy CC properly or force a swap. It'd just be for testing purposes, essentially.
3.) I haven't been around for that, RL forced a break on me. If you can point me towards a thread featuring a discussion or alike, I'd be very thankful. I heard about the test, but I didn't find more elaborate informations about it.
4.) Well, that is the question. It, too, would be just for testing purposes. I'd imagine it to work in favor of small groups, rather than warbands and alike - thinking about it, I'd not bind it to AAO but rather targets affected to up the requirement of positioning and such. [Abbd.: Note: It wouldn't worsen the situation much, I think ~ mildly if at all alleviate the issues or not tangibly change anything, at all].
5.) It arguably would be an ABSOLUTE nightmare to code and balance. One would have to approach it slowly and setup a proper framework, before even touching anything ability related. Its utopian thinking that could horribly backfire essentially.

1, That's correct on Sov, I always do that...
2, k
3, viewtopic.php?f=42&t=19797 viewtopic.php?f=8&t=20040 Catch up on your reading:P It gets detailed... EDIT: This Video(posted by Morf) shows the issues around messing with the target limit and or adding damage multipliers based on Enemies/friendlies... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAriTHtfrsU
4, check the threads. That is basically what the change originally was. Tying it solely towards Morales is an interesting idea however... That would directly help alleviate the unintelligent Zerg morale Bomb, and increase 6man effectiveness vs the Zerg. I dunno if that is a good thing though. This is also the theory behind Siege weapon damage, clump up and you die horribly. Worth fleshing out a bit.
5, Aye, kind of a "if I had a magic wand" idea...

[Darosh]

1, That's correct on Sov, I always do that...
2, k
3, viewtopic.php?f=42&t=19797 viewtopic.php?f=8&t=20040 Catch up on your reading:P It gets detailed... EDIT: This Video(posted by Morf) shows the issues around messing with the target limit and or adding damage multipliers based on Enemies/friendlies... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAriTHtfrsU
4, check the threads. That is basically what the change originally was. Tying it solely towards Morales is an interesting idea however... That would directly help alleviate the unintelligent Zerg morale Bomb, and increase 6man effectiveness vs the Zerg. I dunno if that is a good thing though. This is also the theory behind Siege weapon damage, clump up and you die horribly. Worth fleshing out a bit.
5, Aye, kind of a "if I had a magic wand" idea...

3.) Bleh, I normally am one of those grumpy derps that point towards forum searchfunctions and such, turns out I gotta up my game. I couldn't find those for the life of me - thank you very much. <3
As to the matter at hand, I wouldn't - even though only in hindsight, and yet before watching Morf's footage - couple damage multipliers to it, for one simple reason: If you disable the soaking that the targetcap enables, you will invetiably increase the AoE burst on targets exponentially.
4.) That point of mine solely covered the traits of morales, rather than normal AoE - if you could avoid undefendable damage by messing with the trait by positioning (read: not just moving out of it), you'd be generally more inclined to do so, than putting your coins on pure sustain or the bare minimum of movement to reduce the AoE burst.
5.) And yes, all the magic-wandness on steroids, if you will.

Abbd.: **** my life, the footage in the threads is hilarious to watch.

E: Fixed missing words and such.

[Skalier]

But if the RDPS damage from the maximum distance would be reduced to 10% then it would still be unfair because at the same time mdps could attack for 0%. And additionally RDPS can throw some debuffs, enchaments or different curse.

Have you ever seen any RDPS that has high parry? Because I do not. They do not need it at all. And have you seen mdps who have high dodge/disrupt? Most.

And where there is some justice or at all the point of playing mdps when RDPS can do all the same just that from a distance of 100 and not 5 feet and above all is not at that time attacked by anyone.

Okay, I understand that for some people hitting someone with a mouse and pressing the buttons 1,2,3,4 is triple, don't want to comment this anymore.

[dansari]

You're the one who brought it up. You know who also has high dodge/disrupt? Rdps... is rdps heavy in this game? Sure.. but it's also outshone in many many ways by the damage, debuffs, and utility that mdps can provide to their group. Why do you think the strongest 6v6 meta currently includes at least one mdps? You're right.. you are done talking about it.

[lastalien]

Conceptually against so many changes. Personally, I'm more interested in WHO in the primary version, when a lot of changes on the knee were not applied yet.

In my opinion, such a number of changes will scare people away from the game. Resource players do not have enough resources to optimize the game. Therefore, for the project as a whole, it is preferable to approach the original game, with minor changes.

[saupreusse]

Conceptually against so many changes. Personally, I'm more interested in WHO in the primary version, when a lot of changes on the knee were not applied yet.

In my opinion, such a number of changes will scare people away from the game. Resource players do not have enough resources to optimize the game. Therefore, for the project as a whole, it is preferable to approach the original game, with minor changes.

I disagree. Live was a bad game. Its rvr was equally unfun than it is atm and buggy lotd items or rr100 defensive slayers completely ruined every fight for ppl that werent at least rr90.