Shiri2007-09-16 06:32:51
Faeling was fine even without the super tumble. Especially poser faeling.
I do have to question the stun business though.
I do have to question the stun business though.
Unknown2007-09-16 07:42:12
krin with size 15 headbutts a size 1 or a size 5 who would be 1/3 his size dang well better be stunned for a while...
Forren2007-09-16 08:53:11
QUOTE(krin1 @ Sep 16 2007, 03:42 AM) 442361
krin with size 15 headbutts a size 1 or a size 5 who would be 1/3 his size dang well better be stunned for a while...
We're not debating that stun lasts a while. I'm fairly sure stun is dependent on strength, not size, too. The issue is that while tumble time was increased, stun was not decreased in compensation.
Ixion2007-09-16 13:52:23
Actually, stun relies on both str of user and size of target.
Headslam is also an ineffectual stun.
Headslam is also an ineffectual stun.
Unknown2007-09-16 14:17:00
I don't really mind that stun affects smaller races more, seems like a reasonable limitation for the smaller races, and tweaking it to be slightly increased in duration is not necessarily terrible. And if tumble/somersault are a little slower, fair enough. It seems like a good time to normalize focus body times as well, not to mention ship size speeds, assuming that isn't already being done.
It's just unfortunate the changes seem to favour imps at the cost of faelings, but I guess that is inevitable when you try and balance two completely different races with identical advantages.
It's just unfortunate the changes seem to favour imps at the cost of faelings, but I guess that is inevitable when you try and balance two completely different races with identical advantages.
Shiri2007-09-16 14:19:51
THe problem isn't that it affects lower sizes more, it's that it affects them more when compared to the differences between writhing and tumbling speeds now. Stun is a lot more lethal than web, so it's not really a reasonable limitation at all. (Not that I care, since I can change size, but whatever.)
Unknown2007-09-16 14:29:31
Doesn't that assume that the balance was spot on before?
I always thought small sizes had way more advantages than large sizes, so I don't see a change that is overall disadvantaging to small sizes as a bad one (unless it is unnecessarily excessive).
What's the difference between tumble, writhe, stun and summon times for the range of sizes? Are some extreme and others not? Gogo mighty morphin power titans!
I always thought small sizes had way more advantages than large sizes, so I don't see a change that is overall disadvantaging to small sizes as a bad one (unless it is unnecessarily excessive).
What's the difference between tumble, writhe, stun and summon times for the range of sizes? Are some extreme and others not? Gogo mighty morphin power titans!
Daganev2007-09-16 14:35:00
It seem rediculous to me that the ideal size before was 1. It should probabbly be 8 or somewhere in the middle, or perhaps at the higher end.
Ildaudid2007-09-16 15:04:13
@Xavius - Sorry yea, I was practicing my G Dubyah answers.
Ok yes, if tumble size is increased, stun time should normally decrease you would think.
Now, if they thought both tumble size and stun time were initially too low to begin with, they may have made this modification to put it at where size 1 should have been a while ago. So it may not be a "nerf" but an actual fix. Like when pathways used to be on astral, then Charune removed them. He called it a fix, while those of us who used pathways called it a nerf. This could be the same thing and the admis are trying to get everything right.
It used to be Ixion, but from what I heard, HS is hitting harder now. Not sure though, I haven't tested it.
Ok yes, if tumble size is increased, stun time should normally decrease you would think.
Now, if they thought both tumble size and stun time were initially too low to begin with, they may have made this modification to put it at where size 1 should have been a while ago. So it may not be a "nerf" but an actual fix. Like when pathways used to be on astral, then Charune removed them. He called it a fix, while those of us who used pathways called it a nerf. This could be the same thing and the admis are trying to get everything right.
QUOTE(Ixion @ Sep 16 2007, 09:52 AM) 442393
Actually, stun relies on both str of user and size of target.
Headslam is also an ineffectual stun.
Headslam is also an ineffectual stun.
It used to be Ixion, but from what I heard, HS is hitting harder now. Not sure though, I haven't tested it.
Shryke2007-09-16 17:16:50
If size 1 sucks now, change sizes?
Remove low int damage boost or I will murder my kitty!
Remove low int damage boost or I will murder my kitty!
Ixion2007-09-16 19:39:33
QUOTE(Ildaudid @ Sep 16 2007, 11:04 AM) 442412
@Xavius - Sorry yea, I was practicing my G Dubyah answers.
Ok yes, if tumble size is increased, stun time should normally decrease you would think.
Now, if they thought both tumble size and stun time were initially too low to begin with, they may have made this modification to put it at where size 1 should have been a while ago. So it may not be a "nerf" but an actual fix. Like when pathways used to be on astral, then Charune removed them. He called it a fix, while those of us who used pathways called it a nerf. This could be the same thing and the admis are trying to get everything right.
It used to be Ixion, but from what I heard, HS is hitting harder now. Not sure though, I haven't tested it.
Ok yes, if tumble size is increased, stun time should normally decrease you would think.
Now, if they thought both tumble size and stun time were initially too low to begin with, they may have made this modification to put it at where size 1 should have been a while ago. So it may not be a "nerf" but an actual fix. Like when pathways used to be on astral, then Charune removed them. He called it a fix, while those of us who used pathways called it a nerf. This could be the same thing and the admis are trying to get everything right.
It used to be Ixion, but from what I heard, HS is hitting harder now. Not sure though, I haven't tested it.
It's still a poor stun. Of my two stuns, it's by far the inferior (by about half duration last I checked).
Forren2007-09-16 20:00:15
ANNOUNCE NEWS #913
Date: 9/14/2007 at 22:54
From: Estarra, the Eternal
To : Everyone
Subj: More Stat Updates
Going forward with addressing the issues arising from extremes of stats,
we have updated size formulas which effect tumbling, writhing and stun
recovery. We have also slightly adjusted the formulas for max of health,
mana and ego (you'll probably notice a slight increase across the
board).
As written, the advantages and disadvantages of size should have been normalized. There is no longer an advantage to being small because tumble at size 1 is no longer vastly superior to tumble at size 5-6. According to the announce post, the extreme penalty to stun should have disappeared too, but it actually got worse.
People who are trying to argue that this is fine have likely not tested this or clearly have no idea what is going on. As it stands, the penalty for a huge size (ie. 18+) has lessened. They tumble faster, and they still resist stun quite a bit. The penalty for a small size (ie. 5 or below) is now much much worse than it was.
Date: 9/14/2007 at 22:54
From: Estarra, the Eternal
To : Everyone
Subj: More Stat Updates
Going forward with addressing the issues arising from extremes of stats,
we have updated size formulas which effect tumbling, writhing and stun
recovery. We have also slightly adjusted the formulas for max of health,
mana and ego (you'll probably notice a slight increase across the
board).
As written, the advantages and disadvantages of size should have been normalized. There is no longer an advantage to being small because tumble at size 1 is no longer vastly superior to tumble at size 5-6. According to the announce post, the extreme penalty to stun should have disappeared too, but it actually got worse.
People who are trying to argue that this is fine have likely not tested this or clearly have no idea what is going on. As it stands, the penalty for a huge size (ie. 18+) has lessened. They tumble faster, and they still resist stun quite a bit. The penalty for a small size (ie. 5 or below) is now much much worse than it was.
Myndaen2007-09-16 20:02:56
So, in essence they've just reversed what was in effect, while giving it an overall nerf? Large size is better than small size, now, but everything sucks in comparison to how it was before?
Forren2007-09-16 20:06:13
QUOTE(Myndaen @ Sep 16 2007, 04:02 PM) 442461
So, in essence they've just reversed what was in effect, while giving it an overall nerf? Large size is better than small size, now, but everything sucks in comparison to how it was before?
Except writhing.. which in no way needed a boost, size 5 writhe was fast already.
Rakor2007-09-16 23:23:51
QUOTE(daganev @ Sep 16 2007, 10:35 AM) 442404
It seem rediculous to me that the ideal size before was 1. It should probabbly be 8 or somewhere in the middle, or perhaps at the higher end.
There should be no "ideal size," in that sense. It should depend on who you're fighting. That would give titans and demigods an actual advantage with shrink and expand - and there should be distinct advantages to a very small size, and distinct disadvantages. Same for a very large size. An average size would have average advantages/disadvantages.
Myndaen: We're still testing stuff.
Ildaudid2007-09-16 23:29:41
I always thought size 1 and size 18 are the extremes people didn't want.
So if they made it so people don't want to be size 1 anymore, that sounds like a fix. -shrug-
Like I said 1-4 or 1-6 has all had the same tumble times. So now if it is longer at size one than size 4 or 6 than, maybe it needs a minor tweak. But I think size 1 and size 18 should have horrible horrible disadvantages.... like 1 should make you stunned for 5x longer than normal and 18 should make your tumble take 5x longer.
No one should want to be size 1 nor should they want to be size 18 IMO.
So if they made it so people don't want to be size 1 anymore, that sounds like a fix. -shrug-
Like I said 1-4 or 1-6 has all had the same tumble times. So now if it is longer at size one than size 4 or 6 than, maybe it needs a minor tweak. But I think size 1 and size 18 should have horrible horrible disadvantages.... like 1 should make you stunned for 5x longer than normal and 18 should make your tumble take 5x longer.
No one should want to be size 1 nor should they want to be size 18 IMO.
Unknown2007-09-17 00:21:08
QUOTE(Forren @ Sep 16 2007, 08:00 PM) 442460
People who are trying to argue that this is fine have likely not tested this or clearly have no idea what is going on. As it stands, the penalty for a huge size (ie. 18+) has lessened. They tumble faster, and they still resist stun quite a bit. The penalty for a small size (ie. 5 or below) is now much much worse than it was.
What are the results you have obtained?
Ashteru2007-09-17 06:14:06
2.9 second writhe at size 25, nearly never stunned.
Shamarah2007-09-17 10:31:45
QUOTE(Ashteru @ Sep 17 2007, 02:14 AM) 442575
2.9 second writhe at size 25, nearly never stunned.
... wtf?
So basically web is worthless now?
Simimi2007-09-17 11:10:15
Is not 2.9 seconds a long writhe? Or am I mistaken... seems like a long time to be writhing during a fight...