Basically every single artifact weapon gives both increased damage as well as an advantage in affliction rate. That is pretty much the entire reason why people buy artifacts.
And, honestly, I still say a lot of your argument seems to come down to "I refuse to bash to dragon and I'm not going to tank up heavily, but people with heavy artifacts can still damage me to death so they need to be nerfed."
And, honestly, I still say a lot of your argument seems to come down to "I refuse to bash to dragon and I'm not going to tank up heavily, but people with heavy artifacts can still damage me to death so they need to be nerfed."
It would be one thing if it was only a question of artifacts, but some classes, namely 2h/DWB, can deal an unmanageable amount of damage even with no artifacts in play, especially with high strength races. Being able to die to damage is one thing, but having to run or die (and get past room hinder to get out) after just a few hits can get pretty old pretty fast.
And even with artifacts, I don't think credit investment should be an unbeatable "I win" button, which can often seem like the case once damage gets high enough.
And, honestly, I still say a lot of your argument seems to come down to "I refuse to bash to dragon and I'm not going to tank up heavily, but people with heavy artifacts can still damage me to death so they need to be nerfed."
It would be one thing if it was only a question of artifacts, but some classes, namely 2h/DWB, can deal an unmanageable amount of damage even with no artifacts in play, especially with high strength races. Being able to die to damage is one thing, but having to run or die (and get past room hinder to get out) after just a few hits can get pretty old pretty fast.
And even with artifacts, I don't think credit investment should be an unbeatable "I win" button, which can often seem like the case once damage gets high enough.
I never really understood why a big increase in health is somehow unfair, but crazy offenses purchased with credits is not. A Thoth's fang is a much bigger nuisance than an L3 sword, imo.
Affliction speed is balanced around a fixed curing speed. No matter how much I'm outmatched on credit investment, it's possible to fight back against pure affliction pressure. With health, on the other hand, my ability to fight against it depends on how many levels and defensive artifacts I have. There are always options against artifacted aff pressure, but against heavy health damage, sometimes a fight can be nearly impossible to win right out of the gate, simply because I've spent less money then the other guy.
You will never be priced out of a fight from a thoth's fang. With damage, on the other hand, it's possible to simply pay to win.
Affliction speed is balanced around a fixed curing speed. No matter how much I'm outmatched on credit investment, it's possible to fight back against pure affliction pressure. With health, on the other hand, my ability to fight against it depends on how many levels and defensive artifacts I have. There are always options against artifacted aff pressure, but against heavy health damage, sometimes a fight can be nearly impossible to win right out of the gate, simply because I've spent less money then the other guy.
Well yeah, a big part of why I stuck with monk was that it gave me more tools to survive against being damaged out.
Though as for monk vs magi, magi are basically immune to my damage, and it takes a 4.5 limb setup to have a shot at scythe because of bloodboil, so I can't say I feel too bad you have to prep a few more limbs to make pummel work!
Basically every single artifact weapon gives both increased damage as well as an advantage in affliction rate. That is pretty much the entire reason why people buy artifacts.
And, honestly, I still say a lot of your argument seems to come down to "I refuse to bash to dragon and I'm not going to tank up heavily, but people with heavy artifacts can still damage me to death so they need to be nerfed."
Friendly reminder that 1: I play as a 2h against max artied dragon people and win pretty consistently. 2: while most arties may increase both, most afflictions that get said increased speed don't take 5s to cure by default and none offer a catch 22 scenario between health and afflictions. 3: I'm not talking from a perspective of fighting against 2h, I'm talking from the perspective of fighting as one.
If you can honestly say you're remotely struggling in more than one or two matchups as 2h, you're doing something very wrong.
Well yeah, a big part of why I stuck with monk was that it gave me more tools to survive against being damaged out.
Though as for monk vs magi, magi are basically immune to my damage, and it takes a 4.5 limb setup to have a shot at scythe because of bloodboil, so I can't say I feel too bad you have to prep a few more limbs to make pummel work!
a few more limbs? you tanked no less than SIX sensipummels!!! because your limb curing was shit
And if you'd used staffstrike earth or had prepped my arms beforehand instead of using a prefarar axe every attack, I'd have been smooshed. The only reason I survived was that you seemed to think doing the same thing another few times was going to give you better results. I'd have had a similarly bad time if I went for scythe while ignoring the existence of bloodboil.
And if you'd used staffstrike earth or had prepped my arms beforehand instead of using a prefarar axe every attack, I'd have been smooshed. The only reason I survived was that you seemed to think doing the same thing another few times was going to give you better results. I'd have had a similarly bad time if I went for scythe while ignoring the existence of bloodboil.
I mean... that in no way excuses kai heal being ridiculous at all, and your argument is null. You have 0 room to complain about health damage classes anyway. Time to make a kai heal nerf classlead.
If anything, the opposite argument seems more valid? I can buy more health. I can't buy faster herb balances or rebounding or whatever. That's literally the reason why a lot of dedicated fighters pick aff classes over damage classes: tfang serp will mess anyone up. Damage won't work on a super artied person.
ETA: don't mean to gang up on @Keorin. Just making a point. Idk what @Aegoth's problem is.
@Aegoth, not sure how you having easy counters to kai heal that you didn't use isn't a counterargument for it being ridiculous. Also, you won that fight. And it was nearly an IRL year ago. I haven't beaten you since you started tumble/bloodboiling on my scythe attempts. Does having to use different setups to counter different classes really upset you that much?
@Anedhel And that's the thing, though. L3 artie aff speed is balanced so that it's beatable, even if it's difficult. With a sufficient difference in IRL investment, a fight against health damage can simply be unwinnable. I don't think I should have to buy x amount of artifacts, or spend some ungodly number of hours bashing just to be able to compete. In my mind, artifacts should give an advantage, but they shouldn't price people out of a fight.
The advantage they provide is that you do more damage. For that advantage to be worth paying for, they have to at some point make people easier to kill with damage. If I can't kill somebody who has 4k health without an artefact, and buying it means I still can't kill them, nobody will buy it. At that point it's effectively, if not literally, doing nothing for me.
The advantage they provide is that you do more damage. For that advantage to be worth paying for, they have to at some point make people easier to kill with damage. If I can't kill somebody who has 4k health without an artefact, and buying it means I still can't kill them, nobody will buy it. At that point it's effectively, if not literally, doing nothing for me.
For sure. I'm not saying that damage is inherently bad, and that artifacts shouldn't give you a leg up. I'm just trying to answer why I think that people react worse to extreme damage then to extreme affliction pressure. If anything, the only solutions I'd personally suggest would be to make damage classes like 2h/dwb deal more percent damage then flat damage in their attacks (which would then be raised by artifacts), to try and make there be less cases that they're unstoppable or ineffective.
I don't think I should have to buy x amount of artifacts, or spend some ungodly number of hours bashing just to be able to compete. In my mind, artifacts should give an advantage, but they shouldn't price people out of a fight.
You absolutely should have to invest time in getting a decent healthpool and/or buy health/tank artifacts to survive someone who has invested heavily in damage artifacts.
You can think you shouldn't have to all you want. It's still a stupid thing to think that.
If I am stuffed to the lid of lvl 3 arties and you are level 80, my raw damage as a damage class should moosh you. It probably sounds dickish and unfair, but you CAN get a healthpool to make survivability possible. You can invest the $$$ or time.
Aff classes are differently, because even with full artefacts vs full artefacts it basically comes down to aff or limb pressure. Damage pressure is literally only a problem if your health pool is so puny you get smushed.
My favourite thing about every classlead round is how apparently nobody bothers to read what else has been submitted, so you get basically the same classlead multiple times.
Comments
And, honestly, I still say a lot of your argument seems to come down to "I refuse to bash to dragon and I'm not going to tank up heavily, but people with heavy artifacts can still damage me to death so they need to be nerfed."
Not that I'm complaining
And even with artifacts, I don't think credit investment should be an unbeatable "I win" button, which can often seem like the case once damage gets high enough.
You will never be priced out of a fight from a thoth's fang. With damage, on the other hand, it's possible to simply pay to win.
Well yeah, a big part of why I stuck with monk was that it gave me more tools to survive against being damaged out.
Though as for monk vs magi, magi are basically immune to my damage, and it takes a 4.5 limb setup to have a shot at scythe because of bloodboil, so I can't say I feel too bad you have to prep a few more limbs to make pummel work!
If you can honestly say you're remotely struggling in more than one or two matchups as 2h, you're doing something very wrong.
- Limb Counter - Fracture Relapsing -
"Honestly, I just love that it counts limbs." - Mizik Corten
*jots it down*
ETA: don't mean to gang up on @Keorin. Just making a point. Idk what @Aegoth's problem is.
@Anedhel And that's the thing, though. L3 artie aff speed is balanced so that it's beatable, even if it's difficult. With a sufficient difference in IRL investment, a fight against health damage can simply be unwinnable. I don't think I should have to buy x amount of artifacts, or spend some ungodly number of hours bashing just to be able to compete. In my mind, artifacts should give an advantage, but they shouldn't price people out of a fight.
Results of disembowel testing | Knight limb counter | GMCP AB files
You can think you shouldn't have to all you want. It's still a stupid thing to think that.
Aff classes are differently, because even with full artefacts vs full artefacts it basically comes down to aff or limb pressure. Damage pressure is literally only a problem if your health pool is so puny you get smushed.
-Please.
its not hard at all, although returning would be lovely.
Penwize has cowardly forfeited the challenge to mortal combat issued by Atalkez.
Results of disembowel testing | Knight limb counter | GMCP AB files