1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

Enchanted Apples (Civil Discussion)

Discussion in 'UHall' started by sibble, Feb 24, 2015.

  1. sibble

    sibble Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend 151

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,058
    Likes Received:
    332
    The reason for this thread is to discuss the current usage of Enchanted Apples.

    Currently, this is the way it works:
    Eating an apple has a chance to remove a debuff. If it fails, you can eat another apple again right away. If it succeeds, it will go on cool down.

    The suggested change is this:
    Eating an apple will remove all debuffs. It can't fail, and will always go on cool down after usage.

    The change will do this:
    Put more responsibility on players for PVP (less RNG, more player skill)
    Make it that much harder for people to script auto-apples (u curse player, script removes curse, u mortal player, player cannot remove mortal)


    Scenario:
    A player gets cursed and decides to apple immediately to remove it, putting his enchanted apples on cool down. Said player then gets effected by mortal strike and can't eat an apple. If the player had waited he could have removed both curse and mortal strike. Maybe he did the right thing by using the apple earlier than later so he didn't take more damage from the time he was cursed till the time he was mortaled. Maybe not...?


    Difference in situations:
    Current situation
    Someone mortal strikes you. You get mortaled, eat an apple. It fails, so you eat another and another until the mortal strike is removed. You then get mortal striked again and your apple is on cool down.

    New situation
    Someone mortal strikes you. You eat an apple and mortal strike is removed. You then get moral striked again and your apple is on cool down.

    So there would be no difference in situations of being mortal spammed. Getting mortal spammed is the exact same either way. You eat an apple to remove mortal, apple goes on cool down, you get mortaled again. Both situations (old and new) result in the same out come.


    The suggested change effects nothing towards being spammed with debuffs, it would work exactly as it did before. All that would be changed is that instead of having to eat apple after apple and letting RNG be the deciding factor, instead we put more control to the player!!! Let the player chose when they want to apple, and face consequences if not choosing wisely!

    There are very strong points as to why they should be changed. More importantly, a lot of people think that this is going to change mechanics to the point where you will no longer be able to spam some debuff (such as mortal strike) on someone. If you read the situations above you can see that there is no change.

    Please add any of your concerns to this discussion in a civil manner. This is a PVP related discussion which usually turn into heated discussions. Let's try not to go that route! :)
     
    #1 sibble, Feb 24, 2015
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2015
  2. Nexus

    Nexus Site Support
    Administrator Professional Wiki Moderator Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend Campaign Patron

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    5,572
    Likes Received:
    1,836
    I'd only go for this if there was an increase in the cool down time,or further changes to make it so you can't receive the same debuff more than X times in a certain span. You're signature mentions SWTOR, so I'm sure you remember when Imperial Agents were able to stun lock someone. The same idea applies to being able to Spam Mortal, AI, or having a group basically Para-lock someone, it's an imbalance in PvP and should be given a serious look and ways to better balance it put into place.
     
    sibble likes this.
  3. sibble

    sibble Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend 151

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,058
    Likes Received:
    332
    I'm not opposed to any of those suggestions. I do agree with you in that the entire system of applying debuffs on another player needs to be looked at and balanced. Adding diminishing returns would be one approach, reducing the amount of time the debuff lasts on a person each time it is applied over X amount of seconds.
     
  4. CovenantX

    CovenantX Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,729
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    You know, I get what you're saying, but everything can already happen as it is currently, except with the proposed change, apples would be more reliable on the First attempt, instead of failing.

    I don't really agree with the whole para-locking someone, if you want to avoid that, you take up resist, or carry a trapped box, you can't so such a thing with R N G. these are all things you can control, and they do not need fixing.

    Mortal can be spammed now, and would still be spammable, even if such a change took place.
    If apples were changed to never fail (and still keep the 30 second cooldown) it wouldn't change anything except allowing players to better time their apple uses.

    I'd be in favor of a longer cooldown on apples , maybe 45 seconds? I'd love to be able to rely on an apple that Never fails when it's actually needed.
    (I've posted about this before Here, and damn it's still not locked, how about that?)
     
    sibble likes this.