So I gather that when you're pkilling, and probably while you're
mob killing, the preference of spells fall into the more 'utility'
line (ie, buffs -- str, magic sink, detects, etc) and into the
What is it that keeps you from using direct damage spells in PK?
I'm curious to see what it would take to make direct damage spells
Thursday, September 28 2000, 12:19PM
Me personally, I end up casting some direct damage spells, in particular
gust and immolate, but I would probably cast them more if it weren't
for the fact that it costs me so much if people flee -- if I save the
mana for a heal on myself, it's not going to miss, whereas if I'm
fighting, there's a constant risk of them fleeing at the wrong moment.
So I pick my times pretty carefully. I guess that's not a suggestion
for change, just my $.02 on why I do what I do.
Thursday, September 28 2000, 12:19PM
the problem with damage spells is this. As it stands so much damage
is done in pk so fast that while you might do 70 damage on an immolate,
your going to get bashed for 150 for doing it. Thats why stun is so
powerful. Not because your hitting harder, at least not for most types.
Its because your getting hit LESS. I think if all damage was just toned
down a bit, this wouldn't be such a problem. If I'm a dex mage and I
have 400 hp, a headbutt or bash can easily take 25-40% of my hp. My
firestorm on the otherhand might do 80 damage, but its going to be maybe
15-20% of a fighters hp. Because atm the games balance is based on stun,
damage spells will never be popular. So, take out all the hp gear as
stated above, do an eq wipe of all old gear, make all damages lower at
least in pk, and you might see damage spells used. The same also applies
to mobs because if I'm fighting a mob that hits for 60 damage a round, its
much more beneficial to stun the mob, you do the same damage or slightly l
less then you would have firestorming but you take significantly less. So
I guess I'm kinda rambling, but my point is if you make stun less powerful
and damage lowered a bit, you might see things like kick and immolate and
other direct damage skills/spells used more then they are now.
- A mage who never uses damspells because he'll die if he does.
Thursday, September 28 2000, 12:22PM
My two biggest things are as follows: A couple of my highest damaging
spells I dislike using because of the risk of scrapping someone's eq.
I will more than likely use a skill instead, so that I don't hinder
their fighting by scrapping something they need.
Second is sink. If I try to cast immolate on someone with less mind,
and find that their sink is such that I can't get a spell thru, then
I'm going to spend my mana on healing myself instead. If I have 100
mind, and they have 50, that's totally useless if their sink was gotten
at early levels.
So, there's my 25 cents worth on why I don't use damage spells as
often as I could. =)
Thursday, September 28 2000, 01:04PM
I have to say that Ladyace said most of it.
Why would someone chant an immolate against a
pkiller that could, at any moment flee and cause me
to chant on air? Its nice that it only takes 16 mana
when chanted on nothing, but the real big cost is
the 2 rounds of skill lag on top of that. Its just not
worth it to chant anything that maybe "miss" when
you could use the mana for healing, that NEVER
misses, and for utility spells.
A lot of the time, it works out that a kick (30-35 hps
of damage) and a cure crit (60 hps of heal for 64 mana)
is a much better combo that that same amount of mana
in damagespells that may miss, cost you mana and/or
lag you, granting the enemy a free attack.
Thursday, September 28 2000, 01:13PM
imagine a poor create mage in this situation :P
let me lead you outside and bolt you for comparable damage to immolate
or ill just etheric void you for 40 all across! yahoo
in my opinion, i just want to fight as a create mage not relying
so much on a damn tank.... but i don't see that happening right now
so otherwise ill have to have my tank
Thursday, September 28 2000, 01:41PM
Haven't read the other responses yet but making healing spells
return less hps for the mana would work but then I'm one
that uses damage spells anyway, you won't see me using skills
unless my opponent's likely to eat my spells with sink.
I guess another option would be varying skill effectiveness
depending on hometown.. preferably in damage, not success.
Thursday, September 28 2000, 01:50PM
BTW, my ideas are copyrighted too and since I don't like
them I'm afraid I'm not going to allow you to implement them!
Thursday, September 28 2000, 01:58PM
I use direct damage spells when i know i can win this fight regardless,
or if the other guy has better healing than i do, or if he tumbles everyth
I don't think i use healing much, mostly because i can either get ingame
healing or figure that as a 3c cause with 100hps worth of hp gear,
i can outdamage fighters -- given the str fighters' dam these days and
tumble kicking in every now and then.
Still though, when i immolate for 60 which costs me 60pts of healing,
i'm dealing a net of 0, giving me no advantage. But when i kick for 30
and retain my ability to heal 30 pts, i'm gaining a 60 pt edge over
a person that can't heal... if i stun a person who would normally
decimate me for a round, i'm using 30pts of healing's worth to prevent
45 pts of damage or something like that, giving me a 15pt edge...
Well that was overly simplified, but i hope you get the idea. Mana
is too versatile to be translated into damage when skills can deal damage
just as well.
Thursday, September 28 2000, 02:06PM
What I got from a discussion with Mandarb after his post is that
stun is used as much as a defensive tactic as an offensive one
(eg, you're not taking damage at all, but still dishing it out
even if you can't hit that hard). That's a tough one to fix
without eliminating 'stunned' as a concept =(
Thursday, September 28 2000, 04:06PM
This is just an off the top of my head idea, but here goes:
Raise the stats required for 3rd circle words, and work
it so that the damage done increases exponentially for mind
above 80. If you make it necessary to have 55 or 60 spirit to
cast immolate or lightning bolt, high mind mages fight skills
get downgraded, and the increased damage from spells evens
things back out.
Thursday, September 28 2000, 10:06PM
Damage spells that do good damage have a bad side to it.
besides the healing factor, for me to use a watery death
I have to go over water, most of the fights not one water,
Firestorm if in a room with mobs costs a Hell of a lot
of mana and aggs everything. When its so easy to flee
its hard to make sure your spells will be worth it.
So stun is the skill that has the least drawbacks,
but Its failed, backlashed, tumbled, more than it
wfws. Its got enough of a downside dosent
need to be changed in my opinon.
Thursday, September 28 2000, 10:39PM
I guess another option would be to get rid of healing spells
altogether and make meditate like root..
Friday, September 29 2000, 10:15AM
The denfense offence feature of stun is right on the money as one of the
big causes of not as much damage use in pk. The only time i've ever been
direct damage spelled as a figther(eg no sink) is when i was stunned!
I fought one person who used gust a few times, but for the most part it
was stunning. Taking zero damage in a round and getting a little more
damage in yourself is worth alot more then just doing damage and getting
bash/headbutt. And about stun being tumbled and failing, yes it does that,
but it also has extremely long wfw so those two balance. Perhaps if the c
hance of wfw was lowered along with a slight decrease in stunning chance
it would encourage more direct damage. About the healing thing, yeah that
is kinda ridculous, it shouldn't be more effective to skill/flee/heal then
it should be to cast your damage spells. To solve this
the mana cost could be reduced for attack spells and or the damage increas
ed. Up stun and healing cost and lower direct damage spells?
my two cents + your two cents = 4 cents
Friday, September 29 2000, 10:34AM
I like stun cuz it's a 'pacer' for me. Any stunning skill, if
they land, let me catch my breath, plan my next move, and earns
me valueable time.
It also happens to do quite some harm to my opponent, of course.
What i see as a problem with stun is that it won't break even on
some hard contact such as an immolation or a kick. Think it used
to be that backstabs didn't break stun even back in the old days,
but kick and other skills sure did. Maybe we'll have to go back
to that system, cuz then a wfw will only do half as much damage
as they do now.