FR EN ES PT
Browse forums 
Ankama Trackers

Three changes to achieve greater diversity of teams

By morezanto - MEMBER - September 11, 2016, 06:51:56
DevTracker

Hi

That is simple, actually many teams in pvm 180+ have the same characters (eni + feca + xelor + cra + steam + panda +...) and this become relatively less useful the melee characters (iop, masq, sram, eca, etc.). So, I recommend this for a more diverse game:

1. Change the range for melee and ranged damage.
Maybe, this will give more area to play at melee characters,
Melee: 1 to 3 squares
Distance: 4 and more squares

2. Change the amount of damage (spells) for melee, single target, AoE and distance attacks.
It does not seem very sane that ranged attacks are much stronger than melee attacks. I propose:

Damage melee > distance. Because one is risky and the other is safe for the character.
and
Damage single target > AoE. Because one is concentrate and the other affect multiple targets.

3. Put on moobs/boos incremental resistance to melee and ranged attacks.
I mean, every time an enemy receives melee damage, this will increase his resistance to melee damage and decrease his resistance to ranged attacks and vice versa. I mean put small resistances, but significant when they accumulate because a team abused of full ranged/melee characters, this will force teams have divers characters.

[blockquote]3.1. Alternative: Resistance cumulative by character, not by spell, example:
If a character attacks at distance (no matter how many attacks) = 3% distance resistance at moob/boos.[/blockquote]

2 -2
Reply
First Ankama intervention

Hello there,

Thanks for your feedback and analysis. Some good points have been raised here.

As a result, we have significantly reduced the Lock of Moon Island's Bosses.

This can currently be tested on the Beta server!

See message in context
Reactions 59
Score : 2494

I don't know about you but I see a decent amount of Masq's and Eca's. In my honest opinion, it's not the fact that these classes are melee but rather Iop's simply have a rather boring class design, and sram's still need a rework since the simplification to final damage nerfed it to the ground.

1.) I suppose I could tolerate the change of melee being 1-3 and distance being 4+. I do feel people punching 4 cells away is a bit of a stretch. It just doesn't make scene. If your going to be melee you should play IN melee. 3 to 4 cells away is mid-range no matter how you put it. Yes, I would say right now dungeons are favoring long ranged game play, and it is reflecting a bit in the class variation percentages but that being said, can be fixed with dungeon mechanics that better accommodate for melee players. It's not all about damage...

2.) As far as melee over distance, there is somewhat of a difference in base damage between melee based spells and long ranged based spells. I feel overall melee classes and gear suit their needs of being a bit tankier and that damage shouldn't be affected anymore than it already is within spell base damage. (For example a CC spell like slap shot at level 200 deals an average of 33.75 per AP versus piercing shot which is 25 damage per AP at level 200. That's A whooping 8.75 difference in damage per AP! Over 12 AP.... that's 105 base damage! HUGE! Converted into a percentage a melee spell like slap shot is is 35% more effective than a spell with high range like piercing shot!

As far as single target versus AoE, I think anyone can agree that anyone who is single target focused will deal more damage to a single mob then someone who AoE's. I don't feel AoE's should be discouraged, as it takes time and effort to set up a good AoE with positioning ect. (For example level 200 piercing shot is 25 damage per AP, level 200 boomerang dagger is 21 damage per AP) That's A difference of 48 base damage over 12 AP. That means AoE's like boomerang dagger are 16% less effective then single target spells like piercing shot. Quite considerable if you ask me.

3.) The resistance mechanic you suggested is an interesting idea, and I'd like to see it in action. I feel it would have interesting effects on both PvM and PvP builds.I wonder if this could possibly be a universal class defensive passive. I feel a lot of classes lack defensive capabilities.

(I guess I'm just not one who likes change) Just my two kama's

0 0
Reply
Score : 10004

That resistance to damage types based on what hits the target would be a cool concept for a mob family or a boss, but applying it to everything seems pretty messy.

0 0
Reply
Score : 1202

1) I don't like this change. It's not very realistic (are we going to make swords be able to reach that far?), and there are some classes that would really suffer (enus come to mind), while most of the classically "overpowered" ranged classes wouldn't be affected much at all. Unless you're actually talking about changing the range of melee spells, this wouldn't help almost anyone.

2) Melee spells in general do more damage already, and there is a standardized formula for AoE vs ST spells. Think about Srams, whose base damage is typically 27-31 dmg / AP, excluding their nukes, compared with the uniform 25/AP for most ranged class spells (Enis, ecas [if you look at the average damage of their random rolls], most cra spells, enus, pandas, etc). Meanwhile, AoE ranged spells average 21-23 dmg/ap. There are a few exceptions, but most cost WP. The dmg/ap of melee AoE spells is similarly reduced. I don't see this as a problem at all.

3) I'd definitely enjoy this mechanic for a boss or a family of monsters. It sounds like the whispered cracklers, a group I spent many days farming back in the day. But let's not start talking about making this a universal feature — it would ruin many people's play style, and make the game overall more tedious.

0 0
Reply
Score : 2164

From a PvE perspective, I do think melee chars should do more damage than ranged. It just makes sense for tactical balance. I think it might cause problems for PvP though.

Here's a potential alternative solution: increase the base MP from 3 to 8 and raise the MP cap from 8 to 14.

0 0
Reply
Score : 885

Your suggestions do not encourage diversity. It will result in just the opposite mainly due to point 3. Diversity is not achieved by imposing more restrictions.

For example, I have 9 lvl 190 -200 characters. All except for Cra are capable of dd, cc, and semi-tanking (Sadida, Fogger, and Eni.) I change my configurations depending on which Moon Island dungeon I'm in but with your suggestion I will actually now have to use an actual tank build and get tank gear to use for all the dungeons and I probably would now fail a lot of times since I don't have a Feca.

0 0
Reply
Score : 44

REWAMP ALL CLASSES!!! EXTERMINATE ALL HUMANS!!! *hora-hora-hora*

0 -2
Reply
Score : 11867
morezanto|2016-09-11 06:51:56

1. Change the range for melee and ranged damage.

2. Change the amount of damage for melee, single target, AoE and distance attacks.

3. Put on moobs/boos incremental resistance to melee and ranged attacks.

1. Close Combat being 1-2 tiles and Distance being 3 tiles and greater gets more and more unbalanced as you go to high levels. In the early game a range char might have double the range of a melee char, in the endgame if people are stacking 7-10 range (and show me and endgame Cra that has less than that) that can be 6x the range of a melee char so 'distance damage' covers almost the entire map.

However I don't think this change would accomplish anything. Most melee spells only have 1 cast range anyway and getting your mastery bonuses an extra tile out won't help if you can't use your good spells at that range anyway.

2. This is already sort of the case but the difference isn't big enough to be meaningful against endgame bosses, and most endgame bosses have some sort of damage cap that you can already hit with a range team. A more effective change might be making Kannilooni, Nyl King, Grozepin taking half damage at range. That's the sort of magnitude of change you need to make melee meaningful.

3. Interesting, but would be messy to implement for everything and since most mobs can be killed in say 3-4 good hits it would have to be a HUGE res increase to be meaningful. Which would harm classes which rely on a large number of low AP attacks.

EarthMinion|2016-09-11 07:52:49
2.) As far as melee over distance, there is somewhat of a difference in base damage between melee based spells and long ranged based spells. I feel overall melee classes and gear suit their needs of being a bit tankier and that damage shouldn't be affected anymore than it already is within spell base damage. (For example a CC spell like slap shot at level 200 deals an average of 33.75 per AP versus piercing shot which is 25 damage per AP at level 200. That's A whooping 8.75 difference in damage per AP! Over 12 AP.... that's 105 base damage! HUGE! Converted into a percentage a melee spell like slap shot is is 35% more effective than a spell with high range like piercing shot!


Cra commonly has 25 base damage per AP, sometimes less if the spell has a lot of other effects sometimes more if you count bonus damage.

Sram commonly has 27 base damage per AP, sometimes more if the spell is high AP or has a cast limit. Forceful Blow and Kleptosram are 31 but they're exceptions rather than the norm. And yeah Sram is weak atm but like Cra it's a crit fighter so I think it's a fairer comparison than say Iop.

Anyway I don't think that say ~10% better base damage properly counteracts the advantages that range has.

If a melee DD finishes an enemy with 2-4 AP remaining they may be unable to spend that leftover AP effectively, if a range DD finishes an enemy with 2-4 AP remaining they can easily transition to softening up the next enemy. If a melee DD is far away from the enemies they might have to spend a lot of AP on utility spells or be unable to hit at all, range DDs rarely have dead turns where they can't hit anything and in the unlikely event that they get locked they have some cheap escape moves so they spend much less on utility than melee DDs. Melee DDs may be unable to hit endgame bosses safely without a ton of support or without wasting AP on utility moves (losing 2 AP in a turn on utility moves is 16.67% loss of damage on a 12 AP build so that's probably more significant than the difference in base damages. If you're spending more than that then you're losing that comparison hard.) whilst range DDs are effective all the time, and even if melee DDs can hit bosses safely they're much worse at dealing with boss invulnerabilities (and most moon bosses have some sort of damage cap which you can hit with pure range teams so higher theoretical damage isn't needed). Range DDs can afford to stat as class cannon to squeeze out extra damage that way (which basically counteracts the need of stating range) and still they're safer/easier to play because they can outrange basically all their enemies (especially useful for bosses).

The only time people ever actively recruit for melee DD is SB, a fight where melee sits doing nothing for half the battle. So 50% useless is still more of a role than melee has in most moon dungeons. And one melee DD might maybe be useful for clearing mobs in the rooms, but it's hardly necessary whilst multiple range DDs are basically necessary for Nyl King and Kannilooni (and they're good to have everywhere else too). So a melee char isn't needed but maybe they contribute a little bit, except as you move into certain steles melee goes from merely pointless to pretty much useless (-3MP and stabilized cripples melee chars, especially ones based on their mobility. +1AP cost, +1WP costs and -1MP for each spell cast is annoying for everyone but really cripples melee chars).

These numbers are always going to be debatable but I think the slapshot vs piercing shot comparison is misleading as all hell. Firstly Slapshot gets heavily boosted damage on the second hit but has a cast limit of 3 per target so you're cherrypicking the best possible number from it. If you're hitting an enemy once it's 27 damage per AP, twice it's 33.75 damage per ap, thrice it's 31.5 damage per AP, Secondly Piercing Shot also deals armour damage, and it gives you 15% MP removal and 15% damage inflicted on your next earth spell which you haven't included in your raw damage comparison. If you compare Slapshot with Pulsar instead at 31 damage per AP then the difference in base damage is a lot smaller.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3992

I would rather propose moon bosses decreased lock to make cc classes more able to go in,hit them and get away,like koko the nutt,that is kinda the open door for all fighters because he doesn't have 800lock and enought damage to one turn anything,getting the moon bosses to 300~~500 locks looks more fair to me

Implementin less punishing mechanics for cc classes (like psykoko that take halfed cc dmg,grozepin's start of thrun aoe poison,nyl king's ability to get any unaware fighter to take their last bath) could also increase their viability,somthing like psykoko reducing the damages from 2~~4 cells instead,make grozepin's mp poison less hardcore ( walk 6cell take 7000dmg is a bit extreme),give anyone that dealt more than 1500 damages in close combat to the nyl king a stabil at end of turn (like anchor)

Those are only few examples,these are maybe not the best solutions around.but measures must be taken to save the cc dds from being ditched everywhere

0 0
Reply
Score : 11867
RaderElcaroman|2016-09-11 23:15:49
I would rather propose moon bosses decreased lock to make cc classes more able to go in,hit them and get away,like koko the nutt,that is kinda the open door for all fighters because he doesn't have 800lock and enought damage to one turn anything,getting the moon bosses to 300~~500 locks looks more fair to me

Implementin less punishing mechanics for cc classes (like psykoko that take halfed cc dmg,grozepin's start of thrun aoe poison,nyl king's ability to get any unaware fighter to take their last bath) could also increase their viability,somthing like psykoko reducing the damages from 2~~4 cells instead,make grozepin's mp poison less hardcore ( walk 6cell take 7000dmg is a bit extreme),give anyone that dealt more than 1500 damages in close combat to the nyl king a stabil (like anchor)

Those are only few examples,these are maybe not the best solutions around.but measures must be taken to save the cc dds from being ditched everywhere

Moon bosses (excluding Koko the Nutt) having 800-999 lock is something that only really effects melee DDs yeah (and most melee DDs can't get enough dodge to compete with that). Range DDs will never get that close to moon bosses for their lock to matter (if they do they're probably dying that turn anyway) and Fecas (the tank of choice for all those bosses) just ignore it with bubble so it only effects melee DDs. Some melee DDs have tools they can use to bypass these super high locks but not all the time, and often spending resources on escape/utility moves nullifies the advantage melee DDs have in base damage. So yeah dropping the lock on these bosses would help melee DDs but a lot more needs to be done too.

Koko the Nutt is kind of a fair fight for melee (excluding Gengas stele) but Psykoko's taking half damage in melee is annoying and it makes full melee teams not recommended (for the only dungeon where they really have a role lol). Changing Psykoko damage reduction range from 1-2 to 2-4 would make melee more viable but might weaken mid range fighters or AOE users.

Grozepin's AOE MP poison is really extreme but I think his ability to dish out Stabilize every turn (completely ignoring destabilize) is more of an issue to melees DD. Between his high lock and his immediately to stabilize every turn it gets hard for melee chars to hit him safely unless they have a lot of mobility and constantly avoid getting stabilized (which means being 5+ tiles away with something to block LOS). Lower lock and a rethink on his stabilize would help more than a rethink on his poison AOE imo.

I like the idea about getting a self stabilize if you deal enough CC damage to Nyl King (generally him pushing you into a death tile is a lot more dangerous than his damage output, especially if he can't use his melee moves against you). Being tankier isn't particularly useful dungeons unless you're the primary tank (I have ever seen someone recruiting for an off tank) but it becomes totally useless iif you can get pushed into instant death. And even if he isn't instakilling you his pushback and MP debuffs can cause wasted turns for melee DDs as they're unable to close the distance to attack again. So yeah lower lock + earning anchor for melee damage would make things a lot easier for melee DDs (they're still need heal support though). It might also make Sac a more viable tank here thought they would still have some severe weaknesses.

But really I think the main issues are
1) range characters are needed to deal with boss invulnerabilities (melee chars can't move totems in Kannilooni effectively, melee chars can't hit flowers on opposite sides of the map in Grozepin, melee chars can struggle to hit Nyl King safely at all) but there is no need to bring melee characters along.
2) range teams are too fast, too easy and too effective. Melee has slightly higher base damage (~+10%), but that doesn't mean anything if a range team can already hit the damage cap on a boss or if melee struggles to safely engage in the first place (or if they're forced to spend ~30% of their AP on mobility) . Even if you increase the viability of melee chars against Nyl King and Grozepin you're still going to run into the problem that range teams burn them down easier and faster with less that can wrong.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3992

well,i heard that grozepin's stabil every turn gonna get fixed,nothing's sure yet tho,but if it truly happens,things would be easyer for cc dds in this fight

0 0
Reply
Score : 1688

The biggest pet pevee of mine I've got in this game, is that we have only one "perfect" tank class, and only one "perfect" healer class. Several classes in game are capable of tanking or healing, and with proper gear and build they can manage as well - if not better at times - than feca or eni. And yet! non-eni healers are treated as situational, makeshift healers that may work for only either hunting mobs outside of dungeon, or if eni dies to some freak accident. Favoring one class to do one of the most vital role in party, in an MMO game that has 17!!! classes in total (soon to be 18), is a diddlydoo lazy design choice. This shit might've worked if your game had like, 5 classes in total, but not 10+ and increasing every year!

No, I don't mean fecas shouldn't ever tank, or enis heal - at this point I'm craving some diversity. I want to see sacrier tank not being ripped apart by Kannibal boss because of pretty diddlydoo up strategy it's got. I want to see a masq healer handling Croco or Vore dungeon. I want my eca to be something more than just -res bot to make cra's job easier. I don't want to see yet another person maining sram contemplating changing class of their favourite character into yet another feca, because they cannot find any party to dungeons.

0 0
Reply
Score : 1176
PutThatSwordDown|2016-09-12 01:23:17
The biggest pet pevee of mine I've got in this game, is that we have only one "perfect" tank class, and only one "perfect" healer class. Several classes in game are capable of tanking or healing, and with proper gear and build they can manage as well - if not better at times - than feca or eni. And yet! non-eni healers are treated as situational, makeshift healers that may work for only either hunting mobs outside of dungeon, or if eni dies to some freak accident. Favoring one class to do one of the most vital role in party, in an MMO game that has 17!!! classes in total (soon to be 18), is a diddlydoo lazy design choice. This shit might've worked if your game had like, 5 classes in total, but not 10+ and increasing every year!

No, I don't mean fecas shouldn't ever tank, or enis heal - at this point I'm craving some diversity. I want to see sacrier tank not being ripped apart by Kannibal boss because of pretty diddlydoo up strategy it's got. I want to see a masq healer handling Croco or Vore dungeon. I want my eca to be something more than just -res bot to make cra's job easier. I don't want to see yet another person maining sram contemplating changing class of their favourite character into yet another feca, because they cannot find any party to dungeons.
Those classes can do those dungeons pretty well, ya'll are just trippin'.

While I do agree some design choices are lazy bar choice, all healers are capable of doing their job just not as efficient.

As for tanking, others require more effort put in but they all work.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3992

i agree with most of what's going on,the little problem is that we're deriving from the main topic,i believe

0 0
Reply
Score : 11867
BurningMasochist|2016-09-12 01:47:43
As for tanking, others require more effort put in but they all work.

I think there are viable alternatives to eni for healers (but eni wins on flexibility and efficiency). And there are viable alternatives for tanks in SB and Koko the Nutt, but in moon 2 dungeons not really.

"Harder to play and less effective but technically able to do the job if you give them enough support" doesn't really make for a viable alternative.

Feca vs Sacrier in Nyl King
- Feca has provoke to stop Nyl King moving on bonus mp turns. This also stabilizes feca so no worries about Feca getting moved that turn.
- Feca has leather plating and fecablades to lower his mobility in general
- Feca has bubble to ignore his lock
- Feca has selt+target teleport to move Nyl King around easy, or to cover distance to get close to him.

Sacrier has no MP chip so they'd need someone else to handle that. Sacrier can stabilize themselves (with cooldown) but can't stabilize a target so they can't counter bonus MP turns. Sacrier's swap places teleports are their only way of moving Nyl King around and do the job a lot worse than feca's teleport - so if the Nyl King moves (which sac can't stop on their own) they may be dependent on another player repositioning boss for them because they might not be able to do it themselves (depends on exact circumstances). Sac has to eat heavy penalties manoeuvring around the boss because they can't ignore his lock and there's no way for sac to get high enough dodge to dodge bosses whilst also keeping high enough lock to lock them. And the only advantage to sacs is they can deal some direct damage to boss, but damage output is trash on a tank build so that doesn't mean anything really.

Feca vs Sacrier in Grozepin
- Feca has bubble to ignore his lock.
- Feca has selt+target teleport to move Grozepin around easy.
- Feca has Immunity & peace armour so they can ignore Natural Extermination poisons if they get them near the end of the fight. Or they can peace another player when that player comes to take the poisons.
- Feca has AP glyph (basically allowing you to get glass cannon damage out of a full tank build).

Sac has damage output.. which a) is trash on a tank build, b) is probably less than the damage boost feca glyphs provie and c) doesn't matter at all if DDs are one turning phases anyway.

Anyway I'll glady be proven wrong if someone can post a video of them beating Nyl King bossfight on Pearly stele (+1AP&WP costs, -1mp per spell cast) in a quasi-reasonable time with a team of 4 melee srams, 1 sac tank and whatever healer they so desire. Same goes for Kannilooni on Opal stele (-3mp and stabilize).
0 0
Reply
Score : 1176
TestAccountDONOTKILL|2016-09-12 02:30:21
BurningMasochist|2016-09-12 01:47:43
As for tanking, others require more effort put in but they all work.

I think there are viable alternatives to eni for healers (but eni wins on flexibility and efficiency). And there are viable alternatives for tanks in SB and Koko the Nutt, but in moon 2 dungeons not really.

"Harder to play and less effective but technically able to do the job if you give them enough support" doesn't really make for a viable alternative.

Feca vs Sacrier in Nyl King
- Feca has provoke to stop Nyl King moving on bonus mp turns. This also stabilizes feca so no worries about Feca getting moved that turn.
- Feca has leather plating and fecablades to lower his mobility in general
- Feca has bubble to ignore his lock
- Feca has selt+target teleport to move Nyl King around easy, or to cover distance to get close to him.

Sacrier has no MP chip so they'd need someone else to handle that. Sacrier can stabilize themselves (with cooldown) but can't stabilize a target so they can't counter bonus MP turns. Sacrier's swap places teleports are their only way of moving Nyl King around and do the job a lot worse than feca's teleport - so if the Nyl King moves (which sac can't stop on their own) they may be dependent on another player repositioning boss for them because they might not be able to do it themselves (depends on exact circumstances). Sac has to eat heavy penalties manoeuvring around the boss because they can't ignore his lock and there's no way for sac to get high enough dodge to dodge bosses whilst also keeping high enough lock to lock them. And the only advantage to sacs is they can deal some direct damage to boss, but damage output is trash on a tank build so that doesn't mean anything really.

Feca vs Sacrier in Grozepin
- Feca has bubble to ignore his lock.
- Feca has selt+target teleport to move Grozepin around easy.
- Feca has Immunity & peace armour so they can ignore Natural Extermination poisons if they get them near the end of the fight. Or they can peace another player when that player comes to take the poisons.
- Feca has AP glyph (basically allowing you to get glass cannon damage out of a full tank build).

Sac has damage output.. which a) is trash on a tank build, b) is probably less than the damage boost feca glyphs provie and c) doesn't matter at all if DDs are one turning phases anyway.

Anyway I'll glady be proven wrong if someone can post a video of them beating Nyl King bossfight on Pearly stele (+1AP&WP costs, -1mp per spell cast) in a quasi-reasonable time with a team of 4 melee srams, 1 sac tank and whatever healer they so desire. Same goes for Kannilooni on Opal stele (-3mp and stabilize).
Take a step back for a second and re-read what I said.

I never stated it would be faster.

I never said it would be more efficient.

And I clearly never stated they perform without handicaps.

All tanks work, some require more effort and yes I'm pro-buff for these classes I'm just laying it down that maybe it is in the dungeon design and not so much the classes. Most likely the case in the middle of the two.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3992

yup,but for now,eni and feca easly lead the first uncountested place in term of healin' and tankin' in most situations

i believe everything have been said in this thread,lets see what does the modos think about it,if they ever pass by

0 0
Reply
Score : 11867
BurningMasochist|2016-09-12 02:44:15
TestAccountDONOTKILL|2016-09-12 02:30:21
Take a step back for a second and re-read what I said.

I never stated it would be faster.

I never said it would be more efficient.

And I clearly never stated they perform without handicaps.

All tanks work, some require more effort and yes I'm pro-buff for these classes I'm just laying it down that maybe it is in the dungeon design and not so much the classes. Most likely the case in the middle of the two.

Think a little harder about the situation here.

Feca works as a tank under all circumstances, with basically zero support (sometimes doesn't even need heals if you kill bosses fast enough).

Sacrier doesn't work as a tank for Nyl King and Grozepin unless you bring 1-2 other characters specifically to support them. And even then it's going to do a worse job and the fight will be slower and riskier.

Sac tank in those dungeons has 4-5 serious disadvantages and 0 meaningful advantages so you have no reason to consider them instead of feca unless a) you're super desperate for a tank and just happen to already have classes that can provide the right support or b) you want to prove a point about sac theoretically being able to tank those dungeons. For general play nobody uses sacriers to tank Nyl King or Grozepin (they can use sacs to tank Koko the Nutt or SB, though Feca still performs better there.)

And efficiency *IS* a relevant factor when determining if something works or not. I mean you could demolish a building with nothing but toothpicks provided a) you had enough toothpicks and b) you had enough time, but no sane person would say toothpicks worked for that job. So when you have an option that's universally worse and significantly worse then it ceases to be much of an option.

Sac has an incomplete toolset for tanking Nyl King and Grozepin. You can say that's a problem with dungeon design rather than the class, but those dungeons are unlikely to change significantly and it's not like sac is super duper amazing elsewhere in the game. Feca is universally the superior tank, someone could play Sacrier for 400 hours then class change to Feca and after 10 minutes of Feca playtime they'd be a better tank than they were as Sac (and Sac isn't great as a DD either).
0 0
Reply
Score : 3992

you are kinda both arguing about the same point,that some classes other than feca can tank but only supported by the teammates a lot more than a feca would need external help,exept tropicoco,the boss is so lame even a dd can tankit buahahaha

0 0
Reply
Score : 1679
Tiefoone|2016-09-11 08:15:12
That resistance to damage types based on what hits the target would be a cool concept for a mob family or a boss, but applying it to everything seems pretty messy.
It exists in a way with whisperers, just with elemental resistance.
0 0
Reply
Respond to this thread