1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
[font="]"One vs. one" combat[/font]
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
Mages definitely hit harder.
Several scenarios here:
---
level 100 mage vs level 100 close combat
---
Ok here, you're choosing dual daggers to hit a lot, therefore disrupting the spells often.
Result, broken incantations: 1/4 ... SPLENDID
damage: crap 50+ damage per hit (thanks to PvP damage being halved)
damage received from mage char: about 6-700 per spell
outcome: fighter down
---
level 100 mage vs level 100 2h fight
---
Since the double daggers trick didnt work, lets try to kill the mage before hitting the ground
Result, broken incantations: 2/4 (o_O ? why more than CC ?)
damage: about 250-300 per hit, much better
damage received from mage: still about 6-700 per spell
outcome: fighter down
---
level 100 affliction mage vs level 100 whatever fight
---
Here, the mage goes for madness, whatever you try, you're sitting ducks.
outcome: fighter down, mage down too, wetting his pants cause you hit yourself 8 out of 10 times
Therefore, I'll go with the usual "nerf teh paladins!"
errr, I mean, nerf teh mages
What good is a range fighter when he cant use damage increase, and a mage can use doublespell + amps and still have tons of hp cause he's also level 200 fight ?
Ranged fight as it is *sucks* (sorry, but it had to be said), and mages are overpowered in PvP.
Several scenarios here:
---
level 100 mage vs level 100 close combat
---
Ok here, you're choosing dual daggers to hit a lot, therefore disrupting the spells often.
Result, broken incantations: 1/4 ... SPLENDID
damage: crap 50+ damage per hit (thanks to PvP damage being halved)
damage received from mage char: about 6-700 per spell
outcome: fighter down
---
level 100 mage vs level 100 2h fight
---
Since the double daggers trick didnt work, lets try to kill the mage before hitting the ground
Result, broken incantations: 2/4 (o_O ? why more than CC ?)
damage: about 250-300 per hit, much better
damage received from mage: still about 6-700 per spell
outcome: fighter down
---
level 100 affliction mage vs level 100 whatever fight
---
Here, the mage goes for madness, whatever you try, you're sitting ducks.
outcome: fighter down, mage down too, wetting his pants cause you hit yourself 8 out of 10 times
Therefore, I'll go with the usual "nerf teh paladins!"
errr, I mean, nerf teh mages
What good is a range fighter when he cant use damage increase, and a mage can use doublespell + amps and still have tons of hp cause he's also level 200 fight ?
Ranged fight as it is *sucks* (sorry, but it had to be said), and mages are overpowered in PvP.
-
anarkhaios
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 5:11 pm
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
not so true about mages:
mages need a lot of sap and life to cast a double spell of his/her level.
for example a lvl180 mage need to use about 400 sap AND 400 life to cast an "uber" spell that does about 900*2 damages (average, depends on your gloves (gloves ? is that the right word ? ))
so for a lvl 180 mage with (random basic mage) 2000 sap and life, during a pvp fight the mage nearly kill himself in 2000/400= 5 spells.
with one spell every 4 seconds , it's death in 20 seconds ... quick fight isn't it ?
against him there is a 2h warrior lvl 180 with about 3000 life (basic average warrior). the mage need 3000/(900*2)= 2 spells ... it's quite unfair
BUT !
during the same time the warrior hit the (poor) mage with an average of one hit per 2 seconds (not really sure about this number but as an example we'll use this one) and (same) do about 400 damages per hit (no armor).
we know that a casting mage CAN'T dodge or parry so 100% accuracy
we have now 400*2*(2*2) = 3200 damages ( 2*2 = time for the mage to kill the warrior).
so the warrior can kill the mage during the time this one kill the warrior.
all this without taking care of the resist ability of the warrior, or the broking spells, or various aura, or regen, so ...is that this unfair now ??
mages need a lot of sap and life to cast a double spell of his/her level.
for example a lvl180 mage need to use about 400 sap AND 400 life to cast an "uber" spell that does about 900*2 damages (average, depends on your gloves (gloves ? is that the right word ? ))
so for a lvl 180 mage with (random basic mage) 2000 sap and life, during a pvp fight the mage nearly kill himself in 2000/400= 5 spells.
with one spell every 4 seconds , it's death in 20 seconds ... quick fight isn't it ?
against him there is a 2h warrior lvl 180 with about 3000 life (basic average warrior). the mage need 3000/(900*2)= 2 spells ... it's quite unfair
BUT !
during the same time the warrior hit the (poor) mage with an average of one hit per 2 seconds (not really sure about this number but as an example we'll use this one) and (same) do about 400 damages per hit (no armor).
we know that a casting mage CAN'T dodge or parry so 100% accuracy
we have now 400*2*(2*2) = 3200 damages ( 2*2 = time for the mage to kill the warrior).
so the warrior can kill the mage during the time this one kill the warrior.
all this without taking care of the resist ability of the warrior, or the broking spells, or various aura, or regen, so ...is that this unfair now ??
"Now, if you trust in yourself, believe in your dreams and follow your star, you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard, learning things and weren't so lazy."
Sadalsüüd, lieutenant de la legion etrangere fyros
Sadalsüüd, lieutenant de la legion etrangere fyros
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
Although mages damage is half the way it was before, still, we a melee fighter, for example, run to a mage to kill it, in a pvp area, the melee warrior will be totally wiped in a matter of second, if the mage has a nice pair of 97/97 amps.
Melee vs Melee is great now, no advantages. More tactics involved, also, i see the bodypart hits more usefull now.
Melee vs Melee is great now, no advantages. More tactics involved, also, i see the bodypart hits more usefull now.
Toujour!
[crafter of:]
[~q100 Heavy Melee Weapons][~q90 Heavy Armors]
[In short, stuff that hits, or stuff that takes hits]
[Melee Warrior][Forager]
[crafter of:]
[~q100 Heavy Melee Weapons][~q90 Heavy Armors]
[In short, stuff that hits, or stuff that takes hits]
[Melee Warrior][Forager]
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
jlbloem wrote:Melee vs Melee is great now, no advantages. More tactics involved, also, i see the bodypart hits more usefull now.
No its not.
Wonder why ?
Take 2 brand new chars that are level 130 fight for example, absolutely NO other skills like level 200 mage or anything, just 130 fight.
Same hp, same regen, same equipment ... these, stand a chance to have a fair fight (if fair means "I hit you first")
However, take the same ones and give one a 20 levels bonus , poof , duel nuked, the level 150 one will win no matter what.
Where's the strategy here? levels, that is all...
Long gone is the PvP as seen on ultima online, where you could actually heal yourself for real (not a 100% heal based on a timer), stealth behind the ennemy, use invisibility spells, summon monters, curse the ennemy's stats, use combos to prevent the opponent from healing... this was PvP with skills involved.
Here, the PvP is limited to "I got 20 more levels" or "I casted first" or "I landed the first hit" , tis no PvP, tis a parody...
And if I may add, a tragedy, too...
There cant be *any* pvp if a 20 levels difference will nuke your chances of winning. People should not be required to be level 250 mage/fight to have fun and "pvp"
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
mages do have an advantage over melee.
lvl150 melee will almost surely lose against a mage from the same lvl.
simply because they do more damage and sorry to say but melee also uses alot of stamina or hp and the last wil only make sure you die faster.
lvl150 melee will almost surely lose against a mage from the same lvl.
simply because they do more damage and sorry to say but melee also uses alot of stamina or hp and the last wil only make sure you die faster.
(\(\
(^.^)
(")") *This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread.
Longblade/Ahren
(^.^)
(")") *This is the cute bunny virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread.
Longblade/Ahren
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
Heh, usual ignorance. nothing more to say. If anything it is fighers that have the advantage... mage can not cast without HP/SAP, figher can swing forever.
Given equal levels, in everything figher will always win.
Given equal levels, in everything figher will always win.
dam23 wrote:Mages definitely hit harder.
Several scenarios here:
---
level 100 mage vs level 100 close combat
---
Ok here, you're choosing dual daggers to hit a lot, therefore disrupting the spells often.
Result, broken incantations: 1/4 ... SPLENDID
damage: crap 50+ damage per hit (thanks to PvP damage being halved)
damage received from mage char: about 6-700 per spell
outcome: fighter down
---
level 100 mage vs level 100 2h fight
---
Since the double daggers trick didnt work, lets try to kill the mage before hitting the ground
Result, broken incantations: 2/4 (o_O ? why more than CC ?)
damage: about 250-300 per hit, much better
damage received from mage: still about 6-700 per spell
outcome: fighter down
---
level 100 affliction mage vs level 100 whatever fight
---
Here, the mage goes for madness, whatever you try, you're sitting ducks.
outcome: fighter down, mage down too, wetting his pants cause you hit yourself 8 out of 10 times
Therefore, I'll go with the usual "nerf teh paladins!"
errr, I mean, nerf teh mages
What good is a range fighter when he cant use damage increase, and a mage can use doublespell + amps and still have tons of hp cause he's also level 200 fight ?
Ranged fight as it is *sucks* (sorry, but it had to be said), and mages are overpowered in PvP.
La Riva [Exqusite@windermeer]
-=Riders of Apocalypse=-
Succurro illud inops
Pacis adveho per vestri hostilis nex
-=Riders of Apocalypse=-
Succurro illud inops
Pacis adveho per vestri hostilis nex
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
I posted PVP augmentation suggestion to both NA forum and ATS:
http://ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11238
Unless something changes I'm leaving for Guild Wars - I cant go from Ultima Online PvP to this.... you are 100% correct
http://ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11238
Unless something changes I'm leaving for Guild Wars - I cant go from Ultima Online PvP to this.... you are 100% correct
dam23 wrote:No its not.
Wonder why ?
Take 2 brand new chars that are level 130 fight for example, absolutely NO other skills like level 200 mage or anything, just 130 fight.
Same hp, same regen, same equipment ... these, stand a chance to have a fair fight (if fair means "I hit you first")
However, take the same ones and give one a 20 levels bonus , poof , duel nuked, the level 150 one will win no matter what.
Where's the strategy here? levels, that is all...
Long gone is the PvP as seen on ultima online, where you could actually heal yourself for real (not a 100% heal based on a timer), stealth behind the ennemy, use invisibility spells, summon monters, curse the ennemy's stats, use combos to prevent the opponent from healing... this was PvP with skills involved.
Here, the PvP is limited to "I got 20 more levels" or "I casted first" or "I landed the first hit" , tis no PvP, tis a parody...
And if I may add, a tragedy, too...
There cant be *any* pvp if a 20 levels difference will nuke your chances of winning. People should not be required to be level 250 mage/fight to have fun and "pvp"
La Riva [Exqusite@windermeer]
-=Riders of Apocalypse=-
Succurro illud inops
Pacis adveho per vestri hostilis nex
-=Riders of Apocalypse=-
Succurro illud inops
Pacis adveho per vestri hostilis nex
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
lariva wrote:I posted PVP augmentation suggestion to both NA forum and ATS:
http://ryzom.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11238
Unless something changes I'm leaving for Guild Wars - I cant go from Ultima Online PvP to this.... you are 100% correct
Remind me how long UO has been around?
The order/chaos system, the guild wars, faction systems, pk/anti-pk ... this took a v. long time to tune up.
MMOs constantly evolve, and though I regret the lack of PvP , I'm gonna wait and see what comes next.
Furthermore, here, thru the forums and support tool, we get a chance to make our voice heard...
Oh and by the way, sure, I'm ignorant
I'm not sure I like you, though... bit... pompous, imo
Re: 1-"One vs. one" combat (2)
lariva wrote:Heh, usual ignorance. nothing more to say. If anything it is fighers that have the advantage... mage can not cast without HP/SAP, figher can swing forever.
Given equal levels, in everything figher will always win.
Dam32's statements are valid and based on experience that I agree with; a mage with a Top amp will kill a Mele his level and many levels higher each and everytime. So what if he can swing forever it will be all over in a few seconds.