I think this deserves talking about, Immobilize is nothing more than a pause button now, in fact the tests I've done have actually shown my targets blocking more after I immobilized them... Come on.
I don't know if these tests are just coincidental, but honestly I've done a few tests and they've resulted in myself missing more when throwing a club at an enemy while they were immobilized that when not. please look into this.
SHADOWCHIEF3
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 12:14 AM CST
Are you complaining about the lack of a large defense penalty?
I think the pause button feature makes it desirable enough. If you want to penalize their defenses, stun them instead.
I think the pause button feature makes it desirable enough. If you want to penalize their defenses, stun them instead.
COVERG
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 06:01 AM CST
My problem with immoblize is it seems incomplete. If my opponent is immobilized, shouldn't I be able to walk away from him? Just leave the room without retreating? He is immobile, how is he stopping me?
And it seems to last a HUGE amount of time. I like this, but it seems excessive.
______
Kertig Heart Magdar Bluefletch, Forging Grand Master of M'Riss
And it seems to last a HUGE amount of time. I like this, but it seems excessive.
______
Kertig Heart Magdar Bluefletch, Forging Grand Master of M'Riss
BEVERAGEK
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 07:06 AM CST
I thought all status effects had a cap in duration between 20 and 30 seconds?
~ Leilond
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/Leilond_Progression.jpg
~ Leilond
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/ss1shadow/Leilond_Progression.jpg
COVERG
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 07:45 AM CST
3 minutes plus on a celpeze before I got bored waiting for imobilize to wear off and killed it.
______
Kertig Heart Magdar Bluefletch, Forging Grand Master of M'Riss
______
Kertig Heart Magdar Bluefletch, Forging Grand Master of M'Riss
SHADOWCHIEF3
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 08:40 AM CST
> Are you complaining about the lack of a large defense penalty?
No i'm complaining about the lack of any defensive penalty period, I'm not trying to be greedy but immobilize WAS the LARGEST defensive penalty disabler wise, now its no penalty. I think there could be a happy medium.
No i'm complaining about the lack of any defensive penalty period, I'm not trying to be greedy but immobilize WAS the LARGEST defensive penalty disabler wise, now its no penalty. I think there could be a happy medium.
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 11:21 AM CST
>>No i'm complaining about the lack of any defensive penalty period, I'm not trying to be greedy but immobilize WAS the LARGEST defensive penalty disabler wise, now its no penalty. I think there could be a happy medium
I think preventing your target from acting for thirty seconds is the single most useful debuff in the game, personally. Immobilization was incredibly broken when it set evasion to zero.
I think preventing your target from acting for thirty seconds is the single most useful debuff in the game, personally. Immobilization was incredibly broken when it set evasion to zero.
VEE-REX
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 12:48 PM CST
>>I think preventing your target from acting for thirty seconds is the single most useful debuff in the game, personally.
Calm, sleep, or stunning something for thirty seconds is just as useful as immobilizing for thirty seconds, with the exception that there are a few 'anti stun-like' abilities out there.
Still, immobilization should provide some kind of defensive debuff if it already doesn't.
On a whole, I don't like the way disablers are working right now (too easy to chain-stun/disable when they wear off).
Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.
-GM Abasha
Calm, sleep, or stunning something for thirty seconds is just as useful as immobilizing for thirty seconds, with the exception that there are a few 'anti stun-like' abilities out there.
Still, immobilization should provide some kind of defensive debuff if it already doesn't.
On a whole, I don't like the way disablers are working right now (too easy to chain-stun/disable when they wear off).
Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.
-GM Abasha
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 01:59 PM CST
>>On a whole, I don't like the way disablers are working right now (too easy to chain-stun/disable when they wear off).
I agree.
I agree.
SULLIVANS3
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 02:04 PM CST
I agree with this, and don't mean to move off on a tangent but it's a similar issue in combat. Everything is awesome while your health is higher, but as soon as you let it drop and don't move fast enough, the stuns start and don't stop. Then it's just stand and wait for the 5-10 stun inducing hits to kill you. That part is unfun.
~Katt
A gestalt draugen swipes a hooked leonine claw at Silus. The claw lands a solid hit that cuts deeply into his groin!
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 03:14 PM CST
IMO the main issue I have with Immobilization is that I am rarely going "I really need this guy to stop doing things." Meanwhile, I'm always going "I need to ding this guy's balance/defenses/position/anything."
Immobilization works great if your goal is to be left alone or you need time to do something, but more often than not what I really need is something more proactive, like how stun does that same thing but also throws off balance/defenses/etc.
The teeth lands a solid (5/23) hit that pokes the teeth into Turul's rear end (more embarrassing than painful!).
Immobilization works great if your goal is to be left alone or you need time to do something, but more often than not what I really need is something more proactive, like how stun does that same thing but also throws off balance/defenses/etc.
The teeth lands a solid (5/23) hit that pokes the teeth into Turul's rear end (more embarrassing than painful!).
SHADOWCHIEF3
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 05:20 PM CST
> I think preventing your target from acting for thirty seconds is the single most useful debuff in the game, personally. Immobilization was incredibly broken when it set evasion to zero.
I for one don't get 30 second immobilizes, casting against somebody with 20-30 stats in mentals when I have 60-70's nets me 22 seconds tops, against an at level opponent Its usually not more than 10-12 seconds. Its usually not even enough time for me to prepare another spell and cast before its up.
Of course I could just go to my only other disabler...oh wait that's an aoe immobilize. I agree with what tevesh said though, never really have that time I really want to stop somebody from doing something that bad, and when you have to cast spells with such high mana now it either involves more time harnessing or getting mana tapped pretty quick so stopping them for only enough time to prepare another spell and harness some mana up kind of defeats the purpose.
I have no desire for the effect to be granted some crazy defensive debuff but something would be welcomed, even at the cost of another spell slot or what not. Keep in mind, necromancers are weapon tert and magic secondary so something to chip away at defense a little bit would be nice.
I for one don't get 30 second immobilizes, casting against somebody with 20-30 stats in mentals when I have 60-70's nets me 22 seconds tops, against an at level opponent Its usually not more than 10-12 seconds. Its usually not even enough time for me to prepare another spell and cast before its up.
Of course I could just go to my only other disabler...oh wait that's an aoe immobilize. I agree with what tevesh said though, never really have that time I really want to stop somebody from doing something that bad, and when you have to cast spells with such high mana now it either involves more time harnessing or getting mana tapped pretty quick so stopping them for only enough time to prepare another spell and harness some mana up kind of defeats the purpose.
I have no desire for the effect to be granted some crazy defensive debuff but something would be welcomed, even at the cost of another spell slot or what not. Keep in mind, necromancers are weapon tert and magic secondary so something to chip away at defense a little bit would be nice.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 05:25 PM CST
Just to expand on when I tend to use immobilize...
My system is generally shove/cast or cast/shove.
So, technically, what stunning (or webbing?) someone attempts to do: unbalance someone.
The teeth lands a solid (5/23) hit that pokes the teeth into Turul's rear end (more embarrassing than painful!).
My system is generally shove/cast or cast/shove.
So, technically, what stunning (or webbing?) someone attempts to do: unbalance someone.
The teeth lands a solid (5/23) hit that pokes the teeth into Turul's rear end (more embarrassing than painful!).
MYTHORLOGICAL
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 06:15 PM CST
Immobilize becoming essentially a RT is one of the worst things to change in 3.0 as far as necromancers are concerned. The defensive debuff from PV was our only offensive advantage. Non necros might not see it that way, but zombies weren't all that useful without PV, and weapons were completely useless without it (at level). Some things with our pets have improved, but losing that debuff sucks more than any non necro players or GMs can imagine for anyone who pvps and/or gets chased by angry mobs.
Also:
>Immobilization was incredibly broken when it set evasion to zero.
I have you on ignore, whoever you are, so idk what all you said... But it never set evasion to zero, so don't exaggerate. There should be a defensive debuff. It's a no brainer. Can't move, can't raise shield, can't leap nimbly out of the way=defensively less able.
Markat says, "Pleasant people without moral faults, going to church every week and abstaining from sins such as vanity and zombies. Feh...."
Also:
>Immobilization was incredibly broken when it set evasion to zero.
I have you on ignore, whoever you are, so idk what all you said... But it never set evasion to zero, so don't exaggerate. There should be a defensive debuff. It's a no brainer. Can't move, can't raise shield, can't leap nimbly out of the way=defensively less able.
Markat says, "Pleasant people without moral faults, going to church every week and abstaining from sins such as vanity and zombies. Feh...."
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 06:26 PM CST
>>I have you on ignore, whoever you are, so idk what all you said... But it never set evasion to zero, so don't exaggerate. There should be a defensive debuff. It's a no brainer. Can't move, can't raise shield, can't leap nimbly out of the way=defensively less able.
It did set evasion to zero, actually, at one point.
It did set evasion to zero, actually, at one point.
QUARRIC3
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 06:36 PM CST
>There should be a defensive debuff. It's a no brainer. Can't move, can't raise shield, can't leap nimbly out of the >way=defensively less able.
^
This. I have to totally agree, how can anything parry/block or dodge an attack effectively if it is immobilized, the clue is in the word.
Words Words Words .. in the end thats all it is
^
This. I have to totally agree, how can anything parry/block or dodge an attack effectively if it is immobilized, the clue is in the word.
Words Words Words .. in the end thats all it is
VEE-REX
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 07:05 PM CST
>>I have you on ignore, whoever you are, so idk what all you said... But it never set evasion to zero, so don't exaggerate.
A long time ago it did (maybe 6-8 years ago?). I used to use it to kill 100+ circles at like 50th circle. It was incredibly hax.
But I do agree immobilization should have a defensive debuff.
With that said, I think status effects/disablers as a whole could use a rewrite, to re-balance them so that they are all each somewhat equally useful.
1. Immobilization should provide a large defensive debuff, but it cap at the shortest duration (relative to the others) and one attack should free someone from being immobile.
2. Unconciousness should provide a moderate defensive debuff, but with a moderate duration (relative to the others) and one attack should wake them up.
3. Webbing should have a small defensive debuff, long duration (relative to the others) and multiple attacks won't interrupt the webbing process.
4. Stunning should remain as a balance reduction that indirectly gives the smallest defensive debuff and can knock someone prone, also has potential to range from small duration to moderate.
I think disablers should work similar to that or in a completely different manner as long as all of them could be somewhat unique. It would also leave room for more debuffs (poison, slow, etc...) in the future without too much risk of redundancy. Keep disablers from locking someone down but spells/abilities that only cause debuffs could be used on top of each other as long as it isn't the same kind.
Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.
-GM Abasha
A long time ago it did (maybe 6-8 years ago?). I used to use it to kill 100+ circles at like 50th circle. It was incredibly hax.
But I do agree immobilization should have a defensive debuff.
With that said, I think status effects/disablers as a whole could use a rewrite, to re-balance them so that they are all each somewhat equally useful.
1. Immobilization should provide a large defensive debuff, but it cap at the shortest duration (relative to the others) and one attack should free someone from being immobile.
2. Unconciousness should provide a moderate defensive debuff, but with a moderate duration (relative to the others) and one attack should wake them up.
3. Webbing should have a small defensive debuff, long duration (relative to the others) and multiple attacks won't interrupt the webbing process.
4. Stunning should remain as a balance reduction that indirectly gives the smallest defensive debuff and can knock someone prone, also has potential to range from small duration to moderate.
I think disablers should work similar to that or in a completely different manner as long as all of them could be somewhat unique. It would also leave room for more debuffs (poison, slow, etc...) in the future without too much risk of redundancy. Keep disablers from locking someone down but spells/abilities that only cause debuffs could be used on top of each other as long as it isn't the same kind.
Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.
-GM Abasha
BLUESUEDESHOES
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 07:29 PM CST
Excellent post Vinjince.
________________________________________________________________
"Nope, I decided parry will remain completely and utterly useless. Try something else."
________________________________________________________________
"Nope, I decided parry will remain completely and utterly useless. Try something else."
MOCKERJB
SHADOW7988
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 08:20 PM CST
>Vinjince's post.
Agree.
---
"I think anything that forces you to do something no sane adventurer would do just in order to train is ridiculous."
DR-SOCHARIS
---
Victory Over Lyras, on the 397th year and 156 days since the Victory of Lanival the Redeemer.
Agree.
---
"I think anything that forces you to do something no sane adventurer would do just in order to train is ridiculous."
DR-SOCHARIS
---
Victory Over Lyras, on the 397th year and 156 days since the Victory of Lanival the Redeemer.
HEASTRENFHERO
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 09:24 PM CST
>I have you on ignore, whoever you are, so idk what all you said... But it never set evasion to zero, so don't exaggerate.
Lol DR noob it sure did before, there's no exaggeration. It was incredibly broken and is a shell of its former self.
Also, agreed with Vin's suggestion. There should be a sliding scale of duration and defensive reductions based on the type of status.
Lol DR noob it sure did before, there's no exaggeration. It was incredibly broken and is a shell of its former self.
Also, agreed with Vin's suggestion. There should be a sliding scale of duration and defensive reductions based on the type of status.
MYTHORLOGICAL
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 10:08 PM CST
Psshh I'm no noob, I'm almost 50th circle.
6-8 years ago=forever ago, aka completely irrelevant in a conversation about circumstances the day before 3.0 and the day after 3.0. So whatever, stop exaggerating and nitpicking stupid crap.
Vinj, agree.
Markat says, "Pleasant people without moral faults, going to church every week and abstaining from sins such as vanity and zombies. Feh...."
6-8 years ago=forever ago, aka completely irrelevant in a conversation about circumstances the day before 3.0 and the day after 3.0. So whatever, stop exaggerating and nitpicking stupid crap.
Vinj, agree.
Markat says, "Pleasant people without moral faults, going to church every week and abstaining from sins such as vanity and zombies. Feh...."
MYTHORLOGICAL
Re: Immobilize
01/30/2013 10:11 PM CST
Oh except I don't agree that one attack should free someone from their immobility. That seems a bit excessive on top of being the shortest duration of the defensive debuffs. I do think that an attack should bring someone out of unconsciousness though, bc that makes sense.
Markat says, "Pleasant people without moral faults, going to church every week and abstaining from sins such as vanity and zombies. Feh...."
Markat says, "Pleasant people without moral faults, going to church every week and abstaining from sins such as vanity and zombies. Feh...."
DAENAR-DR
Re: Immobilize
01/31/2013 01:15 AM CST
>> 6-8 years ago=forever ago, aka completely irrelevant in a conversation about circumstances the day before 3.0 and the day after 3.0. So whatever, stop exaggerating and nitpicking stupid crap.
MOD-HELJE
Re: Immobilize ::NUDGE::
01/31/2013 08:22 AM CST
Please refrain from personal attacks. If you would like to conflict, you can take it to a conflict folder.
Helje
DragonRealms Board Monitor
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at MOD-Helje@play.net, Senior Board Monitor Sidatura at DR-Sidatura@play.net, or Message Board Supervisor Annwyl DR-Annwyl@play.net.
Helje
DragonRealms Board Monitor
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at MOD-Helje@play.net, Senior Board Monitor Sidatura at DR-Sidatura@play.net, or Message Board Supervisor Annwyl DR-Annwyl@play.net.
DIMINISHEDANGEL
Re: Immobilize
01/31/2013 08:27 AM CST
>>6-8 years ago=forever ago, aka completely irrelevant in a conversation about circumstances the day before 3.0 and the day after 3.0. So whatever, stop exaggerating and nitpicking stupid crap.
It was an off-handed comment I made, not actually part of my point, so it's neither an exaggeration (it was true) nor a nitpick (you're the one who made it a huge deal, not others).
It was an off-handed comment I made, not actually part of my point, so it's neither an exaggeration (it was true) nor a nitpick (you're the one who made it a huge deal, not others).
DR-MELETE
Re: Immobilize
01/31/2013 08:41 AM CST
When this first started coming up I dug into the code and looked at immobilization. It is more than just a pause button, but its effects can be erratic.
Melete
Our choicest plans
have fallen through,
our airiest castles
tumbled over,
because of lines
we neatly drew
and later neatly
stumbled over.
Melete
Our choicest plans
have fallen through,
our airiest castles
tumbled over,
because of lines
we neatly drew
and later neatly
stumbled over.
APATHETICSMILE
Re: Immobilize
01/31/2013 08:42 AM CST
>>When this first started coming up I dug into the code and looked at immobilization. It is more than just a pause button, but its effects can be erratic.
Can you tell us what effects to watch for?
Can you tell us what effects to watch for?
MOCKERJB
Re: Immobilize
01/31/2013 09:16 AM CST
If you're taking the time to look at status effects from certain things, might want to look at "complete paralysis" too. Last time I tested that (granted it has been weeks), it had no noticeable defensive penalty at all.
SHADOWCHIEF3
Re: Immobilize
01/31/2013 02:31 PM CST
> When this first started coming up I dug into the code and looked at immobilization. It is more than just a pause button, but its effects can be erratic.
Thanks for looking around, did you make sure something didn't break from 2.0 - 3.0 because I could definatly tell a difference before, but now nothing. That goes for general feel and appraising since kodius said it should take into effect balance, debuffs and what not.
Thanks for looking around, did you make sure something didn't break from 2.0 - 3.0 because I could definatly tell a difference before, but now nothing. That goes for general feel and appraising since kodius said it should take into effect balance, debuffs and what not.
