Deck Combat, Single Player and Magic: My Reactions

It wasn't difficult for mages to create some distance in a melee tho. All you had to do was have a couple healing rays or heals in there, run around, hope another player would jump in and slow down the persuer, and some fire arrows and lighting stuns later it was game.

If there are abilities that allow knights to "charge" or "catch up" to running players, that would go a long way to balancing the mage distance advantage.

 

Then, I would say it should be perfectly feasible as a strategy to use your focus to fire a fireball right at the start of combat, if you feel you can survive using the auto-attack until your focus recovers.

Of course, your opponent may have a different approach, saving their focus for actual melee skills to which their armor is better suited (and therefore not a focus draining impediment).

 

Right, you want the benefit of having magic and heavy armor and probably also a two-handed sword or sword and shield without the downside of not knowing if your spell will work or not. I got it.

I don't like that style of play as everyone becomes a hybrid by design. I want balance between all magic and no magic, but I also want them to be viable. I don't agree that losing all or most of your focus is a good compromise. I think that just means people in plate armor will have a ranged attack that they really shouldn't be using. I'd much rather see them attempt a spell and fail (while also losing a reagent). We disagree with each other.

 

Doom , everything you say makes sense and that is great feedback.....
I am taking a back seat to opinions of my own ... I have many ,I plan to see how they wow me .. release 8 set a whole new confidence level with me towards the development team. I believe they will address many things you mentioned in short order.
Great post again
Lor

 

The current *fizzle* mechanic virtually ensures a class-based system along the lines of armor choice.

If you use heavy armor, would you even bother wasting those few precious seconds in combat on the *chance* that the spell will work ? Or would you spend you time using skills that you *know* will work every time ?

So, really no mage in their right mind would bother with any fizzle-based armor at all, since fizzling that Root spell would probably mean certain death.

And no heavy armor wielding melee fighter will bother with magic, when they can use their time in combat spamming skills that won't fizzle.

----

In my opinion: With a hard "Works/Doesn't Work" mechanic like "fizzle" there is essentially no happy middle ground.

 

There will be items and probably skills and spells that help with fizzle %. But yes, fizzle (and backfire which works the same way) are going to keep many people from messing around with high amounts of armor and magic. That's the point. That's exactly what I want.

I want to play a mage, not an idiot that doesn't wear armor. I can't do that if everyone has tons of magic for which there's no penalty. But it's not just for the sake of having traditional classes, it's for game balance. If everyone can have armor and spells then why wouldn't everyone have armor and spells?

 

Exactly because they want to be good at casting spells. If wearing armor means one spell drains nearly all of your focus, you'll never be a good mage, so the people who DO want to sling spells, will shy away from armor to do so. You may think fizzle is a better balancing mechanic (I think anything that saps fun from the game is a poor mechanic) and that's fine, but it does not mean that balance cannot be achieved without it. If wearing heavy armor made every spell cost 3 or 4 times as much focus (or more... I'm just spitballing right now), no mage in his right mine would wear it. There are multiple paths to creating balance.

Frankly, if fizzle remains in the game I may have to abandon my preferred playstyle, because I find it far too frustrating and random. The only armor I had on in R8 were leather boots and I fizzled at least once during every combat. That is not fun.

If the idea of any hybrid bothers you, I'd say that's firmly against Ultima tradition. The cost of hybrid builds is you're sacrificing potency for versatility. If done right, this is an excellent approach to balance.

YMMV (and from your previous comments, I'm certain it will )

 

I'm not against hybrid builds...that's a reality. I'm against encouraging them to the point that being a pure mage or pure fighter makes no sense and gives no competitive advantage. I don't mean that if you play a pure mage or a pure fighter you're going to be better than everyone that is a hybrid. I'm saying that all should be competitive in their own way. If fizzle isn't fun for you, don't wear leather boots. I made myself cloth shoes in R8, but I also ran around naked without a performance hit.

I'm not really sure why you're stuck on wearing leather boots.

 

The devs are already on record stating that they don't want everyone to be a tank mage. Once they start balancing in earnest, I expect that a pure mage or a pure warrior will have benefits that encourage people to go one way or another. People will have the option to be a hybrid, and with the skill system as proposed, Richard Grarriot has said that you fully have the freedom to gimp yourself beyond belief if you desire, but I expect most players will go with the choice that provides the best performance.

 

Which is why I'm so surprised that they would take steps to almost ensure that tanks mages are possible by removing reagents as a spell casting requirement.

 

Like I said above, as a warrior, if my sword breaks I suppose I can pull a dagger and use that, but it most definitely isn't Plan A. I think reagentless casting will be the mage equivalent. You won't be entirely defenseless, but you will be nearly so.

We'll just have to see how it turns out in testing. If it is unbalancing, I fully expect that Portalarium will balance it. That is what testing is for.

 

Right, a mage could never pull a dagger out. That's crazy talk.

 

If the mage has taken points in the blade tree, sure, but since the mage has already expended most of their points in mage related skills in order to be an effective mage, I don't think that as a pure warrior that nail trimmer gives me much reason to panic.

 

Does a pure warrior get to swing his sword when it's broken? He or she shouldn't.

Does a craftsman get to use broken tools? He or she shouldn't.

Nor should a mage get to cast spells without the proper reagents. HOWEVER...if you increased fizzle and backfire AND made the spells less effective, I suppose that might be a compromise I could stomach.

 

Rules for a Gunfight apply, adapted for melee weapons.

Rule 1. Bring a gun. Preferably, bring at least two guns. Bring all of your friends who have guns.

 

Right, using a simile for an example is crazy talk.

 

Then a draw it is. I will agree to disagree with you.

Righto, on to the next issue.