Nexus Clash

Login

Nickname

Password

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. Registered players can create up to three free characters to battle, team up with your friends and explore the worlds of the Nexus! To create a character once you have registered, click on Game Map at the top of the page.
Nexus Clash :: View topic - [pets] Single-attack pets switch away from immune targets
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

[pets] Single-attack pets switch away from immune targets

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Nexus Clash Forum Index -> Promoted Suggestions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
oblivious
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Posts: 346

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 11:19 pm    Post subject: [pets] Single-attack pets switch away from immune targets Reply with quote

Currently if a pet does not have a secondary attack and it encounters an immune target, it will keep dealing 0 damage to the immune target until it is killed or despawns. I suggest that the pet instead jump to a random target.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psyduck
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Oct 13, 2011
Posts: 226

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 3:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This should not happen since if the attackers are using tanks as a bait for the corruptor to steal pets, then the corruptor may take damage which should never happen. This is also true for fort breaking or any type of strategy to make the tank immune so that they can be the bait.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meric
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jan 29, 2012
Posts: 369

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

psyduck wrote:
This should not happen since if the attackers are using tanks as a bait for the corruptor to steal pets, then the corruptor may take damage which should never happen. This is also true for fort breaking or any type of strategy to make the tank immune so that they can be the bait.


Tanks should be tanky enough to deal with the level of damage pets put out without having to drink every immune potion under the sun. Or are you referring to the more common T2 caster who is tanking? Well, screw faux-tanks.

The only pets this would apply to and that would flow off the immuned tank and onto others would be the Imp (5 fire), Sprite (4 holy, not set to passive lol) and Wisp/Wight (7-12 death). So really the Wight is the only serious danger to anyone. Something that waste of CP kinda needs.

Im fine with this. In fact, I would expand it to apply to the the pets that can be dual immuned against (Netherhounds and upgraded JMs). It would turn purchasing the upgraded Hell hounds and Judgemasters into a less shitty choice and give people reason to actually purchase Wights. It would also strengthen the role of tanks instead of everyone using faux-tanks and immunes to completely wreck pets with ease.

Plus it means making raiders think. I like the idea of people having to adapt.
_________________
Aiobhill (Wiz) | Athru (LS) | Eleanor (Advo) | Erehlim (Archon) | Fedayeen (IB) | Lamia (Corruptor) | Morrighan (Rev) | Thane (Seraph)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psyduck
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Oct 13, 2011
Posts: 226

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meric wrote:
It would also strengthen the role of tanks instead of everyone using faux-tanks and immunes to completely wreck pets with ease.

Plus it means making raiders think. I like the idea of people having to adapt.


Oh, I see. This makes sense, so I agree with this idea now. Though I'm sure some tanks still drink immunities if the damage is too high e.g. Judgemaster for IB. They would have to get 8 soak to holy by drinking potions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meric
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jan 29, 2012
Posts: 369

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

psyduck wrote:
Oh, I see. This makes sense, so I agree with this idea now. Though I'm sure some tanks still drink immunities if the damage is too high e.g. Judgemaster for IB. They would have to get 8 soak to holy by drinking potions.


I dont play an IB so I am very unsure of how their builds go, but they can get at least 8 against holy with Chitinous Armor, Lusting and Adrenal healing. So all they would need is a regular/greater invun (+3/4) to bring this damage down to 1 holy if facing fully upgraded JMs doing 12 holy. My fully blinged out Seraph is only soaking 8 unholy so the WM greater pet will be an issue for me to address.

I'm not against tanks using the invuns potions and certainly once we see Fossils and Wrackwyrms popping up they might become an essential tool in the tanks kit.

Immunes on the other hand seem too readily available and reduce pet effectiveness to such a degree as to make pet shields almost moot at this point. By extension this makes tanks depressingly jobless.
_________________
Aiobhill (Wiz) | Athru (LS) | Eleanor (Advo) | Erehlim (Archon) | Fedayeen (IB) | Lamia (Corruptor) | Morrighan (Rev) | Thane (Seraph)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psyduck
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Oct 13, 2011
Posts: 226

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I personally don't like the bloodlust tree because it costs a lot and you need to kill to activate it and it comes with a -10% dodge which makes pets more likely to hit you. But you are right about 8 holy soak if the whole bloodlust tree is activated and 4 holy soak if it isn't
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ragwortshire
Elite Member
Elite Member


Joined: Jan 20, 2010
Posts: 585

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think this is a very sensible suggestion.

I think it should apply to dual attack pets as well - but ONLY if they fail with their secondary attack.

So Primary Attack is immuned -> Switch to Secondary
Secondary Attack immuned -> Switch targets (and switch back to Primary).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oblivious
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Posts: 346

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't mention dual-immunable pets because I thought it would be too hard to work out the logic in a straightforward way, but you have proven me wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bidigam
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Oct 12, 2010
Posts: 315

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like this suggestion (taking Ragwortshire amendment as a granted).
Pets are meant to be raid things (given how poor is their xp return, they have little use otherwise), so they should be smarter at doing that activity (raiding).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oblivious
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Posts: 346

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like Rag's suggestion because it mitigates a problem right now where certain pet "upgrades" are really berfy. I know some people don't plan to upgrade JMs with the electric secondary attack, for example.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meric
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jan 29, 2012
Posts: 369

PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ragwortshire wrote:
I think this is a very sensible suggestion.

I think it should apply to dual attack pets as well - but ONLY if they fail with their secondary attack.

So Primary Attack is immuned -> Switch to Secondary
Secondary Attack immuned -> Switch targets (and switch back to Primary).


Aye, sounds good. It is win-win for tanks and PM who both see their value rise and its likely to cause havoc. I approve.
_________________
Aiobhill (Wiz) | Athru (LS) | Eleanor (Advo) | Erehlim (Archon) | Fedayeen (IB) | Lamia (Corruptor) | Morrighan (Rev) | Thane (Seraph)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobGeneric
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: Nov 07, 2009
Posts: 1762

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Promote.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Nexus Clash Forum Index -> Promoted Suggestions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Forums ©
Credit: Site homepage artwork (C) 2017 Acaisha Buffo
Character creation and raid ticker icons by Lorc and Delapouite at game-icons.net
Original Nexus War classes, powers, and lore copyright 2003 - 2019 Brandon Harris (bharris@gaijin.com) used with permission.
PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.