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 - [Skill Change] Smites affect Forts (in a non-friendly way)
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

[Skill Change] Smites affect Forts (in a non-friendly way)

 
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 -> Suggestions Dump
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Aidan
Elite Member
Elite Member


Joined: Jul 24, 2015
Posts: 540

PostPosted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 1:05 am    Post subject: [Skill Change] Smites affect Forts (in a non-friendly way) Reply with quote

(there's a summary of changes near the bottom of the post which briefly outlines the major points detailed within)

Inspired by this post:

Teksura wrote:
Hmm, as a start, given that their charge attacks could be utilized for quickly taking out a single target, I wonder if we could have the greater charge attacks damage fortifications when used. It would certainly make being the first to charge in a bit more interesting. Then you could swing at the petmasters and deal good damage to the forts in the deal rather than just standing there letting the pets target you.


---------------

This suggestion proposes the following changes to the Seraph skill Greater Smite, IB skill Rage Strike and the ES skill Way of Fire:

1) For Way of Fire only: WoF is no longer a child skill of Elite Attack. It is placed under its own tree as a 30 CP skill with a 60 CP child (more on that later).

2) For Greater Smite and Rage Strike only: When these charge attacks are used against a character protected by forts (i.e when these attacks are subjected to fortification soak), the forts are damaged by an amount equal to EITHER the damage soaked by the fortifications (maximum of 10), OR the damage bonus provided by the attack (maximum of 15) (not BOTH).

--------------------------------------------

The Seraph skill Smite of the Resolute, IB skill Unfettered Fury and a new child skill of the ES WoF, a 60 CP Way of the Persistent Flame now have the following characteristics:

1) For Smite of the Resolute only:

1.1) The MP discount still applies.
1.2) The soak bonus on demon kills still applies.
1.3) In addition, the smite target is inflicted with "Judgement Day" status effect for 1 minute (non-stackable, duration resets on subsequent applications). While under this status effect, when any attack is made against the smite target that would have killed him (after considering character soak, immunities and resistance) if the forts had not been present, the attack ignores forts i.e all killing shots against the target ignore forts, even if forts would have prevented the attack from killing (a conditional damage boost of up to 10).

2) For Unfettered Fury only:

2.1) The MP discount still applies
2.2) In addition, the smite target is inflicted with "Induced Rage" for 5 status ticks (stackable). While under this status effect, all attacks made by the smite target while under the protection of forts will damage the forts by their current soak value. Building fortifications, healing, and other actions will reduce status ticks as expected.

3) For Way of the Persistent Flame only:

3.1) When Way of Fire is used against a character protected by forts (i.e when it is subjected to fortification soak), the forts are damaged by an amount equal to EITHER the damage soaked by the fortifications (maximum of 10), OR the damage bonus provided by the attack (maximum of 15) (not BOTH).

3.2) In addition, when Way of Fire is subjected to soak from fortifications (and only when subjected to soak from fortifications i.e not when attacking from behind fortifications), a tile-based status effect "Persistent flames" is activated for 30 seconds (stackable to a maximum of 2 minutes). While a tile is under this effect, all attempts to rebuild fortifications will have their effectiveness halved (so someone with Structural Engineering would rebuild forts 3 blocks at a time instead of 5 blocks, and so on).


Extra Fort Special idea: Could replace any of the fort specials I proposed above.

1) Target gets "Pinned to the forts" for X number of status ticks, where x is probably a small number

2) While under this status effect, the target (let's say Jim) appears as follows in the tile description:

This location is a stronghold owned by Overpowered Republic. The interior of the stronghold has been extremely well fortified. Jim (xx) is pinned against the fortifications.

One tank can ONLY pin one person at a time (targeting someone else cancels the first pin... something like how Hunted By works, maybe?). A pinned person, along with being highly visible to all attacks, has half the usual soak from fortifications for anyone attacking them except the tank. Killing the tank unpins the person (though other possibilities include working off the status ticks and possibly Absolving Suffering?)

-------------------------

For a summary of changes:

The concepts of Fort damage and Fort special are introduced.

Fort damage refers to the ability of the smite to damage forts when subjected to their soak.

Fort special refers to one of the different special attributes that sets a smite apart from others of its kind. Specials are primarily intended to modify defender behavior and allow the Tank to block off/hinder the common avenues of stronghold defense.

IB Strike:

1) Frontloaded damage bonus and fort damage
2) Backloaded MP discount and fort special

Seraph Smite:

1) Frontloaded fort damage
2) Backloaded MP discount, soak bonus and fort special

ES Fire:

1) Frontloaded MP discount
2) Backloaded fort damage and fort special



The fort specials, classed by the type of response they elicit, include:

1) Strategic Response (currently: Seraph) - Killing shots through the fort are unsubjected to the soak bonus, potentially a +10 damage to well-planned smites/high damage attacks. Encourages defenders to heal up OR fight the heavy hitters specifically.

2) Defensive Response (currently: IB): Defender attacks remove forts, thus discouraging them from immediately attacking the raid team.

3) Offensive Response (currently: ES): Fort rebuilding is slowed down, forcing defenders to take the offensive and actively remove the aggressors instead of focusing on passively outlasting them.

4) Strategic Response (currently: unused): Halves the defense of a defender (usually an active), and makes it easier to murder them, encouraging defenders to heal the dude/fight the tank.

Yeah, I am pretty sure I assigned those specials wrong, the flavor is all wrong ("Who in their right minds would give the ES a 'fiery' skill?") etc. but that can always be solved later. I am just curious whether the idea, uh, flies. Some of those fort specials could get pretty crazy, I reckon.
_________________
For the Kin!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
klapaucius
Mortal
Mortal


Joined: May 04, 2010
Posts: 39

PostPosted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 3:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like this. Gives tanks something else to do while waiting for the pet shield to explode.

I still don't like that forts can be anonymously repaired, though I guess giving tanks the ability to stymie the use of active fort repairs is a vaguely passable alternative to announcing who is performing the repairs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Teksura
Nexus Fixture
Nexus Fixture


Joined: Dec 17, 2009
Posts: 5580

PostPosted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For reference, the initial plan that came from that quote was to have the greater charge attack ignore fortification soak, and deal damage to the fortifications equal to the damage they would deal to the target (before soak is calculated).

Adding effects on top of that is a solid idea though which makes them each behave a bit different. Might need to play with some numbers though, obviously, but now you know whereabouts we were going to start on power level.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MerlintheTuna
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Jun 17, 2014
Posts: 207

PostPosted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very cool.

So the Seraph's skill is best for killing petmasters, the IB's is best for killing active fighters, and the ES's is best for preventing fort rebuilders? That's an interesting way to break it out, but it's a little weird to me that the ES is basically targeted towards shutting down T1s & T2s. That is, yes, some T3 skills enhance fort building, but I have to imagine that active T3 defenders are better off actually fighting, and fort rebuilding is more of an "I can't actually hurt these guys" move. It's not a bad idea by any means, it just stands out a bit as I'm reading it.

Suggesting the ES's child skill be named Master of the Inferno. Slightly more dramatic, and it also fits the "Way of --> Master of" naming convention.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
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 -> Suggestions Dump 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 - 2021 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.