Status Inflictions...

[Perhaps]

    I think what can make an RPG build based game fun is having a good variety of status inflictions, more ways to bend, flex, and manipulate the game, rather than only just straight on damage nuking, and survivability. (I guess all-in-all it always ammounts to this, but all-in-all having many ways to present that is really nice).

[Dekar]

You mean you want to have more debuffs in the game?

[Perhaps]

Positive buffs (+buff) and/or negative buffs (-buff). I didn't think that contrast to make a choice for was necisary. -_-

[Tehw00tz]

So you want it to be more like DoE?

[Perhaps]

I didn't make the topic, "discuss what Perhaps wants." I think the topic is pretty straight forward. -_-

[Dekar]

So you want every fire spell to create a DoT?
And every Ice spell should slow?

Or what do you have in mind?

[Tehw00tz]

It seems that every topic you make is what you want.

[Discombobulator]

Congrats on another dumb suggestion.

[Perhaps]

    The sad thing about this heep of sheep, is that there's a thread neighboring this one, just as simply put for a topic, with just about as broad of an explination. It's pretty fucking simple, it's yes or no, then you reply with why.

    I've done threads just as simplistic as this on the Bungie.net boards, with no problems. So are you telling me that your intelligence is less than those of the Halo 2/X-Box Live mindset?

[Discombobulator]

You definitely belong with the Halo crowd.

[Kibiyama]

Dude, you should know by now that forums are not for suggestions. They're for flaming people that make suggestions.

I think it'd be a decent suggestion if EotA were more about hero vs. hero than team vs. team. You're asking for some emphasis on controlling the momentum of a hero battle rather than killing them outright in, yeah? It's a fair enough idea, but it adds more complexity to an area of the game where it isn't needed. You already have to manage your hero's health, mana, skills, attributes, equipment, and timing with the rest of your team. Managing your +'s and -'s against other heroes adds a bit too much, in an area where it doesn't add anything to the actual game. In the end, it doesn't matter how your hero died -- that doesn't affect the outcome -- it only matters that you did die.

[Perhaps]

    Status Inflictions aren't limited to hero verse hero, they also function for hero verse army, army verse hero, and army verse army. They simply add more flexibility. All the managements such as you list, pretty much end up as proceedure, and the thought of it is pretty much gone already. I suppose buffs could take the same route, but at the very least it would add a bit more situation basis.

[Soulbourne]

So, you want too add DoT's, things that weaken, drains, etc. to the game as minor AoE, so that it adds a bit more and allows for extra damage on the enemy armies, as well as hero's? If it was added, it might help turn the tide early game when it has a tendency to be hero vs army, allowing you too kill faster. Plus if a hero is hit, should he run to get to health place, may die due to damage, would end some of the, he got away with 30 health, things. Or make them worse when the DoT ends at 10 health...

[Kibiyama]

Soulbourne: I assume you're the other one who voted yes, but I can't understand what you're saying.

It'd be nice if whoever voted yes could explain. Even if the idea itself doesn't get adopted, there's apparently some sort of common thread that some people agree with and that deserves some attention.

Perhaps: I don't mean to be negative, I just don't see what it adds to the game besides a gimmick. But I also don't think I get what you mean 100%. Can you give an example of how you see this being utilized? Maybe if you explain better, everyone will see where you're coming from or it can be taken in another direction everyone can agree on.

[Discombobulator]

The wc3 engine is already strained, something stupid like this would kill it.

[Soulbourne]

I just have a tendency to try to further ideas so they are understood better from what I can tell about them, so:

Ex1:
1)bunch of creeps are coming at you(that right name?).

2)you cast an AoE ability, that also adds a status affliction, either lowering stats, or DoT.

3)due to them being weakened or being damaged, battle is in your favor because of extra damage to the enemies, or less damage dealt to allies.



Ex2:
1)A hero is coming at you, maybe with extra units.

2)you cast the status affliction, same effect as in example one

3)the weakened damage or defense allows you too either hit longer or harder

or

deal extra damage over time, thus if you win, and he escapes; He gets taken down by DoT

4)if DoT, he escapes and dies, or survives with little hp left and maybe make you mad...




If added as AoE effects, then it adds good against both hero's and units. Also could have where certain abilities add on a DoT, like a strong blow from arrow or blade causes a deep wound that bleeds, or in case of fire gives severe burns that hurt allot. Most attack abilities can have extra affects, ice can cause severe cold at more powerful lvls, releasing cold that hurt a bit afterwards as the unit warms up. As you can see, the more powerful forms of the strikes are strong enough too add a extra affect due to sheer skill and power applied with that lvl.



Quote any area that seems confusing still, and I'll try to explain.

[jamn455]

So you want to end all chances of a hero getting away with very low life.

That doesn't sound fair at all.

[Soulbourne]

I'm just expanding on what I understand the idea to be to help make it easier too understand for people.

[Ocean.dll]

In my experience, dots are a much better psychological weapon than straight nukes are. I generally think it would be a bad idea to have players in fear. Its not very fun to play when you are afraid.

[Kibiyama]

Everyone can stop with the "So you want <insane extrapolation>" shit. Realistically, nobody suggesting anything on this forum wants to turn this game completely into another, and nobody wants complete imbalance. But, realistically, people have trouble explaining what they mean, and get caught up in their ideas. It's problematic, but the nonsensical flaming shit certainly doesn't help it.

Okay, so. From the first part of your post, I gather that it's really not at all different from regular spells except that it's called something else. However, the last paragraph makes me think that it's something that's either passive or actively cast to add something to the hero's regular attack. That's actually sort of interesting in its own right, but maybe not good for EotA. Since it's part of the regular attack, it can't be too strong or it's just unnecessarily annoying; and if it's too weak, what's the point? So it's essentially just another ability, and not really anything special at all. And what happens to the heroes that already have attack effects? I mean, that's almost the same thing. I don't know if the intention is for every hero to have them, or have them by equipment or what...

I think it could be nice for an entirely separate game, if I'm even interpreting correctly. I think it needs some revising for it to fit into EotA. But take just that last paragraph and make a game around that game mechanic and I'd play it.

[Tehw00tz]

I generally think it would be a bad idea to have players in fear. Its not very fun to play when you are afraid.

Also if you die in the game, you die for real.

[Furion]

I think we have enoug buffs and status inflictions ~~
additionally i dont think every spell should cause one of those things