Welcome to the Wizard101 Message Boards


Player Guide
Fansites
News
Game Updates
Help

Follow important game updates on Twitter @Wizard101 and @KI_Alerts, and Facebook!

By posting on the Wizard101 Message Boards you agree to the Code of Conduct.

Arena Only Amulets - a good tempest solution

2
AuthorMessage
Squire
Aug 04, 2009
554
seasnake wrote:
thorvon65 wrote:
seasnake wrote:
thorvon65 wrote:
travisAk wrote:
thorvon65 wrote:
Ehhh I have to disagree with it. I to am creating some ways to make it more effective but it seems to me that could be something that one school could use to its own benefit and not really work with others. My idea is that attack all spells and sun spells get a little down buffed i think if you use a sun spell on an attack all spell it should be 3/4 of the damage added? But its just like storm is at this huge huge huge advantage and you will see from posts that no storm is willing to give up their new found way of always winning lol, I blame all these new problems completely on waterworks gear.
Like storm and death waterworks gear is amazing its out of this world lol, 82% damage increase, plus like 22% universal accuracy, +26% universal resistance and i'm to scared to hear the critical rate. But then look at ice everything but, they gave everyone else universal resistance and now ice is taking sacrifices to everything because of it. And there are more things to the waterworks gear that show Wizard is favoring schools its just awful.
pls stay on topic, stop using every thread as a podium for your rants about ice. The topic is about school resisting pendants so either add to the subject or start another of you many threads about your troubles with ice.



I want to give my opinion as an ice so that people know what a school's stance on it is. If it's a general answer you want i'll give you one. I think the amulet idea is just bad if you ask me i think they should limit gargantuan on attack all spells. And if you notice i just said about Ice second paragraph yet no one seems to read the stuff i did say.


we kind of ignored what else you said cause it was not only off topic but also not really true... you say storm is at a huge advantage but the other schools can cast stuff like meteors, sandstorm and the like just as fast and with the same result... toning down gargantuan and the like still fails, all it does is get everyone to blade up a single attacker all at once on the side going first with the same end result, no matter what the side that goes first still has an unfair killing advantage under any sort of idea you have mentioned here

Now you may say, oh wow you want protection against a single school that is so unfair, but before celestia came out you had such protection against your own school if you had the best gear on, after celestia came out the best gear dropped such single school protectionism which kind of made everything a bit generic rather than diverse.


Seasnake, To be honest i would love if they all bladed one attacker because thats strategy lol i dont like this mindless blasting and hoping for critical. And your resistance post is obviously at fault because you notice it was towards your own school lol. Making resistance to the school of your choice with all your normal stats is a lot different. Think about it in 1v1 you can change your amulet at beggining of match based on the players school. So while it could be a good idea for 4v4 it just overall is flawed. About criticsm its not really that off topic i believe that would be at benefit to more schools than others and its obvious that not everyone is seeing it the way you are. I gave you my reason for disagreeing now if you can argue it thats fine but just a rant about my post wont change anything lol sorry i need a lot more to budge me than emotional rants.


towards my own school means nothing when I have an account full of wizards of most all of the schools and view tempest, meteors, sandstorm, and the like as all having the same initial killing advantage

The before match time clock can be removed in 1v1 as you aren't waiting for anyone on your team to show up (I never play 1v1 as it has zero interest to me so I don't rightly know if the clock is there like it is in team play or not). Even so, with less attackers on you in 1v1 its easy enough to toss on a conversion and you can use shatter to make sure all the shielding against it is gone. Once again though, I state that 1v1 and team play PvP are quite a lot different from one another and should be treated as such with different programming to make them playable.


Right they are different however different programming? I'm saying from your idea people will use it a lot in 1v1. Just because you dont 1v1 seasnake doesnt mean it doesnt fit in the equation lol.

Astrologist
Aug 21, 2009
1205
thorvon65 wrote:
seasnake wrote:
thorvon65 wrote:
seasnake wrote:
thorvon65 wrote:
travisAk wrote:
thorvon65 wrote:
Ehhh I have to disagree with it. I to am creating some ways to make it more effective but it seems to me that could be something that one school could use to its own benefit and not really work with others. My idea is that attack all spells and sun spells get a little down buffed i think if you use a sun spell on an attack all spell it should be 3/4 of the damage added? But its just like storm is at this huge huge huge advantage and you will see from posts that no storm is willing to give up their new found way of always winning lol, I blame all these new problems completely on waterworks gear.
Like storm and death waterworks gear is amazing its out of this world lol, 82% damage increase, plus like 22% universal accuracy, +26% universal resistance and i'm to scared to hear the critical rate. But then look at ice everything but, they gave everyone else universal resistance and now ice is taking sacrifices to everything because of it. And there are more things to the waterworks gear that show Wizard is favoring schools its just awful.
pls stay on topic, stop using every thread as a podium for your rants about ice. The topic is about school resisting pendants so either add to the subject or start another of you many threads about your troubles with ice.



I want to give my opinion as an ice so that people know what a school's stance on it is. If it's a general answer you want i'll give you one. I think the amulet idea is just bad if you ask me i think they should limit gargantuan on attack all spells. And if you notice i just said about Ice second paragraph yet no one seems to read the stuff i did say.


we kind of ignored what else you said cause it was not only off topic but also not really true... you say storm is at a huge advantage but the other schools can cast stuff like meteors, sandstorm and the like just as fast and with the same result... toning down gargantuan and the like still fails, all it does is get everyone to blade up a single attacker all at once on the side going first with the same end result, no matter what the side that goes first still has an unfair killing advantage under any sort of idea you have mentioned here

Now you may say, oh wow you want protection against a single school that is so unfair, but before celestia came out you had such protection against your own school if you had the best gear on, after celestia came out the best gear dropped such single school protectionism which kind of made everything a bit generic rather than diverse.


Seasnake, To be honest i would love if they all bladed one attacker because thats strategy lol i dont like this mindless blasting and hoping for critical. And your resistance post is obviously at fault because you notice it was towards your own school lol. Making resistance to the school of your choice with all your normal stats is a lot different. Think about it in 1v1 you can change your amulet at beggining of match based on the players school. So while it could be a good idea for 4v4 it just overall is flawed. About criticsm its not really that off topic i believe that would be at benefit to more schools than others and its obvious that not everyone is seeing it the way you are. I gave you my reason for disagreeing now if you can argue it thats fine but just a rant about my post wont change anything lol sorry i need a lot more to budge me than emotional rants.


towards my own school means nothing when I have an account full of wizards of most all of the schools and view tempest, meteors, sandstorm, and the like as all having the same initial killing advantage

The before match time clock can be removed in 1v1 as you aren't waiting for anyone on your team to show up (I never play 1v1 as it has zero interest to me so I don't rightly know if the clock is there like it is in team play or not). Even so, with less attackers on you in 1v1 its easy enough to toss on a conversion and you can use shatter to make sure all the shielding against it is gone. Once again though, I state that 1v1 and team play PvP are quite a lot different from one another and should be treated as such with different programming to make them playable.


Right they are different however different programming? I'm saying from your idea people will use it a lot in 1v1. Just because you dont 1v1 seasnake doesnt mean it doesnt fit in the equation lol.


I understand the 1v1 and 4v4 diffences and yes I think different programming is in order based upon table size. It was my idea that one stun shield should be given for 1v1 play, two for 2v2, three for 3v3, and four for 4v4, and now when i go into the arena I actually see people comment on how glad they are that the chain stunning issue has finally been properly fixed.

It was my observation in the forums that a lot of player vs player bulleton board arguements weren't so much about the ideas being presented but rather were between people who tended to play 1v1 matches against those that play 4v4 matches. What seemed necessary for one and would make things play nice tended to bring a ton of arguments and complaints against it by those that played the other. For instance, those that play 1v1 PvP think beguile is perfect as it is and have not much objection against dispels, those that play 4v4 view both cards as being heavily one sided in favor of the team that goes first. Those that talk about 1v1 are often at odds and speaking a whole different language than those who talk about 4v4 play.

Squire
Aug 04, 2009
554
@ Seasnake, I'm not gonna quote again because its just to long

I do understand that a 4v4 player and a 1v1 player look at pvp completely different I myself am a 4v4er and 1v1er, but the thing is what i'm saying you have to keep both in the equation if something for pvp changes.

And thats gonna be a defense for any spell that is over powered because really they are only good in a certain area. Someone in 4v4 would never say frostbite is an OP spell. Yet in 1v1 arena I have been accused of cheating for using more that 3 times in a match lol.

But yea i completely understand and agree with what you said seasnake its just it has to be considered like what would keep someone from using that necklace in 1v1 because in 1v1 that thing would be monsterous and matches would like never end lol.

Survivor
Dec 15, 2008
15
I actually like this idea. While 40 or 50% resist may be a little extreme, I think 25 would be exceptable. 4v4 has seen a lot of Tempest recently and I think this would cause people to reconsider thier strategies and make 4v4 fun again. I can understand storm wizards are afraid that this would totally be unfair to storm, but as always, you have prisms and there would be amulets for other schools as well. This could fix a lot of problems without affecting the game mechanics much :) good idea!

Astrologist
Aug 21, 2009
1205
Heian wrote:
I actually like this idea. While 40 or 50% resist may be a little extreme, I think 25 would be exceptable. 4v4 has seen a lot of Tempest recently and I think this would cause people to reconsider thier strategies and make 4v4 fun again. I can understand storm wizards are afraid that this would totally be unfair to storm, but as always, you have prisms and there would be amulets for other schools as well. This could fix a lot of problems without affecting the game mechanics much :) good idea!


yes, that is the thing... crafted teams likely would not have all their players wearing storm amulets but rather would mix the protections up between the players so hopefully one of them would survive wave attacks regardless of what school the wave was from... to make things even a bit more interesting these amulets could be rare in game drops only along the lines that the secondary school amulets drop (they could even be added to the same place since most prefer farming waterworks for the super food).

Champion
Apr 18, 2010
407
I like your concept, but it wont work. Maybe if the amulet was 45% universal resist, and the amount it resisted dropped by 15% each round (until it reached 0%.)

-Solstice64

Survivor
Jul 19, 2010
40
40-50% resist is outragous for one item. Terrible idea-End of discussion

Defender
Nov 19, 2008
116
alexmf2 wrote:
that is a terrible idea. Do i even have to explain why?


yes it really is i mean - 40-45% that just gives other wizards a advantage

2