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.

Why a Storm DoT won't help

AuthorMessage
Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
darthjt wrote:
Gtarhannon,

You assume that Ice, with 46 to 49% resistance to all schools and 67 to 70% resistance to fire and storm, will not shield at all.


I don't make assumptions. That's your job. I plan for things based on a worst case scenario because we mere mortals cannot always ensure that we have a shield available.

darthjt wrote:
The Pierce ability, only works on the first resistance it hits, being that of a tower shield, or Resistance.


Actually Darth, and you can verify this in a lab, the way pierce works is to subtract from each resistance encountered until you run out of pierce value. If you have, for instance, a 20% TC fortify and say 45% of pierce (which you can do with a storm) but no other shield up, you will see it say pierce twice and the second pierce directly on armor resist will amount to a 25% reduction. Further, multi-hit attacks will all posses the same amount of pierce for each hit and again, we mere mortals cannot always have enough shields up to cover DoTs, double hit, and triple hit attacks.

darthjt wrote:
Also, you are taking away substancial power from those attacks when using those Armor Piercing stats and lowing the chances of critical.


You are only taking substantial power away at lower base damage levels. I have posted a formula that you can use in order to help you determine when it is beneficial to use armor pierce over spells such as colossal. Yes, you will need to make adjustments if there are shields, however, generally speaking the higher the base damage the more likely it is you will benefit from pierce vs. a sun damage boosting spell.

darthjt wrote:
Also, in order to have armor pierce on gear, you must also lose resistance, same goes with those schools that you claim to say can get mega critical.


What!? Tradeoffs!? Say it isn't so.

darthjt wrote:
Sure they can, but they lose their resistance as well! Also, for that matter, Life, Death, and Balance all lose their 26% power pip chance from gear for minor accuracy, extra critical chance, loss of damage boost. So, not sure exactly what you point is on this issue.


Your entire assertion about the new ice gear rests on the idea that it is somehow more beneficial for an ice in PvP to use it vs. other options. I find that to be a ridiculous assertion, particularly for how I play. I have illustrated that in a variety of ways, but you choose not to see it. I'm not surprised, that's usually how you deal with opposing opinions that provide inconvenient points to your assertions.

darthjt wrote:
I am not saying you are ignorant, never had, I just said you are not looking at the full picture, which is painfully obvious.


No, you generally imply it. You have indeed called me things such as uneducated, unintelligent, etc., in the past, but you seem to have largely grown past that. As to looking at the whole picture, I am. I do not assume to know the best strategy for everyone to use, only the ones that I use. I can see and understand a variety of strategies that do not necessarily work for my play style or mental disposition. Your entire argument about the ice gear is, in my opinion, sour grapes about ice vs. storm. You're trying to assert that it is beneficial for an ice in PvP to use this gear but if you read the forums, Storm in higher level PvP is a minority. In the face of this information, your assertions fall apart.

darthjt wrote:
I understand wanting to defend Ice and it's new gear, but there has to be balance, you can't take more away from some schools and not all of them, that is bias and unfair!


There is a balance and I don't want or even need to defend Ice gear. We wouldn't even be having this discussion without a perfect pet involved in the equation. I'm simply not going to allow you to get away with assertions made under false pretenses. If you wish to talk about bias, then go re-analyze your posts and note all the places where you omitted inconvenient information and minimized the impact of gear item swaps and trades for ice. Its all there and quite clear. You have a problem specifically with the stunning 70% resistance to storm (you can get even higher to fire but you haven't complained about that). Fine, have a problem with it. It does not change the fact that every school is faced with difficult decisions and tradeoffs with the new gear.

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
RosamaryH wrote:
You seem to be missing Darthjt's point entirely Gtarhannon and taking this topic entirely off base.


* What!? The extraordinarily low post count RosamaryH shows up miraculously when Darthjt is losing an argument? Who saw that coming?

Darthjt took it to gear in an effort to justify Storm getting a DoT or AoE DoT. I'm disputing that point. Follow along please dar..., I mean, rosamaryh.

RosamaryH wrote:
However, Darth's point was that the Ice Crafted Robe Does not Take away, in fact gives more than any other schools robe! Is this not a fact?


No. It isn't a fact. It gives more resist, not "more". That makes it a "tradeoff".

RosamaryH wrote:
You act like he fails to mention things, but I do believe it is impossible for anyone to cover every single possible option in gear. This does not change the fact that Ice gear, does not take more than it gives when it comes crafted gear vs Waterworks gear!


I don't act like it... he does. I pointed it out quite a lot in the post you quoted. Its all there. Go ahead and read it. Your last assertion there depends ENTIRELY on your point of view and personal strategy which is another key point I've been making. Were Darthjt to simply assert that "for him" the new gear gives more to ice than any other school, then fine... we wouldn't be having this conversation. But that isn't what he said.

RosamaryH wrote:
Apparently, you have never heard of Triage for that 1 storm hound that storm may have?


Oh, certainly I have. Can't win on gear numbers eh? Moving into puppet strategy scenarios where everything works right for your side of the argument to dismiss the inconvenient points I made?

RosamaryH wrote:
Oh, and look what storm has to give up to have Armor Pierce!


Right, cause... after all... they couldn't use just say, TC infallible and TC unstoppable on their spells? Or, go to things like say... the Storm Caller's Rangers?

RosamaryH wrote:
You keep going around, but you are not stating specific facts.


I am and very clearly stating facts on an item by item basis and referencing the names of the gear I'm using so that others can confirm what I'm saying. Meanwhile you, I mean Darthjt, keep making huge assumptions to justify your side of the argument and minimize the appearance of the sacrifices that have to be made, not the least of which is the assumption of a perfect pet configured EXACTLY the way Darthjt wants it to be for either side of the argument.

RosamaryH wrote:
As far as pets go, any school and anyone can have a pet with the talents they want, it is not school specific, so when you are adding and subtracting those values, you can do that to all schools, not just storm!


Exactly my point which is why you should take it out of consideration when actually evaluating gear. However, Darthjt can't do that or his arguments completely fall apart.

Survivor
Feb 21, 2010
26
Ice has big resist
deal with it

think about it

In real life when you want to chop a block of ice
it gonna take a lot of chops
It resists and takes in most of the impact

So ice in the game is gonna be like ice in the real life

Sure they are getting out of hand

This is a reason(i think) they made fient and armor pierce

For the shields
get treasures(or find a myth teammate) of pierce, shatter, or even earthquake

There are ways to get around things
Your at a wall what do you do:
stay there or walk around it

WALK AROUND IT

Armiger
May 10, 2010
2080
gtarhannon wrote:
darthjt wrote:
Gtarhannon,

You assume that Ice, with 46 to 49% resistance to all schools and 67 to 70% resistance to fire and storm, will not shield at all.


I don't make assumptions. That's your job. I plan for things based on a worst case scenario because we mere mortals cannot always ensure that we have a shield available.


You assume making assumptions is my Job, stating actual facts is my Job and trying to bring people, such as yourself into enlightenment, is what I try and do, but some times, as the Egyptians did, they denied facts presented to them and hardened themselves from enlightenment.

No, not always will a shield be readily available, however, a good PvP player will have towers in the side deck and be ready to defend themself before a major attack occurs!

darthjt wrote:
The Pierce ability, only works on the first resistance it hits, being that of a tower shield, or Resistance.


Actually Darth, and you can verify this in a lab, the way pierce works is to subtract from each resistance encountered until you run out of pierce value. If you have, for instance, a 20% TC fortify and say 45% of pierce (which you can do with a storm) but no other shield up, you will see it say pierce twice and the second pierce directly on armor resist will amount to a 25% reduction. Further, multi-hit attacks will all posses the same amount of pierce for each hit and again, we mere mortals cannot always have enough shields up to cover DoTs, double hit, and triple hit attacks.


I am sure you read my post and findings on Pierce Armor! I know exactly what this talent does and how it effects shields and resistance.

Your theory states or implies that storm has a plethora of DoT attacks at it's disposal. Storm also does not have any double hit or triple hit attacks.

Also, you are also implying that a good PvP player does not have Triage.

darthjt wrote:
Also, you are taking away substancial power from those attacks when using those Armor Piercing stats and lowing the chances of critical.


You are only taking substantial power away at lower base damage levels. I have posted a formula that you can use in order to help you determine when it is beneficial to use armor pierce over spells such as colossal. Yes, you will need to make adjustments if there are shields, however, generally speaking the higher the base damage the more likely it is you will benefit from pierce vs. a sun damage boosting spell.

darthjt wrote:
Also, in order to have armor pierce on gear, you must also lose resistance, same goes with those schools that you claim to say can get mega critical.


What!? Tradeoffs!? Say it isn't so.

darthjt wrote:
Sure they can, but they lose their resistance as well! Also, for that matter, Life, Death, and Balance all lose their 26% power pip chance from gear for minor accuracy, extra critical chance, loss of damage boost. So, not sure exactly what you point is on this issue.


Your entire assertion about the new ice gear rests on the idea that it is somehow more beneficial for an ice in PvP to use it vs. other options. I find that to be a ridiculous assertion, particularly for how I play. I have illustrated that in a variety of ways, but you choose not to see it. I'm not surprised, that's usually how you deal with opposing opinions that provide inconvenient points to your assertions.


To completely show exactly how the new crafted Ice Gear Benefits Ice more than any other school, you simply have to look at 1 Item. The Robe!

All schools get 12 Universal Resistance, all schools get more health.
Ice gains in Global Critical Block, while all other schools lose global critical block and only gain critical block to the 2 opposing schools.
Ice Gains 12 more Resistance to Fire and Storm, while no other school gains any type of resistance.
Ice loses the least amount of accuracy and damage boost on the robe. While the other schools lose more damage boost and/or power pip chance.

State the Facts! How can you dispute the facts?

darthjt wrote:
I am not saying you are ignorant, never had, I just said you are not looking at the full picture, which is painfully obvious.


No, you generally imply it. You have indeed called me things such as uneducated, unintelligent, etc., in the past, but you seem to have largely grown past that. As to looking at the whole picture, I am. I do not assume to know the best strategy for everyone to use, only the ones that I use. I can see and understand a variety of strategies that do not necessarily work for my play style or mental disposition. Your entire argument about the ice gear is, in my opinion, sour grapes about ice vs. storm. You're trying to assert that it is beneficial for an ice in PvP to use this gear but if you read the forums, Storm in higher level PvP is a minority. In the face of this information, your assertions fall apart.


Guilty conscience? I don't imply anything, but when you choose to ignore facts, what are we supposed to believe?

darthjt wrote:
I understand wanting to defend Ice and it's new gear, but there has to be balance, you can't take more away from some schools and not all of them, that is bias and unfair!


There is a balance and I don't want or even need to defend Ice gear. We wouldn't even be having this discussion without a perfect pet involved in the equation. I'm simply not going to allow you to get away with assertions made under false pretenses. If you wish to talk about bias, then go re-analyze your posts and note all the places where you omitted inconvenient information and minimized the impact of gear item swaps and trades for ice. Its all there and quite clear. You have a problem specifically with the stunning 70% resistance to storm (you can get even higher to fire but you haven't complained about that). Fine, have a problem with it. It does not change the fact that every school is faced with difficult decisions and tradeoffs with the new gear.


Is evenyone not entitled to have the perfect pet? Ice, storm, fire, life, death, myth, and Balance? Pet's are not the issue here and are a lot more common in PvP than you say. Just because you don't have one, does not mean they do not exsist or are very rare. Most people I know, have these types of pets.

One thing I do agree with, is that every school does have decisions to make on gear, especially critical vs power and resistance. However, you keep denying that crafted gear, does not take away as much from Ice or give as much to Ice, than it does to the other schools.

Now, since this topic is a DoT won't help storm, and you have stated a case for the Armor Piercing "If storm had a DoT" more than 1 card in a deck of over 60 possible cards, I take it you are recanting that storm does not need a DoT? It's what your statements are supporting!

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
darthjt wrote:
You assume making assumptions is my Job, stating actual facts is my Job and trying to bring people, such as yourself into enlightenment, is what I try and do, but some times, as the Egyptians did, they denied facts presented to them and hardened themselves from enlightenment.


* Swing and a miss.

"Facts" would stop at stating what the increases and decreases of one item to another item are. You tend to leave some of those off making them "incomplete facts". You then weigh in with your judgement on the value of the items in question based on your idea of what a "proper" strategy would be for those items. (that would be an "assumption" for those keeping track) That makes what you do "conjecture", not "state facts".

I particularly like how you try to term me as "unenlightened" while simultaneously elevating yourself to the status of "enlightened". I was excited to see where you might go with the Egyptian analogy, but you didn't really finish that thought. Its kinda like the stats you've been providing in your arguments of late.

darthjt wrote:
No, not always will a shield be readily available, however, a good PvP player will have towers in the side deck and be ready to defend themself before a major attack occurs!


I like how you try to imply that I must not be a "good PvP player" through inference that I must not have towers in my side deck if I'm concerned about unshielded strikes as a way to deflect from my point. Tell me, how good is a treasure tower against a 35% armor piercing orthrus that hits critical exactly?

darthjt wrote:
I am sure you read my post and findings on Pierce Armor! I know exactly what this talent does and how it effects shields and resistance.


Of course I did. I even thanked you in your thread. However, it was preliminary work and you didn't cover in detail what happens when the pierce amount exceeds the shielded amount, so when you said this:

darthjt wrote:
The Pierce ability, only works on the first resistance it hits, being that of a tower shield, or Resistance.


and implied that pierce stops at the first resistance, I clarified so that the other readers following our debate can have ALL of the facts.

darthjt wrote:
Your theory states or implies that storm has a plethora of DoT attacks at it's disposal. Storm also does not have any double hit or triple hit attacks.


I will stipulate that I can see how you took it as ambiguous and how others might as well. I will clarify that the point was to take storm out of the equation and draw your attention to the armor piercing threat of other schools. In doing so, I underscored just how ridiculous I find that it is to give up more global resistance for merely more resistance to two schools, particularly when one is said to be uncommon in high level PvP.

darthjt wrote:
Also, you are also implying that a good PvP player does not have Triage.


Triage does not help with double and triple hits, nor is it a magic bullet for every DoT spell that comes your way. What I am implying is that a good PvP player sets up their gear for worst case scenarios where they can't necessarily get to their cards when they need them. In my opinion, going with the crafted level 66 ice hat and robe is completely contrary to that ideal.

darthjt wrote:
To completely show exactly how the new crafted Ice Gear Benefits Ice more than any other school, you simply have to look at 1 Item. The Robe!

All schools get 12 Universal Resistance, all schools get more health.
Ice gains in Global Critical Block, while all other schools lose global critical block and only gain critical block to the 2 opposing schools.
Ice Gains 12 more Resistance to Fire and Storm, while no other school gains any type of resistance.
Ice loses the least amount of accuracy and damage boost on the robe. While the other schools lose more damage boost and/or power pip chance.

State the Facts! How can you dispute the facts?


Fact: For your statements on resistance to be true, you'd have to compare the 66 crafted to the level 60 waterworks robe. For your damage loss statement to be true, you'd have to compare the 66 crafted to the level 58 ice robe. Your accuracy statement is ambiguous in that it doesn't specify precise quantities nor what should be compared to what.

If you are saying that ice loses the least amount of global accuracy, you're correct, but they had the least to lose. For balance, life, and death, they lost power pip chance in exchange for accuracy so you can't strictly say that ice had the least loss when those three only had a gain to accuracy.

There is more information of course, but before I bother to post a factual analysis, how about you go ahead and choose which one you'd like to compare first?

darthjt wrote:
Guilty conscience? I don't imply anything, but when you choose to ignore facts, what are we supposed to believe?


The implication there being that I am "projecting" and that therefore, in reality I am the one who makes implications. (wait? Wasn't that an implication?) What I ignore is your conjecture, not your facts.

darthjt wrote:
Is evenyone not entitled to have the perfect pet? Ice, storm, fire, life, death, myth, and Balance? Pet's are not the issue here and are a lot more common in PvP than you say. Just because you don't have one, does not mean they do not exsist or are very rare. Most people I know, have these types of pets.


Yes, they are indeed entitled to make a "perfect" pet. I made no statements otherwise. However, you and I both know that you wouldn't be having an issue with the actual gear should there not be a perfect pet involved. Further, I made no statements as to the commonality of pets in PvP, only that you are assuming one and its amounts to make you're arguments. Its preposterous and no where near an accurate assessment of the actual tradeoffs on an item by item basis.

darthjt wrote:
One thing I do agree with, is that every school does have decisions to make on gear, especially critical vs power and resistance. However, you keep denying that crafted gear, does not take away as much from Ice or give as much to Ice, than it does to the other schools.


I deny the conjecture that the new crafted gear gives more to ice than it does the other schools. That statement cannot be factually made without specificying the evaluation criteria necessary for analysis of the factual tradeoffs. In other words, the wizard's strategy has to specifically be known as opposed to assumed. A loss of 4% damage might not seem that much to a storm wizard, for instance, but each percent is a lot harder to come by for an ice wizard.

darthjt wrote:
Now, since this topic is a DoT won't help storm, and you have stated a case for the Armor Piercing "If storm had a DoT" more than 1 card in a deck of over 60 possible cards, I take it you are recanting that storm does not need a DoT? It's what your statements are supporting!


* I suppose that if you don't include the sidedeck, where treasure storm elves are found, then yes... 1 card in a deck of over 60 assuming of course a large deck. Wow, for someone who doesn't make assumptions, you sure expect me to make a lot in order to follow along with you

Why would I be recanting? My statement is that storm doesn't need a trained DoT. I stand by that. If anything, I have demonstrated how a new trained DoT spell combined with armor pierce could make Storm overpowered. Clearly, a trained DoT would help Storm too much, not too little. No, storm absolutely doesn't need a trained DoT.


Armiger
May 10, 2010
2080
Gtarhannon,

So, according to you, level 68 crafted Ice gear does not give more than other schools? This is your statement and you are sticking to it.

Ok, fine, let's tear down your arguement piece by piece.

Waterworks Robe vs Crafted 68 Ice Robe

More health?
More Resistance?
More Critical Block?
More Critical Attack?
Accuracy change from Global to Ice, any Ice accuracy loss?
Loss of Ice damabe boost?

Yes to loss of Ice Damage boost, but as you said, Ice has the least, so the least to take from.

Waterworks Robe vs Crafted 68 Storm Robe
More Health?
More Resistance? No?
More Critical Block? No?
More Critical Attack?
Accuracy change from global to storm, any storm accuracy loss?
Loss of Storm Damage boost?

Of course, storm has the most to take, so it will lose the most, right? Oh and storm also loses the most global accuracy, also supporting the fact that storm loses more than Ice does.

Not to mention that Life, Balance, and Death lose all Power pip chance!

How is Ice not benefitting the most from the new crafted gear?

Let's go to the Hat, shall we?

Ice Crafted 68 hat vs Waterworks Ice Hat:

More Health?
More Resistance? No and Yes? How much global resistance was lost? Oh, it kept some global resistance? Did it gain any other resistance?
More Critical Attack? Oh wait, because you say criticals are useless for ice, this is meaningless. And you say I am looking by a specific strategy?
Accuracy change from global to ice, any loss? Yes, but as you say, the lowest accuracy boost, so has the least amount to lose! Remember this!
Ice Damage Loss? Yes, this is one aspect that Ice does lose a bit.

Storm Crafted hat vs Waterworks Hat
More Health? No? Less, but storm has the least health to lose, why take it from them? You must have an explanation for this, right?
More Critical Attack? With critical block being so high, is this truly a factor? Or a preference? How much critical block is truly needed, do you know?
Accuracy change from global to storm, any loss? Yes? but as you say, storm has the most so can lose the most, but it loses the most in every category?
Storm Damage Loss? Yes again?

Now again, Life, Death, and Balance lose all power pip chance and gain a few accuracy. Still quite a substancial loss, don't you think?

So, does any school besides Ice, keep global resistance on hats or boots? Oh, and what second school is required on the boots to get global critical block? Oh, wait that is Ice once again.

You use figures that suit you and you state that I am looking at a specific strategy, when you are the one, since you say Ice critical is not a factor. Once again, can you prove that Critical attack points and critical block points are based upon the same scale? So the more critical points you have means you overpower the critical block points? Or do they both give a percentage based on attack and block, meaning you may block it, or may not!

As for your theory that Rosamary is me, I don't need anyone to fight my battles for me, especially as I am not losing this one. However, it proves how wrong you are. Just because someone agrees with me and not you?


Explorer
May 12, 2010
77
gtarhannon wrote:
RosamaryH wrote:
You seem to be missing Darthjt's point entirely Gtarhannon and taking this topic entirely off base.


* What!? The extraordinarily low post count RosamaryH shows up miraculously when Darthjt is losing an argument? Who saw that coming?


So, because I am not as vocal, as you at 899 posts, you think I am Darth?
I do believe darth has what, around 1500 posts, and always seems to hold his own.

However, I have not always agreed with everything Darth says, take for instance, the minion issue in PvP. Darth was opposed to allowing a 2v1, while I on the other hand, find no issues with minions being allowed in PvP and have posted as such.

So, what, I am his split personality? Or is it just your excuse on why more people see the benefits of Ice's new crafted gear, than you are going to admit.

So, the other person, I forget his name, that posted a message stating
"Crafted gear benefits Ice more than any other school" That is now Darth too? So, everyone that agrees with Darth is Darth? Does that mean that everyone that disagrees with darth is you?

Darthjt took it to gear in an effort to justify Storm getting a DoT or AoE DoT. I'm disputing that point. Follow along please dar..., I mean, rosamaryh.

Now, as being that you think I am Darth, why on earth would I ever agree that storm does not need a Dot spell? Although, darth is correct on the gear issues, you are right in believing that storm has enough and clearly a Dot spell for storm would make them too overpowered.

RosamaryH wrote:
However, Darth's point was that the Ice Crafted Robe Does not Take away, in fact gives more than any other schools robe! Is this not a fact?


No. It isn't a fact. It gives more resist, not "more". That makes it a "tradeoff".


A trade off? What is Ice's new robe trading off compared to the other robes? It still have 12 universal resistance, adds 12 resistance to fire and storm, it adds health, it adds universal critical block, it changes accuracy from universal to Ice (huge loss there), and takes away a minimal amount of damage boost.

Do the other robes for all the other schools do as much? No, actually, they don't. So, get your facts straight before you go and critcize me.

RosamaryH wrote:
You act like he fails to mention things, but I do believe it is impossible for anyone to cover every single possible option in gear. This does not change the fact that Ice gear, does not take more than it gives when it comes crafted gear vs Waterworks gear!


I don't act like it... he does. I pointed it out quite a lot in the post you quoted. Its all there. Go ahead and read it. Your last assertion there depends ENTIRELY on your point of view and personal strategy which is another key point I've been making. Were Darthjt to simply assert that "for him" the new gear gives more to ice than any other school, then fine... we wouldn't be having this conversation. But that isn't what he said.


Your points of view have also been based on strategy and not in actual comparison to what the new gear gives. For someone as good at math as you are Gtarhannon, you sure are making some huge mistakes on simple math.

RosamaryH wrote:
Apparently, you have never heard of Triage for that 1 storm hound that storm may have?


Oh, certainly I have. Can't win on gear numbers eh? Moving into puppet strategy scenarios where everything works right for your side of the argument to dismiss the inconvenient points I made?

What inconvienient points have you made? 1 triage is all it takes to remove the 1 possible Storm hound spell that storm may have. That is stating that storm is in fact facing Ice. Not to mention the fact on what storm would be giving up with the new gear vs any other school, while Ice, which is my school of choice, still is sitting pretty, with more of everything, with the new crafted gear.

RosamaryH wrote:
Oh, and look what storm has to give up to have Armor Pierce!


Right, cause... after all... they couldn't use just say, TC infallible and TC unstoppable on their spells? Or, go to things like say... the Storm Caller's Rangers?


And lose all resistance for pierce armor? Would Ice be willing to do that? And you yourself know that infallible with Colossal does more damage. It is, after all, in the math, is it not?

RosamaryH wrote:
You keep going around, but you are not stating specific facts.


I am and very clearly stating facts on an item by item basis and referencing the names of the gear I'm using so that others can confirm what I'm saying. Meanwhile you, I mean Darthjt, keep making huge assumptions to justify your side of the argument and minimize the appearance of the sacrifices that have to be made, not the least of which is the assumption of a perfect pet configured EXACTLY the way Darthjt wants it to be for either side of the argument.


Here you go again, bringing pets into the conversation. We are talking level 68 crafted gear and waterworks gear, was that not obvious?

RosamaryH wrote:
As far as pets go, any school and anyone can have a pet with the talents they want, it is not school specific, so when you are adding and subtracting those values, you can do that to all schools, not just storm!


Exactly my point which is why you should take it out of consideration when actually evaluating gear. However, Darthjt can't do that or his arguments completely fall apart.


I will agree, without a pet that gives those stats, Ice would not have 70% resistance to Fire and Storm, but a pet with spell proof of 10 would take that resistance to 65%, is that not common?

Also, one final point, Ice has this resistance to 2 other schools, while maintaining 40 to 50% resistance to all other schools, depending on pet. Is this not true? Does not every other school have to give up that universal resistance on everything except the robe? Oh but then, they lose the universal critical block. Does ice lose that?

Wow, you argument seems to be falling apart Gtarhannon. Just as your theory about Darth and I. But, clearly, you are not always right.

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
Dear RosadarthmaryjHt:

You seem to have missed what I was implying by going back and forth with your names. Whether or not you are the same person in real life is irrelevant. The posts are written in the same style, make the same points, use the same debate tactics, coin the same phrases, and even share the same mutual love of awkwardly placed exclamation marks. It doesn't matter if you share a body, you certain share a mind.

Survivor
Oct 10, 2010
29
While the arguments here have been interesting, we seem to have strayed from the original thread topic. Which is namely why a storm DoT will not help, into an argument over whether or not ice with a proper gear set up is over the top.

If this was truly answered in the last two posts then i apologize, the back and forth arguing got old and I skipped ahead since it seemed to me the discussion had moved too far afield.

As it stands right now storm has three options for a DoT spell. They can spend cash for a one time shot storm hound. They can hope they get a high enough ranking in pvp to get a storm elf pet, again for a one shot. Something the standing evidence would show is not easy. Evidence being the number of high ranked storm wizards.

The last option is to train to fire elf, and either pay through the nose for mutate cards at the bazaar or spend a long time farming frequently for the card. This third option has draw back in that unlike other schools none of its spells are on the pvp critical spell list (i.e. feint, tower shield, reshuffle, sprite, satyr, and weakness). Making storm wizards tight in their training point distribution. Yes, it can all be done. I propose though that to do that you have made a wizard only for pvp, with none of the other spells you will need for various pve quests. How does that set up help vs say Charmbreaker? Yes, you can buy back training points. Is that really an option for most players? Build your wizard in pve to max level. Buy back your training points, and retrain for pvp. Then when the next world comes out, buy them back again so you can pve the next world. To finally, hopefully, one last time buy them back again to prepare for pvp. Yes, this last is under the assumption that the new spell set that is historically released has some spells that are critical for one but not the other.

Storm wizards have the worst life total, and accuracy of all schools. Which means any tactic, or gear setup, must takes these into account and either over come them or somehow work around them.

Please no arguments about perfect pets. Have you long timers forgotten just how hard it is to even get spell defy, let alone the dozen of generations and failed attempts to make a pet with the skill set you so frequently quote? If there is a discussion somewhere about how to control what you pet will learn, or how to control what skills the off spring will inherit from the parents, then please post a link. I am sure there are tons of players that would love to read it.

Back to storm's lack of life; using a life mastery amulet will only further decrease it. A situation many players will feel they can ill absorb. Some remove the fizzle factor through gear through the sacrifice of critical rating, other do not. But from observation, either group have come to same conclusion as to what is the most workable pvp tactic.

Many storm players have come to the conclusion, that I happen to subscribe to as well, that the best tactic is to hit. Hit hard, hit often, and keep them searching for heals. This tactic runs into four major blocks.

First obviously if you want to hit hard, then you want to critical. In my experience a simple 30% block rating is really equal to more like 90%. So right there you can count out critical as a valid tactic and move it over into the luck area.

Second, is life. Depending on the school this is more of a problem than others. 2000 damage is an ice school is about a third of his life, but 1000 to storm is nearly half of his (at least 40% for you sticklers). If it wasn't life, they can probably hit the thresh hold for another 1000 damage faster than storm's 2000 damage.

Third, which came up in second, is time. Every turn is a turn storm can possibly take damage, damage it can ill afford to absorb.

Please spare me the treasure card solution. Adding a DoT to storm would be a long range change to how storm is played and it's tactic options. Treasure cards are a finite resource, that possibly large amounts of effort must be put into for repeatably use. Not on the same level as when you add a spell to a school.

Lastly is the resistance, particularly shield spells. As far as anyone that wants to do pvp seriously, then they must get tower shield. In getting tower shield they also will get ice's dual school shield, which happens to cover the two most damaging schools out there. So I would think the average deck set up would have max tower shield, and probably two or three of the dual shield. Now storm has seven to nine shields it must contend with. Every shield cast blunting storm's attack, and saving up pips for the shield's caster to prepare higher ranked spell that will proportionately hurt storm more.

A DoT spell would give storm the option of stripping away the target's shields long enough to score, possibly, some solid hits and winning. I say possibly for several reasons. One is fizzle though at level 70 having an 100+ accuracy is quite doable. What I am more looking at is deck construction.

I don't think anyone will disagree with me in the idea that in pvp, especially, a small card selection is more to your benefit than a completely filled deck. Part of winning in pvp is to find the card you need when you need it and not something else. The more cards you have the worse your odds are of finding what you need/want.

Adding a card to storm's selection, that as far as i know any storm wizard will stuff into his deck, will not be without consequence. Now his deck is thicker, reducing the odd of getting the combination of cards he needs, or there are too few DoT spells that it becomes on a hope and prayer that he/she gets them. Discarding to find is a double edged sword given how reshuffle works, and the cost in pips to cast (If a storm wizard is unwilling to use a life mastery amulet over life drop, how much more is unlike is he/she to use a balance mastery to cast one spell, maybe, once in a dual?). Even an aoe dot spell, balancing cost vs damage, would be doable given these additional factors and current play constraints would be realistic. Honestly, would an aoe storm elf level damage spell that cost 5-6 pip be that unbalancing?

Lastly, even if you are under the effects of a DoT you can still cast a shield guessing that next round attack will be a direct attack. You don't know what he will do, you are guessing. And this mental warfare, trying to out think and guess you opponent, was at the heart of pvp in the beginning till everyone started posting, this is what to wear and do threads.

I don't see a storm DoT as unhelpful, nor do it see it as unbalancing given all other factors that must be balanced to truly succeed in pvp post ds.

Delver
Aug 15, 2009
272
Off topic, you guys should join speech and debate class! A suggestion

Oh I believe Storm seriously needs improvements and need to have highest pierce stats.

Armiger
May 10, 2010
2080
gtarhannon wrote:
Dear RosadarthmaryjHt:

You seem to have missed what I was implying by going back and forth with your names. Whether or not you are the same person in real life is irrelevant. The posts are written in the same style, make the same points, use the same debate tactics, coin the same phrases, and even share the same mutual love of awkwardly placed exclamation marks. It doesn't matter if you share a body, you certain share a mind.


Have you not heard the phrase, "Great minds think alike?"

Doudjy
Aritako
Rosamary
Archmage
AkihiroHattori5
Kingurz
CorbinW
Lion359
LauraWatersong
Even Colagada, whom I don't always get along with.

These are some of the people who generally look at things objectively and without tunnel vision. Some of them, have quite often agreed with me and even used my "Quotes" as I have often quoted others when they make a very good point! I actually read the message boards and know what people have to say.

Now, I do make minor errors from time to time, such as the Crafted gear being level 66 and not 68, and double resistance on gear from 51 to 55, but these are mute errors that are meaningless and irrelavent. However, you seem to find pleasure in irrelavent points, or you would not keep bringing them up.

You would easily be one of the top "Thinkers" and posters, if you would shed your tunnel vision and stop being biased against Storm and being biased to Ice. This has always been your downfall!

Archmage has quite clearly demonstrated why it would not hurt storm or unbalance the game to have a DoT spell.


Explorer
Mar 15, 2011
89
archmage987 wrote:
While the arguments here have been interesting, we seem to have strayed from the original thread topic. Which is namely why a storm DoT will not help, into an argument over whether or not ice with a proper gear set up is over the top.

If this was truly answered in the last two posts then i apologize, the back and forth arguing got old and I skipped ahead since it seemed to me the discussion had moved too far afield.

As it stands right now storm has three options for a DoT spell. They can spend cash for a one time shot storm hound. They can hope they get a high enough ranking in pvp to get a storm elf pet, again for a one shot. Something the standing evidence would show is not easy. Evidence being the number of high ranked storm wizards.

The last option is to train to fire elf, and either pay through the nose for mutate cards at the bazaar or spend a long time farming frequently for the card. This third option has draw back in that unlike other schools none of its spells are on the pvp critical spell list (i.e. feint, tower shield, reshuffle, sprite, satyr, and weakness). Making storm wizards tight in their training point distribution. Yes, it can all be done. I propose though that to do that you have made a wizard only for pvp, with none of the other spells you will need for various pve quests. How does that set up help vs say Charmbreaker? Yes, you can buy back training points. Is that really an option for most players? Build your wizard in pve to max level. Buy back your training points, and retrain for pvp. Then when the next world comes out, buy them back again so you can pve the next world. To finally, hopefully, one last time buy them back again to prepare for pvp. Yes, this last is under the assumption that the new spell set that is historically released has some spells that are critical for one but not the other.

Storm wizards have the worst life total, and accuracy of all schools. Which means any tactic, or gear setup, must takes these into account and either over come them or somehow work around them.

Please no arguments about perfect pets. Have you long timers forgotten just how hard it is to even get spell defy, let alone the dozen of generations and failed attempts to make a pet with the skill set you so frequently quote? If there is a discussion somewhere about how to control what you pet will learn, or how to control what skills the off spring will inherit from the parents, then please post a link. I am sure there are tons of players that would love to read it.

Back to storm's lack of life; using a life mastery amulet will only further decrease it. A situation many players will feel they can ill absorb. Some remove the fizzle factor through gear through the sacrifice of critical rating, other do not. But from observation, either group have come to same conclusion as to what is the most workable pvp tactic.

Many storm players have come to the conclusion, that I happen to subscribe to as well, that the best tactic is to hit. Hit hard, hit often, and keep them searching for heals. This tactic runs into four major blocks.

First obviously if you want to hit hard, then you want to critical. In my experience a simple 30% block rating is really equal to more like 90%. So right there you can count out critical as a valid tactic and move it over into the luck area.

Second, is life. Depending on the school this is more of a problem than others. 2000 damage is an ice school is about a third of his life, but 1000 to storm is nearly half of his (at least 40% for you sticklers). If it wasn't life, they can probably hit the thresh hold for another 1000 damage faster than storm's 2000 damage.

Third, which came up in second, is time. Every turn is a turn storm can possibly take damage, damage it can ill afford to absorb.

Please spare me the treasure card solution. Adding a DoT to storm would be a long range change to how storm is played and it's tactic options. Treasure cards are a finite resource, that possibly large amounts of effort must be put into for repeatably use. Not on the same level as when you add a spell to a school.

Lastly is the resistance, particularly shield spells. As far as anyone that wants to do pvp seriously, then they must get tower shield. In getting tower shield they also will get ice's dual school shield, which happens to cover the two most damaging schools out there. So I would think the average deck set up would have max tower shield, and probably two or three of the dual shield. Now storm has seven to nine shields it must contend with. Every shield cast blunting storm's attack, and saving up pips for the shield's caster to prepare higher ranked spell that will proportionately hurt storm more.

A DoT spell would give storm the option of stripping away the target's shields long enough to score, possibly, some solid hits and winning. I say possibly for several reasons. One is fizzle though at level 70 having an 100+ accuracy is quite doable. What I am more looking at is deck construction.

I don't think anyone will disagree with me in the idea that in pvp, especially, a small card selection is more to your benefit than a completely filled deck. Part of winning in pvp is to find the card you need when you need it and not something else. The more cards you have the worse your odds are of finding what you need/want.

Adding a card to storm's selection, that as far as i know any storm wizard will stuff into his deck, will not be without consequence. Now his deck is thicker, reducing the odd of getting the combination of cards he needs, or there are too few DoT spells that it becomes on a hope and prayer that he/she gets them. Discarding to find is a double edged sword given how reshuffle works, and the cost in pips to cast (If a storm wizard is unwilling to use a life mastery amulet over life drop, how much more is unlike is he/she to use a balance mastery to cast one spell, maybe, once in a dual?). Even an aoe dot spell, balancing cost vs damage, would be doable given these additional factors and current play constraints would be realistic. Honestly, would an aoe storm elf level damage spell that cost 5-6 pip be that unbalancing?

Lastly, even if you are under the effects of a DoT you can still cast a shield guessing that next round attack will be a direct attack. You don't know what he will do, you are guessing. And this mental warfare, trying to out think and guess you opponent, was at the heart of pvp in the beginning till everyone started posting, this is what to wear and do threads.

I don't see a storm DoT as unhelpful, nor do it see it as unbalancing given all other factors that must be balanced to truly succeed in pvp post ds.


Yeah that's all nice. The thing you're not addressing is Storm's raw power while going first (where you exercise a greater flexibility in dealing with your opponents shields and get a turn advantage on your opponent) in a PvP duel compounded now with the suggestion that they should get a DoT....

The thing that annoys me is the suggestion of Storm getting a DoT presented under the lame hallmark of balancing PvP in general. Or that it wouldn't upset PvP balance.

A Storm DoT would not balance PvP. The only thing a Storm DoT would do is make Storm wizards win more in the arena.

And still, the odd thing is, with all Ice's resistance to Storm, it wouldn't even help (especially not if it's a lower ranked spell) against Ice, unless it is bladed to max, which considering Storm's low resist and health already is tenuous considering an Ice wizard could potentially take that Storm out with a couple stacked Frostbites and maybe a minion. So much for all those blades on that DoT that probably won't even kill the Ice yet.

But yeah, it could give Storm more advantage over weaker/lesser PvP schools. Sure. I guess that's what we're after...


Survivor
Oct 10, 2010
29
jojowild23 wrote:

Yeah that's all nice. The thing you're not addressing is Storm's raw power while going first (where you exercise a greater flexibility in dealing with your opponents shields and get a turn advantage on your opponent) in a PvP duel compounded now with the suggestion that they should get a DoT....

Storm can no longer decedely put the match in his favor with from first position. Everyone is sporting 30-50% innate universal resistance. Nor do I feel it fair that match should be fairly well decided by turn order, a factor a player has no control over.

jojowild23 wrote:

The thing that annoys me is the suggestion of Storm getting a DoT presented under the lame hallmark of balancing PvP in general. Or that it wouldn't upset PvP balance.

A Storm DoT would not balance PvP. The only thing a Storm DoT would do is make Storm wizards win more in the arena.

Um, the arena is PvP. Is there some other ranked PvP out there I am missing?

Since storm is barely, arguably, the ugly fourth duckling in schools to rank in the arena. Wouldn't adjusting things so storm could win more often, thereby have ranked members through out all tiers balancing it out?

jojowild23 wrote:

And still, the odd thing is, with all Ice's resistance to Storm, it wouldn't even help (especially not if it's a lower ranked spell) against Ice, unless it is bladed to max, which considering Storm's low resist and health already is tenuous considering an Ice wizard could potentially take that Storm out with a couple stacked Frostbites and maybe a minion. So much for all those blades on that DoT that probably won't even kill the Ice yet.

But yeah, it could give Storm more advantage over weaker/lesser PvP schools. Sure. I guess that's what we're after...


Do you have me confused for someone else? My goal is to equal things out, so storm has a better chance against any opponent. I do not go in for this "every other school is too strong, and my poor picked on storm is too weak."

I EXPECT storm to have a hard time vs ice. Ice is on the winning side of the rock-paper-scissors triangle of the elemental schools to storm. Torrance hints at this fundamental position himself when he calls the giants "cowardly."

A school that sits behinds tower shields, glacial shields, and ice armor till it can decide the match would appear cowardly to a more barbaric dueling style of storm.

What HAS changed is that sizable universal resistance is no longer an ice only trait. Storm now has to deal with both plenty of shields and resistance from who ever he face no matter what the rank.

What I have proposed in all my responses is that either:
A) A DoT spell so a well timed spell is only stopped by resistance.
or
B) Enough pierce to nullify the current average resistance (basically leaving it so that only ice still has some remaining) leaving it up to the skill and ability of the player to get past the shields for a clean hit. This would also have to be done in such a way the the player would have to use infallable and unstoppable precluding any damage buffers except those old options that all players have the opportunity to counter.

How you consider that giving a sun boosted spell to smash against 30-50% and reducing the possibility 50-80%, or removing all sun and star boost to cut through around 50% of this isn't balancing, is what I don't see.

The days of instant kill and two hit combo are over. Now storm is down to the long game, but storm doesn't have what it takes for the long game.

Storm's game is to do unto you before you do unto him. I merely wish to force others to play that game with storm, thereby giving storm a chance. In no way will either of these tactic set up guarantee storm a victory, but will return the:
"A storm mage! I had better kill him quick, i can't take too many of those _____."

"Yes! I blocked that _______, man it would have hurt if I hadn't."

"He has power pip! One more of those Kraken and I am done, I gotta find my satyr."

Ice will never play the short game of storm's. It has all the tools to drag it out, and I personally, am perfectly fine with that.

Explorer
Mar 15, 2011
89
archmage987 wrote:
jojowild23 wrote:

Yeah that's all nice. The thing you're not addressing is Storm's raw power while going first (where you exercise a greater flexibility in dealing with your opponents shields and get a turn advantage on your opponent) in a PvP duel compounded now with the suggestion that they should get a DoT....

Storm can no longer decedely put the match in his favor with from first position. Everyone is sporting 30-50% innate universal resistance. Nor do I feel it fair that match should be fairly well decided by turn order, a factor a player has no control over.

jojowild23 wrote:

The thing that annoys me is the suggestion of Storm getting a DoT presented under the lame hallmark of balancing PvP in general. Or that it wouldn't upset PvP balance.

A Storm DoT would not balance PvP. The only thing a Storm DoT would do is make Storm wizards win more in the arena.

Um, the arena is PvP. Is there some other ranked PvP out there I am missing?

Since storm is barely, arguably, the ugly fourth duckling in schools to rank in the arena. Wouldn't adjusting things so storm could win more often, thereby have ranked members through out all tiers balancing it out?

jojowild23 wrote:

And still, the odd thing is, with all Ice's resistance to Storm, it wouldn't even help (especially not if it's a lower ranked spell) against Ice, unless it is bladed to max, which considering Storm's low resist and health already is tenuous considering an Ice wizard could potentially take that Storm out with a couple stacked Frostbites and maybe a minion. So much for all those blades on that DoT that probably won't even kill the Ice yet.

But yeah, it could give Storm more advantage over weaker/lesser PvP schools. Sure. I guess that's what we're after...


Do you have me confused for someone else? My goal is to equal things out, so storm has a better chance against any opponent. I do not go in for this "every other school is too strong, and my poor picked on storm is too weak."

I EXPECT storm to have a hard time vs ice. Ice is on the winning side of the rock-paper-scissors triangle of the elemental schools to storm. Torrance hints at this fundamental position himself when he calls the giants "cowardly."

A school that sits behinds tower shields, glacial shields, and ice armor till it can decide the match would appear cowardly to a more barbaric dueling style of storm.

What HAS changed is that sizable universal resistance is no longer an ice only trait. Storm now has to deal with both plenty of shields and resistance from who ever he face no matter what the rank.

What I have proposed in all my responses is that either:
A) A DoT spell so a well timed spell is only stopped by resistance.
or
B) Enough pierce to nullify the current average resistance (basically leaving it so that only ice still has some remaining) leaving it up to the skill and ability of the player to get past the shields for a clean hit. This would also have to be done in such a way the the player would have to use infallable and unstoppable precluding any damage buffers except those old options that all players have the opportunity to counter.

How you consider that giving a sun boosted spell to smash against 30-50% and reducing the possibility 50-80%, or removing all sun and star boost to cut through around 50% of this isn't balancing, is what I don't see.

The days of instant kill and two hit combo are over. Now storm is down to the long game, but storm doesn't have what it takes for the long game.

Storm's game is to do unto you before you do unto him. I merely wish to force others to play that game with storm, thereby giving storm a chance. In no way will either of these tactic set up guarantee storm a victory, but will return the:
"A storm mage! I had better kill him quick, i can't take too many of those _____."

"Yes! I blocked that _______, man it would have hurt if I hadn't."

"He has power pip! One more of those Kraken and I am done, I gotta find my satyr."

Ice will never play the short game of storm's. It has all the tools to drag it out, and I personally, am perfectly fine with that.


Ok. Reasonable enough. Fair enough, overall.

Explorer
May 12, 2010
77
gtarhannon wrote:
Dear RosadarthmaryjHt:

You seem to have missed what I was implying by going back and forth with your names. Whether or not you are the same person in real life is irrelevant. The posts are written in the same style, make the same points, use the same debate tactics, coin the same phrases, and even share the same mutual love of awkwardly placed exclamation marks. It doesn't matter if you share a body, you certain share a mind.


For your information Mr. Gtarhannon,

An Exclamation is:
The exclamation mark, also referred to as an exclamation point, bang, or dembanger, is a punctuation mark usually used after an interjection or exclamation to indicate strong feelings or high volume (shouting), and often marks the end of a sentence. Example:
“Watch out!”

This punctuation mark is called, in the newspaper world, "a screamer, a gasper, [or] a startler".

History of the Exclamation mark:

The exclamation mark comes from the term “note of admiration”, in which admiration referred to its Latin sense of wonderment. One theory of its origin is that it was originally a Latin exclamation of “joy” (io), written with the “I” above the “o”.
The exclamation mark was introduced into English printing in the 15th century, and was called the “sign of admiration or exclamation” or the “note of admiration” until the mid-17th century.

Usage of the Exclamation mark:

A sentence ending in an exclamation mark is an actual exclamation (“Wow!”, “Boo!”), the imperative mood (“Stop!”), or intended to be
astonishing or show astonishment: “There were the footprints of a gigantic duck!” Exclamation points can also be placed mid-sentence with a
function similar to a comma: “On the walk, oh! there was a frightful noise.” Casually, exclamation marks may be repeated for additional emphasis

The exclamation mark is sometimes used in conjunction with the question mark. This can be in protest or astonishment ("Out of all places; the squatter-camp?!") however this can be replaced with a single,
nonstandard punctuation mark, the interrobang, which is the union of a question mark and an exclamation point.

Some authors , most notably Tom Wolfe, are known for unashamedly liberal use of the exclamation mark.

In comic books, the very frequent use of exclamation mark is common!

This is what an Exclamation mark is. Now, I do use them occasionally or sometimes even frequently, especially when I am emphasising a point.

Explorer
Mar 15, 2011
89


At which specific category (rank) do you insert the Storm DoT into the game without disenfranchising Fire wizards of their specialty? And how is this even possible given Storms high damage?

Survivor
Oct 10, 2010
29
jojowild23 wrote:

At which specific category (rank) do you insert the Storm DoT into the game without disenfranchising Fire wizards of their specialty? And how is this even possible given Storms high damage?


archmage987 wrote:
Honestly, would an aoe storm elf level damage spell that cost 5-6 pip be that unbalancing?


In further thinking about it I will change my stance to an AoE storm elf to 5 and no higher. A fair cost would be 4, but since we want this a utility spell and not a efficient attack spells a 5 pip cost would be a further hindrance since most players would end up wasting a power pip to cast.

Explorer
Mar 15, 2011
89
archmage987 wrote:
jojowild23 wrote:

At which specific category (rank) do you insert the Storm DoT into the game without disenfranchising Fire wizards of their specialty? And how is this even possible given Storms high damage?


archmage987 wrote:
Honestly, would an aoe storm elf level damage spell that cost 5-6 pip be that unbalancing?


In further thinking about it I will change my stance to an AoE storm elf to 5 and no higher. A fair cost would be 4, but since we want this a utility spell and not a efficient attack spells a 5 pip cost would be a further hindrance since most players would end up wasting a power pip to cast.


Ok so what cool new utility spell is my balance getting for 5 pips? My death? My myth? My fire?

They all want to share in the fun, to. Are they allowed?

Explorer
Mar 15, 2011
89
Check that: Fire's already got Phoenix and Scald, so nevermind there. The others?

Survivor
Oct 10, 2010
29
jojowild23 wrote:

Ok so what cool new utility spell is my balance getting for 5 pips? My death? My myth? My fire?

They all want to share in the fun, to. Are they allowed?


A) There is no reason when KI if (not when) acts on this suggestion that all the other schools will also not get a new spell. If fact I am 100% positive that IF KI does add something for storm all other schools will get something as well.

B) There is no guarantee that it will be a five pip spell. In the first batch from Grizzleheim storm got an x cost spell while balance got two 5 pip spells. Just because storm gets a 5 pip doesn't mean that the spells for all other spells could or should be 5 pip.

C) Suggestions for deficiencies in the all other schools spell selection really belongs on another thread. This thread is about how given ice's current resistance how some propose that a DoT for storm would accomplish nothing, while others propose the opposite.

Make your suggestions on another thread and we will debate them there, they are not germane here.

Survivor
Feb 21, 2010
26
Storms are made to be quick and destructive
Like lightning
One second a tree
the next a tree that exploded and is on fire

fire burns and it hurts for a while

See why Storm has no DoT and Fire has most

Hero
Jun 08, 2009
793
carlcarl99 wrote:
Ice has big resist
deal with it

think about it

In real life when you want to chop a block of ice
it gonna take a lot of chops
It resists and takes in most of the impact

So ice in the game is gonna be like ice in the real life

Sure they are getting out of hand

This is a reason(i think) they made fient and armor pierce

For the shields
get treasures(or find a myth teammate) of pierce, shatter, or even earthquake

There are ways to get around things
Your at a wall what do you do:
stay there or walk around it

WALK AROUND IT
Feint can be cancelled out, Pierce Armor fails miserably with 70% Shields. Easy enough on paper, in the Dueling Arena, very hard.

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
Hello archmage. I hope this message finds you well. Work has kept me from having much free time as of late, so I apologize for the tardiness of this post as it must feel somewhat disjointed at this late date. However, you have a good post here and I felt it merited some time for a decent response.

archmage987 wrote:
As it stands right now storm has three options for a DoT spell.


Agreed.

archmage987 wrote:
The last option is to train to fire elf, and either pay through the nose for mutate cards at the bazaar or spend a long time farming frequently for the card. This third option has draw back in that unlike other schools none of its spells are on the pvp critical spell list (i.e. feint, tower shield, reshuffle, sprite, satyr, and weakness). Making storm wizards tight in their training point distribution. Yes, it can all be done. I propose though that to do that you have made a wizard only for pvp, with none of the other spells you will need for various pve quests.


I do agree that it should be cheaper/easier to obtain storm elf mutate cards (as mentioned earlier in the thread). My point of contention, however, is that if it is part of your strategy to use storm elf, its worth the 2 training points needed to obtain it. Yes, it could make your points a little tighter at certain points of the game, but there are a lot of training points available now and that number rises with every world release. I don't believe it is the "PvE OR PvP" issue that it used to be unless we're talking about making a wizard for low/mid-level PvP.

archmage987 wrote:
Storm wizards have the worst life total, and accuracy of all schools. Which means any tactic, or gear setup, must takes these into account and either over come them or somehow work around them.


I am a definite agree on the life but less so on the accuracy. Yes, I agree that storm has the lowest base accuracy, however, there are so many different ways for storm to acquire accuracy boosts (and in significant amounts as well) that it becomes extremely difficult for me to consider them the "least accurate" after Marleybone.

archmage987 wrote:
Many storm players have come to the conclusion, that I happen to subscribe to as well, that the best tactic is to hit. Hit hard, hit often, and keep them searching for heals. This tactic runs into four major blocks.

First obviously if you want to hit hard, then you want to critical. In my experience a simple 30% block rating is really equal to more like 90%. So right there you can count out critical as a valid tactic and move it over into the luck area.


Discussing critical vs. critical block is a long and often fruitless conversation, particularly in light of KI's refusal to publish the methodology for the system. In the spirit of focusing on the main issues of the thread, I will immediately concede that I find it silly for any school to develop a strategy that relies heavily on successful critical strike. However, I maintain that it is a major factor affecting gear selection.

archmage987 wrote:
Second, is life. Depending on the school this is more of a problem than others. 2000 damage is an ice school is about a third of his life, but 1000 to storm is nearly half of his (at least 40% for you sticklers). If it wasn't life, they can probably hit the thresh hold for another 1000 damage faster than storm's 2000 damage.


I concede the intent of your point (which I take to be that lower amounts of damage are more significant percentages of total storm health) but I find a 6000 health ice to be a real stretch. The few I have seen in this range have given up significant amounts of resist and other attributes to attain that level of health.

archmage987 wrote:
Third, which came up in second, is time. Every turn is a turn storm can possibly take damage, damage it can ill afford to absorb.

Please spare me the treasure card solution. Adding a DoT to storm would be a long range change to how storm is played and it's tactic options. Treasure cards are a finite resource, that possibly large amounts of effort must be put into for repeatably use. Not on the same level as when you add a spell to a school.


I will not argue that a trained storm DoT would be a long range change and that it would affect Storm tactics. Would it help? Against Ice, I believe it would not and against other schools, I believe it would help too much.

archmage987 wrote:
Lastly is the resistance, particularly shield spells. As far as anyone that wants to do pvp seriously, then they must get tower shield. In getting tower shield they also will get ice's dual school shield, which happens to cover the two most damaging schools out there. So I would think the average deck set up would have max tower shield, and probably two or three of the dual shield. Now storm has seven to nine shields it must contend with. Every shield cast blunting storm's attack, and saving up pips for the shield's caster to prepare higher ranked spell that will proportionately hurt storm more.


I see this shield argument everywhere. I just don't see the validity vs. any other school. Multiple types of shields affecting storm damage would all trigger with one storm hit, and the individual value of each shield goes down (For instance, a tower would reduce damage by 50%, but a tower and a storm shield would only reduce storm damage by 90%, not by 130% which means that the value of your storm shield just dropped from -80% to -40%) as they stack. Assuming that "7 to 9" shields is a measure of the raw number of shields in a deck that a school might have to contend with vs. the likelihood of stacking shields, then I would say that balance has it worse than anyone else.

I would also like to point out the other advantage a "storm elf" storm gets is the ability to cast a low pip out of school fire elf to strip weakness(es) and tower shield(s) which are far more common than any other kind of damage reducer. A couple of those not only forces the opponent to burn through their shields for fear of a big storm hit, but also draws out their storm shields for disposal by a storm elf. Given that storm's ability to kill with storm shark or kraken is legendary, every school but Ice can already be put on the defensive (ie. forced to shield and heal rather that cast more blades and traps) with the tools at hand. A new trained DoT would do little to enhance this further, particularly if storm elf mutates become easier and cheaper to obtain.

archmage987 wrote:
A DoT spell would give storm the option of stripping away the target's shields long enough to score, possibly, some solid hits and winning. I say possibly for several reasons. One is fizzle though at level 70 having an 100+ accuracy is quite doable. What I am more looking at is deck construction.


As stated above, a new trained DoT would do little (if anything?) to alter the current strategic setting vs. existing options (again assuming better access and price for mutate cards). Due to the raw power of storm, however, larger pip storm DoTs would rapidly unbalance the game which I will get to in the following post due to character limits....

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
archmage987 wrote:
I don't think anyone will disagree with me in the idea that in pvp, especially, a small card selection is more to your benefit than a completely filled deck. Part of winning in pvp is to find the card you need when you need it and not something else. The more cards you have the worse your odds are of finding what you need/want.

Adding a card to storm's selection, that as far as i know any storm wizard will stuff into his deck, will not be without consequence. Now his deck is thicker, reducing the odd of getting the combination of cards he needs, or there are too few DoT spells that it becomes on a hope and prayer that he/she gets them. Discarding to find is a double edged sword given how reshuffle works, and the cost in pips to cast (If a storm wizard is unwilling to use a life mastery amulet over life drop, how much more is unlike is he/she to use a balance mastery to cast one spell, maybe, once in a dual?). Even an aoe dot spell, balancing cost vs damage, would be doable given these additional factors and current play constraints would be realistic. Honestly, would an aoe storm elf level damage spell that cost 5-6 pip be that unbalancing?


In short, the answer to the query regarding "unbalancing" is simply yes, yes it would become "that" unbalancing. Consider this:

In the case of trained single target DoT spells with no special effects vs. the average base damage of trained single target single hit spells of the same school, the damage per pip ranges from 20.37% higher to 36.67% higher. This means that the minimum damage per pip appropriate for a trained single target storm DoT would be 162 damage per pip. That puts a 5 pip trained storm single hit DoT at 810 damage. Given sun spells and the huge damage boosts available to storm, I think its obvious how quickly this would unbalance things for everyone but ice. And again, this supposes that we go with slightly less than the lowest percentage boost for DoTs. My hunch (based on Death's Poison and Skeletal Dragon) is that for a 5 pip spell, it would be more appropriate to go with 30% to 35% rather than 20% and that would bring the damage up to 880, or 176 damage per pip.

The question of a trained storm AoE DoT is a little harder but given that there are only four of those spells currently in the game (3 belonging to fire and 1 to ice), we can use meteor strike and blizzard as a base AoE comparison to determine the percentage increase. Since both of those spells are exactly average damage equivalent to the corresponding rank 3 single hitter, we can infer that the base AoE damage for storm should be 101 per pip by referencing storm shark average damage against 4 pips instead of 3. Looking at aoe dots against rank 4 aoes, we see 14.46% greater damage per pip with scald at 5 pips, 39.08% greater damage per pip with fire dragon at 7 pips, 39.71% greater damage per pip with snow angel at 8 pips, and 50.43% greater damage per pip with rain of fire at 9 pips. This would put a 5 pip storm aoe dot at 115 per pip or 577 damage to all, and that number rises RAPIDLY as we increase the pip count. Coupling the damage with sun spell options, the massive gear boosts available to storm, and the relatively low pip count this spell could be cast at, (remembering that ice has to wait for 8 pips for a spell of a similar nature) this would rapidly unhinge the game against every school but ice.

archmage987 wrote:
Lastly, even if you are under the effects of a DoT you can still cast a shield guessing that next round attack will be a direct attack. You don't know what he will do, you are guessing. And this mental warfare, trying to out think and guess you opponent, was at the heart of pvp in the beginning till everyone started posting, this is what to wear and do threads.

I don't see a storm DoT as unhelpful, nor do it see it as unbalancing given all other factors that must be balanced to truly succeed in pvp post ds.


I would only agree with these statements under the context of the current storm elf option with better access to mutate cards or in the case of a new pet spell for a storm aoe dot option. In my opinion, a better enhancement for storm would be a zero pip disarm and the introduction of a new spell which could remove all positive charms for 3 pips such as I discussed here:

https://www.wizard101.com/posts/list/44828.ftl#250353

I look forward to your response.

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
darthjt wrote:
Have you not heard the phrase, "Great minds think alike?"


Great minds may tend to think alike but they seldom write alike as well.

darthjt wrote:
Doudjy
Aritako
Rosamary
Archmage
AkihiroHattori5
Kingurz
CorbinW
Lion359
LauraWatersong
Even Colagada, whom I don't always get along with.

These are some of the people who generally look at things objectively and without tunnel vision. Some of them, have quite often agreed with me and even used my "Quotes" as I have often quoted others when they make a very good point! I actually read the message boards and know what people have to say.


Given your list and stated criteria for said list, I should be on it as well. However, that would diminish your attempt to cast me as a paranoid schizophrenic so I completely understand why I was omitted despite the fact that we have agreed on a great number of occasions.

darthjt wrote:
Now, I do make minor errors from time to time, such as the Crafted gear being level 66 and not 68, and double resistance on gear from 51 to 55, but these are mute errors that are meaningless and irrelavent. However, you seem to find pleasure in irrelavent points, or you would not keep bringing them up.


You have a tendancy to make bold unqaulified (as in no exceptions or qualifiers, not a lack of education or experience) assertions. Almost without exception I have pointed to "irrelavent" errors because they directly refute one of your bold assertions. Were I actually to take pleasure in this, my responses to you would be riddled with things such as how you meant "moot" and not "mute", or how you spelled irrelevant wrong. You do realize that if you started using qualifiers such as "generally" or "in my opinion" in your posts that you would see a lot less of me right?

darthjt wrote:
You would easily be one of the top "Thinkers" and posters, if you would shed your tunnel vision and stop being biased against Storm and being biased to Ice. This has always been your downfall!


Much as I appreciate the "endorsement", I have never aspired to be thought of in such lofty terms. I post here primarily as a recreational outlet. As to your assertion of bias... I freely admit that there was a time that I thought storm was out of balance back when I had perhaps 1 or 2 wizards. Realistically, my opinion back then was more ignorance than bias. However, I still argued for aggregate attribute caps specifically to prevent things you are now complaining about. Perhaps you were referring to recent events when I argued for a zero pip disarm for storm? Yes. That does indeed seem to be clear evidence of bias.

darthjt wrote:
Archmage has quite clearly demonstrated why it would not hurt storm or unbalance the game to have a DoT spell.


I read archmage's post and I while I think its very well thought out, calm, and rationale, I also disagree with it and have posted a response. In my opinion, a trained storm DoT appropriate to storm damage levels would be an unbalancing factor for the game. I think that enhancing storm's ability to remove positive charms is a much better option and does more for overall game balance than introducing a storm DoT would do.