Redux

[Scott]

Just looking at the dueler's thread and I saw a conversation and it brought me back to an idea I once had. Gokkem talked about how he use to have a 500 or so DS and see warriors spelled up to where they were pretty close to his DS/TD. Anyway, the difference is the warrior has 90% redux, while he has X amount.

I always thought it was a good idea to change the formula. For X number of spells you wear (that you haven't learned since you are already penalized for knowing spells) you lose X% of redux. I'm tired of seeing idiots like Haashek and Warclaidhm who wear spells and still have redux. Warriors/rogues have redux because they don't have spells, yet for some reason they can still walk around glowing like a christmas tree and still having all their redux.

Self cast was an improvement, but it still hasn't changed much. Warriors can still pack on every spell that isn't self cast, and still have their redux. Wearing spells should be no different then knowing spells, your redux should be penalized as long as you are wearing spells....

[FishSticks]

Originally posted by Gemstone101
Just looking at the dueler's thread and I saw a conversation and it brought me back to an idea I once had. Gokkem talked about how he use to have a 500 or so DS and see warriors spelled up to where they were pretty close to his DS/TD. Anyway, the difference is the warrior has 90% redux, while he has X amount.



I always thought it was a good idea to change the formula. For X number of spells you wear (that you haven't learned since you are already penalized for knowing spells) you lose X% of redux. I'm tired of seeing idiots like Haashek and Warclaidhm who wear spells and still have redux. Warriors/rogues have redux because they don't have spells, yet for some reason they can still walk around glowing like a christmas tree and still having all their redux.

Self cast was an improvement, but it still hasn't changed much. Warriors can still pack on every spell that isn't self cast, and still have their redux. Wearing spells should be no different then knowing spells, your redux should be penalized as long as you are wearing spells....

Maybe your just jealous, :?:

I've always loved warriors, haven't played one character who wasn't a warrior.

[Gokkem]

Originally posted by Gemstone101
Just looking at the dueler's thread and I saw a conversation and it brought me back to an idea I once had. Gokkem talked about how he use to have a 500 or so DS and see warriors spelled up to where they were pretty close to his DS/TD. Anyway, the difference is the warrior has 90% redux, while he has X amount.

I always thought it was a good idea to change the formula. For X number of spells you wear (that you haven't learned since you are already penalized for knowing spells) you lose X% of redux. I'm tired of seeing idiots like Haashek and Warclaidhm who wear spells and still have redux. Warriors/rogues have redux because they don't have spells, yet for some reason they can still walk around glowing like a christmas tree and still having all their redux.

Self cast was an improvement, but it still hasn't changed much. Warriors can still pack on every spell that isn't self cast, and still have their redux. Wearing spells should be no different then knowing spells, your redux should be penalized as long as you are wearing spells....

Wow what a great idea. I don't know why I didn't think of that. I agree whole heartedly.

[Edaarin]

Do you still play Gokkem? I see Gokkem hunting TK's and acting like a general newb sometimes, figured it wasn't you.

[Gokkem]

Originally posted by FishSticks

Originally posted by Gemstone101
Just looking at the dueler's thread and I saw a conversation and it brought me back to an idea I once had. Gokkem talked about how he use to have a 500 or so DS and see warriors spelled up to where they were pretty close to his DS/TD. Anyway, the difference is the warrior has 90% redux, while he has X amount.



I always thought it was a good idea to change the formula. For X number of spells you wear (that you haven't learned since you are already penalized for knowing spells) you lose X% of redux. I'm tired of seeing idiots like Haashek and Warclaidhm who wear spells and still have redux. Warriors/rogues have redux because they don't have spells, yet for some reason they can still walk around glowing like a christmas tree and still having all their redux.

Self cast was an improvement, but it still hasn't changed much. Warriors can still pack on every spell that isn't self cast, and still have their redux. Wearing spells should be no different then knowing spells, your redux should be penalized as long as you are wearing spells....

Maybe your just jealous, :?:

I've always loved warriors, haven't played one character who wasn't a warrior.

It's not jealousy, it's unbalanced. Any of us could make us up a square, beg for spells and be uber. Or even better yet, we could MA with a wizard spelling our square so we wouldn't have to beg, like other warriors I know. Redux was a 'bandaid' and I'm sorta suspecting it'll go away in it's present form in GS4. Before everyone starts yelling at me, this is my own personal guess. I didn't read it anywhere nor did anyone tell me about it. I'm just assuming that they'll have the combat mechanics updated to where the redux band-aid isn't needed anymore.

[Scott]

Maybe your just jealous, :?:

I've always loved warriors, haven't played one character who wasn't a warrior.

Jealous that I can hunt under my own means and you can't? I don't think so. I just don't like people taking advantage of idiot programmers. Learn to hunt spelless, people like you are just pussies of Gemstone. Even with all your uber gear that you duped to get, you still can't hunt under your own means, that's SO sad.

I hate my warrior, he's my least favorite character to play. A 60 train 2 handed warrior, who by the way, hunts without ANY spells and has NEVER used spells. 60 trains without any spells, can you say that?

[Edited on 7-8-2003 by Gemstone101]

[Ardwen]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Maybe your just jealous,

I've always loved warriors, haven't played one character who wasn't a warrior.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ya know for someone thats ALWAYS been a warrior you know suprisingly little about warriors, ya sure ya arent really an empath that forgot to learn spells?

[Bobmuhthol]

Shut up, Ardwen. You're jealous of his MAD SKILLZ. I want to see Warclaidhm play The Fallen. That would be something. Hopefully he'll be smart enough to change his name. I'll be sure to make a character named Ardwen so everyone knows not to mess with me.

Redux is already uber powerful. Spells are for fools. I hunt with spells if someone wants to give me spells. I NEVER ask for them to hunt. Maybe to protect myself if I just got raised and someone wants to kill me.

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by FishSticks


Maybe your just jealous, :?:

I've always loved warriors, haven't played one character who wasn't a warrior.

Mr Fish: That you have not played other classes comes to no shock to the viewing public.

I also play a warrior the majority of the time, and a two-handed one at that and for some odd reason I don't ever ask for spells from people before hunting. If I have mass elemental3 and maybe blurs or blues thats plenty for almost anything I hunt.

Don't be an idiot and bull your way against stronger spell using creatures. Use your strengths and play your opponents weaknesses. I come back all nicked to hell with loads of minors but pretty much always make it back after a hunt.

Do I love Redux? Hell yeah, but I AND you do not need every spell possible to hunt.

God almighty do I hate Haashek. He is an embarasment to the profesion.

[Bobmuhthol]

I take the extra 1 second swing roundtime and wear 0x hauberk now. I'm waiting for a set to be enchanted to 4x for me. Let me tell you, even with no redux, 0x hauberk saves my ass more than 4x brig.

Haashek = Stupid.

[Edaarin]

Looking for a wizard and spirit spellup ttm please thank you

[Bobmuhthol]

think to edaarin I'll give you all the spells you need, but first you have to prove to me that you have redux. Otherwise you don't deserve spells and you can only watch others get spells from the sidelines. You'll be very jealous of all the other people that have redux and spells at the same time.

[
Maybe your just jealous, :?:

I've always loved warriors, haven't played one character who wasn't a warrior.

Maybe your just Ugly.

[Chyrain]

no offense, but maybe it would be more effective if you said "you're" instead of "your."

*adds another one to my list of pet peeves*

;)

Originally posted by Chyrain
no offense, but maybe it would be more effective if you said "you're" instead of "your."

*adds another one to my list of pet peeves*

;)

No offense, but maybe your grammatical corrections would mean something if you capitalized the first word in a sentence.

[Bobmuhthol]

Hahahaha.

End communication.

[Scott]

I was thinking something like......
(All these are spells worn you HAVEN'T learned)

0-5 mana- 0% redux loss (401, 101, 503)
6-10- 5% (add 103)
11-15- 10% (add 202, 406)
16-20-20%
21-30- 40%
31-40- NO REDUX

I think it seems reasonable. It could be tweaked of coarse after being tested, but it sounds about right to me. Minimal spell's, no loss, so many spells, no redux...... No more christmas tree's with redux.

[Bobmuhthol]

What spell takes over 30 mana? I'm just curious.

[Scott]

Originally posted by ElanthianSiren
Gemstone 101, I was just going to post a chart up to demonstrate that... but here is what I had in mind. It's sort of based on hunting IN WYNEB in fact.

Base level of redux based on skill blah blah blah.

Mana
0 (no spells) + 5% to redux
1-4 mana - 0% to redux
5-9 mana - 5% to redux

etc, but yea, we had the same idea except that + to redux for no spells.

-Melissa

Sounds good to me. Warriors without spells should get something over warriors with spells....

[Scott]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
What spell takes over 30 mana? I'm just curious.

I'm talking TOTAL mana, not spells. So like 414, 406, 401, 101, 107, 503, 509....

So like your classic Haashek christmas tree gets no redux....

Erm, edited because I forgot Haashek buys ruby amulets.... and still dies, how sad.

[Edited on 7-9-2003 by Gemstone101]

[imported_Kranar]

It simply doesn't make any sense to penalize a warrior for having a defensive spell cast on them. To do so is to turn a defensive spell into an offensive spell.

Heck, next time a warrior pisses me off... I'll give them a shot of wall of force to teach em a lesson.

[Scott]

Originally posted by Kranar
It simply doesn't make any sense to penalize a warrior for having a defensive spell cast on them. To do so is to turn a defensive spell into an offensive spell.

Heck, next time a warrior pisses me off... I'll give them a shot of wall of force to teach em a lesson.

Then the warrior lops off your head for attacking them, cause that's what it would be.

[imported_Kranar]

<< Then the warrior lops off your head for attacking them, cause that's what it would be. >>

You do see the irony, right?

[Edited on 7-9-2003 by Kranar]

[Warriorbird]

Redux is getting pretty severely downtweaked. Along with a few of the self cast changes, overspelling is gonna be less of an issue.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Skirmisher Don't be an idiot and bull your way against stronger spell using creatures. Use your strengths and play your opponents weaknesses. I come back all nicked to hell with loads of minors but pretty much always make it back after a hunt.

Um.. we are talking about Warclaidhm here right... being an idiot isn't a choice of his.. it IS him. He has no strengths and hasn't the mental capacity to figure out an opponent's weakness.

I cannot believe Haashek and Warclaidhm aren't best friends.. they should adopt each other.

Haashek: Hugs and kisses to my favorite son Warclaidhm! I love you son. Huggsies to you! Oh, and paying well for a wizard and spirit spell up ttm thank you.