Spiral Knights - Damage Vs. monster UV's don't fit in line with ASI/CTR

Damage Vs. monster UV's don't fit in line with ASI/CTR

6 replies [Last post]

Mon, 04/02/2012 - 22:48

Exerpa

(Not a suggestion to buff just for the sake of buffing but an observation and conclusion)

Damage Vs. monster UV's on weapons should be replaced with just plain 'damage' in order to bring them in line with CTR and ASI. Why?

Consider Vog VS. Skolver (Sword ASI VH vs. Sword Damage VH). Equal units of defence+offense, just used differently, right?
Consider Volcanic Demo Vs. Bombastic Demo (Bomb CTR VH Vs. Bomb Damage VH). Again, equal amount of defence+offense, just used differently.

From an helm and armor point of view, CTR, ASI and Damage against everything are all mutualy interchangeable.
From a UV point of view, Damage against 1 out of 6 is a bad deal with interchangeability in mind.

..or alternatively you could say in offense ability Skolver is 6 times more 'overpowered' than Vog and Bombastic is 6 times more 'overpowered' than Volcanic demo.. (but dont tell the bombers that)

-Important disclaimer!-
In my opinion a simple "damage to all" UV seems correct from the point of view of game design. It would be a function of the weapon, not it's victims, much the same way ASI and CTR are.

As for "MMO game design" I don't know. What would mean to the user-generated UV market, or the Punch crown sink, again I don't know. There would be no more 'bad' UV's, in fact there would only be 3 kinds of UV so triples would have a bit of everything. Triples would be impossible for bombs though.

And before any Lockdown T_T responses, Skolver+Striker already has has damage max. But now you have the option of basing amor choice around defense not offense (Mercurial anyone?)

Mon, 04/02/2012 - 23:26

Demonicsothe

I'm foreseeing damage

I'm foreseeing damage bonus/asi vh toothpicks and gf being used on top of ice queen/merc with freeze/shock/stun max uv's.

At least with the current system, you need to use an armour than only protects from one source, or sacrifice trinket slots for vh damage.

Of course, bonus damage vs family is underwhelming in pve. Give those the ability to stack beyond max. But this suggestion also does get in the way of stopping players from facerolling clockworks. Imagine max damage from equip, added on top of a vh damage vs family.

Tue, 04/03/2012 - 02:18

Severage

Hrmhrm.

I find Max! bonus damage useful in PvE.

I use an AP with ASI VH, with my Deadshot set. Instantaneous ASI/Vs Undead Max! abilities (Tyvm for giving my armor set a gunner's use Devs).

Of course, this is mostly useful for CSKs, FSC, etc. But really, do you need damage bonuses for anything else?

Anyway, back on topic, testing on KoA's first depth, I do approximately 33% more damage by having max Undead damage bonuses.

Without wearing Deadshot, I do about 106, while wearing it, I do about 146; keeping in mind that I still have medium damage bonus vs Undead when doing 106, since AP has it already. So yeah 33% is a really rough estimate but still, with a weapon like AP, if you can fire off shots so that two shots does the damage of three, you're doing pretty good.

~Sev

Tue, 04/03/2012 - 04:54

Exerpa

Armor specific monster damage

Armor specific monster damage bonus + UV general damage should still respect the max cap. But it would be nice if monster specific weapons could sit above that cap to prevent the waste of their primary intent. I used to own an undead high CIV (undead max) whose charge did 440 to the zombies and 330 to the blast cubes in d24 (as i remember). So my understanding is each high is an extra 1/6. If i take my Levi and wear snarb+bts (2/6 extra damage)I should be able to out do the CIV against the zombies (and everything else). Surely asking for a plain CIV +snarb+bts to be able to do reach beyond the levi (3/6 damage) for zombies but still a hint weaker for eveything else not too unreasonable? Something I noticed the other day was the Wild hunting blade material consumption chain is almost identical to the Skolver chain.. implying it was to be a set?

Even if none of these suggestions go anywhere, I'm still gonna ask - Operation crimson hammer gave us 2 things I noticed were missing:
Remember that survey question about 'what item would you want that doesn't exist?' - I wrote shadow damage bomb.
Gremlin anti-construct weapon? http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/43992

Tue, 04/03/2012 - 07:50

Juances

How about grouping those UVs based on enemies weaknesses?
Instead of rolling one UV that says damage vs slimes, you'll get an UV that says damage vs slimes and gremlins (both are weak to shadow)

Unless you like normal damage weapons, there's no need to go for a global bonus as an UV, you only need a buff on the enemies that sword is supposed to kill.

Tue, 04/03/2012 - 10:14

Aemicus

I'm getting a little... one

I'm getting a little... one sec... oh wait, there it is. This whole idea just reeks with the stench of another idea designed to make the clockworks even easier, as if they weren't simple enough before.

-Eneal

Tue, 04/03/2012 - 21:28

Exerpa

Some people make suggestions

Some people make suggestions about new things they dream up and thats fine. I make suggesstions about things that are missing or inconsistant. The Skolver vs. Vog and Volcanic Demo vs. Bombastic argument seemed like good evidence for inconsistancy in UV's.
Perhaps then we should all just run with 4* Caliburs and Blasters, cause they are good enough to get into Tier 3

Search

Damage Vs. monster UV's don't fit in line with ASI/CTR