A common thing in fantasy games are weapons that allow for sacrificing ones health to be able to do more damage.
In Spiral Knights this could be done via charge attacks, for example: A sword that will take two of your health bars to deal a massive amount of damage. It could optionally also take a half of your health bars, with regular attacks if they deal more damage than usual sword attacks.
Weapons That Allow More Damage For Sacrificing Health
Fri, 11/04/2011 - 18:51
Fri, 11/04/2011 - 19:19
#2
You fail so hard.
You fail so hard.
Fri, 11/04/2011 - 19:37
#3
"You win so hard"
Thx. But
"You win so hard"
Thx. But seriously, FoV and GF already exist.
Fri, 11/04/2011 - 19:52
#4
Your failed troll is fail.
Your failed troll is fail.
Fri, 11/04/2011 - 19:58
#5
Can't tell if troll, or just new...
They won't be too popular. People prefer the Combuster over Fang of Vog, and the Acheron over Gran Faust. Why? Because they get the job done and you can use charge attacks without having to worry about your health. Heck you can even set fire to enemies with the Combusters charge attack like the Fang of Vog, only you don't set yourself on fire. I'm pretty sure they'll just become collectors items
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 04:22
#6
Desouler, instead of
Desouler, instead of dismissing Khamsin with a "you fail" you might prefer to discuss the point raised. You've asked for weapons that damage the knight when using charge attacks. We already have a couple of weapons that sort of do that (inflicting negative status rather than direct damage).
Conservation of health is generally massively important in Spiral Knights, especially as you move up the tiers and enemies start doing more damage per hit. Implementing something that directly damages the knight isn't going to be very popular. A bit of extra damage isn't worth killing your knight over.
That said I wouldn't mind a few more negative status backlash weapons. Perhaps something like a weapon that can poison a knight. However, while I wouldn't mind them, I don't think they would be all that popular no matter what the backlash effect is.
Thu, 11/10/2011 - 12:21
#7
Niichi wrote
Niichi wrote:
"instead of dismissing Khamsin with a "you fail" you might prefer to discuss the point raised."
Everyone can see the difference. The difference is small. It's the difference between directly sacrificing health and receiving a status. Khamsin knew this, too. You may wonder: "So why did he write his post, if he knew". Every possible reason he had leads to him failing really hard. Just think about what possible replies he could've expected and where this would ultimately lead to (if he expected replies at all). Do you expect me to waste my time answering to trivial troll posts? I admit, sometimes I react to trolls for fun, but it has to be some wits in it to be fun.
I expect people to think a tiny bit for themselves. A simple thought, like "Why did he post that? What is the difference between what we already have and what he suggests?" would've made him not write his post, except if he was trollin' right away ... and you fell for it, because he had that thought and posted anyways.
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 07:52
#8
Here's the thing, your post
Here's the thing, your post doesn't deserve a serious response. You ask for something that already exists.
Receiving fire directly results in receiving damage, even if you cure it as the earliest possible moment. In that sense, they're exactly the same.
Stop acting like you deserved a serious response and that you're hurt.
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 10:21
#9
The difference is small. It's
The difference is small. It's the difference between directly sacrificing health and receiving a status.
Perhaps in the case of the GF's self curse, but fire status inflicts damage and once set alight there isn't a whole lot you can do to stop it short of busting out a remedy capsule. While I might have preferred Khamsin to have clarified this better with the initial post despite personally understanding where he was coming from (which he has done now), it might have been better for you to ask why those weapons were relevant to the suggestion or at least to point out why they weren't.
Regardless of whether you think something is actually trolling or not, responding in kind doesn't look good for your suggestion.
Besides that, I think the overall point is that we have something extremely similar and nobody seriously uses it outside of boss fights. Losing health for a bit more extra damage simply isn't that appealing. Should the developers really be working on weapons that wouldn't see use the majority of the time?
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 10:54
#10
At first i thought of a
At first i thought of a powerfull weapon with max health -2 or something like that.
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 11:13
#11
Max Helath -2?
Tetra-Heart Pendant. Or Tue-Love Locket. Or anything which negates that. If the weapon is really strong then it doesn't really matter if you need to give up a Trinket Slot to use it without any problems. But if it's not... then no one is going to use it then.
Balancing, Balancing, Balancing.
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 11:26
#12
i'm just trying to save the thread
Would it be possible to have a weapon that alters defense (negative status resist, etc) or overall speed?
With multiple side effects you wouldn't be able to counter all (unless you have a ton of money to roll Uvs)
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 13:09
#13
If there was a Weapon which gave you that many debuffs
It just wouldn't be worth it.
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 13:26
#14
Yeah, well, Super Slime
Yeah, well, Super Slime Slashers aren't worth it, too, but noobs are still running around having fun with shovels, so what.
Sat, 11/05/2011 - 17:27
#15
Hmmmm
I guess there would be people who would buy them. If only for the novelty effect.
Fang of Vog and Gran Faust.