Subject: "Well no" Previous topic | Next topic
Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend CF Website
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #66868
Show all folders

lasentiaWed 08-Feb-17 11:51 AM
Member since 27th Apr 2010
987 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list
#66879, "Well no"


          

All 7 of those people now have a 7 v 1 in their gank rating.
The gank penalty impacts everyone, not just bards. A warrior with a GOM with 2.5 will likely not find openings for skills when ganging more often than a warrior with a 1.5 GOM.

There has always been a flaw in group battles as it relates to GOM in that the size of Grembolin's group is never displayed or considered.
It also disregards facts such as when you die in an unrelated encounter that takes place before your adrenaline wears off from the initial.

I don't think the GOM is accurate, or that it should be tied to any mechanical functions of the game because of it's failures as it relates to cabal raids (I'd say this is the majority of group on group fights).

Gank protection can be a static thing and how often you have ganged should have no impact on ability to gang. Honestly, someone that has ganged a lot would be better at it, not worse.

Basically I'd like it to work out that you're unlikely to be hit by 2 commands against you from 2 sources, but will be hit at a rate higher than 1.
2 v 1 Commands have 90% success rate
3 v 1 Commands have 60% success rate
4 v 1 Commands have 40% success rate
anything greater have 20% success rate.
Number of melee attacks should equally diminish.

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote

HOT TopicA bard anti-gank code suggestion [View all] , Kstatida, Wed 08-Feb-17 09:07 AM
Reply RE: A bard anti-gank code suggestion, Jormyr, 08-Feb-17 01:38 PM, #23
Reply I knew I was good, Ganky bard (Anonymous), 08-Feb-17 02:47 PM, #24
     Reply RE: I knew I was good, Jormyr, 08-Feb-17 03:00 PM, #25
          Reply It's not about Zagaer, Kstatida, 08-Feb-17 03:10 PM, #26
               Reply RE: It's not about Zagaer, incognito, 09-Feb-17 02:05 AM, #30
                    Reply Mind sharing your edge points with me?, Ganky bard (Anonymous), 09-Feb-17 02:29 AM, #33
                    Reply Yeah, Daurvryn, give him EP so he can gank, Murphy, 09-Feb-17 02:36 AM, #34
                    Reply Worry not, I'm gonna share some with you, Ganky bard (Anonymous), 09-Feb-17 02:40 AM, #36
                    Reply RE: Mind sharing your edge points with me?, incognito, 09-Feb-17 09:52 AM, #38
                    Reply See above, Kstatida, 09-Feb-17 09:07 AM, #37
Reply As implemented, code is counter-productive, Saagkri, 08-Feb-17 12:48 PM, #19
Reply I think it's based on current GoM, Kstatida, 08-Feb-17 12:51 PM, #20
Reply Songs never fail 1 v 1, lasentia, 08-Feb-17 12:56 PM, #21
     Reply Correct, Saagkri, 09-Feb-17 01:25 PM, #41
          Reply Kill 20 people solo and you're back on track, Kstatida, 10-Feb-17 04:18 AM, #42
Reply It looks to me like this is one thing (not that there a..., TJHuron, 08-Feb-17 09:58 AM, #6
Reply This isn't about the sole purpose ganking character, Kstatida, 08-Feb-17 11:31 AM, #9
Reply Been there since my first bard , lasentia, 08-Feb-17 12:05 PM, #14
     Reply My fiends were useless as a Elf Romantic., TMNS, 08-Feb-17 03:44 PM, #27
Reply I agree but not re high int issue, incognito, 09-Feb-17 02:08 AM, #31
     Reply the only edge we can afford these days, Murphy, 09-Feb-17 02:39 AM, #35
Reply I actually don't like this, lasentia, 08-Feb-17 09:33 AM, #4
Reply On the other hand, Kstatida, 08-Feb-17 11:23 AM, #8
     Reply Well no, lasentia, 08-Feb-17 11:51 AM #10
     Reply Warriors don't have AOE attacks., Murphy, 08-Feb-17 12:03 PM, #12
          Reply That doesn't matter., lasentia, 08-Feb-17 12:09 PM, #15
               Reply RE: That doesn't matter., Kstatida, 08-Feb-17 12:45 PM, #18
               Reply I looked at it., Murphy, 08-Feb-17 10:15 PM, #29
     Reply RE: On the other hand, Grembolin (Anonymous), 08-Feb-17 11:55 AM, #11
          Reply Nobody cares, Murphy, 08-Feb-17 12:04 PM, #13
          Reply Butthurt?, Grembolin (Anonymous), 08-Feb-17 12:12 PM, #16
               Reply About what?, Murphy, 08-Feb-17 10:40 PM, #28
                    Reply Haha, Grembolin (Anonymous), 09-Feb-17 11:05 AM, #39
                         Reply Your hatred for ragers is obvious, Kstatida, 09-Feb-17 12:21 PM, #40
          Reply You've posted the log., Kstatida, 08-Feb-17 12:27 PM, #17
               Reply RE: You've posted the log., Grembolin (Anonymous), 08-Feb-17 01:21 PM, #22
Reply I'd like to see them lower the anti-gank threshold acro..., Sarien, 08-Feb-17 09:09 AM, #1
     Reply Knowing your bias, Kstatida, 08-Feb-17 09:12 AM, #2
          Reply The current super-gank bunch isn't limited to only gank..., Sarien, 08-Feb-17 09:14 AM, #3
               Reply And you address it how?, Murphy, 08-Feb-17 09:42 AM, #5
               Reply How I'd address it? Probably wouldn't be popular, Sarien, 08-Feb-17 10:18 AM, #7
               Reply RE: The current super-gank bunch isn't limited to only ..., incognito, 09-Feb-17 02:14 AM, #32
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #66868 Previous topic | Next topic