Bst / Pal buff stacking

G

Garluk

Dalayan Beginner
Would it be possible to get the Bst Spritual Vigor buff line and the Paladin Sihala's buff to stack in a fashion similar to Focus/WoN? Namely, that if you have one the other simply bounces.
 
/agree.

This would make buffing worlds easier. At the moment, when we rebuff (even if its just one person who wants SSS) vigor gets overwritten, then each time thereafter SSS is cast vigor is overwritten again. Not to mention non-perma SSS overwriting perma Vigor ;( . I this is a great request, and probably quite easy to implement (just make it like focus/won).
 
I've wondered -- would it be so horrible if two "pure" buffs that share a slot simply took the max of the two values, but didn't bounce?

Ie, if Spell 1 was slot 1, +300 HP, and Spell 2 was slot 1, +200 HP, slot 2, +50 ATK, together they'd be:
+300 HP, +50 ATK.
They would both land, but instead of adding they'd take the max of the two.

It does remove some small amounts of tactical buff selection, but the limited buff list size forces tactical buff selection anyhow.
 
In the case of your example, you give up extra HP for ATK, so no, they wouldn't be allowed to work like that.
 
Xeldan said:
In the case of your example, you give up extra HP for ATK, so no, they wouldn't be allowed to work like that.
Click to expand...
What you're missing is that given the lack of available buff slots, something like this wouldn't be very overpowered. I'm sure it could be manipulated somewhat but by no means enough to make it unbalancing. Don't get me wrong, I'm against this idea based on the fact that I have enough buffs to click off during raids as it is. :censored:
 
Xeldan said:
In the case of your example, you give up extra HP for ATK, so no, they wouldn't be allowed to work like that.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of the tradeoffs, as designed currently. I was asking if it would be so horrible if those tradeoffs where discarded. Quite possibly the answer is "yes".

In every single case that I am aware of, such tradeoffs are on between-class variations of the same buff. (Paladin/BST HP buffs -- pal gets more HP, BST gets ATK). The total impact on stats, if you where allowed to take the max, wouldn't be all that large on raid-buffed people, simply due to the shortage of buff slots. (DPS melee might end up with 200 more HP, and defensive melee with 100 more ATK, in the absolute worst case situation -- which isn't game breaking by any stretch of the imagination).

About the only really abusive problem would be the combo buffs (cleric courage+symbol combo buffs), that might require slot juggling (make the combo-buff have two seperate +max HP slots, one for symbol and one for courage, and two +AC slots, one for courage and one for shield). This additional complication is an arguement against my idea.

The benefits would be:
1> In small group situations, some classes would work better together buff-wise.

2> Synergy and overlap in different class's buffs can be made without having lots of buffs. Spell designers could decide exactly how much two classes buffs overlap and how much they do not. Currently, spells are either "100% additive" or "not additive at all" -- you can't have two spells which give 150 HP each, but if you have both up you get a total of 200 HP.

3> Each column could be given an adjective, and the spells and spell stacking becomes understandable at an english-language level. 'Only the largest of two "Blessing" HP amounts work on a player'.

4> Designing the stacking of spells is tricky and problematic.

The only way to make two spells not stack would then be Screech() type code -- explicit, rather than implicit, stacking.

Problems:
1> It reduces the tactics of buff selection down to one cost -- buff slots/marginal benefit of the buff
2> The "max buff" stats of some classes would go up a bit. (necros would have more mana, Pal/SK more ATK and mana regen, warriors more ATK, etc)
3> Combo-buffs would have to have their benefits placed in multiple slots to prevent ... bad results.
4> The slots of some buffs may have to move, so <3> can be done effectively.

I do understand why you think it is a bad idea.
 
To be frank, it would more than likely require buffs to be redesigned overall with the "effect mixing" in mind. So most buffs would probably lose some overall power incase someone decided to mix a hp buff with a hp and atk buff, etc. The buffs are designed the way they are right now because you make tradeoffs, which is what I was trying to point out. If using your suggestion, they would probably be weaker than they are now - you may not even like the outcome of effect mixing in the end.
 
I would like it if the presence of either buff caused the other spell not to land entirely. Kind of a first come first served mutal exclusion. Or on the other hand, the paladin lvl 65 HP buff could be removed entirely.

KAS

but I'm not bitter.
 
I also thought of another reason why it would be a bad idea.

Probably some of the stacking/buff effect code is in the client. Changing the rules for stacking might confuse the client.
 
Yakk said:
I also thought of another reason why it would be a bad idea.

Probably some of the stacking/buff effect code is in the client. Changing the rules for stacking might confuse the client.
Click to expand...


My client seems to live in a state of confusion anyway!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom