Report 1117

Special Report #1117
Skillset: Aerochemantics Skill: Thinktank/Links
 Org: Hartstone Status: Completed Mar 2013
Furies' Decision:
Solution 1 (not DMP, reducing from +25% to +10%) and 3 (lose 10% of base damage
per room from epicentre).
Problem: The bonus to adjuvant/spore/catalyst damage on a target standing in the
demesne of a linked mage/druid quickly becomes overwhemling, because it is a
flat percent that bypasses the diminished returns of dmp buffs, which can
already stack quite high. While it makes getting hit by these effects much more
dangerous, it does nothing to increase the likelyhood that they hit, or that the
caster will be alive to use them. This promotes turning combat into 'laser tag',
devolving fights with a chemancer-meld combo into staying constantly shielded
(and stationary) or risking being blasted with enormous damage totals.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #1: Remove the 25% damage bonus for a linked demesne for
 all adjuvant/spore/catalyst and mirror skills and
 replace it with the equivalent of a 25 'all'
 (offense) dmp for a/s/c effects only.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #2: Remove the 25% damage bonus for a linked demesne
 etc., replace with an increase to the chance for
 sheens/branches/clouds by 5% while the
 -chemancer/-wood is in the linked demesne.
[A: 0 R: 0] Solution #3: Solution 1, but in addition make the damage on these
 attacks scale down the further the target is from the
 epicenter.
Player Comments:
---[Tulemrah writes]:
This is definitely a needed change and I support both solutions.
---[Llandros writes]:
Either is fine and they won't hurt 1v1 combat. Something along these lines is
needed, the resulting damage is devastating and has too large an impact on group
combat.
---[Shuyin writes]:
Either solution is fine
---[Tacita writes]:
Supported, either solution.
---[Ushaara writes]:
Supported.
---[Eventru writes]:
Clarify 'dmp'? You mean damage mitigation or damage boosting? We use the same
acronym for both sometimes, unfortunately.
---[Eventru writes]:
Also, solution #2 was in report 1049 (less specific in that one) and it was
turned down. I doubt the opinion's changed since then. I mean, you're welcome to
make your suggestions whatever you want, but felt like that needed pointing out.
---[Shuyin writes]:
I assume it meant damage boos
---[Kregarn writes]:
Supported.
---[Enyalida writes]:
Two clarifications: Solution 2 was NOT in report 1049 and was therefore not
turned down there. Second: It wouldn't make any sense to give the caster
defensive dmp against their own effects, so yes: Offense DMP.
---[Eventru writes]:
Oh, you're right! I misread your solution here (I thought you meant
fields/mists/flowers), ie the passives, not the retributives. Ha. Well there we
go. Nevermind then in that regard!
---[Eventru writes]:
Well, my first read through made me think you meant for the damage types
associated with their reactions, then the second made me realize you probably
meant for a weighted +25 offensive boost.
---[Xenthos writes]:
I'm not sure why it's necessary that the linking makes these adjuvant 'bomb'
attacks ranged, either. Buff the damage with a +dmp bonus, and then seriously
tone down the ranged aspect if it is decided to keep it. Boulderblast and
Hailstorm were both seriously nerfed, and they were an AoE? attack that could
only be done to -one- room at a time, not to all rooms in a radius around the
caster. This is particularly egregious with Aerochems who have multiple nukes
that can be made ranged. Basic idea would be to cut the damage the further away
from the caster you are- 50% if one room away, 33% if 2, 25% if 3, etc. Thus
they are still useable, but not in the "I'm just going to stand over here and
cast it while doing nothing else" kind of way.
---[Xenthos writes]:
Honestly, the mere fact that you can link and have these things increase their
radius when more people are linked, they are -mobile-, and they can't be broken
or protected against (unlike a demesne) makes them pretty broken. Adjuvants and
the like should be blocked by protection when not in the same room as the user.
They are, after all, supposed to be a 1v1 spec. Or so we are told.
---[Eventru writes]:
Just to comment on one point you make Xen - we've considered, previously,
removing demesne protection scrolls, since their purpose is now null and void
(group hindrance with demesnes at range - we've since limited demesnes to a
smaller radius). Like demesne effects, passive mists etc weren't really meant to
be removed/blocked save by shielding, and I know Est has said this a few times.
---[Shuyin writes]:
Apparently shielding doesn't even stop the passives, blind does. Or so Enyalida
says.
---[Enyalida writes]:
It looks like the damage problem with Aerochemancy is stacking compounding
buffs: dmp (higher on these attacks for aerochems than it is for aquachems),
interferance, demesne bonus, artifact bonus. That stack makes any increase in
dmp (due to beer, for instance) magnified enormously, to the levels you don't
see in the other skillsets due to poorer damage typing and less dmp. Solution 1
will help alleviate this problem by both reducing the percentage increased, and
hopefully (depending on how it implemented), reduce the number of levels of
compounding boost, which is more important. A further change to make
interferance not compound should fix the bulk of this runaway damage problem.
---[Tacita writes]:
Neos & I just tested passives on the test server - blindness is not stopping
them, neither is shield.