would wither be too weak?
You can still pretty easily get 200% Increased Damage Taken. Solo. There's a reason they changed it to 7% for the release: they realised it was broken.
|
![]() |
Well, I thought they will just put upper limit rather than try to balance it this way... but still, just like I said few days ago xD
Скрытый текст
" |
![]() |
" The game generally doesn't recognize a player as 'source' when such mechanics are concerned, I'd say you can have a combo where one mage prepares the field with contagion and the other casts essence drain. That said, I'm finding the system to be pretty enjoyable even when solo, turns out contagion does only nominal damage and its main purpose is proliferating essence drain which is the hard hitter of the two (not sure I'd still want to use it without LMP though). Wish the armchair developers would go back to developing armchairs.
◄[www.moddb.com/mods/balancedux]► ◄[www.moddb.com/mods/one-vision1]► |
![]() |
" Was reading Skill feedback just now; they did put a cap on it, check the Wither description: 20 stacks is powerful, but it also makes a third Chaos Mage entirely obsolete, pretty easy to hit 20 stacks when it matters. Heck, even the second Chaos Mage really needs to bring more than just Wither to be truly worthwhile. ----- @Charan: unless Contagion and Essence Drain work different from other Debuffs, they do not care about source. If a monster is debuffed by Contagion, then it will spread Contagion and Essence Drain indiscriminately. Similarly, because it's a non-stacking Debuff, having two people casting Contagion on the same enemy just wastes time and Mana. It's always worth verifying, but that's what I expect to happen based on prior experiences. e;f,b.. Raics! Последняя редакция: Vipermagi#0984. Время: 12 дек. 2015 г., 09:43:59
|
![]() |
I remembered a important thing to increase duration--------------Temporal Chains
it apply 40% increased duration to any buff/debuff on target and it could also slow enemies. it could both buff our damage and defence and wither is not a curse, so we could use it without any conflict |
![]() |