Jump to content

  •  

Perk - Eagle Eye


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2451 posts

Posted 04 April 2018 - 12:19 PM

Eagle's Eye (when doing ranging attacks)
+2 Increase In accuracy
+4 Increase In accuracy
+6 Increase In accuracy

Changes:
Restriction on when the Perk is active change to doing ranging attacks so it affect bow bows & crossbows and never Melee even if wielding a bow.

Concerns/Issues:
Are there any Perks this should conflict with?
What definition of Accuracy is intended? Currently preparing to be similar to adding Accuracy Pot bonus that EL uses. Whether a different definition should be used or not should be discussed.

#2 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2451 posts

Posted 04 April 2018 - 02:06 PM

Initial version is now available on Test from Wraith 2

#3 AlddrA

AlddrA

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 590 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 04 April 2018 - 04:10 PM

If you have to have a conflict, guess you could lower the lucky archer one? :(

#4 butler

butler

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1417 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 04 April 2018 - 04:40 PM

Would say ranger ones having some conflict with the magic ones / or a melee one, so they get an advantage at one version of combat and a disadvantage on another (since off/def magic, off/def melee have a distinction that isn't clear cut withing archery)

#5 ohmygod

ohmygod

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts
  • Locationaustralia

Posted 05 April 2018 - 08:37 AM

All mages worth their salt are rangers as well. I think ranger perks should conflict with mage perks,

#6 butler

butler

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1417 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 05 April 2018 - 10:48 AM

View Postohmygod, on 05 April 2018 - 08:37 AM, said:

All mages worth their salt are rangers as well. I think ranger perks should conflict with mage perks,
I'd like to point at WaterBottle, as an exception to the perceived rule.

But yeah, the other main thing against that is what the game wants to encourage in these directions. For example, the argument for melee is, you're a ranger, you're supposed to do damage from a distance, and avoid getting caught up in melee. Splitting magic off would be argued to allow the non melee playstyles to not end up being entangled. I think there's a good argument for both.

I'd also say that ranging kind of needs the ability to move over some tiles whilst firing >.> so it has any hope of competing with other attack styles.

#7 Bat17

Bat17

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 332 posts

Posted 05 April 2018 - 04:03 PM

I'd also say that ranging kind of needs the ability to move over some tiles whilst firing >.> so it has any hope of competing with other attack styles.

I take it by this that you mean firing by walking which seems a good Idea, can be balanced with a accuracy penalty too.

Bat17

#8 butler

butler

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1417 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 05 April 2018 - 05:31 PM

View PostBat17, on 05 April 2018 - 04:03 PM, said:

View Postbutler, on 05 April 2018 - 10:48 AM, said:

I'd also say that ranging kind of needs the ability to move over some tiles whilst firing >.> so it has any hope of competing with other attack styles.

I take it by this that you mean firing by walking which seems a good Idea, can be balanced with a accuracy penalty too.

Bat17

Yeah, but tbh I should make a new topic for that, I was just stating that, since the perks not being compatible should reflect playstyles the game wants to encourage going forward.

Only really posting this comment to try and further clarify that this isn't really a suggestion to add to the perk but a more general one best epitomized by the ranging perks, and the design there in best reflecting playstyles, and that the attached moving whilst shooting being being an example of something further down which would give a bigger argument for a melee defense perk being incompatible (as you should be trying to avoid being attacked in short range, whilst getting a long range bonus, similar to how tactic games and maybe other genres balance that).

I hope that clarifies that bit of the post more?

EDIT: I edited in proper quote marks for bat's post because it annoyed me more than it ever ought to

#9 WaterBottle

WaterBottle

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 05 April 2018 - 05:40 PM

View Postbutler, on 05 April 2018 - 10:48 AM, said:

View Postohmygod, on 05 April 2018 - 08:37 AM, said:

All mages worth their salt are rangers as well. I think ranger perks should conflict with mage perks,
I'd like to point at WaterBottle, as an exception to the perceived rule.

Lol unexpected compliment. Appreciate it.

But I wouldn't be against having a conflict with ranger/melee perk(s). If anything it assists in creating some specialization one way or another, which I have been all for in previous discussions. It's not going to deter me from ranging if an additional healer is not needed; I just don't have access to additional benefits which again reiterates some point of specialization.

#10 ohmygod

ohmygod

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts
  • Locationaustralia

Posted 05 April 2018 - 07:56 PM

Quote

If anything it assists in creating some specialization one way or another,
And that is the dilemma, players are not asked to pick a specialization at the character creation screen, it is mainly about the Pick point placement which determines if you will be mediocre or OP at getting the most from it.

I reckon that "mage/healers" due to the pick point placement, or lack there of,  would contribute more damage as a ranger in a boss fight than as melee. I am happy to be corrected though.....I do acknowledge auto attacking while casting takes not as much skill as ranging and casting and is more "key board faceroll", but range damage per hit I believe would be more than they could manage with a melee per hit?

Hoping that explains my reasoning behind "mage" restrictions for this perk....

#11 butler

butler

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1417 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 06 April 2018 - 07:21 AM

View Postohmygod, on 05 April 2018 - 07:56 PM, said:

Quote

If anything it assists in creating some specialization one way or another,
And that is the dilemma, players are not asked to pick a specialization at the character creation screen, it is mainly about the Pick point placement which determines if you will be mediocre or OP at getting the most from it.
I generally think that the fact we are not asked before playing what we'd like to do is in it's own way and advantage, as it means we don't cut ourselves off from parts of the game at the beginning, and at the beginning you are likely going to want to explore multiple paths as a player. The fact you are then not restricted, and given the opportunity to use your pp to specialise yourself as you see fit (or not), i find a lot more appealing than being stuck in a cookie cutter predetermined build. It also means you get some advantage from exploring and experimenting with builds to best suite your playing style.

If you want to choose a class before hand, I'd say play GW2, it's a cracker of a game. I think this unique element of EL/LE/OL is an advantageous and interesting thing that should be kept.

View Postohmygod, on 05 April 2018 - 07:56 PM, said:

I reckon that "mage/healers" due to the pick point placement, or lack there of,  would contribute more damage as a ranger in a boss fight than as melee. I am happy to be corrected though.....I do acknowledge auto attacking while casting takes not as much skill as ranging and casting and is more "key board faceroll", but range damage per hit I believe would be more than they could manage with a melee per hit?

Hoping that explains my reasoning behind "mage" restrictions for this perk....

So my main response to this is that you are thinking of a mage effectively just being an augmentation of another build, and to continue with the idea of game encouraging play styles, I'd say that whenever a magic update is released, or even now, you don't want to make the most powerful mages rely on other skills. Realistically, we want the mages to eventually be on a relatively even playing field with melee and range in terms of damage, just requiring a different tactics.

In terms of damage whilst a boss, there's also a monetary concern. For Enola and Giganta, and other bosses where melee damage isn't going to be reliable, or the need to rapidly decrease a tough bosses hp, ranging is more often what a mage does, but not always. Occasionally one mage does nothing but focusing on healing and sometimes poisoning whilst not engaged at all, due to tank's death/dis chance being relatively high, and the skill at healing at the right time with some of those bosses.

Ones like Cyce and others that are weaker, they tend to be on the boss as well, and give you a little help with the healing.

Again, it generally depends on the play styles of current mages. Different ones excel in different areas, between people like DueCE, WaterBottle and Aine (when she has a mage build), you kind of see different ways of handling situations.

tbh i think it should either be:

Conflicts with mage perks

and have a small defence skill penalty whilst a bow/xbow or arrows in hands, though i know that'll add extra coding time.

hope this answers some questions and gives some reasoning.

#12 ohmygod

ohmygod

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts
  • Locationaustralia

Posted 08 April 2018 - 08:52 AM

, I like your suggestion that a small defence skill penalty while bow/xbow or arrows in hands apply. And would add, perhaps too late now, but perk could have bonus secondary positive effect chance on arrow hit of stunning mob/target for few seconds, similar to when you use diss ring, giving ranger time to move/tele away, or get in a few extra shots

#13 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2451 posts

Posted 08 April 2018 - 09:43 AM

View Postohmygod, on 08 April 2018 - 08:52 AM, said:

, I like your suggestion that a small defence skill penalty while bow/xbow or arrows in hands apply. And would add, perhaps too late now, but perk could have bonus secondary positive effect chance on arrow hit of stunning mob/target for few seconds, similar to when you use diss ring, giving ranger time to move/tele away, or get in a few extra shots
I think it would be more fun if you had to use a special arrow to get the stun effect

#14 ebattleon

ebattleon

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 137 posts

Posted 11 April 2018 - 07:51 AM

Okay tested Eagle eye perk and it does improve ranging accuracy some.
OL does not have muskets thus ranging has no opposing skill set at all. Thus there can be no counter or perk exclusion to Ranging.

#15 SimAnt

SimAnt

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 95 posts

Posted 11 April 2018 - 05:16 PM

View Postebattleon, on 11 April 2018 - 07:51 AM, said:

OL does not have muskets thus ranging has no opposing skill set at all. Thus there can be no counter or perk exclusion to Ranging.
Interesting logic. I don't think it is valid. multiple ranging perks can conflict and other build types can conflict as well if desired.

#16 PandemiC

PandemiC

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 614 posts
  • LocationLondon, United Kingdom

Posted 19 April 2018 - 03:43 PM

Testing rank 3 of this perk, even with 20 perception I'm missing shots quite close to target. I don't have the best range in the world, but I don't think it's adequate enough for someone wanting to specialise.

#17 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2451 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 04:41 PM

Don't forget that PErception + day/night cycle as well as your ranging skill still affect your ability to hit with Ranging.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users