Belias Posted June 15, 2011 Report Posted June 15, 2011 i suggest changing the effect of mistress / donation cloak for the skill hocus-pocus. it shouldn't require yellow gems if you are using mistress or donation cloak. if you're not fine with that, how about 2 mistress card or cloak + mistress = 0 gems needed? tell me your opinion.
Xtopher Posted June 15, 2011 Report Posted June 15, 2011 I don't think it stacks. I don't know if it's possible to stack them. I disagree though... It would make it too easy to spawn MVPs and for professors to self buff themselves with like every buff ever.
Acetrainer Posted June 15, 2011 Report Posted June 15, 2011 Agree with changing the Donation Cloak / Mistress to making the catalyst for ninja stone 0. Disagree for Hocus Pocus.
Belias Posted June 15, 2011 Author Report Posted June 15, 2011 Agree with changing the Donation Cloak / Mistress to making the catalyst for ninja stone 0. Disagree for Hocus Pocus. it doesn't matter if we use gems or not, its only a pain to buy them over again. not the amount of money we spend, but the procedure to buy them, put them in storage, buy them etc. we do abra all day. usually, we use 30k yellows to begin with. mostly, we use even more. the money is no problem at all, as i said... you could make mistress effect stay the same but donation cloak removing the requirement of hocus using gems.
Acetrainer Posted June 15, 2011 Report Posted June 15, 2011 it doesn't matter if we use gems or not, its only a pain to buy them over again. not the amount of money we spend, but the procedure to buy them, put them in storage, buy them etc. we do abra all day. usually, we use 30k yellows to begin with. mostly, we use even more. the money is no problem at all, as i said... you could make mistress effect stay the same but donation cloak removing the requirement of hocus using gems. Yes, but the process of MVPing isn't supposed to be easy. Especially with the MVP's VERY low HP, we don't need to make it any easier. And hocus pocus can be a very powerful spell when used in pvp and we don't need to have people spamming it on proffs. And on top of that, the skill itself specifically says that the mistress card cannot bypass the gemstone requirement so the skill would have to be changed not the card and i don't believe any of the gms want to go about changing skills.
Belias Posted June 15, 2011 Author Report Posted June 15, 2011 Yes, but the process of MVPing isn't supposed to be easy. Especially with the MVP's VERY low HP, we don't need to make it any easier. And hocus pocus can be a very powerful spell when used in pvp and we don't need to have people spamming it on proffs. And on top of that, the skill itself specifically says that the mistress card cannot bypass the gemstone requirement so the skill would have to be changed not the card and i don't believe any of the gms want to go about changing skills. hocus in pvp? are you kidding me? seriously... hocus is useless in pvp, because its random.. but okay, if you dont like the idea, its okay for me. even without the 0 gems requirement, its still easy, even easier then hunting the mvps ^^
Weezing Posted June 15, 2011 Report Posted June 15, 2011 Hocus Pocus is a doble edged skill in pvp, you can get the so feared grim-reaper, or get the completely useless coma/play dead, and about the gemstone catalyst for hocus pocus, it would require a source edit, so not gonna happen.
Belias Posted June 15, 2011 Author Report Posted June 15, 2011 Hocus Pocus is a doble edged skill in pvp, you can get the so feared grim-reaper, or get the completely useless coma/play dead, and about the gemstone catalyst for hocus pocus, it would require a source edit, so not gonna happen. .... have you ever hocus'ed at all? i mean, i hocus EVERY day since several months, on different servers... you get so many random spells, that you cannot use it efficiently in pvp... the pvp thing is a bad excuse. that it will ease getting mvps may be true, but the pvp excuse is just ridiculous...
Honey Moon Posted June 15, 2011 Report Posted June 15, 2011 If you are afraid of having a prof hocus'ing at pvp like crazy cuz of the gems than make it with "into the abyss"! What i mean: MistressCard+Into the abyss = no gems needed! It would be a compromise i think ;)
supream Posted June 16, 2011 Report Posted June 16, 2011 are u guys saying no to hocus pocus cause of what i was doing? if thats the case it you can also cast coma and suicide on yourself and mental strength that makes it so u cant do anything, did you think about that? summoning mvps isnt suppose to be hard. its not like its giving other people a disadvantage cause they cant kill those mvps anyways.
Ryuk Posted June 16, 2011 Report Posted June 16, 2011 Alright. First of all I agree with this suggestion. I'll explain why by commenting on other arguements given. It would make it too easy to spawn MVPs and for professors to self buff themselves with like every buff ever. Disagreed. Why ? Buying gems does not make anything harder. It's just an annoyance of having to buy them again every single time. Removing the gemstone cost will not give them any advantage that they don't already have (except for some weight problems removed). And hocus pocus can be a very powerful spell when used in pvp and we don't need to have people spamming it on proffs. Despite of what everyone has been saying hocupocus CAN indeed be a very good skill in pvp. Mostly because of the buffs it can give not because of the coma effect. However removing the yellow gemstone requirement from this skill wont make this skill any better than it already is. It's the same thing with arrows and bullets. Why were they made unlimited ? because it's an annoyance to keep on buying them and stuffing your character with extra weight. On top of that as stated by Supream the skill has many downsides as well so there would be no way that this would be "overpowered". So ya if it's possible at this given time, then I agree to this change. Regards, Ryuk
Seraphine Posted June 16, 2011 Report Posted June 16, 2011 (edited) I see no real reason not to agree but the issue is like Weezing stated is if it's a source edit which it might be but i'm not sure if it is.If it is a source edit it most likely won't happen. Edited June 16, 2011 by Seraphine
Belias Posted June 17, 2011 Author Report Posted June 17, 2011 I see no real reason not to agree but the issue is like Weezing stated is if it's a source edit which it might be but i'm not sure if it is.If it is a source edit it most likely won't happen. another idea, make it like you did with the arrows. that only 1 of the gems need to be in the inventory, if you wear donation cloak / mistress.
