Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Lanie

  • Rank
    Community Wiki Admin
  1. Well, at least, we can also apply a more friendly definition in related wiki articles, after confirming such a bit more. Could then write about that passive as "Reduce damage taken to x% of attack" or something. Though maybe Trendy will look into it as well.
  2. I suspect it's a 90% reduction at a strange part of the formula, instead of at the end of the formula. Addition/Subtraction can do strange things to a percent if the percent is applied before it. There is also the fact that Apprentice is really squishy, with only a fragment of health compared to others. Usually, playing one, you really don't want to get hit anyway.
  3. It would be of great help to collect a vote of which of the two existing styles is most preferred! The two layouts to chose from are: MonoBook VectorNot going into the details of exactly how it is laid out, but more the preference between two existing skins. We want to see what feels better for the community. Also, if you have any other visual/theme feedback, please let me know!
  4. No, we don't need sacrifices or volunteers for rituals to summon the old ones or anything. The DD2 Wiki - http://wiki.dungeondefenders2.com - just needs a few fresh new recruits willing to help with sorting and ordering the library of knowledge passed down to future generation of defenders. Basically, people willing to help add content to the wiki. We still have quite a few extra Tasks left to fill out, and pages in general need a lot more content (written and graphical). If you are willing to help out, you don't even need to ask, though feel free to leave a note here saying your intentions if you wish. It's a very open wiki we have there, everyone is able to help out already, we're just slowing down of late on wiki edits.
  5. Somewhere after the information I was given, someone rethought the range of the Skyguard, which was supposed to have more range than a Cannon. I'm guessing someone thought that range should allocate the full diameter of it's attack area, which would only work if you couldn't hit the tower itself. That's probably the idea you need to dispute as well, they are looking at it's range based upon the coverage area, which if you look at your image is equal to the cannon's.. and no one is thinking about the tower getting hit itself.
  6. That's not true for everyone. I personally for example, if you exclude this game, play zero Tower Defense games, avoid games in the Strategy genre, and have a hatred for how boring anything Turn-Based is. My genre of choice is RPG, with an intense interest in anything done in real time, though I appreciate getting the time to setup a field and plan for combat. This is why I play games like Terraria, where your biggest battles are done in an arena designed to your own construction, where planning and preparation are key, but then the thrill of fast paced combat is one of the rewards of good planning and preparation. The point when I'm able to plan and prepare so well that the arena I'm in does everything for me, when the thrill of combat dies, especially if I can actually go afk, is when the game has failed me, and I start to rapidly lose interest. I'm not the only one here who thinks this way either, as I've noticed. This game is equally Tower Defense and Action RPG, there are a lot of people here who love the thrill of fast paced action. Trendy has said they want to sustain this image, and to do so they need to balance both equally as well, an observably difficult goal. People who like Tower Defense elements will focus highly on the build phase, and just feel that the combat phase is the boring part where you see how well you did in preparation, but people who like the Action RPG element will find the build phase boring (as a chore needed to make sure you are prepared for battle), and will focus highly on the combat phase. Neither are to be dismissed. Possibly the reason why you find so few of such Action RPG types at the forums is because a large number of them have such a huge level of impatience that they hate things involving reading and chatting (and thus never visit the forums). In this, I'm probably a bit of an oddity. But while I don't do strategy things, I do like getting tactical, so my pre-planning is a very vested process for me that I dedicate a lot to (and is the only reason why I've actually worried about builder stats on some heroes, for an Action RPG -type, I put a lot into my building), and so I do worry about chatting and planning and numbers (aka, the wiki). But most of such people won't put their voice here, even though they shouldnt be neglected either.
  7. I would say it's more appropriate to base that on DU rather than towers, or total building mana spent. Different towers cost differently for a reason. That's not as true as you might expect. Every Hero has one defense costing 20 mana, one costing 30 mana, one costing 40 mana, and one costing 50 mana. This is a clear pattern in construction. The only difference between heroes is the order of those four costs: Huntress: 20/30/40/50Apprentice: 30/20/40/50Monk: 30/40/20/50Squire: 40/30/50/20You could thus base it on mana consumed, but there are other patterns to approach in this one (converting each of the 4 different cost prices into a specific meaning of value). It is true though that they can't be scaled equally.
  8. An actually decent attempted approach for a hero, without blowing it out of scope with weird new features, not something we've seen much of. However, it might be good to note that there is no Ice Damage in DD2. Nothing deals Ice Damage. A combo is either started with a status, or ended with an element. For example, Freeze is a Status (not an element), that has a combo with the Crushing Element to cause the Shatter Combo. This works because if an enemy falls from any height, they take zero crushing damage, which can trigger Shatter (instead of giving it to weapons as an elemental on weapons). To describe how combos apply, you either indicate the elemental and/or status of a defense/ability, and then include the resulting combo if affected by the status/element to finish off the pair. This is expected to potentially get more confusing too if we get additional water elemental defenses, as the water element does not cause Electrocution. However, we could double this over by having something deal an "Electrify" status, which then could combo with the Water Element to ALSO cause Electrocution. We can create new status effects, but its much more difficult to invent more elements than the 5 we have now (Fire, Water, Storm, Earth, Crushing).
  9. Try the following link: https://trendyent.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/requests/new
  10. Lanie

    E.V ....

    Dreizehn wants Roll to have a personality more like classical Samus, and less like her Other-M, then wants that character in DD2. Other than such visual stimulus, I see no value of EV in DD2 now. We don't even have anything left to give such a character for Defenses, would all have to be brand new ideas. High-tech engineering styled ideas, but new ideas none-the-less. After all, a laser turret would still be just another ballista.
  11. The original pillars of the game said that it is Trendy's goal to make the game balance equally in importance between DPS and Defenses, so that you could swap one of the two at will and retain just as much of a result. To meet this, that would mean that any map where you could have a single person solo build, and the rest AFK, you could then in reverse be just as equally efficient if that one builder instead was swapped with a DPS hero, never building anything at all. We aren't noticing this impact yet. The game was listed to be equal parts Tower Defense and Action RPG. If you poke people who are more interested in Action RPG, it seems like a lot of them come from games like Dynasty Warriors, full of mass enemy destruction in a spree of hack and slash, and honestly expect a game with 300 enemies per way to end up simply being a "smaller scale version of the same idea". The closest equivalence to a tower in DW however is the foot troops, which in most situations were the epitome of futility (only barely slowing down your enemy so that you have time to rescue everyone). If that was paralleled in DD2, you would have defenses that would hold for a short while, but would need to be always instantly rescued. This is the opposite of what we have now. Opposite, which isn't a balance between the two. This means the pillars have not been met yet. We don't need something exactly like DW has now, instead we need something more in the middle between the two, where we could instantly replace the importance of each interchangeably. Players who love the Tower Defense features want a fully strategic game, where you setup a solid defense and then get to casually watch the enemy die in futility to your brilliant setup. Players who love the Action RPG features instead prefer a more hack-n-slash or third person shooter design, depending on weapon type (sitting in the middle of the fray unrelenting with a squire, or firing an endless storm of arrows as a huntress from afar, enemies dying before they move any closer to you, or somewhere in between with either the monk or apprentice), where they can get to the point that their enemy is destroyed by their fast paced ferocity and is mercilessly crushed by their own hands. Both of those are remarkable ambitions which rightfully have a place in our game. Only one of them does currently. The Action RPG element instead takes second stage, where all you do is act in support of active towers, at best replacing the entirety of a single lane of defenses (only in the first half of the game), and contemplating that you're not influencing stuff nearly as much as you feel the builders are (fast pace action thrill thus out the window). Hopefully this flaw in balance is addressed eventually. I personally play DD2 because I crave both of these factors equally, something which drew me originally to DD1 because that would mean the game is ultimately perfect (DD1 however hardly delivering action features at all), but even in DD2 it has been an incredibly underwhelming experience in one of the two factors it claimed to be aimed to deliver.
  12. Incursions are in the next patch. That should give you everything you need.
  13. That's one of the changes in the next patch. You are correct that the multi-target feature on the other hand makes it really challenging to take full use out of. After the patch, the way it looks, if it hits 6 enemies in close range, the last enemy hit will fully shrug off the attack, hardly noticing it. At this point, the Builder Squire would have been more efficient hitting the group in melee dps. As such, Ballistas won't replace Cannons either.
  14. If this is true, the tier 1 Long Range towers will around double the range of a Jav Thrower (5000px). Sky Guard is getting a serious range boost at the end of the month. That partially solves the problem (the kobolds) while (inadverdently) creates another: Since the ballista can aim up/down and has a longer range, a well-placed ballista would strictly dominate an equally well-placed sky guard in terms of anti-air. Except Ballista already has a large handful of flaws over the Sky Tower. Sky Tower not only has that 360 degree firing angle, but it also will still do full damage at any range. The Ballista requires maximum range to do full damage, and since it's a really long range tower, finding an area that gives it full range will be more than just a bit difficult. Even if you find a good place giving this full range, if enemies make it past the full range, they start taking less than full damage. This could have close range enemies taking pitiful damage from the Ballista while still taking full damage from the Sky Guard. These factor gives the Sky Guard an edge over the Ballista for valid areas to attack.
  15. Nope, not towers, NOPE. DPS OK. Towers NO. Just to be clear, I'm agreeing that everybody should be able to contribute DPS from their hero stats, but requiring towers from everybody I will NEVER back. I do not believe anywhere in my post I expressed what people had to be doing, or what build they had to be, to achieve the required objective. The only thing I scratched off is the ability to play afk. A room with 4 people requires 4 people doing stuff, or there isn't much of a chance of victory. If this means 1 builder and 3 dps, or 3 builders and 1 dps, whatever. So long as there are 0 people afk, that's the important part.
  • Create New...