![]() |
Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Very frustrated. Just had my decked out Star Child killed during an assassination attempt on an Atlantean Consort. First paralyzed him with Mind BLast then moved up to melee range after 10 MBs didn't kill him. I attacked and killed him in 2 shots but was poisoned (I'm assuming from his _repel_ attempt while _paralyzed_!?). Should a paralyzed unit be able to repel?! I wouldn't think so. Furthermore my Star Child had cast Twist Fate and Personal Luck. Neither had any effect on the poison. Granted the Personal Luck may simply have failed the 50% chance to avoid damage but shouldn't Twist Fate protect from the first poison damage or at least from the repel? And Lastly how many rounds more does a battle Last when one side has all died/routed with only winner left on the field? Several (2 or 3) seemed to go by as I watched my Star Child drip with poison and die. The horror ... the horror ...
P.S. If this is a bug I have the turn saved for Dev review. |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
They also have coral armor.
Which means whenever they are hit by an opponent they are struck by the poison. I don't know if there is a % chance of this or not specifically, but since you were striking the opponent your twisted fate did not kick in, though perhaps it should (in that circumstance). Fire Shield, Astral Shield, Vine Shield and innumerable other items in the game work in this fashion. [ January 21, 2004, 04:10: Message edited by: Zen ] |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
I think a longer weapon will avoid poisoning from coral armor.
In general, yes, I think luck and twist fate would help, though perhaps not against attacking something with poison armor using a short weapon. The results of poison, being on fire, etc. will continue to be resolved until the situation is corrected by the afflicted units (i.e. there's a chance each turn the poison will stop having effect). Naturally, the defeat of the enemy doesn't help against poison already in the veins. PvK |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Thanks for the fast response Zen and PvK. Ididn't know that about Coral Armor but it makes sense. The weapon the Star Child was using was a Frost Brand with Length=2. Maybe the length needs to be greater to avoid poison damage.
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
More than likely. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Though if I was a Star Child in assassin territory I'd get a 100% Poison Resist item. Since nearly everything has coral armor or weapons and poison is annoyingly effective 1 on 1.
If you haven't, put a starshine cap on your Star Child (if you've invested alot of gems in his equipment already) and have him teleport back to labs to pick up specific items he needs for his assassin routines. (Anti-heat for Abysia, anti-poison for Atlantis, etc) |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Quote:
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Graeme is right, again! For some reason I keep thinking it's Astral 2, must be because I use Cloud Trapeze too much.
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Quote:
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Shhhhh! That was supposed to be a secret. Damn Canadians.
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Atral 2 won't allow you to cast Teleport but you need a Lab to cast it anyway and if you have a Lab that defeats the whole purpose of the suggestion in the first place (to re-equip). However, Astral 2 _will_ allow you to cast Returning. Attack anything with Returning scripted to return to Capital, re-equip and head out again. Maybe. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Quote:
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Testing:
Axeman gets poisioned by blind Consort. Swordsman does NOT get poisioned. Does that clear it up? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif (In other words, poison spikes are length 2) [ January 21, 2004, 05:31: Message edited by: Saber Cherry ] |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Maybe only the spikes on the *Consort's* armor are Length 2! What about for the Coral Guard? Hmmm...
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
The item is called Coral Hauberk and it would be the same regardless of what type of unit it is on.
So Coral Guards, Consorts, Mother Guard, etc would all be the same. The thing would be to test the Reef Warrior, he has a Coral Curaiss and if any would be different it might be him, if the length was shortened or lengthened. |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Supposedly they're all the same length. But it also appears that the spikes are specified on the unit, not the armor - Triton Guards have the same coral armor but are not spiky.
|
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Speaking of potential bugs, should undead be vulnerable to banefire/decay?
Seems unlikely to me, but they appear to be at present. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif Rabe the Unusually Dead |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
In any normal universe it is the dead that do decay, not the living http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif
Banefires are fires and harm the dead as well as the living. Banefires are not uranium fires and the decay caused by banefires is not atomic radiation. Atomic radiation does not affect the dead http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif . |
Re: Bug, Oversight, or Intended Behavior?
Can we get something that does atomic radiation damage to go with our undead, then?
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:54 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.