Feedback talk:User/Ni Di/Mark of Protection

I looked, and figured out that you were trolling. Keep up the good effort, perhaps you will become good at it one day. Pika Fan 15:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind discussing if the wiki was less about e-thugs and more about explanations. Ni Di 15:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Pika may be a little aggressive, but he's commonly right about these things. Calling him an "e-thug" does not negate the fact that this suggestion is.....well, there are no words. Karate [[File:User Karate Jesus KJ for sig.png]] Jesus  15:55, 27 October 2009  (UTC)
 * Please, I don't use the wiki often so it would be best if I could answer to clear, elaborate answers.Ni Di 15:59, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 99% of spike damage triggers this skill, granting invincibility to spikes, especially since any half-decent spike resolves in 3 seconds. 8 seconds of recharge is laughable, considering people spike in just about, what? Every 8 to 10 seconds. Yay. I got a skill that renders me invulnerable to spikes, and useless in all other forms of play other than GvG and just maybe HA. Such a niche skill would certainly help benefit the game and its balance, I am sure. Power creep ftw! Counter imba spikes with even better spike catches!Pika Fan 16:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answer, allow me make a few points:


 * I tend to assume that when checking suggestions (if they do), Anet doesn't really read numbers and will focus more on ideas.


 * Since numbers are mostly there as "placeholders", they can be reconsidered at will (it could trigger once and cost 5, for example). In fact, that's probably what happened with the original Mark of Protection. They had a more useable one and realized how powerful it was so they "reconsidered" the numbers. In its current form it's impossible to use, so keeping the concept in a more useable form would be interesting. Aura of Faith was a good example of such a rework (even though it's still lacking, I don't see how you could make it better now).


 * Still, let's take a look at the numbers I went with. I simply thought of a short anti-spike multi-RoF since it felt more natural considering what RoF does, and because the current, long-lasting multi-RoF Mark of Protection defeats its own purpose (people will ignore it or shatter it), and that's probably what making it a longer, less powerful (with a lower cap that would trigger on weak damage sources), more universal multi-RoF would do. I'm not saying it couldn't be done but fire-and-forget protection skills are usually a bit less interesting to play than awareness-based prots.


 * There are other skills with a potent concept but where the numbers are way off, like Blessed Light, Healing Hands, etc. Most broken skills, underpowered or overpowered, could probably be fixed by a modest tweak in numbers. That's the last thing I would consider when trying to "brainstorm".


 * Overall I think that a Reversal of Fortune that trigger multiple times in an interesting concept, there probably is a way to make a useable one.


 * Thank you again for you answer. Ni Di 16:57, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

unrelated
You need a Feedback User page before you can post feedback, I'm pretty sure. You can make one at Feedback:Getting started. -- FreedomBound  15:44, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just read that. You are right, but I see there are already other suggestions without a userspace, so apparently, as long as it's only one suggestion, admins just let it go. I'll create one if I make additional suggestions, thank you for the information. Ni Di 15:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Unusable?
That is an untrue statement, it can be used, and very effectively given the perfect situation. I mean look at Assault on the Stronghold perfect when used with Blessed Aura and a 20% Enchant mod on the Poor Dino, I mean first its beaten, then captured, then sent on a suicide mission, and they used its genetics without written consent to create clones! -/-I just disagree with your unusable comment-/- Discuss 14:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Not only being good in one single particular situation does not mean it is seriously usable, but in that one single particular situation, there are other, better skills that will also be useful earlier and later in that mission. I see what you mean but the same can be said for many skills and it's an information that doesn't really make sense in a discussion about the possible need for a buff. Ni Di 12:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)