Attacking @ less than 50% health
2010.Feb.19, 05:21 PM
RE: Attacking @ less than 50% health
Post: #8
(2010.Feb.19 05:17 PM)Accipender Wrote:  
(2010.Feb.19 04:45 PM)NastyFO Wrote:  
(2010.Feb.19 03:58 PM)thatthingufear Wrote:  Bad idea. What good putting someone in serious be when they attack you then? The way it is now if someone takes you down to serious you pay for it with food.

I'm really not trying to be combative... but I do not understand what you're trying to say in that first sentence... The english was bit broken.

Irony'd

As far as your idea, if you were able to attack from Serious/Critical, it would be only fair to be forced to defend from critical as well. Which would be not cool imo.

LMAO... Irony'd indeed.

As far as your point goes... Why? Why would you have to be able to defend in critical/serious? My proposal is not to balance attacks and defends... just apply this policy to attacks.

I like how you cannot be attacked when you're in crit/serious... It's passive. Attacking while in crit/serious is an overt action though - a choice by the attacker.
This post was last modified: 2010.Feb.19 05:22 PM by NastyFO.

5.) You hit for 1073 points of damage. (xx) resists 20 for a total of 1053 damage. <-- My first crit over 1K - no candy. :-) 2/14/10

29.) You hit for 1120 points of damage. Xavier Halcon resists 54 for a total of 1066 damage. <-- 2/15/10!
Thread Closed


Messages In This Thread
Attacking @ less than 50% health - NastyFO - 2010.Feb.19, 12:03 PM
RE: Attacking @ less than 50% health - NastyFO - 2010.Feb.19 05:21 PM