BoutCheetah

Other BoutCheetah Stuff => Suggestions => Topic started by: nanak tatum on June 13, 2013, 05:24:32 AM

Title: Block dammage skill
Post by: nanak tatum on June 13, 2013, 05:24:32 AM
Not sure how good of a suggestion this is but I thought it would be cool to have a skill (passive probably) that allows you to do more dammage against blocked players. So when this is equipped, instead of doing say 50 dammge, you do 150 or 100 or something.
Title: Re: Block dammage skill
Post by: matan124 on June 13, 2013, 06:49:56 AM
Well, lvl 221 hit with rush hit any bot 130 with block so imo the damage should be higher then 150 if you want the skill to be effective.
Though, this skill is a little useless because there are much better passive skills like- breakfall and charge but if the other suggestion of 2 passive skills will be accepted this skill is ok (but people would still prefer charge + breakfall)
Title: Re: Block dammage skill
Post by: hawk5005 on June 13, 2013, 06:53:05 AM
^What he said. The only time someone would use this skill is in pvp, and in pvp breakfall/mobost is always a better pick.
Plus you have an active that can do full dmg through shield.
So yeah it's kinda useless.
Title: Re: Block dammage skill
Post by: Purple on June 13, 2013, 06:54:14 AM
In terms of PvP Breakfall > anything imo.

This is because there is still lag (this is going off the last time I played) where if you get knocked down without breakfall, chances are the player will be able to get a free rush off which is way more than this skill could do.
Title: Re: Block dammage skill
Post by: Cooky on June 13, 2013, 08:21:49 AM
Quote from: Purple on June 13, 2013, 06:54:14 AM
In terms of PvP Breakfall > anything imo.

This is because there is still lag (this is going off the last time I played) where if you get knocked down without breakfall, chances are the player will be able to get a free rush off which is way more than this skill could do.
I agree with this
Title: Re: Block dammage skill
Post by: Toast on June 13, 2013, 08:57:13 PM
There would be other passives (like break-fall) that would be better than this. You could also use gc.