Ice rune PVP implementation

[cinos]

Okay, since we all know that the next is gonna be the ice element, we have to address it's PVP implementation before it gets outta hand. If we take HH as the base, the ice rune freezes you in place, and while I straight up don't remember how it worked in pvp since elemental weapons were quickly outclassed by better, simply more damaging weapons, in Eliatopia, a game with a big emphasis on runes and a lesser emphasis on endurance, the concept of STOPPING in place is a guaranteed death and/or lock, so let's NOT implement that part of the ice rune against players please, if at all (up for debate, I frankly don't know).
Instead, atleast in PVP, the ice rune should cause Frostbite, which makes you cold, with subsequent shots causing more and more damage than the previous one. Basically, yeah literal frostbite, your skin is weaker, you succumb to the cold, and it hurts more and more, with the process's speed depending on the user's damage output and attack speed as per usual. I think this is both a more interesting mechanic and a less obnoxious piece of shιt to deal with than literally being locked in place, though the actual frostbite stat should be thoroughly analyzed to avoid any undesired results.

[Flashlight237]

The way I remember the ice element in HH, it actually never worked in PVP. If it did, well, I would've given it props for working right, but it is going to be a nuisance in that regard.

I'm not sure what inspired you to go for the Frostbite effect, but I support it nonetheless.

[ImCrazy2]

Ice rune should just slow enemies down so that it wont get TOO op

[Robby]

Thanks for the recommendation. I've definitely thought about this, as I feel the lock-in-place mechanic would definitely cause issues in both PVP and with enemies getting permanently locked in place. I haven't fully decided yet, but yes I may do something similar to what you mentioned, or I may have it so that enemies will have ice around them, and simply "take 125% damage" from additional hits once frozen. Or maybe they will also just slow down, but not completely stop. I'll have to see, but I probably won't be having them freeze in place as it would be far to easy to exploit.

[Flashlight237]

Thanks for the recommendation. I've definitely thought about this, as I feel the lock-in-place mechanic would definitely cause issues in both PVP and with enemies getting permanently locked in place. I haven't fully decided yet, but yes I may do something similar to what you mentioned, or I may have it so that enemies will have ice around them, and simply "take 125% damage" from additional hits once frozen. Or maybe they will also just slow down, but not completely stop. I'll have to see, but I probably won't be having them freeze in place as it would be far to easy to exploit.

That reminds me, will fire and ice runes be split up from one another? As in you can't put fire runes in an ice weapon and vice versa?

[cinos]

Thanks for the recommendation. I've definitely thought about this, as I feel the lock-in-place mechanic would definitely cause issues in both PVP and with enemies getting permanently locked in place. I haven't fully decided yet, but yes I may do something similar to what you mentioned, or I may have it so that enemies will have ice around them, and simply "take 125% damage" from additional hits once frozen. Or maybe they will also just slow down, but not completely stop. I'll have to see, but I probably won't be having them freeze in place as it would be far to easy to exploit.

That reminds me, will fire and ice runes be split up from one another? As in you can't put fire runes in an ice weapon and vice versa?

Well either that or we're gonna have to call every ice plus fire kill "freezer burn" from now on, mandatory, you can't NOT say it.

[Robby]

@flashlight I'm not sure. While that does make logical sense and I partially like the idea of choosing between one or the other, I think I like the idea better of players being able to build the ultimate weapon, and having tons of upgrades stacked on top of each other.

[Flashlight237]

@flashlight I'm not sure. While that does make logical sense and I partially like the idea of choosing between one or the other, I think I like the idea better of players being able to build the ultimate weapon, and having tons of upgrades stacked on top of each other.

Last time I checked, fire melts ice.

[CrazyVanilla]

@flashlight I'm not sure. While that does make logical sense and I partially like the idea of choosing between one or the other, I think I like the idea better of players being able to build the ultimate weapon, and having tons of upgrades stacked on top of each other.

Last time I checked, fire melts ice.

Last time I checked, no one asked if it did.

[Flashlight237]

@flashlight I'm not sure. While that does make logical sense and I partially like the idea of choosing between one or the other, I think I like the idea better of players being able to build the ultimate weapon, and having tons of upgrades stacked on top of each other.

Last time I checked, fire melts ice.

Last time I checked, no one asked if it did.

What kind of lame excuse is "no one asked?" Every game I've played uses "fire melts ice." Your lame excuse doesn't mean jack.