How much more powerfull should Destruction be for you to feel like its not UP?

#201lorddrago88Posted 2/6/2013 4:45:06 PM
GBALoser posted...

Oh, frost is notoriously weak just based on enemy resistances, although a properly aimed Ice Storm will wreak havoc, and having a few seconds of paralysis with the perk guarantees a kill on low-health enemies. Shock's only really weaknesses are cost and range (I think 2/3 the range of the other two types on average).


How do you aim your Ice Storms to get the most damage?
#202FreeMan5407Posted 2/6/2013 4:48:59 PM
are you kidding me, now you are saying that costing more is a problem?, not everyone use atronach stone or use a breton or use the lord stone for that matter

also impact have a 2.8 cost, so you are contradicting with your first words, neither everyone use impact

i do agree about the mage but it still help, against dragons shock is very useful since all of them have HIGH HP and low magicka, if you take their range attack , the combat efficiency of the dragons skydive

and chain lighting does multiple stagger
#203lorddrago88Posted 2/6/2013 4:52:53 PM
FreeMan5407 posted...
are you kidding me, now you are saying that costing more is a problem?, not everyone use atronach stone or use a breton or use the lord stone for that matter


- Compared to Ignite or Flames? Yeah, shock spells cost too much for their damage, especially when nothing is weak to them.


also impact have a 2.8 cost, so you are contradicting with your first words, neither everyone use impact


Why would a destruction mage not get the Impact perk?


i do agree about the mage but it still help, against dragons shock is very useful since all of them have HIGH HP and low magicka, if you take their range attack , the combat efficiency of the dragons skydive


Or you could just Impact stun them.



and chain lighting does multiple stagger


No it doesn't.
#204GBALoserPosted 2/6/2013 4:53:11 PM
lorddrago88 posted...
GBALoser posted...

Oh, frost is notoriously weak just based on enemy resistances, although a properly aimed Ice Storm will wreak havoc, and having a few seconds of paralysis with the perk guarantees a kill on low-health enemies. Shock's only really weaknesses are cost and range (I think 2/3 the range of the other two types on average).


How do you aim your Ice Storms to get the most damage?


Typically, I aim at torso so that it also lays down that ever annoying ice path I hate about Ice Wraiths.
---
Every once in a while I realize the human race may be worth saving. Of course, then I come back here, but still, those are good moments. -Readyman
#205FreeMan5407Posted 2/6/2013 4:57:51 PM
lorddrago88 posted...
FreeMan5407 posted...
are you kidding me, now you are saying that costing more is a problem?, not everyone use atronach stone or use a breton or use the lord stone for that matter


- Compared to Ignite or Flames? Yeah, shock spells cost too much for their damage, especially when nothing is weak to them.


also impact have a 2.8 cost, so you are contradicting with your first words, neither everyone use impact


Why would a destruction mage not get the Impact perk?


i do agree about the mage but it still help, against dragons shock is very useful since all of them have HIGH HP and low magicka, if you take their range attack , the combat efficiency of the dragons skydive


Or you could just Impact stun them.



and chain lighting does multiple stagger


No it doesn't.


haven't unlock it yet? or maybe the mage don't have 0 cost or high magicka, or not every one want to use the same tactic
#206lorddrago88Posted 2/6/2013 5:02:12 PM
FreeMan5407 posted...

haven't unlock it yet? or maybe the mage don't have 0 cost or high magicka, or not every one want to use the same tactic


You don't need 0 cost to star being a Destruction mage.

Don't complain about Destruction being weak if you are using an inferior tactic.
#207FreeMan5407Posted 2/6/2013 5:11:32 PM
lorddrago88 posted...
FreeMan5407 posted...

haven't unlock it yet? or maybe the mage don't have 0 cost or high magicka, or not every one want to use the same tactic


You don't need 0 cost to star being a Destruction mage.

Don't complain about Destruction being weak if you are using an inferior tactic.


to spamming dual cast , you really need high magicka or decent cost reduction or a combination of both

thats the problem it only have 1 tactic and stagger opponents over and over is hardly call a tactic, and yea i know the other magic skills, the fact that those skill help me better on master than destro with my pure mage prove everything
#208lorddrago88Posted 2/6/2013 5:22:21 PM
FreeMan5407 posted...

to spamming dual cast , you really need high magicka or decent cost reduction or a combination of both


Which is doable @ 60 Destruction, 50 Illusion, and 60 Enchanting. Beyond that it becomes easier and easier.

The only things I had issues with were Draugar Deathlords when I was trying to get the ring that teaches Ignite, but then again anyone at level 13 is going to have issues with Draugar Deathlords.
#209Darg727Posted 2/6/2013 5:32:35 PM
lorddrago88 posted...
FreeMan5407 posted...

elemental fury/dual fury/necromage combo have the best dps PERIOD,


I'm quite sure I wasn't disagreeing with you.



Darg727 posted...

First of all when some one talks about destruction it can be understood as flame/frost/shock. Second, everyone loves band aids amirite? It doesn't fix the issue and supersedes any destruction spell learned from that point onward, or at least until you get thrown in jail.


-Again, this topic is about Destruction magic being too weak, not about how much better fire is compared to frost and shock. Considering that most enemies are weak or neutral to fire (short of Flame Atronachs, Fire Dragons, Dunmer, and Buring Spriggans), using primarily fire is fine.

- You complaint would be someone whining about 1-handed combat being too weak compared to sword and board or dual-wielding. Not everything is always going to be equal and some things are better than others.


I personally will never touch AoT because of it's total disregard for the other two branches as all three should be equally destructive. It's a bug whether Bethesda wants to fix it or not. It makes lower fire spells decent and an enchantment OP.


- Frost is still good for enemies resistant/immune to fire. Ice Storm is amazing for stunlocking multiple enemies.

Shock is pretty worthless though.


I never said anything about fire not being fine and you yourself says shock isn't fine. Damage wise destruction is useable and even better with alchemy. It's the fact that people say that an enchant and a bug is what destruction needs to pull it out of a rut. I argued that destruction is fine except that that the cost of making it that way takes away options that other play styles have when it comes to gear choice unless you resto loop.

If you are so adamant on it, I am on topic such as I have continuously said that destruction spells cost too much for their output in more ways than one while also pointing out as the first person to mention that the master level spells are not as powerful as they should be for the added risk and cost.
#210FreeMan5407Posted 2/6/2013 5:40:48 PM
lorddrago88 posted...
FreeMan5407 posted...

to spamming dual cast , you really need high magicka or decent cost reduction or a combination of both


Which is doable @ 60 Destruction, 50 Illusion, and 60 Enchanting. Beyond that it becomes easier and easier.

The only things I had issues with were Draugar Deathlords when I was trying to get the ring that teaches Ignite, but then again anyone at level 13 is going to have issues with Draugar Deathlords.


im not saying is not doable, but if we focus the skill with the rest of the magic and offensive skill, it really lack the power and others potential, i mean no variety, it have little to none strategy, is not silence unless you take quite casting, don't do sneak attack , the master spells suck, don't do enough damage or dps for a destructive skill, the fact that the attributes, shouts and power help better the other offensive skills, elemental fury, berserker, necromage to name a few