Muck to strong, poison to weak

[Cisz]

Kirby pointed out that muck is easier to get than pollution, and is stronger, and I found this to be true.

Pollution needs to significantly outdamage muck to be usefull. Pollution has 0.9 dmg/gold/sec and basically hits everything in a general direction. Muck does 1.65 dmg/gold/sec in 300 splash (less but good), so poison is to weak. Focused fire (same splash radius as muck) does 1,75 dmg/gold/sec, so pollution needs to get at least 1,75 too and muck is overpowered.

A lv.2 dual needs to outdamage a focused single, as it needs twice the elements to be built, right? I havn't got my dmg/gold/sec list here (it's on my broken comps hd...), but I remember that this was planned that way.

[holepercent]

More tower balacing to work on..

Rememeber the old b5 poison? That one was overpowered.

Muck tower is much easier to put into play and is a strong tower with the aoe slow and higher damage than pollution which is purely a damage tower. Pollution requires support in slows to really be effective.

Poison would do well with an increase in the damage. Gunpowder can be a decent tower after the damage buff from 400 to 500..

A lv.2 dual needs to outdamage a focused single, as it needs twice the elements to be built, right?

.

In theory this would be ideal but it's difficult in practice due to the way different towers are used.. There's also a question of balancing for 'best' placement, 'average' placement and random placement.

[jolin012]

well, poison is one of the duals beeing a bit too weak, and muck is one of the suporters which's damage is a bit too strong. Ontop of that the build balance is aiming to make duals more worth to use, ain't it?

Currently Muck can have higher damage output than a random damage triple, say drowning or hail(which are both also 2pass and don't vary in their avarage damage depending on placement or anything).

I'm a bit tired when writing this, but I think I'm right in some of the points I bring up

[DDRKirby(ISQ)]

yes, imo muck's damage might be =that= much of a problem when considered on its own, but add in the fact that it's also a slowing tower, and AoE? a little too much going for it, when compared with poison which is just vanilla damage effect. its range is not bad either.

[jolin012]

yep, imo we have to decide on all support triples if they sall be high or low damage (like roots or like enchantment) if they shall be stackable or not in damage (like roots or muck) and how much % they shall boost, and All have the Same on these

For now, say enchantment, ya need to spent 3000-4500 gold to make this buff completly. while corrosion, you can spend 1500-3000 and those are well spent as this has higher dps than a regular dmage triple.

[DDRKirby(ISQ)]

it just doesn't feel right when i'm playing SR and in preparation for a water wave I build a whole crapload a muck towers at the same place because that gives the best damage output. "isn't this supposed to be a slowing tower, and the slow doesn't stack...?" my mind says.

would probably make more sense if, you kept muck at a "debuff tower location" and had to use other towers (poison!) to do the damage.

i realize i'm "preaching to the choir" here...