Ludia Forums

A new passive idea: an alternative to partial Immunities

Just brainstorming here.

What if partial Immunities were diversified into Resistances and true partial Immunities? Hear me out.

Version1) So, suppose Entelomoth got “Resistance to stuns” instead of “Immunity to stuns”. This would mean that it would be unaffected by the first stun it encounters in a battle, but it would be susceptible to being stunned after that.

So a Resistance (I’m open to other names for the passive) to a debuff would grant the owner a free pass against that debuff for one turn, but not for a second time. Often, one turn of being Immune to a debuff is all you need. Alloraptor, for instance, only needs to avoid Deceleration once to beat, say, Geminititan.
Quetzorion only needs to avoid Distraction once to beat an Erlikospyx.

And so on. But, by strategic use of SIAs, sacrificing a low HP dino for instance, you could eliminate an opponent’s Resistance for a more specialised dino to take it out later.

So some current Partial Immunity holders could be given a “Resistance” instead, to tone them down a bit.
Unfortunately, some debuffs (e.g. DoT) are unlikely to be present on your team more than once, but that can’t be helped.

So Alternatively,
Version 2) perhaps the debuff could stick, but only take effect after the first turn, if it has an effect over multiple turns. This way, Lethal Wound would still deal two turns of 0.34x opponent health to a creature that resists DoT.
Distracting Impact would Distract the opponent on their second turn of being Distracted, but not the first.

Version 3) perhaps the debuff could have a lower percentage, say 50% the original? So Distracting Impact would Distract by 25%, Lethal Wound would deal 0.17x opponent max HP per turn, etc. 75% chance stuns would have a 38% chance.

So the concept definitely has its flaws, but I think it could be interesting to talk about. Thoughts?

8 Likes

So basically if a creature is immune to deceleration and if it gets decelerated once it won’t work but when it gets decelerated twice it will work? Hmm, I’m not 100% sure about this mechanic,

If it is Resistant to Deceleration, then yes. Immunity to Deceleration would still work the same.

Great idea, except stuns. I don’t want more RNG. A better solution is just reducing the amount of creatures immune to stuns

1 Like

I think he is saying like indom or procera will always be immune to everything. But something like carbonemys will be immune to d.o.t. for the first turn it is used against it.

No. This isn’t a rework of partial Immunities, it’s an alternative, a less powerful version.
If you gave this passive to Carbo, the second version, then yes. Partial Immunities would remain as they are.

1 Like

I’m all for anything that would remove all these immunities and make status effects useful again

I think complete immunities such as indom and erlidom are fine. Indominus should be immune. It has all those animal things. Animals like Gallimimus shouldn’t be immune.

#Qaw

So you want complete immunity to be nerfed as well as partial.

1 Like

No. This is an alternative version to partial Immunities, that can be used in the future or used to replace partial Immunities on some creatures. I’m not touching Immunity or partial Immunities at all.

1 Like

You can choose which one you want?

Oh never mind, I get it now. This only happens to some.

You can think of it this way: 38% is better than 0%. Just assume that it isn’t going to stun, and consider yourself lucky if it does.

Personally, I like version 1 better, where you are Immune to stuns, but only the first time.

Not sold. I reckon something that reduces the numbers might be a better alternative.

I.e. halves distraction penalties, halves slow penalties, halves stun chances, halves DOT damage. It would be easier to code and calculate on the fly. Half-DOT damage would be a good alternative to all these Immune to DOT creatures :\

Same with the Immune to Distraction crutch which is being used to prop up Indoraptor II and Procerat.

Version 3 sounds great to me. That’d be far superior to the current system.

I like version 3 makes some creatures better at handling jacks of all trades but doesn’t make those jacks useless unlike partial or fully immunes

My alternative idea is to have a disability. So the creature would be immune to something but a specific debuff affects it more just like steriods.
Vuenerbility 50% to 66% or 75%
Distraction 50% to 75%. 75% to 100%
Deceleration 2 turns to 3 turns
Dot 2-3 turns to 3-4 turns
Stun 75% to 90%
Swap prevent. 1-3 turns to 3-5 turns

4 Likes

Now that’s an interesting idea! I like it.
Since the word Vulnerable is taken, we could call them Prone passives.

So if Indoraptor G2 was Prone to DoT, it could take 50% extra damage from DoT. Meaning if you used Lethal Wound on it, every turn you would deal 0.51x it’s health. If you used Swap-in Wound on it, you would deal 0.38x every turn.

Stuns could be 50% more effective, so they could be guaranteed.

Distraction would be 50% more effective, so 75% for regular Distraction, 113% for Debilitating Distraction and 135% for Instant Distraction.

Vulnerability would be 50% more effective, so 75% extra damage.

Deceleration could last for 50% extra turns, so 3 turns if it was a 2 turn deceleration move, and let’s round it off to 2 turns for 1 turn deceleration moves. Or you could just say it adds 1 turn of deceleration, that would work too.

I think this idea has promise for sure. What do y’all think?
There is literally only one downside: it would make creature descriptions longer.

@DinoMaster3000, @Goobahfish, @Thylo_75, @Colin, @Creative_Screen_name, @anon51787916, @Starlinger27, what do y’all think, since you’ve already commented on this thread?

3 Likes

But what happens when distraction goes over 100%? It does nothing…

That isn’t true. Damage can go up to 200%, so it would still work. Think of creatures that can buff their damage. Entelomoth, Gorgosuchus, Sarcorixis, etc.

1 Like

If you use yoshi and then you distracting rampage and then instant distract, the opposing Dino would do 0 damage even though the distraction was -140%