1.125C Pendragon Patch Notes

Patch 1.125C is now up on the Pendragon test server!

Click below to check out the latest patch notes! We're nearing the home stretch for Patch 1.125 and look forward to your continued feedback!

Important Note:
We highly suggest duplicating your game directory and using the duplicate copy as a Pendragon-only game directory *before* patching and testing on Pendragon.


Click here to visit the DAoC Herald!
DAoC Community Lead
Broadsword Online Games
Tagged:
«13

Comments

  • edited November 2018 PM
    RMs with ST and Savages with Climb Walls. It's is gonna get messy on here
    Post edited by Auberne on
  • Wow!!!! Love it!! Savages are going to be fun!
  • Auberne wrote: »
    RMs with ST and Savages with Climb Walls. It's is gonna get messy on here

    The climb wall ability for savages could've been messy; however, I believe they took the right path slotting it at 50 savagery spec. I'm not certain on the standard savagery spec but I don't think most will go completely to 50 (could be wrong).

    RM's receiving ST... I suppose, in lieu of other classes that could earn it, it isn't the worst thing that could happen, lol.
  • I still think Alb should look into Heretics getting ST. If you're going to boost their AF and ABS, then ST shouldn't be on the list, especially coupled with their RR5. Please find another class.
  • yeah, no more positional side stun
  • Tanky wrote: »
    Wow!!!! Love it!! Savages are going to be fun!

    Well of course you would :). However, I do believe Midgard is still horrendously under powered and the dev's prefer Albion exclusively, right?
  • Tanky wrote: »
    I still think Alb should look into Heretics getting ST. If you're going to boost their AF and ABS, then ST shouldn't be on the list, especially coupled with their RR5. Please find another class.

    My goodness there is no pleasing some people.
  • Like the EV changes and the roof adjustments. Honestly, this is a really great patch (c)
  • While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.
  • Agreed, 50 spec savages won't be able to spec 44 h2h I think.
  • Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.
  • Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Guess I dont know how to optimally spec a minstrel then :smile:
  • Yup, 50 savagery, 43 (weapon), 2 parry (seeing as CW would most likely be utilized in group or bg encounters parry isn't necessary).
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Solid rationale and I agree.

    On another issue, I have qualms about adding a second ST to Midgard. Even if no Thanes were to spec it, Midgard would still be the premier realm when it comes to AOE stuns. In my experience playing, AOE Stun has been far deadlier than any ST (max level or not) I have seen placed, other than the ones I've personally witnessed being layered on top of a Healer AOE Stun to stun-lock crowds, even through Purge 1s, for 10+ seconds (it would be longer if we didn't kill them first).

    Considering the synergy, the argument that Midgard must have a second ST simply because Albs do, is imo not substantive. It would be akin to Albs arguing that they need an AOE Stun simply because Mid has one, which is invalid in a game that benefits from not having exact mirrors on all sides.

    Post edited by Ylazul on
    Minstrel. Thane, Druid
    Heretic, BD, Animist
    Mauler
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Ae Stun to theurgist? Air spec?

    Maybe minstrel?
    Post edited by Abattoir on
  • Ylazul wrote: »
    Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Solid rationale and I agree.

    On another issue, I have qualms about adding a second ST to Midgard. Even if no Thanes were to spec it, Midgard would still be the premier realm when it comes to AOE stuns. In my experience playing, AOE Stun has been far deadlier than any ST (max level or not) I have seen placed, other than the ones I've personally witnessed being layered on top of a Healer AOE Stun to stun-lock crowds, even through Purge 1s, for 10+ seconds (it would be longer if we didn't kill them first).

    Considering the synergy, the argument that Midgard must have a second ST simply because Albs do, is imo not substantive. It would be akin to Albs arguing that they need an AOE Stun simply because Mid has one, which is invalid in a game that benefits from not having exact mirrors on all sides.

    Yeah my primary counter to giving Mids a second ST was the obvious elephant in the room, Healers. I agree, the reason why Mid primarily only had a single ST class was because they have access to AoE stun. Seems someone was convincing enough for that fact to be overlooked.
  • savages climb walls and runemaster st
    Plus cabby nerf ok I can see where this game is going.
    I am going to have a lie down in a dark room.
    It’s april the 1st right!
  • Ylazul wrote: »
    Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Solid rationale and I agree.

    On another issue, I have qualms about adding a second ST to Midgard. Even if no Thanes were to spec it, Midgard would still be the premier realm when it comes to AOE stuns. In my experience playing, AOE Stun has been far deadlier than any ST (max level or not) I have seen placed, other than the ones I've personally witnessed being layered on top of a Healer AOE Stun to stun-lock crowds, even through Purge 1s, for 10+ seconds (it would be longer if we didn't kill them first).

    Considering the synergy, the argument that Midgard must have a second ST simply because Albs do, is imo not substantive. It would be akin to Albs arguing that they need an AOE Stun simply because Mid has one, which is invalid in a game that benefits from not having exact mirrors on all sides.

    Yeah my primary counter to giving Mids a second ST was the obvious elephant in the room, Healers. I agree, the reason why Mid primarily only had a single ST class was because they have access to AoE stun. Seems someone was convincing enough for that fact to be overlooked.

    ST and AoE stun are not exactly comparable since ST does not provide immunity while AoE stun does. The radius is also smaller for AoE stun than ST (250 vs. 350 ). Granted, AoE stun in combination with ST could be deadly, but I have yet to witness that being a problem in RvR. I still think my original suggestion of having 1 ST class on a non-charge hybrid tank on each realm is the way to go.
  • Ylazul wrote: »
    Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Solid rationale and I agree.

    On another issue, I have qualms about adding a second ST to Midgard. Even if no Thanes were to spec it, Midgard would still be the premier realm when it comes to AOE stuns. In my experience playing, AOE Stun has been far deadlier than any ST (max level or not) I have seen placed, other than the ones I've personally witnessed being layered on top of a Healer AOE Stun to stun-lock crowds, even through Purge 1s, for 10+ seconds (it would be longer if we didn't kill them first).

    Considering the synergy, the argument that Midgard must have a second ST simply because Albs do, is imo not substantive. It would be akin to Albs arguing that they need an AOE Stun simply because Mid has one, which is invalid in a game that benefits from not having exact mirrors on all sides.

    Yeah my primary counter to giving Mids a second ST was the obvious elephant in the room, Healers. I agree, the reason why Mid primarily only had a single ST class was because they have access to AoE stun. Seems someone was convincing enough for that fact to be overlooked.

    ST and AoE stun are not exactly comparable since ST does not provide immunity while AoE stun does. The radius is also smaller for AoE stun than ST (250 vs. 350 ). Granted, AoE stun in combination with ST could be deadly, but I have yet to witness that being a problem in RvR. I still think my original suggestion of having 1 ST class on a non-charge hybrid tank on each realm is the way to go.

    Champs/Pally/Thane for ST and only those three. That would be ideal and certainly less convoluted than trying to balance a 2x2x2 ST tier across all three realms.
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Since you seem to have gone "all-in" on realm equality this patch, giving mids things because other realms have them, when will Albion and Hibernia receive instant AOE stun and castable AOE stuns? Minstrels or Smite clerics are a good candidate for these abilities on Albion.
    Post edited by Ewer on
  • edited November 2018 PM
    #1 One things for sure, we can't say @Broadsword doesn't listen to feedback.

    #2 Cabby lifetap getting same treatment as SM's is more telling then it seems. I've suggested previously, that behind these balance changes, it would be nice to get a hint of what's the thinking behind the changes. This didn't happen, however this change tells me they simply think Lifetap's utility is too strong for it's damage. With this clear, like it or not, at least I can see a clear vision behind the change, that's fine.

    #3 ST, once again, it's just too powerful ability. I play Midgard atm, yet I think giving them to RMs is just too much. I argued it's easier accepted if it's same represented in all realms. However it's true, zergs just have too many RMs in them, and this likely trigger even more. Not a good idea. AoE stunn is good, so is Amnesia on bards, so is bolt-range mezz (which is much more powerful nowdays with lots of range bonus), however I wouldn't probably give ST to RMs. That may be just too powerful.

    #4 @Brut Don't be depressed, SM got it's nerf too, Heretic got it's love too, so all is well. :) ST, well I already commented on it on #3

    Post edited by Gavner on
  • edited November 2018 PM
    @Beetleguisse

    I would personally prefer AOE Stun over ST, straight-up. AOE Stun does give an immunity, but when you're getting the most value out of it it's for bombs - and being dead will get rid of immunity too. For the combo, think about how deadly ST is. Then think about a 10s AOE stun being tossed onto it, with its own immunity being removed by ST ticks, and tossed in again :* In theory, you can get AOE stunned, 1st ST tick goes in while you're stunned, rinse and repeat until you and 20 other people have been stunned for 45 seconds straight by two people pressing two buttons. In reality you'll have taken 30000-40000 damage from one single PBAEr, so that won't play out. But still.

    "I still think my original suggestion of having 1 ST class on a non-charge hybrid tank on each realm is the way to go."

    That would work too.
    Post edited by Ylazul on
    Minstrel. Thane, Druid
    Heretic, BD, Animist
    Mauler
  • Ewer wrote: »
    Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Since you seem to have gone "all-in" on realm equality this patch, giving mids things because other realms have them, when will Albion and Hibernia receive instant AOE stun and castable AOE stuns? Minstrels or Smite clerics are a good candidate for these abilities on Albion.

    Also don't forget to gain ST on Albion heretics had to give up Ichor. Please remove ichor from a mid class.

    Remember, Minstrels got Ichor as a result. Alb still nets zero on Ichor with the current patch notes.
  • AoE stunn is great, but let's not forget, that DET classes simply twitch once, and go walk away.
  • Ewer wrote: »
    Grish wrote: »
    While its appreciated that savages get climb walls ,maybe putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 would have been better? I dont see it getting specced for with it being that high in savagery seeing how savages work currently.

    That's exactly the point :).

    "Optimally" specced Minstrels don't have climb-walls either.

    Since you seem to have gone "all-in" on realm equality this patch, giving mids things because other realms have them, when will Albion and Hibernia receive instant AOE stun and castable AOE stuns? Minstrels or Smite clerics are a good candidate for these abilities on Albion.

    Also don't forget to gain ST on Albion heretics had to give up Ichor. Please remove ichor from a mid class.

    Remember, Minstrels got Ichor as a result. Alb still nets zero on Ichor with the current patch notes.

    Thanks, I missed them giving it to minis. Edited my above.
  • Gavner wrote: »
    AoE stunn is great, but let's not forget, that DET classes simply twitch once, and go walk away.

    Then it should be fine to add one Smite Clerics of course. Also most targets do not have Det, and Det does I believe work on ST ticks. A det tank with dead healers and casters in the group isn't going to be alive much longer.
    Minstrel. Thane, Druid
    Heretic, BD, Animist
    Mauler
  • On the ST/ stun thingy i will just repeat myself like i siad over here https://forums.darkageofcamelot.com/discussion/1527/runemaster-st-strongly-disagree-with-adding-a-second-st-class-on-midgard
    Vrisslar wrote: »
    Personally i wish they would just remove ST or limit it to 1 hybrid per realm like thane / champ / paladin or something like that.
    AoE stun and stun immunity reset in the same RA is just silly imo.

    As a player with multiple healers / clerics / druids / bards ( i like support :P ) for all i care you can remove AoE stun too and give me something more fun in return. ( DoT / Nuke / instant amnesia / hammer spec line / pet / whatever lol )
    Many times with det and stuff stun is just a minor speedbump anyway.

    On the Caba LT reduction let me repeat what i said over here https://forums.darkageofcamelot.com/discussion/1502/sm-cabby-nerf/p1 about SM nukes.

    Why nerf the damage potential of a spec nuke, balance the life it returns.

    Why no taunt for a SM and enchanter pet ?
  • edited November 2018 PM
    @Vrisslar

    When it comes to pets, I'm sure Cabs would love to trade taunt for intercept, or the Body line for the Dark line for that matter. Taunt is one of many things Mythic could have added to Jade Sim for it to fit their design vision of the pet and the Cabalist class. The SM and Cab pets are significantly different anyway.

    I think at this point, whenever Alb gets even the most inconsequential "buff" (a PVE Taunt for a weak pet), Midgard demands it as well - while ignoring many substantial advantages, some it has had for decades. I don't think this is a fair way to proceed with game balance.
    Post edited by Ylazul on
    Minstrel. Thane, Druid
    Heretic, BD, Animist
    Mauler
  • ST and AoE stun are not exactly comparable since ST does not provide immunity while AoE stun does. The radius is also smaller for AoE stun than ST (250 vs. 350 ). Granted, AoE stun in combination with ST could be deadly, but I have yet to witness that being a problem in RvR. I still think my original suggestion of having 1 ST class on a non-charge hybrid tank on each realm is the way to go.

    I believe this is what @Amp_Phetamine was referring to....
    Ewer wrote: »
    Since you seem to have gone "all-in" on realm equality this patch, giving mids things because other realms have them, when will Albion and Hibernia receive instant AOE stun and castable AOE stuns? Minstrels or Smite clerics are a good candidate for these abilities on Albion.

    It could get worse when you start going down this road. What about the other 2 realms getting a reflect spell like shamans, or Mid/Hib getting a 3rd stealther for support, or any of a thousand other things. Not saying I'm against their moves here, just saying that as Amp and a few others have stated, when you start going down that "balance" road it starts to get really iffy on where to draw the line. Nobody wants WoW mirrored classes here, but at what point do you stop trying to balance and instead just deal with each realm having their own unique abilities.




  • edited November 2018 PM
    Ylazul wrote: »
    @Vrisslar

    When it comes to pets, I'm sure Cabs would love to trade taunt for intercept, or the Body line for the Dark line for that matter. Taunt is one of many things Mythic could have added to Jade Sim for it to fit their design vision of the pet and the Cabalist class. The SM and Cab pets are significantly different anyway.

    All pets used to have access to taunt, why it was removed i dont know, but i really dont think you can compare a taunt thats useful in PvE and on Gaheris, with what your comparing it to.
    Post edited by Vrisslar on
  • RonELuvv wrote: »
    ST and AoE stun are not exactly comparable since ST does not provide immunity while AoE stun does. The radius is also smaller for AoE stun than ST (250 vs. 350 ). Granted, AoE stun in combination with ST could be deadly, but I have yet to witness that being a problem in RvR. I still think my original suggestion of having 1 ST class on a non-charge hybrid tank on each realm is the way to go.

    I believe this is what @Amp_Phetamine was referring to....
    Ewer wrote: »
    Since you seem to have gone "all-in" on realm equality this patch, giving mids things because other realms have them, when will Albion and Hibernia receive instant AOE stun and castable AOE stuns? Minstrels or Smite clerics are a good candidate for these abilities on Albion.

    It could get worse when you start going down this road. What about the other 2 realms getting a reflect spell like shamans, or Mid/Hib getting a 3rd stealther for support, or any of a thousand other things. Not saying I'm against their moves here, just saying that as Amp and a few others have stated, when you start going down that "balance" road it starts to get really iffy on where to draw the line. Nobody wants WoW mirrored classes here, but at what point do you stop trying to balance and instead just deal with each realm having their own unique abilities.




    Classes have their own unique abilities RA's are a whole different story.
  • @Vrisslar

    A lot of things were removed during the overhaul. There is an Animist pet with a casted taunt and I believe some BD pets use taunts and taunt styles. They were simply migrated over to different classes when pets were evened out between all summoners.
    Minstrel. Thane, Druid
    Heretic, BD, Animist
    Mauler
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Ylazul wrote: »
    @Vrisslar

    A lot of things were removed during the overhaul. There is an Animist pet with a casted taunt and I believe some BD pets use taunts and taunt styles. They were simply migrated over to different classes when pets were evened out between all summoners.

    Both Ani harbinger pet and BD pets had access to taunt before too, so no migration happening there.

    Taunt is lovely for focus shield, that only the orignal pet classes have access to.

    Basicly its like if we remove all mess from the game, then 2 weeks later only return it to bard andcall it realm unique and all realms shouldnt be alike.
    Post edited by Vrisslar on
  • RonELuvv wrote: »
    ST and AoE stun are not exactly comparable since ST does not provide immunity while AoE stun does. The radius is also smaller for AoE stun than ST (250 vs. 350 ). Granted, AoE stun in combination with ST could be deadly, but I have yet to witness that being a problem in RvR. I still think my original suggestion of having 1 ST class on a non-charge hybrid tank on each realm is the way to go.

    I believe this is what @Amp_Phetamine was referring to....
    Ewer wrote: »
    Since you seem to have gone "all-in" on realm equality this patch, giving mids things because other realms have them, when will Albion and Hibernia receive instant AOE stun and castable AOE stuns? Minstrels or Smite clerics are a good candidate for these abilities on Albion.

    It could get worse when you start going down this road. What about the other 2 realms getting a reflect spell like shamans, or Mid/Hib getting a 3rd stealther for support, or any of a thousand other things. Not saying I'm against their moves here, just saying that as Amp and a few others have stated, when you start going down that "balance" road it starts to get really iffy on where to draw the line. Nobody wants WoW mirrored classes here, but at what point do you stop trying to balance and instead just deal with each realm having their own unique abilities.




    Agree'd, trying to balance and make changes to appease the "...that class on that realm has X ability, why doesn't class Y on my realm have it too?" is incredibly dangerous.

    It should be quite obvious why Midgard doesn't require a second ST class. I don't believe this addition will make it past testing. The initial complaint regarding Albion receiving a second ST class was that it was initially going to be given to the Minstril and it was pointed out, correctly, how effective that would be.

    If the current combination of ST classes is in flux and changes are required then re-instate ST to one class on each realm: Thane/Paladin/Champion and be done with it.
  • I'm fine with one ST class... But that would require needing a hib class....watch the whines if you do this.
    And let's get off the decades old BS of aoe stun ffs.... Get over it.
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Whats the issue?! Alb already Wins 90% of their fights!

    ...sorry..just joking around to ease the flames :P

    Edit: Yap, ST is way too powerful for way too little RA points. 1/Realm is more then enough.
    Post edited by Gavner on
  • Tanky wrote: »
    I'm fine with one ST class... But that would require needing a hib class....watch the whines if you do this.
    And let's get off the decades old BS of aoe stun ffs.... Get over it.

    So mids should get everything albs and hibs have, but hibs and albs shouldn't get everything mids have?
  • I think this whole patch cycle is getting totally out of control much of it is being directed as a paper daoc exercise the though of basically 2 aoe stuns coming in from mid classes is just scary why don’t we just roll all of these stupid class changes back to before the ruined keep changes and just start again one class at a time with some seriously consideration to all points of view not a select view from a minority elite playerbasec it’s just getting stupid now it really is.
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Brut wrote: »
    I think this whole patch cycle is getting totally out of control much of it is being directed as a paper daoc exercise the though of basically 2 aoe stuns coming in from mid classes is just scary why don’t we just roll all of these stupid class changes back to before the ruined keep changes and just start again one class at a time with some seriously consideration to all points of view not a select view from a minority elite playerbasec it’s just getting stupid now it really is.

    Back to 2015 please, or perhaps 14.
    Post edited by Vrisslar on
  • TBH this never going to stop. Albs was like +1 ST all cool! Mids/Hibs was like why? Mids get +1 ST (altho very wrong class) Albs like WHY THEY HAVE AOE STUN. So does alb have bolt-range mezz, best base lifetap, so what. Every realm has its strenght, but all this argument clearly shows that ST is just waaaay too powerful RA.
  • The runemaster ST won't make it to live. I apologize to those who may be disappointed but 2 ST classes on the only realm with AoE stun oversteps the line of balance, it will be altered.

    That being said, the general consensus suggests limiting ST to a single class per realm (Thane/Paladin/Champion) is probably the most "balanced" solution.
  • Ewer wrote: »
    Tanky wrote: »
    I'm fine with one ST class... But that would require needing a hib class....watch the whines if you do this.
    And let's get off the decades old BS of aoe stun ffs.... Get over it.

    So mids should get everything albs and hibs have, but hibs and albs shouldn't get everything mids have?

    I do believe he is a troll of epic proportions.
  • Gavner wrote: »
    TBH this never going to stop. Albs was like +1 ST all cool! Mids/Hibs was like why? Mids get +1 ST (altho very wrong class) Albs like WHY THEY HAVE AOE STUN. So does alb have bolt-range mezz, best base lifetap, so what. Every realm has its strenght, but all this argument clearly shows that ST is just waaaay too powerful RA.

    I agree with the ST being a very powerful RA. Hence, my suggestion above.

    Regarding other RA's such as Ichor, Negative Maelstrom, Wraith of Champions, etc. should have their damage types set to Essence. I may or may not have an interest in making a bomb Champion...
  • Gavner wrote: »
    TBH this never going to stop. Albs was like +1 ST all cool! Mids/Hibs was like why? Mids get +1 ST (altho very wrong class) Albs like WHY THEY HAVE AOE STUN. So does alb have bolt-range mezz, best base lifetap, so what. Every realm has its strenght, but all this argument clearly shows that ST is just waaaay too powerful RA.

    I agree with the ST being a very powerful RA. Hence, my suggestion above.

    Regarding other RA's such as Ichor, Negative Maelstrom, Wraith of Champions, etc. should have their damage types set to Essence. I may or may not have an interest in making a bomb Champion...

    I remember prior to WoC nerf it used to be a devastating RA. Now it's little more than an annoyance.
  • Ewer wrote: »
    Tanky wrote: »
    I'm fine with one ST class... But that would require needing a hib class....watch the whines if you do this.
    And let's get off the decades old BS of aoe stun ffs.... Get over it.

    So mids should get everything albs and hibs have, but hibs and albs shouldn't get everything mids have?

    When it comes to certain things they should be equal across the board I do believe this.
  • I’d be happy with the champ/thane/pally only st.

    Also for a bg running savage, I don’t see speccing 50 savagery as a bad thing. Now for a small man/8 man savage it would be dumb, but then they really wouldn’t use climb walls as much either
  • BurkleyRIP wrote: »
    I’d be happy with the champ/thane/pally only st.

    Also for a bg running savage, I don’t see speccing 50 savagery as a bad thing. Now for a small man/8 man savage it would be dumb, but then they really wouldn’t use climb walls as much either

    Agree'd.
  • Agree with @Amp_Phetamine and others who have suggested champ/thane/pally st.

    1 per realm. In the end, you're gonna piss off half your player base and appease the other half... its how it always works.

    c04jnvqtr6oh.gif
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Ewer wrote: »
    Tanky wrote: »
    I'm fine with one ST class... But that would require needing a hib class....watch the whines if you do this.
    And let's get off the decades old BS of aoe stun ffs.... Get over it.

    So mids should get everything albs and hibs have, but hibs and albs shouldn't get everything mids have?

    This is what I've heard over the last 16 years.

    @Vrisslar since that change Animists pets can now move, and they have all sorts of abilities to toss onto their pets depending on spec. Likewise, PVE rarely revolves around Focus Pull anymore, other than in situations where you're doing it to masses of mobs for PL, in which case a single target taunt is not all that meaningful. Cabs would prefer something else, I'm sure. Bonedancer pets were also buffed.

    @Juzzo it's clear by "certain things" I suspect you mean only those things unique to Alb or Hib, and none of those things unique to Mid, that have proven for years to be significantly more of an advantage.

    @Gavner rather the main point for Alb was that ST doesn't suit Friars that much, and when Mid asked for a second class the obvious answer was that you have AOE Stun. There's no reason at all to hand out an RA to Mids just because Albs got one.
    Post edited by Ylazul on
    Minstrel. Thane, Druid
    Heretic, BD, Animist
    Mauler
Sign In or Register to comment.