Patch 1.127 Update and Upcoming Hot Fix Discussion

1356789

Comments

  • Well the main flaw I see is the subspeccig required kills your parry, so def more noticeable in solo play.

    So if you do that growth rates technically don't need to be adjusted.

    Snapshot could be made more available to put some flavor on the class. The R5 could be revisited (and could revisit the hero r5 at the same time)
  • Shoke wrote: »
    Well the main flaw I see is the subspeccig required kills your parry, so def more noticeable in solo play.

    So if you do that growth rates technically don't need to be adjusted.

    Snapshot could be made more available to put some flavor on the class. The R5 could be revisited (and could revisit the hero r5 at the same time)

    Yeah, I would be okay with BS not doing much with the current growth rates if the spec points were adjusted. If the spec points are to remain as is; however, I will firmly stand in support of dps increase.

    I'm not familiar with the Hero's rr5 (I'd have to look it up) but I have seen prior post's regarding reviewing it along with the armsman's rr5.

    The arms rr5 is great if you're stun immune fighting a melee dps that is just /stuck or /facing you. The penalty following the buff seems dated and unnecessary. The biggest issues with the arms rr5 is the fact that it's frontal cone, melee dps only and can be danced through and does nothing against ranged dps.

    Adding snapshot as a class specific skill and removing it from the x-bow spec line would certainly add a new uniqueness to the armsman.
  • edited February 11 PM
    @Amp_Phetamine
    Armsman: by rank 6 an arms is at 20 parry (with slash or thrust sub spec@52). Yes that is not the 39parry Warriors get, but 19 parry, or significantly less at higher rank, is a small small cost for an advanced styleline and higher full-time armor abs with a better elemental resist table.

    Positional stuns:
    Warriors would kill to have more than just a single 2-part positional chain stun in only axe, so they don't have to rely on slam 100% of the time. Shield styles have 0% bonus to-hit, and swapping to slam significantly reduces burst dps on softer/fleeing targets. Having both a 6(7) + 9 second positional stun in chains on a high growth styles is extremely useful in both Pole and Two-hand. These particular set style chains is why people attribute arms as having 'more damage': they do, in most chasing-stun-kill rvr scenario's.

    I think you have to play both to appreciate the significant advantages armsman brings to real rvr scenarios and not be so focused on the 1v1, 1vX lower defense (parry) value.

    Armsman rr5 is unfortunate. Its use with Dashing defense 2-3 is great but niche. If there was one place to consider a little love, that would be it. Warrior r5 is not fun on either side, but it does have its uses.
    Post edited by Rohan on
  • Shoke wrote: »
    Well the main flaw I see is the subspeccig required kills your parry, so def more noticeable in solo play.

    So if you do that growth rates technically don't need to be adjusted.

    Snapshot could be made more available to put some flavor on the class. The R5 could be revisited (and could revisit the hero r5 at the same time)

    Yeah, I would be okay with BS not doing much with the current growth rates if the spec points were adjusted. If the spec points are to remain as is; however, I will firmly stand in support of dps increase.

    I'm not familiar with the Hero's rr5 (I'd have to look it up) but I have seen prior post's regarding reviewing it along with the armsman's rr5.

    The arms rr5 is great if you're stun immune fighting a melee dps that is just /stuck or /facing you. The penalty following the buff seems dated and unnecessary. The biggest issues with the arms rr5 is the fact that it's frontal cone, melee dps only and can be danced through and does nothing against ranged dps.

    Adding snapshot as a class specific skill and removing it from the x-bow spec line would certainly add a new uniqueness to the armsman.

    iirc hero rr5 is defensive parry?/evade?/block? rate with small movement penalty.

    +1 adding free snapshot and boosting spec points.
    "...the best thing to do if you disagree (or agree) isn't to ask us why (which is rhetorical)...." -John_Broadsword
    "the patch [1.127] is later this year" -Carol_Broadsword, aka "constable paddy biehbien of the bentsword local community Enforcement force "
    send a message with your wallet
  • KoeKoe
    edited February 12 PM
    The complaint that arms alone needs to be buffed would be taken more seriously if one could show why arms as opposed to all 3 heavies needs a re-work. I (and others here) have already pointed out that Arms hits as hard as anything else. They also have better innate damage absorb and play on a realm with paladins.

    I will give you that their curse set, freezing vest, and loyalty cloak are sub par.
    Post edited by Koe on
  • edited February 12 PM
    ...
    Post edited by Daelin on
  • @Koe did you just say that the arms loyal cloak is sub par?
  • Need to clarify a few things:

    @Koe No one ever stated or suggested that armsmen alone needed re-work. It's been stated, and agree;d upon by many people, that the armsman class in it's current state is the worst of the 3 heavy tanks. You and others are well within your rights to disagree if you feel differently.

    The "better innate damage absorb" - I believe someone did the math in a previous thread. Don't hold me to this, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but iirc armsmen are able to mitigate 6% more damage by having plate armor, or 6 points of dps per 100 value dps or 60 points of dps per 1000 value dps. I'd hardly consider that "significant".

    The curse set and the freezing vest are mediocre; the loyalty cloak ignore blade turn is amazing.

    @Rohan - I have stated numerous times that I don't speak for the other two heavy tanks as my play experience is exclusively with the armsman. I appreciate your input though. But all of my comments and suggestions are not coming from paper daoc or theory crafting. It's first hand experience in observing the classes capabilities diminish over the last 6 years (2014-2020).
  • Shoke wrote: »
    @Koe did you just say that the arms loyal cloak is sub par?

    Vs warrior, sure.
  • edited February 12 PM
    Back peel on my healing friar 27 seconds , pells on polearm both side style and back 15 seconds (lol) , crush back 15 sec and side 19 seconds , seriously they need a better peel duration if you compare with warrior and hero .
    Post edited by Hellblast on
  • edited February 12 PM
    Hellblast wrote: »
    Back peel on my healing friar 27 seconds , pells on polearm both side style and back 15 seconds (lol) , crush back 15 sec and side 19 seconds , seriously they need a better peel duration if you compare with warrior and hero .
    Comparing the best snare in the game, on the same realm, and crying foul. Wow just wow.

    Hammer and axe are also 15/19. Only sword has a 23 at 50 (rear), and the entire line has no positional stuns. Terrible specline compared to two-hand or Pole.
    Warrior shield spec has some 20+ but they have no to-hit bonus at all, so they miss constantly, and do no dps. In other words they are crap and you are welcome to them. Where your 2h pole is snareing, stunning, and dps'ing better than any mirror in the meantime.
    Post edited by Rohan on
  • @John_Broadsword The housing changes seem a welcome addition.
    The champ is basically fine as is, the PBAE delve is fine as is. You don't see a large percentage of the Hibernian groups building around the champ ae de buff. Some players have used other means while playing with that combo to make it seem more OP/Exploitive than it is, then cried nerf, can only speculate as to why.

    There are far larger and older issues in the game to be concerned with.
    Update the class spell list on the website- it's outdated since 2008!
    Implementing stronger exploit detection and consequences- The lack of which has kept many who play the game to "play the game as intended" from playing the game.
    Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think most Hib and Mid would agree, do something really bad to Theurgist pets please? ..Haha couldn't resist. But seriously they are far too mobile and numerous for such passive effect.
    Pet pathing- slightly improved, thank you-but still wonky.

    To list a few


  • edited February 13 PM
    Lol Rohan keep calm man , and yes arms need better peel . The champion definitively need nerf
    Post edited by Hellblast on
  • Class with dual positional stun chains and dual positional snares in both their advanced lines, and pbt pierce cloak needs better peels?

    Now I’ve heard everything.
  • edited February 13 PM
    Hybrid class with better longer peel duration then a tank is ridiculous . I dont play arms , hero or warrior , i just said its weird . Peel should be exclusive to hero /arms /warrior .
    Post edited by Hellblast on
  • edited February 13 PM
    @Rohan What he was saying is that both Hero and War have 20+ seconds peels from both back and side. Saying warr can't land a shield style is ridiculous. I don't have more miss peels on war than hero or arms.

    The only diff on Arms is that the peels are 14 & 15 seconds in duration. Not the end of the world tbh.

    The overall comment about arms was that

    - Hero gets a great weapon line in CS for both peels and dps
    - Hero gets Moose, which adds to the cool factor of the class
    - Hero Cloak is meh (group ablative) but Fury charge is good.
    - Hero R5 is meh, not really useful in groups, I suppose can be good in solo.

    - War gets the bonus of sword being 1H/2H and has access to great peels through the shield spec.
    - having sword both 1H and 2H allows the warr to reach 40+ parry spec easily, without any downside.
    - War has a really good cloak, with the 10 sec group charge or 15 min group AoM.
    - War has a nice R5 with Testudo.
    - War is alone on the highest DPS table
    - The warrior has a ridiculous frozen chest proc.

    - Arms has a nice unique weapon line in Polearm.
    - Plate armor isn't really special.
    - Arms has the potential for snapshot, but since the requirement for double spec, the Arms needs high RR to even think about it without killing its dps.
    - Arms has an average R5, pretty useless in groups as it doesn't seem to apply to DD/guiard block chance (could be mistaking, but I did ask about that in the official discord)
    - Arms has a really killer cloak with the pierce BT on a peel class.
    - because of double speccing, the Arms is limited to low parry spec, which hurts in smaller settings (solo), but also for winning the peel war in groups.
    - Frozen chest is a 15% movement increase. Might aswell just template a crescendo charge.


    Nobody said the arms is broken, it's just a decent heavy tank. Adjusting spec points allows it to spec snapshot or higher parry would make it special, but not over the top.

    Not sure why CH9 set comes into play, it's the same for all heavy tanks.
    Post edited by Shoke on
  • edited February 13 PM
    “Can’t land” was certainly never said. Shield styles have no to-hit bonus and warrior does not have its own pbt-pierce cloak. The efficacy of shield styles 44 and 46spec 20+ sec snares for warrior are highly diminished due to miss rate, missing due to pbt, lack of shield defense penetration, and lower dps when snare-killing or slam stun killing. That’s what I said. Claiming to play one, and arms, and not know this is suspect.

    Going for these styles does not allow “40+ parry”. 46 shield is 37 parry. Still more than arms 20 at rr6, but 17 parry is meaningless in non-1v1 scenarios compared to style utility which arms has in spades among many other strict advantages like abs.
    Splitting hairs but I can’t just read 40+ parry and not call it out when ‘shield snares’ are the topic and they are at 44/46 shield.

    Arms: Doubler in two-hand is 23 seconds by the way. No idea why this was omitted by everyone’s post so they could make points about short snares?
    Post edited by Rohan on
  • Because they want it to be weapons unique to each heavy tank even though warrior isn't unique
  • Can we switch the Cabalist RR5 for something usefull ? A not CCable pet that will be killed with 2 nukes or is simply not there due to Spirit specc is pretty useless.

  • Thanks all for the feedback thus far, please see our latest hot fix notes here: https://darkageofcamelot.com/article/valentines-event-rvr-bonuses-and-live-hot-fix

    And keep the feedback for 1.127 going!
  • Thanks all for the feedback thus far, please see our latest hot fix notes here: https://darkageofcamelot.com/article/valentines-event-rvr-bonuses-and-live-hot-fix

    And keep the feedback for 1.127 going!

    Great patch, it's nice to be heard.
  • edited February 14 PM
    Armsmen MAY APPEAR to hit harder than Warriors because

    1) they get thrust damage and use it often (slash is an okay damage type for Mid and crush is pretty bad - a lot of crush resistant Albs and Hibs)

    2) they have much better 2handers overall. For example, Warriors don't get the "good" Pictslayer 2hand weapons, like Armsmen do (the ones with resist debuffs + abs debuffs). Mid generally gets the resist debuff/str con debuff weapons, which are garbage. Hib has the best 2hand weapons in the game (and the best Pictslayers overall)

    3) the growth rates in 2hand and polearm are slightly better

    Theoretically, a Warrior should hit harder because of higher weaponskill and having 50 weapon spec (which is especially notable when they're swinging their 1hander and still hitting hard as hell).

    Double speccing isn't really an issue when comparing Hero vs. Armsman, because a Hero is going to spec about 34 Thrust/Blunt/maybe Blades for 1handed damage, just like an Armsmen will (but do so for 2handed damage). That doesn't mean the double-speccing mechanic isn't stupid.
    Post edited by Enkertons on
  • free snapshot?
    A huge unnecessary buff.
  • Rohan wrote: »
    free snapshot?
    A huge unnecessary buff.

    How so?

    It was literally unused before. Hardly anyone, outside of maybe a select few players, would even waste the spec points into 25 xbow to obtain it.

    So warriors have higher WS and are on the highest damage table, hero's have stag, armsmen have snap shot. Is that imbalance?
  • Rohan wrote: »
    free snapshot?
    A huge unnecessary buff.

    How so?

    It was literally unused before. Hardly anyone, outside of maybe a select few players, would even waste the spec points into 25 xbow to obtain it.

    So warriors have higher WS and are on the highest damage table, hero's have stag, armsmen have snap shot. Is that imbalance?

    Armsman have the opportunity to wear sexy kilts!!!!
  • Daelin wrote: »
    Rohan wrote: »
    free snapshot?
    A huge unnecessary buff.

    How so?

    It was literally unused before. Hardly anyone, outside of maybe a select few players, would even waste the spec points into 25 xbow to obtain it.

    So warriors have higher WS and are on the highest damage table, hero's have stag, armsmen have snap shot. Is that imbalance?

    Armsman have the opportunity to wear sexy kilts!!!!

    This is a significant advantage ;)
  • Armsman changes not impressed amp is correct in everything he has posted but Woopy doo we can use our crossbows now jeezus give me a break.
    Once again alb not listened too I mean seriously we had a great armsman thread it was civil well though out and some solid ideas but yet again alb is ignored.
    Nothing again for reavers but hey we all ready know devs have given up on them as a group class.
    Necro nerfed again lowest pbaoe spell increase out the lot
    And alb suffering on the heal front because the pally is the only healing class on all realms that doesn’t get to have a decent power pool in temp because of items in game just give greater group heal to heretic and give pally static tempest that coupled with a group melee buff for reaver would make alb tank synergy something approaching the other realms.
  • Brut wrote: »
    Armsman changes not impressed amp is correct in everything he has posted but Woopy doo we can use our crossbows now jeezus give me a break.
    Once again alb not listened too I mean seriously we had a great armsman thread it was civil well though out and some solid ideas but yet again alb is ignored.
    Nothing again for reavers but hey we all ready know devs have given up on them as a group class.
    Necro nerfed again lowest pbaoe spell increase out the lot
    And alb suffering on the heal front because the pally is the only healing class on all realms that doesn’t get to have a decent power pool in temp because of items in game just give greater group heal to heretic and give pally static tempest that coupled with a group melee buff for reaver would make alb tank synergy something approaching the other realms.

    BS is still leaving themselves room for future tweaks /adjustments. This was a step in the right direction regarding implementing a small set of tweaks in this holiday event/hot fix. More will come with the addition of patch 1.127. Just keep discussing things that may need changed, may need reverted and things that should be looked into and BS has already revealed this year that they are taking our opinions and observations into consideration.
  • how about taking pbt away from the thug and give it to the reaver----make them group friendly
  • edited February 14 PM
    The free crossbow adds on arms can be used for rupt , i love it . And you can do that whyle moving .
    Post edited by Hellblast on
  • not sure what this patch is gonna bring, but gotta say I feel special geting run over by a hib 8 man at the solo spot right now
  • conteesa darkenrider kovackheal pahhh addzstogami arfvivi etc, gj you really got me.....
  • edited February 14 PM
    Happens every day. Plz dont tell us now every day. Ty.
    It wasnt a patch btw. But im sure you know that.
    Post edited by Kroko on
  • tyvm for your response @Kroko im sure you and your friends enjoy the 8v1... I did not tho so ill be getting my fix elsewhere xoxox
  • @Brut I think BS biggest mistakes for class balance has been making huge changes at once instead of going in increments.

    Arms didn't need a huge buff, they just needed something to feel a bit "special". Free snapshot is a good, small change. Let's see how this goes.

    I think some classes shoukdn't be balanced for groups. Take vamps and reavers. Great in solo, not so much in groups. Great players will still make them work, but they are lacking. But that's fine, not every class has to be good in all areas of the game, I think it's ok to have "niche" classes
  • Dale_Perf wrote: »
    The biggest problem on YWAIN is that when one realm is dominating RvR, it shuts down all other aspects of that realms ability to RvR. IE when hero zerg is rolling cutting all ports and taking keeps, any solo/duo/small mans now have to boat from relic town to make it back to the action. Outer keeps are effectively useless to Hero because he can take a keep without cutting port thanks to population imbalances. This forces an entire realm to play one play style: zerg keep defense. While this is great when we had a reason to defend something, now there is no reason to defend thanks to dead realm pride and relics are too easy for hero to take right now.

    So let's learn from this. Remove the old/broken relic system and update the bonuses your realm gets from owning more keeps. New server doesn't need relics, or you risk one realm dominating the other two for the life of the season, and we want to promote BALANCE not IMBALANCE. . Remove the broken keep RP reward system as well, it promotes 8mans jumping on the zerg train and consolidating action rather than spreading it around a little bit .If you're going to lock people down to one realm, and one realm is set up to dominate that season (we all know certain patches certain realms were stronger, some groups will take advantage of this, ontop of relic stacking), people will just quit or go farm EC players on Ywain.

    Provide more incentives for groups 4 or less. This is probably one of the more important points for the overall life of DAoC. A lot of people can agree the general playerbase ATM is pretty, well, bad. People consider assisting high level play..... The best way for people to learn their classes and abilities is small manning. You need to use the full strength of your class to be competitive in a small man, unlike zerging where you're mistakes can largely be covered by other players around you. 8man elitism isn't a good thing to promote either.

    IMO I would use the Solo zone strategy here:

    Allow groups 4 or less to click an obelisk in each realms maze. Obelisk gives 25-50% RP bonus, and allows you to port to the other realms mazes. Mazes would become a hub for small man action, and if 8mans try to come gank them they can run to the obelisk and port out, or all the smallies turn. Return the buggane's obelisk to the middle of the island for 8mans giving them an extra 15% RP's. Also if you're in a BATTLEGROUP you should not reap the rewards from buggane, no RP bonus for you. If you want to play with larger numbers, which a lot of times means you're going to zerg down any smaller force you find, THAT is your RP bonus from zerging. You can't give huge RP bonuses to zergers, or else you have the product we have today: high RR brain-dead zergs.

    Also on this progression server I would cap the RR at 5-8.. If somebody decides to sub in month 4 of 6 during progression server and nobody is leveling anymore so they have to do it all solo, they might not keep subbing. Then they have to wait 180 days................................



    Edit: One last note, want to bring back more old subs? When we launch the progression server bring back the 14 day free-trial for previous subs. It will give your player base that decided to leave JUST over Broadsword, a chance to come back in and see your new shiny product before deciding to go EC or sub.



    Most issues today IMO are rooted in population. Hib has dominated before, and the top spot has usually been a turntable, sometimes lasting a month, a couple years, or in some cases the life of the server (speaking archived servers). So with one dominating realm being a near constant, the changing variable is population.

    200 vs 100 is one thing, at least with 100 people you will get plenty of kills, plenty of RP's to go around.

    50 vs 10 is another. Add multiple language barriers, general pessimistic attitude, and some ill-advised patches and you have what we have today. I agree the devs should not bail anybody out of this situation, but we are still looking through too small of a lens here. The game needs to change for the population we have, not strive to keep the same system designed for several thousand people playing on the same map.

    Until BS does something that improves the system, we will have this cycle on repeat. This could even be used to explain why no solution to realm timers will work. Extend realm timers or remove them, you will alienate people. We had "realm pride" and realm timers work before because there were multiple servers, and you could only play one realm per server. With one server, there will always be some swapping, so the entire model needs some rethinking there as well.

    ATM we are trying to hold up a broken system designed for something we don't use it for, and trying to change the inner workings (class balances is a good example) instead of fixing the system as a whole. Does this mean DAoC 2? Does this mean they need to change the relic/port system and create a new flow? That's all up to @John_Broadsword .





    The fact that on a leveled keep, the outer towers can see the inner CK roof is one of the worst keep design flaws. One way to remove that is to stop keeps from leveling up aesthetically, only difficulty-wise.




    EC driving players to other places. Wonder if we've realized BS does not have a monopoly on DAoC. I can think of a couple F2P models that just limit inventory/bank space. I'd restrict EC on vaults, housing, mount inventory. No stackable items.

    Right now they can't even run the same buffs as everybody else without spending $$, why RvR if I have other options to do the exact same thing with no restrictions for free?




    F2P players are also likely to never sub at all, no matter how well EC is done or how well the game is doing. Once you open those gates, there will *always* be a market for BS to tap into. Making it so restrictive that nobody wants to hang out for free, BS loses this revenue. There will ALWAYS be a good portion of the F2P players that will never sub to a game, and will spend some $$ every month in cash shop on skins/QoL/etc. But not if they can't compete in RvR thanks to RSP caps, supremacy pots restrictions, and more.

    Missing out on revenue here.

    And if you increase the value of subscriptions (like giving us free mithril every month, say 200-400), you wont get too many subs unsubbing.

    putting such a wall of text ... i didn't even read it all... maybe try break it down in a few different post.
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • Koe wrote: »
    On XP for EC accounts:

    I helped a friend level up two toons to 50 on an EC account for kicks. Combination of PL, BG quests, (Tower runs), and PL quests. Quest XP is in a good place, IMO, but could be boosted a little bit in the BG's. She spent hours running back and forth and it seemed like she went from maybe 36-37, or 38-39. The level 40-50 quest in NF (kill 100 mobs) is good for the portion of the grind where it really gets rough otherwise, but you really need a bunch of friends to make it work. I think that's a good way to grind; people should be grouping up for these quests. She did pop a 25% and then 50% xp token, so I'm guessing she put in $10 this month between armor dyes and xp buffs. However she did it more as an investment in not having to pay the $15/mo every month. If she didn't have my help it would probably have taken her three times as long, or more. Still we/she probably put in 14-16 hours per toon. On conversion to subs, I don't think she's going to convert to a real sub as she's absolutely a part time gamer.

    EC and non EC people can't level together.

    non EC people leave their EC people behind in level.
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • xuu wrote: »
    @John_Broadsword Here is my honest feedback to help the game in its current state. These changes would be extremely beneficial and you wont have to go back and hotfix them after.

    Remove aoe from champ debuffs, too strong. I am saying this as my main toon atm is a champ....

    Nerf heavies so they arent unkillable, hero zerg is unkillable. Sometimes my grp can take him 5 r11 caster with a 50% debuff. Entire grp focusing on him solo..... but even thats rare. That is so unbalanced. Theres no way normal players can kill him. Remove their passive AOM. Passive aom + cloak + fury + moose + IP + rampage.

    Another related idea to make sieging actually interactive and fun - remove wall climbing ability completely.

    Don't touch pbaoe delve. It's not terribly op and all realms have access to it. It's the champ that makes hib so op. Not to mention its the champ that makes alb and mid so crap. Can't bomb when red aoe debuffed on every caster. We do want it to be dark age of mongo tankers. In fact increase the necro bainshee and lock one to 425 too so they are viable.

    Midgard is the worst realm by far for 8man or zerging. Buff casters spec nukes to allow for them to do dmg. The hybrid or casters setups are crap. Insane low dps compared to alb or hib. Give supp spec a 209 spirit nuke. dark spec a 209 cold nuke. summoning & bone army spec lines a 209 energy nuke.

    They are also crap because shaman + pac is crap in comparison to bard + druid. Give shaman a pet like druid and it will be viable for grping other than resists. Or better yet, give it a peel. Maybe even both. bards and wardens all go 10 blades to side snare. Having backline peels is extremely NEEEDED in midgard. If this comes at nerfing dps (dots, nuke) of sham than so be it. It shouldnt be dpsing anyway in a group (like a druid).

    Skalds are crap in 8v8 so we never run one (((although we rarely play midgard in general because it is so bad compared to hib/alb))) so we dont have sos. I dont even know where to start. The constant cresendo was way to OP for midgard tankers.. so not that. We also want to be able to have sos in a caster / hybrid setup so they change shouldnt just be good for tankers. Honestly not sure without making them too OP for solo play. My mind initially went to champ like debuffs but single target obviously.

    Wizard r5 is the longest standing joke in game (aside from pet pathing). Up the delve and add a snare component.

    Give valks battlemaster or banelord instead of stormlord (lol).

    And for the love of god nerf tic r5, aoe snare range and and have it give an immunity, and the pulse that they can still spam cast over and over while being meleed.

    i think i agree to 90 % of this post.

    the thing i don't agree is the wiz rr5 to some degree, it might not be the best, but i wish warlock rr5 was as good. warlock rr 5 is garbage.

    i'm not sure about the remove climb wall completely. assassins should have climb walls. but the classes with the heaviest armour in the game ? does it make sense for people in heavy armour to climb walls ? did hibs need vamps to climb walls with no spec requirement while albs needed a low spec requirement on mincers to climb walls and mids needed a spec destroying requirement to get their 3rd class to climb walls resulting in NO third mid class being able to climb walls ? giving climb walls to savages at that requirement was a joke. it would have been way better to give climb walls to mid on another class without that stupid spec requirement. climb walls on the different realms is just not equal.
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • Dale_Perf wrote: »
    xuu wrote: »

    Nerf heavies so they arent unkillable, hero zerg is unkillable. Sometimes my grp can take him 5 r11 caster with a 50% debuff. Entire grp focusing on him solo..... but even thats rare. That is so unbalanced. Theres no way normal players can kill him. Remove their passive AOM. Passive aom + cloak + fury + moose + IP + rampage.

    Another related idea to make sieging actually interactive and fun - remove wall climbing ability completely.

    Don't touch pbaoe delve. It's not terribly op and all realms have access to it. It's the champ that makes hib so op. Not to mention its the champ that makes alb and mid so crap. Can't bomb when red aoe debuffed on every caster. We do want it to be dark age of mongo tankers. In fact increase the necro bainshee and lock one to 425 too so they are viable.

    I don't think nerfing all heavies just because hero's are the best heavy tank, and keeping pbae at the same delve is a solution. If theyre going to buff heavy tanks then don't touch the pbae, but if theyre going to nerf all heavies the pbae needs to change a little bit, at least.

    Also taking climb walls away from heavy tanks +53742560937. Light tanks should be the only ones climbing, they don't have the HP/Beefiness of a heavy to withstand too much dps inside a keep. No climb walls would turn it into a caster-only fest for breaking down the outer door, while heavy tanks do nothing but either camp the outer door or posterns. Doesn't sound too fun and interactive to me.

    light tanks should have been the ones to climb walls, not heavy tanks. light tanks should climb the walls, heavy tanks should destroy the gate or breach the walls.
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • Increase PBAoE mana consumption similar to spread heals. Thanks
  • are reavers considered a light tank ----
  • No, they are considered a hybrid like thanes or champions afaik.
  • Muylae wrote: »
    Dale_Perf wrote: »
    xuu wrote: »

    Nerf heavies so they arent unkillable, hero zerg is unkillable. Sometimes my grp can take him 5 r11 caster with a 50% debuff. Entire grp focusing on him solo..... but even thats rare. That is so unbalanced. Theres no way normal players can kill him. Remove their passive AOM. Passive aom + cloak + fury + moose + IP + rampage.

    Another related idea to make sieging actually interactive and fun - remove wall climbing ability completely.

    Don't touch pbaoe delve. It's not terribly op and all realms have access to it. It's the champ that makes hib so op. Not to mention its the champ that makes alb and mid so crap. Can't bomb when red aoe debuffed on every caster. We do want it to be dark age of mongo tankers. In fact increase the necro bainshee and lock one to 425 too so they are viable.

    I don't think nerfing all heavies just because hero's are the best heavy tank, and keeping pbae at the same delve is a solution. If theyre going to buff heavy tanks then don't touch the pbae, but if theyre going to nerf all heavies the pbae needs to change a little bit, at least.

    Also taking climb walls away from heavy tanks +53742560937. Light tanks should be the only ones climbing, they don't have the HP/Beefiness of a heavy to withstand too much dps inside a keep. No climb walls would turn it into a caster-only fest for breaking down the outer door, while heavy tanks do nothing but either camp the outer door or posterns. Doesn't sound too fun and interactive to me.

    light tanks should have been the ones to climb walls, not heavy tanks. light tanks should climb the walls, heavy tanks should destroy the gate or breach the walls.

    It would make sense, lore wise, that the duel wielding classes would've been the ones able to climb but no way will BS make that change.
    Dreamscape 12Lx Dark Lotus
  • Anything that can help sway the server away from the zerging meta should be reviewed and implemented. It's really getting old getting zerged down by 3-4 FGs of zergers day in day out.
  • Shoke wrote: »
    Anything that can help sway the server away from the zerging meta should be reviewed and implemented. It's really getting old getting zerged down by 3-4 FGs of zergers day in day out.

    One would argue PBAE patch is partially to blame. Now people can log in, get wasted, charge you and spam pbae button. Plays right into the hands of casuals.
    "...the best thing to do if you disagree (or agree) isn't to ask us why (which is rhetorical)...." -John_Broadsword
    "the patch [1.127] is later this year" -Carol_Broadsword, aka "constable paddy biehbien of the bentsword local community Enforcement force "
    send a message with your wallet
  • Rohan wrote: »
    @Koe
    “Heck, just giving a mid class, any mid class any spec line the ability to cast a 50% buff to heals on a mate for 30 seconds, Oof.”

    I’m gonna let you finish. And I agree with some of what you are saying. But mid does indeed have this ability, it’s on shaman. It’s actually 45 seconds duration and at only 35 aug so... basically universal.

    @Rohan Actually Hib Enchantment buff allows the target to cast heals 50% more effectively. That is, group heals, spreads, and single target heals. That impacts the entire group, even the guys out of LOS.

    Mids Shaman heal buff is 45 seconds but it is single target and allows heals cast on a target to receive (if you have LOS to receive the buff) 50% more effective heals. Two entirely different abilities, and one is significantly more effective, especially if your tanks are over the wall and the r13 druid/wardens want a heal buff. Power management less important if heals are 50% more impactful when they come.

  • edited February 18 PM
    Rohan wrote: »
    In regards to defense it’s effectively as good.

    Both aug and pac Healers have spread, and shaman buff works for the whole group if cast on a healer spreading (or warlock). Shaman recast is only 15 seconds so it’s easy to have a 45duration spell on 2 targets (maybe a 3rd).
    In the situation at hand it is as good if not better and faaaaaaar more available to mid than running a specific off-train (body) nuker on hib. Again not saying it’s a bad spec line, it’s great, but calling foul on this particular Enchantment chanter ability when mid arguably has an equivalent, more inclusive alternative is a poor argument.

    Post edited by Daelin on
  • @Koe
    We went over all that a week ago when I responded to you post. Not sure how you missed that or the fact that it works just fine on spread heal (for the whole group). So your over a wall example seems intentionally misleading.

    Omitting this ability when begging for a parallel on mid when it’s on shaman of all classes included in completely normal spec (longer duration, short reuse) compared to an off spec on enchanter is just sublimely myopic.
  • KoeKoe
    edited February 19 PM
    Actually no, they are entirely different, and Hibs version is 5x more useful. You can't get even a skilled group to cast that heal on all the targets that need it, vs even a homer can cast it on the main healer in the group. Secondly, almost no groups run aug shaman. There are far more players making RPS on chanter than on Shaman, so, nobody buys this utility argument unless they are the ones collecting 2m-4m a week on their hibs. Enchanters: 17m rps last week. Shamans: 5.5m rps. Over the last 2 months the weekly averages are similar, 13m vs 5m.

    Asking for that ability, on any class, any spec, is completely reasonable given the ability to simply rock a heal "buff bot" and pump out 50% more heals than all other toons on either side of the zerg, or as hib meta groups are dealing with a significant heal advantage. That you are rabid about it not being an advantage is telling.
    Post edited by Koe on
  • Koe wrote: »
    Actually no, they are entirely different, and Hibs version is 5x more useful. You can't get even a skilled group to cast that heal on all the targets that need it, vs even a homer can cast it on the main healer in the group. Secondly, almost no groups run aug shaman. There are far more players making RPS on chanter than on Shaman, so, nobody buys this utility argument unless they are the ones collecting 2m-4m a week on their hibs. Enchanters: 17m rps last week. Shamans: 5.5m rps. Over the last 2 months the weekly averages are similar, 13m vs 5m.

    Asking for that ability, on any class, any spec, is completely reasonable given the ability to simply rock a heal "buff bot" and pump out 50% more heals than all other toons on either side of the zerg, or as hib meta groups are dealing with a significant heal advantage. That you are rabid about it not being an advantage is telling.

    You do realize that your enchanter stats are completely skewed by the IRC guys? They have a rotation of 4-5 chanters, each of them making between 2 and 5 Million RPs per week.

    If you remove these guys from the equation (they don't play mid) then you have shamans and enchanters on the same level.

    And why won't people group Shamans? Disease, rupts, heals, resists, shears aren't important on mid? I don't see why anyone playing a shaman with the intent of grouping wouldn't run 40 Aug.
Sign In or Register to comment.