Remove athletic if you don't want to include hybrids (though I prefer athletic/capable over fast or strong for Priest), and the argument still holds.
If Noctu turns out to be a great tarot based affliction class, people will use fast. If someone wants to balance themselves for teams and roll out for burst damage instead, they can use intelligent. If someone doesn't want a gem and wants to try and split the balance, capable is still there waiting for them as a very acceptable version of both.
I'm presuming in advance that Noctu will have a way to leverage afflictions into damage in the same way you cite that DSB does. They'll either cause additional unhealed attunes that make their damage more dangerous, or have an attune based modifier that just makes their skills do more flat damage overall. This style would require a short build up just like fast affliction classes do, but it should also have a higher ceiling overall to make up for it.
Somehow I missed that part. Just wanted to make sure. I can just as easily replace slow for something else in shamanism.
The thing is, aeon, together with someone doing a proper work with hitting with mercury, worked as a disabler, which Demonic really lacks in comparison with maybe 2/3 of AM professions, to compensate for the difference of burst.
I don't know, this seems a pretty bad moment to make classleads. Too many unknown variables.
I wouldn't worry about that. Coding these is going to take 2-3 months, then a month of beta, possibly more - we'll likely be close to starting another classlead round by the time these changes go live.
I wouldn't worry about that. Coding these is going to take 2-3 months, then a month of beta, possibly more - we'll likely be close to starting another classlead round by the time these changes go live.
I have faith that you won't take that long. It took you 2 months, from announcement, to code the 3 Bonding additions - and those were the same amount of skills (1 new from Outrider, 5 new from Druid/Hunter, plus small Hunting tweaks), and then we took our time in beta. Of course, unforeseen circumstances and etc. I look forward to more details as things roll out.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>****, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
Don't take away Selthis's tentacles, or he will have to buy another diadem. And the last thing this game needs is Selthis to fling his mastercard around more. And now back to not caring, later!
I have faith that you won't take that long. It took you 2 months, from announcement, to code the 3 Bonding additions - and those were the same amount of skills (1 new from Outrider, 5 new from Druid/Hunter, plus small Hunting tweaks), and then we took our time in beta. Of course, unforeseen circumstances and etc. I look forward to more details as things roll out.
Message 73
Sent By: Sarrius on 6/12/2013/18:49
Hey man...can you use another wing man? I will bring Lalitana with me to make you clothes.
“We abjure labels. We fight for money and an indefinable pride. The politics, the ethics, the moralities, are irrelevant."
Finally, to answer the obvious question, the profession will no longer
have aeon-style functionality, nor anything similar to the current
Crystalism vibrations.
Consequently, is there anything planned to be done with Shield Tap?
Finally, to answer the obvious question, the profession will no longer
have aeon-style functionality, nor anything similar to the current
Crystalism vibrations.
Consequently, is there anything planned to be done with Shield Tap?
Are we getting close to more information? Maybe a tentative completion percentage? Or a super-tentative beta date? I imagine we're following the same timeline as last year's class remakes, meaning a summer-long beta.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>****, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
Are we getting close to more information? Maybe a tentative completion percentage? Or a super-tentative beta date? I imagine we're following the same timeline as last year's class remakes, meaning a summer-long beta.
Well, the actual coding started less than a month ago (after classleads), and I'm juggling a bunch of other projects along with this one, so it really is too early to provide things like beta dates. Right now mages are about halfway coded, no code exists for summoners yet.
Since this came up a while ago, is the aeon affliction going to disappear completely, or mobs will keep it? Will it be around still, but with a different mechanism?
Shields are nice, but they're not game changing. There's no real reason to deny mages shields. They'd really be denying themselves income (and we wouldn't want to do that!). The thing they have to make sure they don't do (haha) is create a walking nuke-bot class that can troll around in super armor (terrais). Makes me wonder if the terrible intelligent statpack patch is going to come back and bite us in the ****.
For all the "This is not D&D" comments, that was a total D&D maneuver.
P.S: I feel that fast isn't tanky. Can we sign a petition to take 2str from fast and put it in con?
Shields are nice, but they're not game changing. There's no real reason to deny mages shields. They'd really be denying themselves income (and we wouldn't want to do that!). The thing they have to make sure they don't do (haha) is create a walking nuke-bot class that can troll around in super armor (terrais). Makes me wonder if the terrible intelligent statpack patch is going to come back and bite us in the ****.
For all the "This is not D&D" comments, that was a total D&D maneuver.
P.S: I feel that fast isn't tanky. Can we sign a petition to take 2str from fast and put it in con?
/signed
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>****, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
And which determinate stat does fast have that increases it's damage output?
You'll probably say fast balance, but that's negligible because the strength is so low. Your next fall back will be 'omg, afflictions' but that won't hold much water because of the double malus fast takes to sipping and the fact that all afflictions strategies are long term. With the overnerf to ciguatoxin, classes are incapable of locking down burst offenses that run with strong (balanced) and intelligent (not).
Int --> Damage. Also picks up an eq bonus. Double upgrade, single (nerfed) malus. Fast --> Afflictions. Double bonus, double malus.
Fast has 20% faster balance, intelligent has 10% faster equilibrium and 16 intelligence. Both of those statpacks give up basically everything else to obtain a significant and unparalleled advantage in their offense.
I wouldn't be against raising fast's strength (slightly), but I would be against making the 20% balance race less inherently vulnerable to damage.
Comments
Sometimes I miss the stupid things we did in that game.
The thing is, aeon, together with someone doing a proper work with hitting with mercury, worked as a disabler, which Demonic really lacks in comparison with maybe 2/3 of AM professions, to compensate for the difference of burst.
I don't know, this seems a pretty bad moment to make classleads. Too many unknown variables.
I have faith that you won't take that long. It took you 2 months, from announcement, to code the 3 Bonding additions - and those were the same amount of skills (1 new from Outrider, 5 new from Druid/Hunter, plus small Hunting tweaks), and then we took our time in beta. Of course, unforeseen circumstances and etc. I look forward to more details as things roll out.
Consequently, is there anything planned to be done with Shield Tap?
For all the "This is not D&D" comments, that was a total D&D maneuver.
Fast got no such love.
Fast --> Afflictions. Double bonus, double malus.