Jeremy said: Okay, fair enough. I will not say that we will not try to fix major issues in team combat. Obviously we will. What I mean is that there is absolutely no way we will ever be able to make team combat super fair. Trying to fix every little team combat possibility is just not feasible.
I am thinking about creating more opportunities for 1v1. This revolves mainly around things where two people are want the same thing and have to fight to decide who gets it (like shards). This opens many little other problems of course, but I am looking into it. -------------------------------------------------------- EDIT: also, what is up with the quotes here, I can't ever get them to work properly.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Just click the quote button on the post. Its what I do and they work fine for me. Except once where it wouldn't let me put the cursor outside the quote, so I just erased it all and re-did the quote and it worked fine.
At least Sarrius is on the job (and I hate I have to waste a classlead to address double-level burrow, but it's been broken long enough)
edit: Just saw the civility post, so I will add that tear map is fine (which I first heard from Khizan), and multi-summoner hanged man chains impacting CC situations could probably be addressed if people think its a problem (though stun is a bigger problem for all 3 circles imo), though I don't see the 1x1 tweak to hanged man in the same light (if you really want to witness a miserable 1x1 stonewall, find yourself a fast WD...lot of Azfel hate here )
“We abjure labels. We fight for money and an indefinable pride. The politics, the ethics, the moralities, are irrelevant."
I haven't put anything up for druid because someone has already addressed the two problems I see with the profession - The 3-4 limb break combo and poison wisp.
Also, burrow has been addressed. Digging is much quicker and you see them move - Yes, once they get two layers down, you're not going to dig them out, but burrow has sufficient limitations on it that it can be blocked or becomes useless in many situations. It's also limited to very few professions, possibly as few as one, outside of artifacts.
Of course, if we're going to stray in to nerfing artifact-based escape skills, I'm not adverse to burrowing being changed or the claws being removed, assuming raksha bands and earrings also become far more limited for escape purposes.
Menoch's reports asking for Summoner buffs in the line of making Enlighten easier, if all of them are approved, would be absolutely insane. I just don't see why we need to streamline Summoner having the ability to reliably Enlighten. It feels like all of these reports combined would make it effortless, but that's simply from an 'on paper' perspective.
Also, whomever Ellen is, they need to check their facts a little: her classlead would actually make wisp poison MORE powerful, because Wisp Poison's 20% unblockable is only 10% actual damage - the duration buff, paired with this, would probably be insane. I think making the wisp usable every OTHER wisp instead of EVERY wisp fails to recognize the actual point of nerfing it - using it should not be a no brainer. This buff would make 2 applications of toadstool useless and open up usage of another wisp, sure, but it still makes poison wisp always used - just every other wisp instead of every wisp. Both the current wisp poison (10% maxHP damage + the loss of 10% maxHP heal from toadstool) and the one in 75 (2 losses of 10% maxHP heal from toadstool) would be the same problem, just spread out across two applications. My solution 2 on Classlead 24 is about the same spirit of intent, except 1 toadstool instead of 2. Personally, I believe the damage itself isn't the problem, but the damage TYPE.
Post edited by Sarrius on
<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>
7: Not really an answer to Mage's problems, honestly. A single affliction on such a slow time scale won't really do a whole lot (or, quite frankly, much of anything - it'd just be endless oxalis spam for Stridulation trolling, or maybe strych spam for teams), and single damage + toxin won't do anything in retardation aside from sliiiightly open up the ability to damage kill someone in it eventually if you can't manage to straight behead them somehow. Extra damage in general might return them to kill-town, but not in any sort of interesting way aside from adding an extra line to their one button.
8. Strong enemy-only damage has been nerfed for good reasons, most of which involve giant teams and/or retardation+totem traps.
9. Augmented robes won't really do anything noticable, but allowing them to be customized would be sweet. Bag of stasis is a QOL change. Multiple enchantments on one item would be nice, no charge reduction required, and please god no stupid mechanics like toxic rings of pestilence crumbling randomly out of the blue for no reason (someone classlead that and just mandate a cap of 3 toxins or something instead, please). It's really just reducing the need to wear 18579 rings.
11. No real reason not to. QOL change.
21. Terrais doesn't have a staffcast modification for a reason.
64. Inks aren't really that expensive, no. Blue ink supplies running out has always been a problem in Kinsarmar, but the restock rate is sufficient in general.
67. This got voted down last round, didn't it? It'd introduce way more trouble than it's worth, regardless of individual opinion on the matter.
77. Aside from my dislike of 'Zealotry', it's a pretty minor change. That said, the big reason Brutality is seperate is because hound and kestrel/falcon actually do work a bit differently.
One of the major problems Runeguards have is that they lack any true offense outside of pure DSL; if they are unable to
overwhelm the target with raw DSL damage, they are often unable to score a kill. Fast sabre-knights are somewhat less
susceptible to this, but that's a niche playstyle that's unavailable to many players and they often still have problems
with it.
Decision:
Like report 79, this too feels a tad too vague.
"If we can't overwhelm with damage, we can't kill people. We'd like a bit more situational damage."
"That's a bit too vague."
Too vague? What? Just how explicit are we supposed to be here? "Justicars are bussing over people with 230 damage burst combos and have a blessing that hits us for goddamned 20+ damage per flare, give us Runeflare so we at least have an offense that's in the same ballpark." Would that be better? I'm a bit confused here.
EDIT: Now I now how explicit they want me to be, but after years of suggesting one idea and getting "similar thing that's still not at all what I suggested", I thought I'd go away from my 3 paragraph classleads Dranor used to give me hell about. Oh well.
Post edited by Khizan on
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
I'm kind of sad Garryn chose the boring redemption option, but I also saw it coming. I really hope that when Knights get redesigned, Templars get more of a Paladin setup. I'd love to see the class have auras.
‘Least I won’t have to carry it no more. You see how bloody heavy it is?’
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
There's a few I disagree with.I get tired of the "We're aware there's a problem but hey, we're not going to fix it any time soon" and "too vague..nyarg."
I think my biggest came from:
While the problem description of "there is one best option" is valid, I don't think that "remove all the other options" is a very good solution.
10 years of practical application has proven this to be quite accurate.
At the end of the day, I think it wasn't a bad classlead round.
While the problem description of "there is one best option" is valid, I don't think that "remove all the other options" is a very good solution.
Asking them to remove every other sword option but sabres was excessive and unnecessary.
Like I said, the games have proven over the course of 10 years that there are no other options. Sabres/rapiers have been the flavor of the decade because when you're riding the high end of the afflictions/second, you're going to win more than you lose. Everything in the middle benefits from varying degrees of crappy trade offs. Claymores have replaced battleaxes as the new hotness, though you can still old-school it with a battle-axe/tower. Personally, I'd like to see the all weapons standardized and made more useful. I don't see this happening because of ::effort::. If they wanted to band-aid solution it, you make two types of weapon classes and base knights off which class of weapon they're using. In ten years of juggling, no one has ever come near a fair/balanced/good/decent/useful/working middle ground. Ever.
A lot of this stems from the fact that devotion, necromancy and runelore suck because doubleslash is so hard to balance. When you start reducing damage output, you make it harder to kill. The trio of mediocre don't offer enough burst or dps to really burn someone down. Sure, flare can try, but I'm just going to turtle through it and watch you reset your rites. Necromancy and chargers are nice gap fillers, but combat decided by RNG is meh. Runelore does zero damage (and shouldn't).On the flip side, if you reduce afflictions/second, templar and runeguard get railed and dk's can still farm up wins with vivisect. These really aren't band-aid fixes that can be dinged off on a classlead list. Knowing the classlead system, we'll take a short sighted approach and throw in "huradur runelaser swords" and then act shocked when people start trying to use anti-health circles and burn people down in 6s.
ID D Classlead Skillname Problem ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 23 A Eldreth Tentacles Tentacles has a hard start/stop, and doe 25 A Eldreth Readaura Summoners have not one..but three differ 27 A Eldreth Golgotha Oh Golgotha...how do we loathe thee? Let 28 A Eldreth Devil The RNG nature of double-throw is seen a 29 A Eldreth Demonrays Demonrays are rarely used for a number o 39 A Eldreth Devilmark The purpose of Devilmark is to extend do 40 A Eldreth Hood I understand the general trend to mitiga 41 A Eldreth Cleanseaura Cleanseaura has no current functionality
Plus Delrayne and Leisane carrying my two other suggestions to glory. (Bellatores): Apoloc says, "And people say money has no influence." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“We abjure labels. We fight for money and an indefinable pride. The politics, the ethics, the moralities, are irrelevant."
So...can we have the aspect section of classleads removed in the future? Having things rejected for "Outside the Scope of Classleads" is getting tiresome. Aleutia doesn't like being mislead with an 'aspects' section. It hurts her feelings when it very clearly states that it is within the scope of classleads. Do not mislead the Aleutia.
"Redo the aspect system entirely" and "Make major sweeping changes to the aspects" are outside the scope of the classlead system.
"Warp is a crazy stupid good escape skill and should be stopped by something" would have, imo, been within the scope of it.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
While the problem description of "there is one best option" is valid, I don't think that "remove all the other options" is a very good solution.
Asking them to remove every other sword option but sabres was excessive and unnecessary.
Like I said, the games have proven over the course of 10 years that there are no other options. Sabres/rapiers have been the flavor of the decade because when you're riding the high end of the afflictions/second, you're going to win more than you lose. Everything in the middle benefits from varying degrees of crappy trade offs. Claymores have replaced battleaxes as the new hotness, though you can still old-school it with a battle-axe/tower. Personally, I'd like to see the all weapons standardized and made more useful. I don't see this happening because of ::effort::. If they wanted to band-aid solution it, you make two types of weapon classes and base knights off which class of weapon they're using. In ten years of juggling, no one has ever come near a fair/balanced/good/decent/useful/working middle ground. Ever.
A lot of this stems from the fact that devotion, necromancy and runelore suck because doubleslash is so hard to balance. When you start reducing damage output, you make it harder to kill. The trio of mediocre don't offer enough burst or dps to really burn someone down. Sure, flare can try, but I'm just going to turtle through it and watch you reset your rites. Necromancy and chargers are nice gap fillers, but combat decided by RNG is meh. Runelore does zero damage (and shouldn't).On the flip side, if you reduce afflictions/second, templar and runeguard get railed and dk's can still farm up wins with vivisect. These really aren't band-aid fixes that can be dinged off on a classlead list. Knowing the classlead system, we'll take a short sighted approach and throw in "huradur runelaser swords" and then act shocked when people start trying to use anti-health circles and burn people down in 6s.
I use a broadsword when I'm using Templar more often than I use sabre, and I have L3s of both artifacts. Sabre has the fastest affliction rate, but is too fast for some of the other synergies that come with playing Templar.
So your argument is spend 1200 credits to use a 300 credit skill. Sounds reasonable. There are still only two types of weapons in use. You really only argued that a weapon needed a certain threshold of damage/speed before you used it. I tip my hat to you, sir. I couldn't have done it without you.
Khiz: Whooooooosh. Given, my point was a little vague, not nearly as vague as your classlead, but pretty vague. Classleads are solid indicators of things that need fixing outside of a spot fix. You can't shouldn't spend half the year saying, "that's an issue for classleads" and then brush them off as "outside the scope" when they come around. We(he) admit(s) the aspect system sucks. Guess who's in a position to fix it?
While I'm at it. Does anyone else think this "We're not going to take team pvp into account" decision making is blah? We already saw what happened to Imperian when we pandered to white knighting. That crap was boring and went nowhere. The game is so much more involved and active now. People are fighting who would never have considered fighting. I'm not saying 1v1 needs to be forgotten entirely, but the game has naturally progressed to team combat and it's been a lot of fun for the past few months. We really shouldn't be switching gears and ignoring team combat while accidentally/intentionally brain farting out some more insta-gib combinations. We were all such -huge- fans of them.
The only 1 v 1 that's happening in Imperian is in player houses. And most of the time even that is 2 v 1. Looking at @Alitis, @Maglust, @the otherpieceofbread in that sandwich.
So your argument is spend 1200 credits to use a 300 credit skill. Sounds reasonable. There are still only two types of weapons in use. You really only argued that a weapon needed a certain threshold of damage/speed before you used it. I tip my hat to you, sir. I couldn't have done it without you.
Not at all, I could do the exact same thing slightly less effectively with smithed weapons - which is basically true of every artifact.
The more I think about the battlecry change, the more I like it. Diavlous and Lorekeepers can now go strong with essentially no penalty (aside from the tiny mana pool which Clerics/Malignists, IE no one could abuse) and enjoy what really is some sweet high claymore damage.
For Justicars, there's always going to be flare which keeps me out of strong unless I'm bashing. For other Justicars that do not go the flare route, battlecry is still totally viable with pocket pindown. I assume other circles have access to prones, but pindown really does make it pretty easy.
All in all, very solid change. Keeps Knight from being in charge of the stunlock, but with the right setup, it can still stun where necessary.
‘Least I won’t have to carry it no more. You see how bloody heavy it is?’
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
So your argument is spend 1200 credits to use a 300 credit skill. Sounds reasonable. There are still only two types of weapons in use. You really only argued that a weapon needed a certain threshold of damage/speed before you used it. I tip my hat to you, sir. I couldn't have done it without you.
Not at all, I could do the exact same thing slightly less effectively with smithed weapons - which is basically true of every artifact.
Then it's not exactly the same thing. Good attempt, maybe?
Does anyone else think this "We're not going to take team pvp into account" decision making is blah?
I am unsure what you are referring to, as I absolutely do take it into account,
Mentioned previously in this thread. You do a good job of keeping team combat in mind. A lot of the changes in the past few classleads have definitely made team pvp more tolerable and more exciting. I hope we keep this momentum going instead of 'balancing for 1v1' and reverting back to the Imperian of 2006. Though, I can understand people's motivation to return to relevance. You still have your veterans who get their street cred for having killed a million dudes before autocuring. The cool part is you have people who would never have been involved in combat in 2006 showing up and actually initiating combat outside of city defense. It's exciting for them and it's exciting for people who actually want competition. I imagine it pads the wallet pretty well since you have a two or three fold increase in active pkers.
So your argument is spend 1200 credits to use a 300 credit skill. Sounds reasonable. There are still only two types of weapons in use. You really only argued that a weapon needed a certain threshold of damage/speed before you used it. I tip my hat to you, sir. I couldn't have done it without you.
Not at all, I could do the exact same thing slightly less effectively with smithed weapons - which is basically true of every artifact.
Then it's not exactly the same thing. Good attempt, maybe?
Because symantics sure was the core of my argument. There isn't a single thing I do with tempar that I couldn't do without artifact weapons - but would in fact use something other than sabres.
You still haven't really refuted the statement there are two types of weapons, which would justify all weapons being classified as either "Speed" or "Damage" which would clear up most if not all of the weapon inconsistencies that are floating around right now. If anything, you're basing your argument on semantics. My sword wasn't favoring speed or damage, it was just a broadsword that I used for highest damage and closet sync to my equilibrium. It's not my fault you used the words "Exact" and "slightly less" in the same statement.
The only reason you used a broadsword was because it was an artifact. Ozreas|Aleutia|Sekhir|Me all tried to smith for good broadswords and I don't think that ship ever arrived. You would have ended up using the highest damage axe that came as close to synchronization with equilibrium. Why? Highest damage closest speed. Back to the argument that started it all, the middle ground sucks. The middle ground has always sucked. People play knight at the extremes because they're the viable options. You tried to argue for the middle ground and ended up showing that the cookie-cutter damage is the way to go. They don't need to 'delete' all the weapons, because I like the variety and customization, but they really need to standardize stats and get rid of all the "not fast, not high damage" variations of bad.
The more I think about the battlecry change, the more I like it. Diavlous and Lorekeepers can now go strong with essentially no penalty (aside from the tiny mana pool which Clerics/Malignists, IE no one could abuse) and enjoy what really is some sweet high claymore damage.
Just as a small note, I believe the damage from sap and yellow ink smite are purely percentage based. So even if these two classes were in fashion, it wouldn't really be much of a reason to dissuade someone from going strong.
Comments
That post from the other combat thread is such a better way of phrasing this.
---------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy said:
Okay, fair enough. I will not say that we will not try to fix major issues in team combat. Obviously we will. What I mean is that there is absolutely no way we will ever be able to make team combat super fair. Trying to fix every little team combat possibility is just not feasible.
I am thinking about creating more opportunities for 1v1. This revolves mainly around things where two people are want the same thing and have to fight to decide who gets it (like shards). This opens many little other problems of course, but I am looking into it.
--------------------------------------------------------
EDIT: also, what is up with the quotes here, I can't ever get them to work properly.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Just click the quote button on the post. Its what I do and they work fine for me. Except once where it wouldn't let me put the cursor outside the quote, so I just erased it all and re-did the quote and it worked fine.
Galt Summoner Classleads - 2
Galt Druid/Mage/Assassin/any-potential-class-that-can-be-played-by-Galt-in-Magick classleads - 0
At least Sarrius is on the job (and I hate I have to waste a classlead to address double-level burrow, but it's been broken long enough)
edit: Just saw the civility post, so I will add that tear map is fine (which I first heard from Khizan), and multi-summoner hanged man chains impacting CC situations could probably be addressed if people think its a problem (though stun is a bigger problem for all 3 circles imo), though I don't see the 1x1 tweak to hanged man in the same light (if you really want to witness a miserable 1x1 stonewall, find yourself a fast WD...lot of Azfel hate here
)
Also, burrow has been addressed. Digging is much quicker and you see them move - Yes, once they get two layers down, you're not going to dig them out, but burrow has sufficient limitations on it that it can be blocked or becomes useless in many situations. It's also limited to very few professions, possibly as few as one, outside of artifacts.
Menoch's reports asking for Summoner buffs in the line of making Enlighten easier, if all of them are approved, would be absolutely insane. I just don't see why we need to streamline Summoner having the ability to reliably Enlighten. It feels like all of these reports combined would make it effortless, but that's simply from an 'on paper' perspective.
Also, whomever Ellen is, they need to check their facts a little: her classlead would actually make wisp poison MORE powerful, because Wisp Poison's 20% unblockable is only 10% actual damage - the duration buff, paired with this, would probably be insane. I think making the wisp usable every OTHER wisp instead of EVERY wisp fails to recognize the actual point of nerfing it - using it should not be a no brainer. This buff would make 2 applications of toadstool useless and open up usage of another wisp, sure, but it still makes poison wisp always used - just every other wisp instead of every wisp. Both the current wisp poison (10% maxHP damage + the loss of 10% maxHP heal from toadstool) and the one in 75 (2 losses of 10% maxHP heal from toadstool) would be the same problem, just spread out across two applications. My solution 2 on Classlead 24 is about the same spirit of intent, except 1 toadstool instead of 2. Personally, I believe the damage itself isn't the problem, but the damage TYPE.
8. Strong enemy-only damage has been nerfed for good reasons, most of which involve giant teams and/or retardation+totem traps.
9. Augmented robes won't really do anything noticable, but allowing them to be customized would be sweet. Bag of stasis is a QOL change. Multiple enchantments on one item would be nice, no charge reduction required, and please god no stupid mechanics like toxic rings of pestilence crumbling randomly out of the blue for no reason (someone classlead that and just mandate a cap of 3 toxins or something instead, please). It's really just reducing the need to wear 18579 rings.
11. No real reason not to. QOL change.
21. Terrais doesn't have a staffcast modification for a reason.
64. Inks aren't really that expensive, no. Blue ink supplies running out has always been a problem in Kinsarmar, but the restock rate is sufficient in general.
67. This got voted down last round, didn't it? It'd introduce way more trouble than it's worth, regardless of individual opinion on the matter.
77. Aside from my dislike of 'Zealotry', it's a pretty minor change. That said, the big reason Brutality is seperate is because hound and kestrel/falcon actually do work a bit differently.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
I think my biggest
10 years of practical application has proven this to be quite accurate.
Asking them to remove every other sword option but sabres was excessive and unnecessary.
While this does have merit, I'm not really keen on turning a unique mechanics into a generic room
effect.
This makes me have sad face
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23 A Eldreth Tentacles Tentacles has a hard start/stop, and doe
25 A Eldreth Readaura Summoners have not one..but three differ
27 A Eldreth Golgotha Oh Golgotha...how do we loathe thee? Let
28 A Eldreth Devil The RNG nature of double-throw is seen a
29 A Eldreth Demonrays Demonrays are rarely used for a number o
39 A Eldreth Devilmark The purpose of Devilmark is to extend do
40 A Eldreth Hood I understand the general trend to mitiga
41 A Eldreth Cleanseaura Cleanseaura has no current functionality
Plus Delrayne and Leisane carrying my two other suggestions to glory.
(Bellatores): Apoloc says, "And people say money has no influence."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Redo the aspect system entirely" and "Make major sweeping changes to the aspects" are outside the scope of the classlead system.
"Warp is a crazy stupid good escape skill and should be stopped by something" would have, imo, been within the scope of it.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Wait. I think I did that wrong...
For Justicars, there's always going to be flare which keeps me out of strong unless I'm bashing. For other Justicars that do not go the flare route, battlecry is still totally viable with pocket pindown. I assume other circles have access to prones, but pindown really does make it pretty easy.
All in all, very solid change. Keeps Knight from being in charge of the stunlock, but with the right setup, it can still stun where necessary.
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
Then it's not exactly the same thing. Good attempt, maybe?
Because symantics sure was the core of my argument. There isn't a single thing I do with tempar that I couldn't do without artifact weapons - but would in fact use something other than sabres.
The only reason you used a broadsword was because it was an artifact. Ozreas|Aleutia|Sekhir|Me all tried to smith for good broadswords and I don't think that ship ever arrived. You would have ended up using the highest damage axe that came as close to synchronization with equilibrium. Why? Highest damage closest speed. Back to the argument that started it all, the middle ground sucks. The middle ground has always sucked. People play knight at the extremes because they're the viable options. You tried to argue for the middle ground and ended up showing that the cookie-cutter damage is the way to go. They don't need to 'delete' all the weapons, because I like the variety and customization, but they really need to standardize stats and get rid of all the "not fast, not high damage" variations of bad.