October Survey questions.

Started 6 Oct 2020
by Sunkissed
in Ask the Team
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?
You could also ask if people like tooth ache...everybody will say no.
No other damage is put into question.
So why isnt a question if wizard damage is too high? Or why is gtaoe damage too high or the timer too low?

It feels like there is already pre-nerf consideration against archers.
We still suffer from that volley nerf where we lost our unique ra-ability without any comoensation.

Why isnt there a question if archers have enough utility? They are only reduced to a question if there is too much damage.
If you nerf archer damage you can delete archer classes completely so there is nothing left they are able to do.
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:11 PM by Noleran
If you lower physical bow dmg, make poison available to apply on a stack or something.... I mean, there is no other utility - just dps.
Archer are at a solid spot, because of the lack in utility.
Volley is already gone (or atleast nearly with that nerf and stayinf cost. Dont destroy a full archetype on that game.
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:22 PM by protege
Wizard damage isn't too high, though.

Wizards also don't wear studded armor, have access to a 9 second stun, and a spammable root style.
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:29 PM by Noleran
Right, wizards got only: Nearsight, Heatresist debuff, AE dot, single DoT, third Bolt, AE speed decrease nuke, GTAOE, Matter resist debuff (for own dot).....
Just all in Earth spec line
And we are not done - Baseline Bolt, Baseline Heatnuke, Root. Last points Fire and go for another Bolt and nice debuff value.
So, what ya want more in a zerg as caster?
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:35 PM by DinoTriz
I see your point, OP.

It's kind of like in a debate the moderator asking one person to denounce extremists, but doesn't ask the other person to denounce extremists.
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:38 PM by Woolly
agree Sunkissed
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:45 PM by Laron
On the alternative baseline nuke question, there is a "spirit" line mentioned for Mid casters. I assume that should be Suppression, because there is no "spirit" line.
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:49 PM by thirian24
protege wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:22 PM
Wizard damage isn't too high, though.

Wizards also don't wear studded armor, have access to a 9 second stun, and a spammable root style.

Or IP
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:56 PM by DinoTriz
Earth Wizards get a complete caster toolbox - I'm surprised they don't have studded armor or IP.

Try to take a keep from Alb and you'll see how powerful Earth Wizzies are.

I'm not in favor of nerfing, but denying that they're extremely powerful is laughable.
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:58 PM by thirian24
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?
You could also ask if people like tooth ache...everybody will say no.
No other damage is put into question.
So why isnt a question if wizard damage is too high? Or why is gtaoe damage too high or the timer too low?

It feels like there is already pre-nerf consideration against archers.
We still suffer from that volley nerf where we lost our unique ra-ability without any comoensation.

Why isnt there a question if archers have enough utility? They are only reduced to a question if there is too much damage.
If you nerf archer damage you can delete archer classes completely so there is nothing left they are able to do.

How many hundreds of posts or threads do you see complaining about Wizard dmg?
Tue 6 Oct 2020 9:04 PM by DinoTriz
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:58 PM
How many hundreds of posts or threads do you see complaining about Wizard dmg?

Should the questions be based on how loud the crowd cries about something?

Mob justice always ends up bad.
Tue 6 Oct 2020 11:37 PM by Dariussdars
I've seen lots of complaints about Ranger/Scout damage being too high.

Don't think I've seen any complaints about Hunters and their 5.0 speed bow damage though.

Weird.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:02 AM by Gildar
Noleran wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:29 PM
Right, wizards got only: Nearsight, Heatresist debuff, AE dot, single DoT, third Bolt, AE speed decrease nuke, GTAOE, Matter resist debuff (for own dot).....
Just all in Earth spec line
And we are not done - Baseline Bolt, Baseline Heatnuke, Root. Last points Fire and go for another Bolt and nice debuff value.
So, what ya want more in a zerg as caster?

And they also make coffee !!!
LOL

Back to serious comment ... the point isnt giving alternate spec line dmg on other casters ... they all become too OP and tanks die without mercy

The point is only NERF EARTH WIZZIES and make them aligned with voidelds or rc RM

Imho

Anyway good job Staff !
Survey is a good thing
Only a question i miss : You consider good the 2 limit rams on keeps doors ? (I can accept 2 limit on towers, not on keeps)
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:06 AM by DinoTriz
In regards to Earth Wizzies, I'd say put their GTAOE in their bolt line (Fire) like all the other bolt casters.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:56 AM by hend
You should add options in vote :
- Bring back the original characters movement (not only the side arch) and fix the melee range system Or the actual custom one (Phoenix feels like World of warcraft in melee compared to Uthgard)
- Original hps or the actual custom hps
- No rank 5 RA or the "custom thing" coming
- Original RAs or the custom thing (a really big issue when it comes to classes like Skalds)
- Feathers system how it was at release (after the /use fix) + decent charge buffs OR the actual system.

Its always better to fix whats obviouly broken since day 1 beta before trying to add new content.

Also. Some questions are linked together. If you start fixing the game core mecanics (you should start with that), the overpower list of classes will change.
For exemple, Minstrel is actually a non sense. The class is supposed to be overpowered but hard to master. It was easy to play for a long time on Phoenix due to the chant system. And then, instead of fixing the chant and making it hard to master, you just destroyed the class. Now its broken and pure shit. So i don't see how we can have a discussion about the minstrel, its like on Phoenix we never seen what the class is supposed to look like.

Also after so many months of broken changes, players commited too much in this "unique and special" meta. Most of them will probably only vote to keep some advantages. I don't see any blademaster (the class never been that good on any version of the game or any server) vote to fix the melee system, it would be a direct nerf against them. Thats the problem when you don't fix the rotten mecanics early, from the roots, it will be hard now if you don't make a fresh start...
Wed 7 Oct 2020 7:54 AM by Centenario
1) Preferred playstyle doesnt include PvE nor farming nor leveling.
2) Baseline stun on hib casters make them OP IMO
3) I personally feel that Wizards are not strong enough, they have low utility, if compared to eldritch which has AoE mezz, stronger single target snare, ranged stun, debuffs str/con and d/q on top of nearsight. Ice wizz is unusable too.
4) Putting Smite line at the same level as Summoning, Mentalism, Enchantment is wrong. Cleric is way underpowered, make him equivalent to enchanter/eldritch/mentalist = ranged stun + DD so that alb can compete, maybe run 4 clerics in 8-man :' Would be nice.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 8:00 AM by Stoertebecker
Centenario wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 7:54 AM
4) Putting Smite line at the same level as Summoning, Mentalism, Enchantment is wrong. Cleric is way underpowered, make him equivalent to enchanter/eldritch/mentalist = ranged stun + DD so that alb can compete, maybe run 4 clerics in 8-man :' Would be nice.

Agreed, if the healer gets the runemaster cold or rc line
Wed 7 Oct 2020 10:23 AM by Ormilig
hend wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:56 AM
- Bring back the original characters movement (not only the side arch) and fix the melee range system Or the actual custom one (Phoenix feels like World of warcraft in melee compared to Uthgard)

Ah yes, the good and better Uthgard Melee range...



This is a Screen from Uth2 at the exact Moment my Runemaster got slammed. Its the same thing over there.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 10:54 AM by gruenesschaf
Ormilig wrote:
hend wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:56 AM
- Bring back the original characters movement (not only the side arch) and fix the melee range system Or the actual custom one (Phoenix feels like World of warcraft in melee compared to Uthgard)

Ah yes, the good and better Uthgard Melee range...



This is a Screen from Uth2 at the exact Moment my Runemaster got slammed. Its the same thing over there.

In both cases it's done to replicate the daoc melee range, see live for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ro3k32hGag

I personally wouldn't mind including this in the next survey and if people consider the melee range too large remove the additional range when both are moving and only keep the stationary and either moving ranges. But that would neither be a fix nor a return to daoc mechanics but a custom change. Just like the reduction of the side style arc would be a custom change.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 11:10 AM by DinoTriz
Centenario wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 7:54 AM
3) I personally feel that Wizards are not strong enough, they have low utility

Flame war in 3...2...1
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:33 PM by gotwqqd
How about if people would rather have rng gen as it was or the normalization of it implemented?
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:44 PM by Centenario
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 10:54 AM
In both cases it's done to replicate the daoc melee range, see live for comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ro3k32hGag

I personally wouldn't mind including this in the next survey and if people consider the melee range too large remove the additional range when both are moving and only keep the stationary and either moving ranges. But that would neither be a fix nor a return to daoc mechanics but a custom change. Just like the reduction of the side style arc would be a custom change.

Talking about RNG, yea maybe implement some kind of RNG there, for the melee range, from what it is current to what it is when not moving. Have each hit ask for a range, and give this range information as Random between (current moving range, standing range).
At least it would still feel classic-like, this was implemented to fight high latency/low fps ppl.

One thing to fix atm is the people randomly moving about around and landing at a wrong position. It feels like there is a discrepancy between clients localization data of certain players. It feels like they are tweaking it with a lag switch or an inject.
It mostly happens when they are in danger too.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:56 PM by Sepplord
you want to add RNG to melee-range calculations? Oo

how is that supposed to improve gameplay?
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:57 PM by Vkejai
Way to many nerfs, changes , QoL stuff . Feels like sometimes Phoenix trying to much at once. Taking away the feel of Daoc imo.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 1:02 PM by gruenesschaf
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:33 PM
How about if people would rather have rng gen as it was or the normalization of it implemented?

That one is not going to be up for a vote because that one has my hard veto.

The physical / critical damage variance is just a bit of useless fluff that just makes it harder to compare different specs / stats but has otherwise only very minor impact when compared to for example 3 or 4 resists / misses in a row.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 1:26 PM by Runental
Give back 100% crit Dots to DoT classes thx.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:22 PM by bculpepper
1) Given that we don't have access to a test server like pendragon to test specs I appreciate the removal of the rng in melee. I never wanted to parse 1000 swing logs and this make it much simpler.

2) Archers: IMO the problem isn't that they are overpowered by themselves. I play a SB as my main and honestly don't think rangers/scouts are that big a deal. The problem is the playstyle that the archer community is currently using. Groups of 6+ stealth (almost all archers) taking out solos or 2/3. The fact that they can spread out and hit from 2000 range makes it very frustrating as there is little counter from the people getting attacked. I don't see this frustration with SB/NS/Inf because if you are attacked by them its pretty obvious and you can hit back - they are right in your face.

My suggestion: Decrease archer damage for extra attackers.

1st archer attacking you = 100% damage
2nd archer = 50%
3rd archer = 25%
4th+ archer = no damage.

This allows the class to keep the same performance for most situations, but strongly discourages the large groups of archers that I believe are the root cause of most complaints about archers.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:36 PM by skipari
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 1:02 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:33 PM
How about if people would rather have rng gen as it was or the normalization of it implemented?

That one is not going to be up for a vote because that one has my hard veto.

The physical / critical damage variance is just a bit of useless fluff that just makes it harder to compare different specs / stats but has otherwise only very minor impact when compared to for example 3 or 4 resists / misses in a row.

Maybe I miss something, but why was it even asked if people prefer the rng in melee actually if thats something which won't change whatever happens? Afair that were basically the first? two questions in this survey.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:50 PM by roope
Why is there no option to mark favorite playstyle as 'duo'?

1v1 is way too boring/unbalanced.
Smallmen means minstrel+sorc+cleric+necro and is a ridiculously op shit.

Duo is the right balance, which provides great complexity, and actuall skill play. And its not even an option to select...
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:53 PM by gruenesschaf
skipari wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:36 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 1:02 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:33 PM
How about if people would rather have rng gen as it was or the normalization of it implemented?

That one is not going to be up for a vote because that one has my hard veto.

The physical / critical damage variance is just a bit of useless fluff that just makes it harder to compare different specs / stats but has otherwise only very minor impact when compared to for example 3 or 4 resists / misses in a row.

Maybe I miss something, but why was it even asked if people prefer the rng in melee actually if thats something which won't change whatever happens? Afair that were basically the first? two questions in this survey.

gotwqqd and my veto refers to rng for crits/misses/resists/procs/blocks etc. as that is the part that would have a major impact.

The first 2 questions are about variance and while I personally see it as entirely pointless to bring it back, it wouldn't have a noticeable negative impact except making spec / stat testing largely impractical, but if that's what the majority wants so be it.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:58 PM by Sepplord
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:53 PM
gotwqqd and my veto refers to rng for crits/misses/resists/procs/blocks etc. as that is the part that would have a major impact.

The first 2 questions are about variance and while I personally see it as entirely pointless to bring it back, it wouldn't have a noticeable negative impact except making spec / stat testing largely impractical, but if that's what the majority wants so be it.

ohhhh....i misinterpreted that completely because i thought meant you would veto useless fluff changes that are just work for nothing, but something that might actually be important and has influence on the game is something to look into if the majority make it a priority topic ^^

Good you cleared that up, thanks
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:59 PM by skipari
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:53 PM
skipari wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:36 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 1:02 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:33 PM
How about if people would rather have rng gen as it was or the normalization of it implemented?

That one is not going to be up for a vote because that one has my hard veto.

The physical / critical damage variance is just a bit of useless fluff that just makes it harder to compare different specs / stats but has otherwise only very minor impact when compared to for example 3 or 4 resists / misses in a row.

Maybe I miss something, but why was it even asked if people prefer the rng in melee actually if thats something which won't change whatever happens? Afair that were basically the first? two questions in this survey.

gotwqqd and my veto refers to rng for crits/misses/resists/procs/blocks etc. as that is the part that would have a major impact, unlike the stuff that was voted for (the variance).

ah, now I get it. Well a good roll for the damage modifier and a 99% Crit in teddy mode would make some peoples pants wet I bet But I hope, if that ever happens, that the variance will be a bit more tight.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:29 PM by DinoTriz
bculpepper wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:22 PM
My suggestion: Decrease archer damage for extra attackers.

1st archer attacking you = 100% damage
2nd archer = 50%
3rd archer = 25%
4th+ archer = no damage


Lol - I'm just imagining the look on the face of a guy who learns this through trial and error.

"I don't get it, all four of us attacked him and he's still at 100% HP!"

Would be worth it for the trolling factor alone.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:40 PM by bculpepper
DinoTriz wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:29 PM
bculpepper wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:22 PM
My suggestion: Decrease archer damage for extra attackers.

1st archer attacking you = 100% damage
2nd archer = 50%
3rd archer = 25%
4th+ archer = no damage


Lol - I'm just imagining the look on the face of a guy who learns this through trial and error.

"I don't get it, all four of us attacked him and he's still at 100% HP!"

Would be worth it for the trolling factor alone.

LOL - yeah, that would be funny. What I mean is that adding additional archers to an engaged target would not help. For example the 2nd scout/ranger to add to an existing target gets a message like "Your target is engaged and your damage is reduced by 50%". This would make solos/duos and small stealth groups viable, but try to reduce the stealth zergs occurring today.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:47 PM by Sunkissed
bculpepper wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:22 PM
1) Given that we don't have access to a test server like pendragon to test specs I appreciate the removal of the rng in melee. I never wanted to parse 1000 swing logs and this make it much simpler.

2) Archers: IMO the problem isn't that they are overpowered by themselves. I play a SB as my main and honestly don't think rangers/scouts are that big a deal. The problem is the playstyle that the archer community is currently using. Groups of 6+ stealth (almost all archers) taking out solos or 2/3. The fact that they can spread out and hit from 2000 range makes it very frustrating as there is little counter from the people getting attacked. I don't see this frustration with SB/NS/Inf because if you are attacked by them its pretty obvious and you can hit back - they are right in your face.

My suggestion: Decrease archer damage for extra attackers.

1st archer attacking you = 100% damage
2nd archer = 50%
3rd archer = 25%
4th+ archer = no damage.

This allows the class to keep the same performance for most situations, but strongly discourages the large groups of archers that I believe are the root cause of most complaints about archers.


You say they are not overpowered by themselves..no they aren't!
So why do you think they have to assist each other? You can't kill anything besides of a solo caster as an archer. THAT ist why they are forced to group and that ist why people whine...a class which seems not to have a right to kill something finds a solution: grouping and assisting ---> ok, they managed to kill something, we have to nerf that....

So if an assistrain of melees is on me, i can conclude, that if they are 4 i dont have to expect any damage from them?! Thank you for the laugh!
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:53 PM by Astaa
You could fix wizzy's bad spec lines by spreading their abilities about.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:58 PM by bculpepper
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 3:47 PM
You say they are not overpowered by themselves..no they aren't!
So why do you think they have to assist each other? You can't kill anything besides of a solo caster as an archer. THAT ist why they are forced to group and that ist why people whine...a class which seems not to have a right to kill something finds a solution: grouping and assisting ---> ok, they managed to kill something, we have to nerf that....

So if an assistrain of melees is on me, i can conclude, that if they are 4 i dont have to expect any damage from them?! Thank you for the laugh!

So your saying for you to be successful you need 4+? Big of you to admit that....
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:08 PM by Kwall0311
This survey willl consist of the most biased answers ever seen. I bet i already know the outcome. It will mirror the exact % of the realm population/class. Example. 20% of the population is archers. Is archery too high? 80% yes, 20% no. Will be the same outcome for the overpowered column.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:16 PM by tommccartney
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:08 PM
This survey willl consist of the most biased answers ever seen. I bet i already know the outcome. It will mirror the exact % of the realm population/class. Example. 20% of the population is archers. Is archery too high? 80% yes, 20% no. Will be the same outcome for the overpowered column.

You mean actually listening to the majority instead of the minority ?
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:20 PM by DinoTriz
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:08 PM
This survey willl consist of the most biased answers ever seen. I bet i already know the outcome. It will mirror the exact % of the realm population/class. Example. 20% of the population is archers. Is archery too high? 80% yes, 20% no. Will be the same outcome for the overpowered column.

I'm sure the devs realize that the opinions on the survey and the actual truth, are completely separate things.

They're probably just trying to get an idea of our perception.

For example, I understood the archery damage question to be on an individual level. I didn't even think about grouped archers.

I put Scouts down as underpowered because the addition of "Stop" didn't really help the class.

And for Midgard, I couldn't think of any overpowered classes. Maybe Skald? I know BDs used to be pretty OP.

My point is I don't think devs will use our information to make any hard decisions.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:27 PM by Kwall0311
tommccartney wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:08 PM
This survey willl consist of the most biased answers ever seen. I bet i already know the outcome. It will mirror the exact % of the realm population/class. Example. 20% of the population is archers. Is archery too high? 80% yes, 20% no. Will be the same outcome for the overpowered column.

You mean actually listening to the majority instead of the minority ?

I dont believe that kind of logic of majority/minority apply here. Too many variable s(ppl that play the classes). Another example, there is a very small amount of champs. Will they be voted overpowered? Of course they will, by every single person that doesnt play a champ. Even if it were true or not. So the 'Majority' already wins that vote in your system.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 5:27 PM by Delsaer
Stealth classes are meant to pick off single targets quickly and at their discretion. That is what their skills all boost. Problem is on this server there are very few classes left that it is an option, and if they are grouped, which most are, you can just forget about it. Example: assassins used to be able to wreck casters if they got PA off, even if grouped. This gave them purpose in keep fights and made them useful for keeping casters off walls. So instead you see hordes of stealthers sitting at docks and bridges because they no longer serve their basic function well and are incentivized into other play styles, and casters rule the server.

If you want to get stealthers back into RvR and away from stealthzerg, don’t take away their viability, that just encourages more of the behavior people dislike. Instead think about why stealthzerg is the desirable play style over others and adjust accordingly. Incentivize desired play styles by making them strong in the role. Don’t nerf them hoping that will somehow get the classes to fit something
they are not good at.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 5:31 PM by Helwyr
A lot of the survey question answers are going to be of little value without adding context to the responses, especially opinions on which classes are believed to be overpowered or under powered.
bculpepper wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:22 PM
[...]

2) Archers: IMO the problem isn't that they are overpowered by themselves. I play a SB as my main and honestly don't think rangers/scouts are that big a deal. The problem is the playstyle that the archer community is currently using. Groups of 6+ stealth (almost all archers) taking out solos or 2/3. The fact that they can spread out and hit from 2000 range makes it very frustrating as there is little counter from the people getting attacked. I don't see this frustration with SB/NS/Inf because if you are attacked by them its pretty obvious and you can hit back - they are right in your face.

My suggestion: Decrease archer damage for extra attackers.

1st archer attacking you = 100% damage
2nd archer = 50%
3rd archer = 25%
4th+ archer = no damage.

This allows the class to keep the same performance for most situations, but strongly discourages the large groups of archers that I believe are the root cause of most complaints about archers.

I don't see why Archers should be made a special case in this regard. You either reduce damage from multiple attackers across the board or not at all IMO. Of course doing so would present a problem of being able to kill anyone who's getting healed, which is another problem with DAoC in that healing is ridiculously strong. Which in turn is perhaps why some archers are grouping and focus firing as they are, in order to actually be able to kill targets that are part of groups with healing. Which is finally why were seeing most of the complaints about archers at all, it's mostly 8mans that think they should be immune from dying to archers or any non 8man for that matter. The only issue I see with archers is Scouts 99% anytime snare and volley when ground target is assisted by multiple archers, which is really a problem with ground target assist not archers or volley.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 6:07 PM by Bradekes
What survey tho
Wed 7 Oct 2020 6:33 PM by DinoTriz
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 6:07 PM
What survey tho

https://forum.playphoenix.online/server/announcements/26449-survey-october-2020
Wed 7 Oct 2020 6:41 PM by tommccartney
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:27 PM
tommccartney wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 4:08 PM
This survey willl consist of the most biased answers ever seen. I bet i already know the outcome. It will mirror the exact % of the realm population/class. Example. 20% of the population is archers. Is archery too high? 80% yes, 20% no. Will be the same outcome for the overpowered column.

You mean actually listening to the majority instead of the minority ?

I dont believe that kind of logic of majority/minority apply here. Too many variable s(ppl that play the classes). Another example, there is a very small amount of champs. Will they be voted overpowered? Of course they will, by every single person that doesnt play a champ. Even if it were true or not. So the 'Majority' already wins that vote in your system.

Nah I think it has to do with full archers crit shotting for almost 1k dmg.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 6:50 PM by Bradekes
DinoTriz wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 6:33 PM
https://forum.playphoenix.online/server/announcements/26449-survey-october-2020

Thanks, that was a good survey actually. Would only be nice to add a small explanation of your answers too tho
Wed 7 Oct 2020 7:03 PM by Delsaer
Helwyr wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 5:31 PM
A lot of the survey question answers are going to be of little value without adding context to the responses, especially opinions on which classes are believed to be overpowered or under powered.
bculpepper wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:22 PM
[...]

2) Archers: IMO the problem isn't that they are overpowered by themselves. I play a SB as my main and honestly don't think rangers/scouts are that big a deal. The problem is the playstyle that the archer community is currently using. Groups of 6+ stealth (almost all archers) taking out solos or 2/3. The fact that they can spread out and hit from 2000 range makes it very frustrating as there is little counter from the people getting attacked. I don't see this frustration with SB/NS/Inf because if you are attacked by them its pretty obvious and you can hit back - they are right in your face.

My suggestion: Decrease archer damage for extra attackers.

1st archer attacking you = 100% damage
2nd archer = 50%
3rd archer = 25%
4th+ archer = no damage.

This allows the class to keep the same performance for most situations, but strongly discourages the large groups of archers that I believe are the root cause of most complaints about archers.

I don't see why Archers should be made a special case in this regard. You either reduce damage from multiple attackers across the board or not at all IMO. Of course doing so would present a problem of being able to kill anyone who's getting healed, which is another problem with DAoC in that healing is ridiculously strong. Which in turn is perhaps why some archers are grouping and focus firing as they are, in order to actually be able to kill targets that are part of groups with healing. Which is finally why were seeing most of the complaints about archers at all, it's mostly 8mans that think they should be immune from dying to archers or any non 8man for that matter. The only issue I see with archers is Scouts 99% anytime snare and volley when ground target is assisted by multiple archers, which is really a problem with ground target assist not archers or volley.

Totally agree that healing is over-tuned in RvR. Something as small as requiring LoS (and facing) for all healing spells would solve a lot of issues. It would also make keep fights much more dynamic.

Could also give a heal-block ability to some classes (super disease with short duration and immunity timer?)

Just some things to think about.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 7:05 PM by nineonezero
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?
You could also ask if people like tooth ache...everybody will say no.

Totally agree everyone except whose playing archers will answer yes and this can apply to every other single class.

Please make archers much more VISI groupable
e.g. giving caster a buff to add damage to arrows, base on their spec line (matter, cold, fire etc...).

Or giving envenom spec line to all archers usable only on arrows with the same total specs point (have to compromise between stealth, shield or wp dmg)
Wed 7 Oct 2020 7:11 PM by Bradekes
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?
You could also ask if people like tooth ache...everybody will say no.
No other damage is put into question.
So why isnt a question if wizard damage is too high? Or why is gtaoe damage too high or the timer too low?

It feels like there is already pre-nerf consideration against archers.
We still suffer from that volley nerf where we lost our unique ra-ability without any comoensation.

Why isnt there a question if archers have enough utility? They are only reduced to a question if there is too much damage.
If you nerf archer damage you can delete archer classes completely so there is nothing left they are able to do.

So you should have changed the title of your post here. You're not talking about the survey in general, but specific to archers. I think the survey was well laid out. In general wizard damage isn't too high but they have too much utility in one spec line.

I think the addition to more subspec baseline nukes would alleviate the damage issue but not the utility issue.

Archers can deal a lot of damage. More than any other class. Magic damage can be mitigated by resist buffs but physical damage is mostly left unmitigated, some might spec phys def, but I doubt that is a very popular RA.

I think archers are in a decent spot balance wise. They could use more utility but to me utility abilities would feel clunky with the current archery system. Unless they had some instant cast buff that added additional effects to their next shot or something.

And every since they nerfed volly keep fights are more bearable. Dying to 5 man volley gt share is just not fun. Making more people think and be strategic is.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 9:30 PM by Dariussdars
Need to stop lumping Hunters in with Scouts/Rangers, or give them access to 5.5 speed bows.

I've never crit shot anyone for 1k damage, yet Scouts/Rangers do it all the time.

Change the poll question to "do you think Scout/Ranger damage is too high?", since Hunters don't even come close to the damage they both can do.
Wed 7 Oct 2020 10:21 PM by Gildar
How long survey last ?

And we can see results ?
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:38 AM by Horus
Delsaer wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 5:27 PM
Stealth classes are meant to pick off single targets quickly and at their discretion. That is what their skills all boost. Problem is on this server there are very few classes left that it is an option, and if they are grouped, which most are, you can just forget about it. Example: assassins used to be able to wreck casters if they got PA off, even if grouped. This gave them purpose in keep fights and made them useful for keeping casters off walls. So instead you see hordes of stealthers sitting at docks and bridges because they no longer serve their basic function well and are incentivized into other play styles, and casters rule the server.

If you want to get stealthers back into RvR and away from stealthzerg, don’t take away their viability, that just encourages more of the behavior people dislike. Instead think about why stealthzerg is the desirable play style over others and adjust accordingly. Incentivize desired play styles by making them strong in the role. Don’t nerf them hoping that will somehow get the classes to fit something
they are not good at.

This
Why do rangers spec 50 bow/48 PF and stay in defensive positions? Because that is how the current server setup funnels them. If you want to play a hib archer that is what you have to do. Sure you can play some watered down, no envenom, no bow, nightshade wanna be. But then you might as well play a nightshade. For a hib realm archer you have 1 choice. All bow, no melee. Feast or famine....and in order to survive you have to play defensive and avoid melee at all costs. At least scouts have the luxury to attack at range or attack stop lock in melee. Don't blame the players, blame the game that has forced them into a particular playstyle.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 2:20 AM by thirian24
Horus wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:38 AM
Delsaer wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 5:27 PM
Stealth classes are meant to pick off single targets quickly and at their discretion. That is what their skills all boost. Problem is on this server there are very few classes left that it is an option, and if they are grouped, which most are, you can just forget about it. Example: assassins used to be able to wreck casters if they got PA off, even if grouped. This gave them purpose in keep fights and made them useful for keeping casters off walls. So instead you see hordes of stealthers sitting at docks and bridges because they no longer serve their basic function well and are incentivized into other play styles, and casters rule the server.

If you want to get stealthers back into RvR and away from stealthzerg, don’t take away their viability, that just encourages more of the behavior people dislike. Instead think about why stealthzerg is the desirable play style over others and adjust accordingly. Incentivize desired play styles by making them strong in the role. Don’t nerf them hoping that will somehow get the classes to fit something
they are not good at.

This
Why do rangers spec 50 bow/48 PF and stay in defensive positions? Because that is how the current server setup funnels them. If you want to play a hib archer that is what you have to do. Sure you can play some watered down, no envenom, no bow, nightshade wanna be. But then you might as well play a nightshade. For a hib realm archer you have 1 choice. All bow, no melee. Feast or famine....and in order to survive you have to play defensive and avoid melee at all costs. At least scouts have the luxury to attack at range or attack stop lock in melee. Don't blame the players, blame the game that has forced them into a particular playstyle.

This isnt true at all. Ive fought some rangers that were smart about how they played. But you have to actually use your brain in this play style and not spec 50 bow. But very few people do this b/c they dont want to play solo, learn to play their class. They want 1k hits and run around with 7+ other archers.

Learn to play your class and not be pigeon holed into 50 bow.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 6:46 AM by Cadebrennus
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 2:20 AM
Horus wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:38 AM
Delsaer wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 5:27 PM
Stealth classes are meant to pick off single targets quickly and at their discretion. That is what their skills all boost. Problem is on this server there are very few classes left that it is an option, and if they are grouped, which most are, you can just forget about it. Example: assassins used to be able to wreck casters if they got PA off, even if grouped. This gave them purpose in keep fights and made them useful for keeping casters off walls. So instead you see hordes of stealthers sitting at docks and bridges because they no longer serve their basic function well and are incentivized into other play styles, and casters rule the server.

If you want to get stealthers back into RvR and away from stealthzerg, don’t take away their viability, that just encourages more of the behavior people dislike. Instead think about why stealthzerg is the desirable play style over others and adjust accordingly. Incentivize desired play styles by making them strong in the role. Don’t nerf them hoping that will somehow get the classes to fit something
they are not good at.

This
Why do rangers spec 50 bow/48 PF and stay in defensive positions? Because that is how the current server setup funnels them. If you want to play a hib archer that is what you have to do. Sure you can play some watered down, no envenom, no bow, nightshade wanna be. But then you might as well play a nightshade. For a hib realm archer you have 1 choice. All bow, no melee. Feast or famine....and in order to survive you have to play defensive and avoid melee at all costs. At least scouts have the luxury to attack at range or attack stop lock in melee. Don't blame the players, blame the game that has forced them into a particular playstyle.

This isnt true at all. Ive fought some rangers that were smart about how they played. But you have to actually use your brain in this play style and not spec 50 bow. But very few people do this b/c they dont want to play solo, learn to play their class. They want 1k hits and run around with 7+ other archers.

Learn to play your class and not be pigeon holed into 50 bow.

The pigeon hole was created by Devs. Pathfinding is useless except in a Sniper build. The main thing that makes Rangers unique is only viable for one build and one play style, making them seem OP in this one particular way of playing.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 7:01 AM by Centenario
bculpepper wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:22 PM
My suggestion: Decrease archer damage for extra attackers.

1st archer attacking you = 100% damage
2nd archer = 50%
3rd archer = 25%
4th+ archer = no damage.

This allows the class to keep the same performance for most situations, but strongly discourages the large groups of archers that I believe are the root cause of most complaints about archers.

Ok with this proposition but increase base damage of archery by 25% and remove >5.0 SPD bow from hibernia.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:09 PM by Horus
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 2:20 AM
This isnt true at all. Ive fought some rangers that were smart about how they played. But you have to actually use your brain in this play style and not spec 50 bow. But very few people do this b/c they dont want to play solo, learn to play their class. They want 1k hits and run around with 7+ other archers.

Learn to play your class and not be pigeon holed into 50 bow.

Enlighten us oh wise one on the workings of the Ranger. Your random anecdotes of "I once had a fight with a guy who did xyz" are meaningless.

Give us an alternative spec and tell us why it is superior and you can be successful with it.

You musings are based on?

Mine are based on 10+ realm ranks of experience and the fact that many other high RR rangers have all tried the same things with the same results.

But yea, those of us that have been playing Rangers from day 1, tried multiple specs, through various RvR landscapes/setups...we all are the ones that need to "learn our class".
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:19 PM by gotwqqd
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 6:46 AM
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 2:20 AM
Horus wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:38 AM
Delsaer wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 5:27 PM
Stealth classes are meant to pick off single targets quickly and at their discretion. That is what their skills all boost. Problem is on this server there are very few classes left that it is an option, and if they are grouped, which most are, you can just forget about it. Example: assassins used to be able to wreck casters if they got PA off, even if grouped. This gave them purpose in keep fights and made them useful for keeping casters off walls. So instead you see hordes of stealthers sitting at docks and bridges because they no longer serve their basic function well and are incentivized into other play styles, and casters rule the server.

If you want to get stealthers back into RvR and away from stealthzerg, don’t take away their viability, that just encourages more of the behavior people dislike. Instead think about why stealthzerg is the desirable play style over others and adjust accordingly. Incentivize desired play styles by making them strong in the role. Don’t nerf them hoping that will somehow get the classes to fit something
they are not good at.

This
Why do rangers spec 50 bow/48 PF and stay in defensive positions? Because that is how the current server setup funnels them. If you want to play a hib archer that is what you have to do. Sure you can play some watered down, no envenom, no bow, nightshade wanna be. But then you might as well play a nightshade. For a hib realm archer you have 1 choice. All bow, no melee. Feast or famine....and in order to survive you have to play defensive and avoid melee at all costs. At least scouts have the luxury to attack at range or attack stop lock in melee. Don't blame the players, blame the game that has forced them into a particular playstyle.

This isnt true at all. Ive fought some rangers that were smart about how they played. But you have to actually use your brain in this play style and not spec 50 bow. But very few people do this b/c they dont want to play solo, learn to play their class. They want 1k hits and run around with 7+ other archers.

Learn to play your class and not be pigeon holed into 50 bow.

The pigeon hole was created by Devs. Pathfinding is useless except in a Sniper build. The main thing that makes Rangers unique is only viable for one build and one play style, making them seem OP in this one particular way of playing.
Your right
The problem is everyone has access to everything using proc items, /use items etc.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:26 PM by Shamissa
Give the same utility to RM and Eldritch, then no need to nerf wiz, until then earth wiz are powerful compared too other 2 classes, heck people cant even take a keep anymore due to the earth wiz dmg. And dont tell me is not true because you all know it is true.
Also need to get ride of Minstrel red/purple pet that is just ridiculous and stealther.

Xoxo
Thu 8 Oct 2020 2:57 PM by DinoTriz
Horus wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:09 PM
Enlighten us oh wise one on the workings of the Ranger. Your random anecdotes of "I once had a fight with a guy who did xyz" are meaningless.

Give us an alternative spec and tell us why it is superior and you can be successful with it.

You musings are based on?

Mine are based on 10+ realm ranks of experience and the fact that many other high RR rangers have all tried the same things with the same results.

But yea, those of us that have been playing Rangers from day 1, tried multiple specs, through various RvR landscapes/setups...we all are the ones that need to "learn our class".

Ignore that guy. It seems all he does is troll and he knows very little about the game, while acting like he does.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 3:45 PM by Sepplord
to be honest though, i have also trouble following the logic there (i might be missing something though):
Ranger was never a bad class and one of the preferred stealthers, most played him as a melee as archery was borked
Then archery got buffed, and suddenly he is only usable as 50bow/48PF spec?

What happened to his melee spec that was loved before?
Why is that suddenly unplayable?
Thu 8 Oct 2020 4:45 PM by Valaraukar
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 3:45 PM
to be honest though, i have also trouble following the logic there (i might be missing something though):
Ranger was never a bad class and one of the preferred stealthers, most played him as a melee as archery was borked
Then archery got buffed, and suddenly he is only usable as 50bow/48PF spec?

What happened to his melee spec that was loved before?
Why is that suddenly unplayable?

It's not unplayable, just that the ranged spec became more OP than the melee one
Thu 8 Oct 2020 5:08 PM by Saroi
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 3:45 PM
to be honest though, i have also trouble following the logic there (i might be missing something though):
Ranger was never a bad class and one of the preferred stealthers, most played him as a melee as archery was borked
Then archery got buffed, and suddenly he is only usable as 50bow/48PF spec?

What happened to his melee spec that was loved before?
Why is that suddenly unplayable?

Melee Ranger got harder to execute when the ws/con debuff got changed so that the ws part reduces the damage more from the enemy. With the change that it now also debuffs before PA makes it even harder to get a melee ranger going. Not to mention, that with the dot buff and now all SB running triple dot which is stupid high damage, usually dot does around 250-260 in its duration, having over 500 by 2 dots + lifebane with Viper 5 = easy 1.1k+ just by that. On top of that, most Inf nowadays are Thrust, having free stuns and + damage on rangers.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:18 PM by IdiamVonGawaine
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?

First, because people don't understand how DPS works in this game, so they complain when they are "victimized" by a 3.9 second front-loaded crit shot from a character that invested everything into....wait for it.....front-loading their damage into their crit shot. Archer DPS fails to approach the DPS of even a BASELINE caster, and yet people have no problems with caster damage for some reason.

Second, because people don't understand the concept of assisting, nor do they recognize why archers assist. In short, archers MUST assist to actually kill anything that's grouped, otherwise the target will get healed, CC/rupt the archer, or simply run out of range. Nobody's complaining about the caster debuff assist train, which murders chars far more effectively, including full tanks.

Finally, there is, always has been, and always will be a vocal group in this game that are opposed to stealthers, be they archer or assassin.

For every screenie posted showing an archer crit for high damage, I can post one showing a low damage crit, and my archer is geared and specced entirely for archery, from race, to spec, and kit.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:25 PM by gotwqqd
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 3:45 PM
to be honest though, i have also trouble following the logic there (i might be missing something though):
Ranger was never a bad class and one of the preferred stealthers, most played him as a melee as archery was borked
Then archery got buffed, and suddenly he is only usable as 50bow/48PF spec?

What happened to his melee spec that was loved before?
Why is that suddenly unplayable?

It’s easier for bow spec with 6 other archers assisting than the solo life of a melee ranger
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:29 PM by DinoTriz
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:18 PM
For every screenie posted showing an archer crit for high damage, I can post one showing a low damage crit, and my archer is geared and specced entirely for archery, from race, to spec, and kit.

Very true.

I actually have a screenshot where I did 3200 damage to someone.

I have no idea how it happened. The stars aligned or something. My best guess was it was someone who didn't bother to buff themselves (it was a caster) and they must've wanted to get killed for the realm task credit. He must've sat down right when I hit him.

20 seconds later a VW runs by and with my chest full of confidence, I open up on him and hit him with a barely 300 Crit shot. Then followed up with like 130 regular shots.

It was an emotional rollercoaster.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:34 PM by Forlornhope
DinoTriz wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:29 PM
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:18 PM
For every screenie posted showing an archer crit for high damage, I can post one showing a low damage crit, and my archer is geared and specced entirely for archery, from race, to spec, and kit.

Very true.

I actually have a screenshot where I did 3200 damage to someone.

I have no idea how it happened. The stars aligned or something. My best guess was it was someone who didn't bother to buff themselves (it was a caster) and they must've wanted to get killed for the realm task credit. He must've sat down right when I hit him.

20 seconds later a VW runs by and with my chest full of confidence, I open up on him and hit him with a barely 300 Crit shot. Then followed up with like 130 regular shots.

It was an emotional rollercoaster.

doesn't VW's abs/af buffs basically give them the same AF/abs of plate/chain though? lol I get what you're saying though, I play a hunter but it's melee build but the difference in damage from some targets to others is pretty crazy sometimes. I think a lot of people's issues with the damage is coming from people who play leather/cloth wearers. But really archers we made to pretty much counter most of those targets so of course their damage is going to be high against them.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:56 PM by thirian24
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:18 PM
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?

First, because people don't understand how DPS works in this game, so they complain when they are "victimized" by a 3.9 second front-loaded crit shot from a character that invested everything into....wait for it.....front-loading their damage into their crit shot. Archer DPS fails to approach the DPS of even a BASELINE caster, and yet people have no problems with caster damage for some reason.

Second, because people don't understand the concept of assisting, nor do they recognize why archers assist. In short, archers MUST assist to actually kill anything that's grouped, otherwise the target will get healed, CC/rupt the archer, or simply run out of range. Nobody's complaining about thecaster debuff assist train, which murders chars far more effectively, including full tanks.

Finally, there is, always has been, and always will be a vocal group in this game that are opposed to stealthers, be they archer or assassin.

For every screenie posted showing an archer crit for high damage, I can post one showing a low damage crit, and my archer is geared and specced entirely for archery, from race, to spec, and kit.

How do you fail to see the difference in CASTER DEBUFF dmg vs an archer doing 1k crit shots?

1. For casters to accomplish this, they need support (buffs), debuffer and spec nuker to achieve pretty high dmg.

2. Archers are using pot buffs with no debuff to achieve 800-1000 dps crit shots. (I'm being hit anywhere from 600-900 dmg in a full 8man grp wearing plate armor 720ish AF)

Are you that dense to see the difference here?
Thu 8 Oct 2020 11:10 PM by Lokkjim
Saroi wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 5:08 PM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 3:45 PM
to be honest though, i have also trouble following the logic there (i might be missing something though):
Ranger was never a bad class and one of the preferred stealthers, most played him as a melee as archery was borked
Then archery got buffed, and suddenly he is only usable as 50bow/48PF spec?

What happened to his melee spec that was loved before?
Why is that suddenly unplayable?

Melee Ranger got harder to execute when the ws/con debuff got changed so that the ws part reduces the damage more from the enemy. With the change that it now also debuffs before PA makes it even harder to get a melee ranger going. Not to mention, that with the dot buff and now all SB running triple dot which is stupid high damage, usually dot does around 250-260 in its duration, having over 500 by 2 dots + lifebane with Viper 5 = easy 1.1k+ just by that. On top of that, most Inf nowadays are Thrust, having free stuns and + damage on rangers.

Last I checked, Hib was neutral to thrust, so no plus damage. I might be wrong though, I've been super busy lately so I haven't been able to play.
Thu 8 Oct 2020 11:25 PM by Valaraukar
Dariussdars wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 9:30 PM
Need to stop lumping Hunters in with Scouts/Rangers, or give them access to 5.5 speed bows.

I've never crit shot anyone for 1k damage, yet Scouts/Rangers do it all the time.

Change the poll question to "do you think Scout/Ranger damage is too high?", since Hunters don't even come close to the damage they both can do.


Holy words my friend, holy words.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 12:23 AM by Horus
DinoTriz wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 2:57 PM
Horus wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 1:09 PM
Enlighten us oh wise one on the workings of the Ranger. Your random anecdotes of "I once had a fight with a guy who did xyz" are meaningless.

Give us an alternative spec and tell us why it is superior and you can be successful with it.

You musings are based on?

Mine are based on 10+ realm ranks of experience and the fact that many other high RR rangers have all tried the same things with the same results.

But yea, those of us that have been playing Rangers from day 1, tried multiple specs, through various RvR landscapes/setups...we all are the ones that need to "learn our class".

Ignore that guy. It seems all he does is troll and he knows very little about the game, while acting like he does.

A concise and well thought out retort. Well done!
Fri 9 Oct 2020 1:01 AM by DinoTriz
I didn't need to say much - his comment spoke volumes.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 2:13 AM by IdiamVonGawaine
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 10:56 PM

How do you fail to see the difference in CASTER DEBUFF dmg vs an archer doing 1k crit shots?

1. For casters to accomplish this, they need support (buffs), debuffer and spec nuker to achieve pretty high dmg.

2. Archers are using pot buffs with no debuff to achieve 800-1000 dps crit shots. (I'm being hit anywhere from 600-900 dmg in a full 8man grp wearing plate armor 720ish AF)

Are you that dense to see the difference here?
[/quote
1. I am simply using the debuff trains that exist as an example of seemingly ridiculous damage created by assisting characters in game, that gets conveniently ignored in favor of attacking archer damage.

2. 800-1000/3.9 draw time (my archer)= 205 -256 DPs. That's well within the DPS of a caster that casts twice as fast on the same target that would allow for such a crit. It is YOU that fails to understand the DPS code of the game, and how it is front loaded for the archer, and diminishes over time.

You also conveniently ignore the fact that we also achieve the following:
RR4 Lurikeen archer
50 archery / 48 PF

4.0 speed bow
RR3 cabbie
Critshot for 363 (-141) in 2.8 seconds
Rapid fire follow up for 133 (-51) in 1.5 seconds
No follow up due to pet interupt from the target.
Total damage: 496
Total time: 3.9 + 1.5 = 5.4
Total DPS = 91.8

5.5 speed bow

RR4 Theurg
Crit shot for 413 in 3.9 seconds
Total damage: 413 (-168)
Total time: 3.9
Total DPS = 105.8

Total DPS on crits, and DPS over time, can't even compete with the baseline spells of a sorc, let alone a caster fully specced for damage, and ACTUAL damage by archers clearly demonstrates that fact.

Archers are fine. What needs to happen is that the player base needs to learn and understand how dps codes, temps, abilities, and RR's impact the damage of various classes.

Thank you.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 3:40 AM by Bradekes
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 2:13 AM
1. I am simply using the debuff trains that exist as an example of seemingly ridiculous damage created by assisting characters in game, that gets conveniently ignored in favor of attacking archer damage.

2. 800-1000/3.9 draw time (my archer)= 205 -256 DPs. That's well within the DPS of a caster that casts twice as fast on the same target that would allow for such a crit. It is YOU that fails to understand the DPS code of the game, and how it is front loaded for the archer, and diminishes over time.

You also conveniently ignore the fact that we also achieve the following:
RR4 Lurikeen archer
50 archery / 48 PF

4.0 speed bow
RR3 cabbie
Critshot for 363 (-141) in 2.8 seconds
Rapid fire follow up for 133 (-51) in 1.5 seconds
No follow up due to pet interupt from the target.
Total damage: 496
Total time: 3.9 + 1.5 = 5.4
Total DPS = 91.8

5.5 speed bow

RR4 Theurg
Crit shot for 413 in 3.9 seconds
Total damage: 413 (-168)
Total time: 3.9
Total DPS = 105.8

Total DPS on crits, and DPS over time, can't even compete with the baseline spells of a sorc, let alone a caster fully specced for damage, and ACTUAL damage by archers clearly demonstrates that fact.

Archers are fine. What needs to happen is that the player base needs to learn and understand how dps codes, temps, abilities, and RR's impact the damage of various classes.

Thank you.

Why conveniently leave out information. These are bubbled targets, you do 50% less dmg to bubble target. That's going to be less than critting someone with plate armor lol..

I'm not saying you're point of dps is invalid but try to present data without excluding information. As you could choose to crit a caster whose bubble you know is broken.

Dps isn't always a factor when it comes to damage. Archer has longer range than most spells meaning you could actually deal nearly 1200+dmg easily before your target has a chance to cast one spell.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 6:11 AM by Sepplord
archers also aren't destealthed when they start drawing an arrow, they are destealthed when they let the first arrow fly
there is no counterplay until after they have already shot, and they can draw arrows without having a target

taking that full rawtime into a DPS calculation of a single shot is intentionally misleading/misrepresenting the situation (intentionally because Idiam list stuff that others need to learn, so clearly he is smart enough to know what he is doing there)
If that wasn't enough, next he looks at a single shot, that has a 50% dmg penalty and uses that for a DPS calculation, and doesn't even mention the bubble



I agree on one point though, the issue isn't the archer or archerdmg per se. It's their ability to be completely invisible up until to the point where they have already done potentially 1k dmg+.
Combine that with assist and character healthpools of 2k-3k damage and you get instantkills from stealth that might have low DPS when you misrepresent the data as seen above, but on the recieving end the target is just dead instantly.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 7:39 AM by Saroi
Lokkjim wrote: ↑
Thu 8 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
Last I checked, Hib was neutral to thrust, so no plus damage. I might be wrong though, I've been super busy lately so I haven't been able to play.

Yes they are neutral but since Ranger is slash resistant you do more damage as Thrust. And at the beginning till around the HP buff almost all Inf were slash.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 12:09 PM by Centenario
Meh the results are somewhat inconclusive.
Too many disparities between ppl points of view, which in the end balance themselves out.

Would have been better to have a first question which differentiates the playerbase in groups:

How much time do you play per week:
Less than 5 hours
Between 5 and 9 hours
Between 10 and 14 hours
More than 14 hours

Then ask the same question to all but divide the results per category.
People who play more might have a better grasp of the overall game to have a more accurate objective point of view.
People who play less opinion is also interesting, for that target market.

Also add a question to eliminate people who don't understand the game:
Is Wizard or Scout or Warden or Thane OP? '
if they answer yes, then don't consider their answers.

So then maybe the answers will be more conclusive.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 12:16 PM by Sepplord
First results are in, and a worry i had while doing the survey was confirmed.

When asking for strongest/weakest classes instead of strongest/weakest meta/setups you get wierd results like scouts/minstrels being voted OP while the actual meta-chars (cough casters cough) don't get many %.
Personally i put the debuffnukers at top in realm for being OP, even if the individual classes might be okay...but debuffnuking is the strongest and most problematic character-balance issue on the server.
But hey,
reaver is more OP than any of the alb casters...yeah right.
Nightshade are more OP than any hibernia caster but animist? OMG
Overnerfed BD is most OP mid-class. was to be expected though, still sad to see so many actually believing it
Nerfed to shitness Animist still top OP hibernia class...


Come on, i mean, i realise everyone is biased. I am biased too. But it looks like the only thing the poll shows it that it is useless to ask the playerbase about classbalance and giving in to vocal pressure of nerfing classes will probably not lead to balance, just short term satisfy many and long term piss off few.


People who play more might have a better grasp of the overall game to have a more accurate objective point of view.
A common fallacy but the opposite is just a slikely. People playing the game a lot get blind to some issues and just take stuff for granted that might help to be changed. They are also inherently more biased through bigger attachment to them and the characters/playstyle they play.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 12:35 PM by Bradekes
I think the results are fine. They focused on the right information. They will have results of which classes are strong and weak by each play type not by who plays more. Also finding their players play style demographic will help them with future ideas/changes/events.

If you notice 8m & solo are the top two play styles so BD will seem op to most soloers, but not most in 8m who might see animist as OP. I was expecting to see more saying wizard was OP but seeings most don't enjoy keep fights the numbers were low.

I like the results and there are plenty of conclusions to draw from them.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 1:38 PM by Sunkissed
I think the results are expected as they are.

This game follows the rule of stone, paper, scissors in many ways, especially in solo action.
People tend to forget that there are classes, which are the scissors for them being the paper. They also forget that they are the paper for some stones around them.

Assuming this to be true in many cases what would those people vote for in such a survey lets say as a caster who runs solo and meets an assassin? It's the easiest way to vote the assassin op'd to contribute to tone him down for a future better standing against him. That is human nature.

So I think, a consideration if a class is op'd shouldnt be a question of feelings people have with another class they maybe hate because they were killed by it.
The results of the survey do not mirror the stats which could explain why a class might be op. So I think a nerf or equalizing adjustments would surely please some players, but would not help the game itself because the overall balance would suffer from that.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 4:49 PM by The Skies Asunder
I didn't personally place any classes in the OP section of the survey. I would much rather see other classes being slightly buffed, than whatever is the most popular at the time constantly being nerfed. It blows my mind that people voted for some of these classes as overpowered. Animist, really? Scout? I have died to a scout exactly one time because of the Stop style. Plenty of scouts have gotten away from me, but that doesn't feel OP, just irritating and poorly thought out. Certainly archers are annoying when there are a bunch of them assisting each other, but that doesn't make the class itself overpowered. The play style needs to change, but nerfing archers again isn't going to make them stop grouping, it will make them group even more.


I hope the devs don't put a ton of stock into which classes people voted as OP.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 4:56 PM by Vkejai
I think one of the most game changing bug or whatever you want to call it isnt even in the survey..... placing GTs using the ram driver. Maybe you should add this in .
Fri 9 Oct 2020 5:49 PM by Higach
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:53 PM
skipari wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 2:36 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 1:02 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:33 PM
How about if people would rather have rng gen as it was or the normalization of it implemented?

That one is not going to be up for a vote because that one has my hard veto.

The physical / critical damage variance is just a bit of useless fluff that just makes it harder to compare different specs / stats but has otherwise only very minor impact when compared to for example 3 or 4 resists / misses in a row.

Maybe I miss something, but why was it even asked if people prefer the rng in melee actually if thats something which won't change whatever happens? Afair that were basically the first? two questions in this survey.

gotwqqd and my veto refers to rng for crits/misses/resists/procs/blocks etc. as that is the part that would have a major impact.

The first 2 questions are about variance and while I personally see it as entirely pointless to bring it back, it wouldn't have a noticeable negative impact except making spec / stat testing largely impractical, but if that's what the majority wants so be it.

Because big crits that happen once every blue moon are fun. We aren't computers who cares if it's all mathematically the same as n approaches infinity.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 6:32 PM by gotwqqd
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 1:02 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Wed 7 Oct 2020 12:33 PM
How about if people would rather have rng gen as it was or the normalization of it implemented?

That one is not going to be up for a vote because that one has my hard veto.

The physical / critical damage variance is just a bit of useless fluff that just makes it harder to compare different specs / stats but has otherwise only very minor impact when compared to for example 3 or 4 resists / misses in a row.
Considering the adverse affect this has on 3 and 4 part chains how about allowing those chains to have option to skip 2nd or 3rd part of chain if you wanted.

I’ll use spear hero as example
It’s tough to get the bleed from parry chain as third part stacking. If you allow omit part two you can forgo the high damage part 2(not really high...should be addressed) and go right for the bleed
Fri 9 Oct 2020 8:18 PM by shintacki
I lost all faith in the efficacy and validity of this poll when I saw that people claiming to be 8v8 players voted Warden as among the most underpowered classes.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 9:01 PM by Sagz
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?
You could also ask if people like tooth ache...everybody will say no.
No other damage is put into question.
So why isnt a question if wizard damage is too high? Or why is gtaoe damage too high or the timer too low?

It feels like there is already pre-nerf consideration against archers.
We still suffer from that volley nerf where we lost our unique ra-ability without any comoensation.

Why isnt there a question if archers have enough utility? They are only reduced to a question if there is too much damage.
If you nerf archer damage you can delete archer classes completely so there is nothing left they are able to do.

I am not disagreeing with you, but maybe because they didn't just increase the bow damage? just like they included the crit damage poll as well cause that was a recent change. I think that is the main reason the question was there. Not to mention coupled by the fact that is after the event and EVERYONE made an archer and were picking people off in the event (not saying that was a bad thing) so people probably complained a lot lately. Which is why the question was added. Just my thought.

On a side note, when you can hit a fully buffed, fully templated caster with 1 shot for easily 1000 damage, while stealthed mind you, and your second shot kills them (if the buffs are potion buffs, otherwise probably about 10% health) before quick cast goes off, i do think it is a bit high imho, but again, I am not asking for a change. You get 4-5 of them hidden somewhere they will almost 2 shot heavy tanks, again i get it, 4 -5 casters or light tanks and a small man will kill them 2, but not in 2 hits. Basically 4 archers 2 shots (cause of the delay and shooting while stealthed there is no defense it will seem like almost getting 1 hit) Where as the 4 man of whatever, there is a defense of seeing them come and being to take some kind of action where it wont feel like getting 1 shot even when debuffed, where as archers are not debuffing.

I think you are more mad that people voted that it is too high, if they had voted the other way you would not have said a thing. (for the record I voted no, not because i think it isn't, just because i don't think they should really change anything, let people adjust.)
Fri 9 Oct 2020 9:07 PM by Dariussdars
So Hunters and their 5.0 speed bows are still lumped in with Scouts and Rangers as far as "too much archery damage"?

Hunters don't come close to the same damage, so why are they tied to the other two and their 5.5 speed bow crit shots?
Fri 9 Oct 2020 9:10 PM by Sagz
shintacki wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 8:18 PM
I lost all faith in the efficacy and validity of this poll when I saw that people claiming to be 8v8 players voted Warden as among the most underpowered classes.

I agree, especially when you rank classes as over powered or under powered what are you comparing it to? I mean a solo minstrel, solo necro/ or solo BD is OP fighting a solo NS/inf/SB. But is it in a zerg/keep fight? not really. Everyone class can usually feel OP in certain situations (especially against bad players). Where as Wizzies are pretty OP in a zerg/keep fight, but not solo etc. Not to mention there are a lot of people who have not even tried a specific class and think its OP and do not understand the mechanics.

Playing DAoC through the character planner is a recipe for failure.

I think they should have removed that part of the poll.

If people really though a class was too easy, too OP, those people would go make that class and be done with it, instead of complaining imho.

If you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing noone.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 10:10 PM by IdiamVonGawaine
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 3:40 AM
Why conveniently leave out information. These are bubbled targets, you do 50% less dmg to bubble target.

That's going to be less than critting someone with plate armor lol..

I'm not saying you're point of dps is invalid but try to present data without excluding information. As you could choose to crit a caster whose bubble you know is broken.

Dps isn't always a factor when it comes to damage. Archer has longer range than most spells meaning you could actually deal nearly 1200+dmg easily before your target has a chance to cast one spell.


The only thing "conveniently left out" about this entire issue is the fact that none of those complaining about archery damage ever discuss the crits that land in the 3-400 range for whatever reason, be it bubble, abs, temp, RR, or level. They only complain about the crits that land at cap, or close to it.

I've got a screenie of a cloth caster I hit for 1042, which is my cap, because it was seated and AFK. I've got another screenie of the SAME cloth caster getting hit for like 392 while they weren't seated and afk, and yet archery needs a nerf? I've got another screenie of a hybrid class taking a crit for like 190, because over 200 points of damage was eliminated by ablatives. And yet my char's 50 bow/48 pf archery damage is too powerful?

Nonsense.

There's already enough tools in the game to counter and marginalize archery damage as is, and absolutly zero reason to nerf it even further, other than personal bias against the class.

Thank you for your comment.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 10:27 PM by thirian24
Delete stealth, reduce archer dmg.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 10:55 PM by Bobbahunter
Do you really want all Archers to reroll assassin’s? It’s a stealth game that draws us. You will just flood the land with tons more Assasins that imo are more dangerous than archers.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM by Bradekes
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 10:10 PM
The only thing "conveniently left out" about this entire issue is the fact that none of those complaining about archery damage ever discuss the crits that land in the 3-400 range for whatever reason, be it bubble, abs, temp, RR, or level. They only complain about the crits that land at cap, or close to it.

I've got a screenie of a cloth caster I hit for 1042, which is my cap, because it was seated and AFK. I've got another screenie of the SAME cloth caster getting hit for like 392 while they weren't seated and afk, and yet archery needs a nerf? I've got another screenie of a hybrid class taking a crit for like 190, because over 200 points of damage was eliminated by ablatives. And yet my char's 50 bow/48 pf archery damage is too powerful?

Nonsense.

There's already enough tools in the game to counter and marginalize archery damage as is, and absolutly zero reason to nerf it even further, other than personal bias against the class.

Thank you for your comment.

So, your arrows deal less damage than you want sometimes, so your class isn't dealing excessive damage other times? This isn't logic-it's biased. I don't think archers have overpowered damage(My vote was no to archer damage too high, also I didn't put any archers on overpowered list), but you trying to say they don't even have okay damage is quite wrong. If you give only examples of instances that are the absolute worst case scenario then I guess you could convince yourself of what you're saying, but good luck for that to convince anyone else.

You would be berating a caster that only gave examples of them dealing dmg to resist buffed targets complaining that their damage isn't as high as you say, so why do you only give examples of essentially the same idea about how your archer doesn't really deal a lot of damage.

I have screenie of archers hitting my caster for 900+dmg fully templated fully buffed AF ABS, just didn't have bubble up because the archer was smart and critshot me after someone else broke my bubble.
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:25 PM by thirian24
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 10:10 PM
The only thing "conveniently left out" about this entire issue is the fact that none of those complaining about archery damage ever discuss the crits that land in the 3-400 range for whatever reason, be it bubble, abs, temp, RR, or level. They only complain about the crits that land at cap, or close to it.

I've got a screenie of a cloth caster I hit for 1042, which is my cap, because it was seated and AFK. I've got another screenie of the SAME cloth caster getting hit for like 392 while they weren't seated and afk, and yet archery needs a nerf? I've got another screenie of a hybrid class taking a crit for like 190, because over 200 points of damage was eliminated by ablatives. And yet my char's 50 bow/48 pf archery damage is too powerful?

Nonsense.

There's already enough tools in the game to counter and marginalize archery damage as is, and absolutly zero reason to nerf it even further, other than personal bias against the class.

Thank you for your comment.

So, your arrows deal less damage than you want sometimes, so your class isn't dealing excessive damage other times? This isn't logic-it's biased. I don't think archers have overpowered damage(My vote was no to archer damage too high, also I didn't put any archers on overpowered list), but you trying to say they don't even have okay damage is quite wrong. If you give only examples of instances that are the absolute worst case scenario then I guess you could convince yourself of what you're saying, but good luck for that to convince anyone else.

You would be berating a caster that only gave examples of them dealing dmg to resist buffed targets complaining that their damage isn't as high as you say, so why do you only give examples of essentially the same idea about how your archer doesn't really deal a lot of damage.

I have screenie of archers hitting my caster for 900+dmg fully templated fully buffed AF ABS, just didn't have bubble up because the archer was smart and critshot me after someone else broke my bubble.

Its the classic, down play every the complaints with "look at my terribly low dmg".
Sat 10 Oct 2020 1:00 AM by Horus
Let's just face the basic truth. The only classes that really complain about Rangers are SBs, Infilts, Minstrels, and Skalds...with a sprinkling of other solo classes.

Why? Because as other "solo" classes, they believe they should be able to pick any target they want, kill it, and get away every time.

And the sad thing is they have the tools to do just that with vanish and SoS.

If you don't want to get shot by multiple Rangers, don't go where they hang out. DC, hib flags, etc.

If you make the choice, you pay the consequences. Don't blame the class, blame the game that creates congestion points of action and you own choices to go there.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 2:53 AM by Higach
Horus wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 1:00 AM
Let's just face the basic truth. The only classes that really complain about Rangers are SBs, Infilts, Minstrels, and Skalds...with a sprinkling of other solo classes.

Why? Because as other "solo" classes, they believe they should be able to pick any target they want, kill it, and get away every time.

And the sad thing is they have the tools to do just that with vanish and SoS.

If you don't want to get shot by multiple Rangers, don't go where they hang out. DC, hib flags, etc.

If you make the choice, you pay the consequences. Don't blame the class, blame the game that creates congestion points of action and you own choices to go there.

Nah pretty much every 8 man hates archers too
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:48 AM by Lokkjim
Higach wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 2:53 AM
Horus wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 1:00 AM
Let's just face the basic truth. The only classes that really complain about Rangers are SBs, Infilts, Minstrels, and Skalds...with a sprinkling of other solo classes.

Why? Because as other "solo" classes, they believe they should be able to pick any target they want, kill it, and get away every time.

And the sad thing is they have the tools to do just that with vanish and SoS.

If you don't want to get shot by multiple Rangers, don't go where they hang out. DC, hib flags, etc.

If you make the choice, you pay the consequences. Don't blame the class, blame the game that creates congestion points of action and you own choices to go there.

Nah pretty much every 8 man hates archers too

^^ Definitely the truth, I regularly look for archers that add onto 8 man fights so they can have their fight and I get a kill in the task area.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:50 AM by IdiamVonGawaine
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
....so your class isn't dealing excessive damage other times?

No. I've posted data based on my archer and my casters that clearly demonstrates that fact. Archer DPS is front loaded, but far inferior to casted damage, and certainly not anymore "excessive" than any given caster.


Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
This isn't logic-it's biased.
The only bias here comes from members of our community, like you, that fail to understand the dps code.



Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
I have screenie of archers hitting my caster for 900+dmg fully templated fully buffed AF ABS, just didn't have bubble up because the archer was smart and critshot me after someone else broke my bubble.
And?

For my archer to have hit you with that crit would require him to wait for 3.9 seconds. 900/3.9=230 DPS for the crit, which is a dps comparable to casted damage, except the casted dps remains the same over time, while archer damage drops significantly over time.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:59 AM by thirian24
Delete archers. Get out there and vote.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 AM by Bradekes
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:50 AM
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
....so your class isn't dealing excessive damage other times?

No. I've posted data based on my archer and my casters that clearly demonstrates that fact. Archer DPS is front loaded, but far inferior to casted damage, and certainly not anymore "excessive" than any given caster.


Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
This isn't logic-it's biased.
The only bias here comes from members of our community, like you, that fail to understand the dps code.



Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
I have screenie of archers hitting my caster for 900+dmg fully templated fully buffed AF ABS, just didn't have bubble up because the archer was smart and critshot me after someone else broke my bubble.
And?

For my archer to have hit you with that crit would require him to wait for 3.9 seconds. 900/3.9=230 DPS for the crit, which is a dps comparable to casted damage, except the casted dps remains the same over time, while archer damage drops significantly over time.

I think you're a bit caught up in some details that aren't exactly relevant. Yes sure it takes 3.9second to load a critshot... I'm not sure how that time factors in dps?? An archer can hold their shot until they want to shoot. It's not exactly the same as DPS. As far as the recipient of the critshot is concerned that damage happens instantly and the time to load didn't factor into the time the fight started for the one being shot.

And again you choose to ignore relevant data which is the distance advantage. Hardly any classes have a spell usable at that distance. Archers can also choose to hold a shot until after they are hit with a quickcasted spell to fire again to interrupt the caster. That has happened to me many times.

So unless the archer gets a qc mezz or stun they are pretty much untouched in most caster fights. You just aren't on the receiving end it sounds like.. play a caster and experience more than your point of view as the down-on-his-luck archer. If they are so strong why would you play your crappy good for nothing archer unless maybe there's something more than what you're saying to the class.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 5:56 AM by Astaa
Will they nerf archers again? yes...ofc they will

Will they fix mincers? lol no.

Will they boost heavy tanks? lol no.

I would love to be proven wrong and I guess years of live has made me a bit jaded with the subject but I will believe any positive change when I see it

Custom changes are sometimes hit and miss, for the most part hit. Recent changes have been more miss than hit imo, the frontiers feel much quieter (without any statistics to back it up)
Sat 10 Oct 2020 6:07 AM by Astaa
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 AM
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:50 AM
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
....so your class isn't dealing excessive damage other times?

No. I've posted data based on my archer and my casters that clearly demonstrates that fact. Archer DPS is front loaded, but far inferior to casted damage, and certainly not anymore "excessive" than any given caster.


Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
This isn't logic-it's biased.
The only bias here comes from members of our community, like you, that fail to understand the dps code.



Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
I have screenie of archers hitting my caster for 900+dmg fully templated fully buffed AF ABS, just didn't have bubble up because the archer was smart and critshot me after someone else broke my bubble.
And?

For my archer to have hit you with that crit would require him to wait for 3.9 seconds. 900/3.9=230 DPS for the crit, which is a dps comparable to casted damage, except the casted dps remains the same over time, while archer damage drops significantly over time.

I think you're a bit caught up in some details that aren't exactly relevant. Yes sure it takes 3.9second to load a critshot... I'm not sure how that time factors in dps?? An archer can hold their shot until they want to shoot. It's not exactly the same as DPS. As far as the recipient of the critshot is concerned that damage happens instantly and the time to load didn't factor into the time the fight started for the one being shot.

And again you choose to ignore relevant data which is the distance advantage. Hardly any classes have a spell usable at that distance. Archers can also choose to hold a shot until after they are hit with a quickcasted spell to fire again to interrupt the caster. That has happened to me many times.

So unless the archer gets a qc mezz or stun they are pretty much untouched in most caster fights. You just aren't on the receiving end it sounds like.. play a caster and experience more than your point of view as the down-on-his-luck archer. If they are so strong why would you play your crappy good for nothing archer unless maybe there's something more than what you're saying to the class.

Yes, uninterrupted archers do some decent front-load, one shot damage. But to do that they have to stealth, queue up crit shot, fire, move and restealth. That's if they aren't interrupted by one of many GTAOEs, catas, a passing moth. Then its back to a couple of seconds of standing there then another 3 second draw time. If you are facing free shooting archers on walls then have a word with your casters, especially if you are allowing unstealthed crit shotting. Regular shots are similar to casted damage, except slower.

Also, you can't hold your shot forever and you can't re-stealth while aiming, you have to get out of combat, stealth, move back to position, draw again. So about 10 seconds between each crit shot, if you're very lucky. ofc archers have the option of shooting fast, if they fancy doing 150 damage per shot with the same interrupts. I would gladly lose crit shot in return for caster dps.

As to your 'why play archers' question, maybe some people play them because they like playing them?
Sat 10 Oct 2020 12:32 PM by Cadebrennus
Basically there's a lot of people who want the option of ranged DPS but don't want to wear a dress to qualify for ranged DPS.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 12:41 PM by Bradekes
Astaa wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 6:07 AM
Yes, uninterrupted archers do some decent front-load, one shot damage. But to do that they have to stealth, queue up crit shot, fire, move and restealth. That's if they aren't interrupted by one of many GTAOEs, catas, a passing moth. Then its back to a couple of seconds of standing there then another 3 second draw time. If you are facing free shooting archers on walls then have a word with your casters, especially if you are allowing unstealthed crit shotting. Regular shots are similar to casted damage, except slower.

Also, you can't hold your shot forever and you can't re-stealth while aiming, you have to get out of combat, stealth, move back to position, draw again. So about 10 seconds between each crit shot, if you're very lucky. ofc archers have the option of shooting fast, if they fancy doing 150 damage per shot with the same interrupts. I would gladly lose crit shot in return for caster dps.

As to your 'why play archers' question, maybe some people play them because they like playing them?

Trying to understand your point. I play caster and people don't let me just sit there and cast spells? Is that a thing you think casters have differently? So just because you're an archer you getting interrupted is unique to you? YOu have way more of a chance to get a shot off in a siege fight than a caster has of getting a spell off, and most the time if the caster is in range of getting a spell off he is tab targeted as soon as he is in view and stunned before his spell goes off... But archers distance is beyond tab targeting adding yet another benefit.

And ofc you can't hold your shot forever, but you can't hold a spell at all.. You can hold your shot and jump and shoot over obstacles and stay safe after your shot.. there isn't much of a threat to you besides siege dmg which affects everyone.

Also, if you read my previous posts, I am not saying archers need a nerf in damage but this guy has been acting like they are not even strong enough in their current state.. He is a bit wonky so try not to support his poor-is-me point of view.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 2:16 PM by Cadebrennus
Casters don't have stealth but they do have quickcast to gain the upper hand. That is essentially front-loaded dps OR utility/cc
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM by Tamy
I really do not get the latest implementation. Physical dmg now has a variance to it while mage dmg hasn't? How does that make any sense?

I get the movitvation and why players voted for it (even if it wasn't a clear vote pro variance at all) but why would you only implement it on one dmg type and create more QQ (justifiably) towards caster meta.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:15 PM by gotwqqd
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 2:16 PM
Casters don't have stealth but they do have quickcast to gain the upper hand. That is essentially front-loaded dps OR utility/cc
And lots of instants and ns and mezz and.....
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:15 PM by gotwqqd
Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM
I really do not get the latest implementation. Physical dmg now has a variance to it while mage dmg hasn't? How does that make any sense?

I get the movitvation and why players voted for it (even if it wasn't a clear vote pro variance at all) but why would you only implement it on one dmg type and create more QQ (justifiably) towards caster meta.
Agree change em both
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:22 PM by Sagz
IdiamVonGawaine wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:50 AM
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
....so your class isn't dealing excessive damage other times?

No. I've posted data based on my archer and my casters that clearly demonstrates that fact. Archer DPS is front loaded, but far inferior to casted damage, and certainly not anymore "excessive" than any given caster.


Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
This isn't logic-it's biased.
The only bias here comes from members of our community, like you, that fail to understand the dps code.



Bradekes wrote: ↑
Fri 9 Oct 2020 11:10 PM
I have screenie of archers hitting my caster for 900+dmg fully templated fully buffed AF ABS, just didn't have bubble up because the archer was smart and critshot me after someone else broke my bubble.
And?

For my archer to have hit you with that crit would require him to wait for 3.9 seconds. 900/3.9=230 DPS for the crit, which is a dps comparable to casted damage, except the casted dps remains the same over time, while archer damage drops significantly over time.

True, but that whole time you are stealthed, so to the person you hit, there is no time delay until the second hit. So it is basically 900 + your second shot then divide the time variance in the second shot only.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 PM by gruenesschaf
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:15 PM
Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM
I really do not get the latest implementation. Physical dmg now has a variance to it while mage dmg hasn't? How does that make any sense?

I get the movitvation and why players voted for it (even if it wasn't a clear vote pro variance at all) but why would you only implement it on one dmg type and create more QQ (justifiably) towards caster meta.
Agree change em both

Caster already have variance, however, casters can spec out of it whereas melees can't. That's how those mechanics work in daoc. The no variance here was a custom change and the majority now voted in favor of removing that custom change and thereby reintroducing pointless variance.

Also not really sure how it would give rise to qq in favor of casters, the average damage hasn't changed only now there are lower and higher spikes. If anything we'll now see some qq for lucky pa variance rolls or lucky svg quadhits.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:46 PM by thirian24
I don't understand the thought of having a poll/survey to get a feel for what the player base thinks, and then implementing changes based on that right away. Maybe you should have said, "This is a vote to change these." Because I know a lot of people that just put random BS down.

Lets face it, the general population have no idea what they are even voting on or deciding on in a survey. Lol
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:51 PM by Kwall0311
I would be willing to bet a large % didnt know what that even meant. Why? because theres already people asking what the change means for them. Change damage variance back!
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:51 PM by gotwqqd
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:15 PM
Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM
I really do not get the latest implementation. Physical dmg now has a variance to it while mage dmg hasn't? How does that make any sense?

I get the movitvation and why players voted for it (even if it wasn't a clear vote pro variance at all) but why would you only implement it on one dmg type and create more QQ (justifiably) towards caster meta.
Agree change em both

Caster already have variance, however, casters can spec out of it whereas melees can't. That's how those mechanics work in daoc. The no variance here was a custom change and the majority now voted in favor of removing that custom change and thereby reintroducing pointless variance.

Also not really sure how it would give rise to qq in favor of casters, the average damage hasn't changed only now there are lower and higher spikes. If anything we'll now see some qq for lucky pa variance rolls or lucky svg quadhits.
So why even put it up for a vote if you,as a dev, thinks is “pointless”?
Sat 10 Oct 2020 5:16 PM by Tamy
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:51 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:15 PM
Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM
I really do not get the latest implementation. Physical dmg now has a variance to it while mage dmg hasn't? How does that make any sense?

I get the movitvation and why players voted for it (even if it wasn't a clear vote pro variance at all) but why would you only implement it on one dmg type and create more QQ (justifiably) towards caster meta.
Agree change em both

Caster already have variance, however, casters can spec out of it whereas melees can't. That's how those mechanics work in daoc. The no variance here was a custom change and the majority now voted in favor of removing that custom change and thereby reintroducing pointless variance.

Also not really sure how it would give rise to qq in favor of casters, the average damage hasn't changed only now there are lower and higher spikes. If anything we'll now see some qq for lucky pa variance rolls or lucky svg quadhits.
So why even put it up for a vote if you,as a dev, thinks is “pointless”?

exactly...even based on a survey where it seems most players did not even know what they vote for, especially if it gets changed right away.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 5:27 PM by Tamy
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:15 PM
Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM
I really do not get the latest implementation. Physical dmg now has a variance to it while mage dmg hasn't? How does that make any sense?

I get the movitvation and why players voted for it (even if it wasn't a clear vote pro variance at all) but why would you only implement it on one dmg type and create more QQ (justifiably) towards caster meta.
Agree change em both

Caster already have variance, however, casters can spec out of it whereas melees can't. That's how those mechanics work in daoc. The no variance here was a custom change and the majority now voted in favor of removing that custom change and thereby reintroducing pointless variance.

Also not really sure how it would give rise to qq in favor of casters, the average damage hasn't changed only now there are lower and higher spikes. If anything we'll now see some qq for lucky pa variance rolls or lucky svg quadhits.

QQ in terms of I was able to hit solid numbers with for example my reaver (melee dmg and proc wise) now it's based on luck (melee dmg wise) if I get higher or lower numbers than before (since I'm not hitting most of my targets with 100+ swings per fight which would flat the variance curve). While a caster is still being able to deal out constant dd's from the first cast onward. I'm not a genius and still aware of the fact that the second scenario is much more in my favor overall (pointless change back like you said).

Not to mention that it was much more convenient to test stuff like different weapon specs with constant dmg figures.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 5:34 PM by skipari
Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM
Not to mention that it was much more convenient to test stuff like different weapon specs with constant dmg figures.

well that could be easily fixed with an maintained public documentation of the formulas, right now its a huge pain to figure out which formula was used for what.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 5:35 PM by easytoremember
If you use baseline spells without composite 50 spec you see variation in your spell damage (DoT ticks too)

Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 5:16 PM
exactly...even based on a survey where it seems most players did not even know what they vote for
yeah ok
Sat 10 Oct 2020 7:52 PM by IdiamVonGawaine
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 AM
Yes sure it takes 3.9second to load a critshot... I'm not sure how that time factors in dps??


Exactly.

And yet you, and other dps ignorant members of the community, express outrage and attack archery damage despite the fact that it can't even compete with the dps of most casted baseline spells.

Bradekes wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:35 AM
You just aren't on the receiving end it sounds like.. play a caster and experience more than your point of view

I RvR on a chanter or light ment, depending on the needs of the group. The only time I run my archer or shade is when I solo. I'm quite familiar with the experience from the caster side as well.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 8:24 PM by IdiamVonGawaine
Tamy wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 3:44 PM
.....why would you only implement it on one dmg type and create more QQ (justifiably) towards caster meta.

Because they apparently hate melee chars?

They really should just go ahead and delete ALL melee and stealth in this game, and design it around casters and support characters. They can just make melee/archer/stealth characters like controlled pets that you can buy in keeps and towers, that way players don't have to waste time building melee characters only to realize they're just fodder for casters/nerfs.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 9:07 PM by Bradekes
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 2:16 PM
Casters don't have stealth but they do have quickcast to gain the upper hand. That is essentially front-loaded dps OR utility/cc

a few things about quickcast... Firstly it is not so "quick" as it takes longer to cast a spell with quickcast... secondly, you still have to be in range of the target to use quickcast. third, if an archer is smart he will hold his shot until after the caster uses qc so he can shoot, because once a shot is full drawn you can't interrupt the archer without stun or mezz.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 10:49 PM by Kwall0311
Id like a revote on this absolute horrible idea of switching the physical damage variance. I want people who actually play the game to vote on it, or have an IQ average of atleast 80.

I truly believe people didnt know what they were clicking, and were more eager to get to voting the toons who they thought were OP, and for it to be so close to the "majority" 51%, i think this warrants a revote.
Sat 10 Oct 2020 11:50 PM by gotwqqd
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 10:49 PM
Id like a revote on this absolute horrible idea of switching the physical damage variance. I want people who actually play the game to vote on it, or have an IQ average of atleast 80.

I truly believe people didnt know what they were clicking, and were more eager to get to voting the toons who they thought were OP, and for it to be so close to the "majority" 51%, i think this warrants a revote.
Or maybe the few here bitching voted no....and are even a smaller minority of those against the move, as the others are dealing with it
Sun 11 Oct 2020 1:41 AM by easytoremember
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 10:49 PM
Id like a revote on this absolute horrible idea of switching the physical damage variance. I want people who actually play the game to vote on it, or have an IQ average of atleast 80.
70 is legally retarded and 90 is retarded
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 10:49 PM
I truly believe people didnt know what they were clicking, and were more eager to get to voting the toons who they thought were OP, and for it to be so close to the "majority" 51%, i think this warrants a revote.
The gap would grow wider to spite people like you especially given it was right next to crit variation
Tue 13 Oct 2020 9:31 AM by Sepplord
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 4:46 PM
I don't understand the thought of having a poll/survey to get a feel for what the player base thinks, and then implementing changes based on that right away. Maybe you should have said, "This is a vote to change these." Because I know a lot of people that just put random BS down.

Lets face it, the general population have no idea what they are even voting on or deciding on in a survey. Lol

I REALLY don't get this argument...

if the staff of the server asks for a survey, then you assume that it will not be used to define changes and therefor think putting random bullshit down makes sense?
Seriously...explain that logic to me. What did you think the information would be used for and why does it make sense to put random bullshit under those circumstances.

Play asshole games, get asshole prices
Tue 13 Oct 2020 8:55 PM by IdiamVonGawaine
Kwall0311 wrote: ↑
Sat 10 Oct 2020 10:49 PM
Id like a revote on this absolute horrible idea of switching the physical damage variance. I want people who actually play the game to vote on it, or have an IQ average of atleast 80.

I truly believe people didnt know what they were clicking, and were more eager to get to voting the toons who they thought were OP, and for it to be so close to the "majority" 51%, i think this warrants a revote.

I would have no problems with the change except for two very key issues:

1. They made this change based on a simple majority - According to the survey results page, 50% wanted the change, while 46% did not

Aside from the missing 4%, that's not a significant majority, and I guarantee more than 4% that answered didn't even know WHAT they were responding to in the first place. NO changes should have been made without at least approaching a 2/3 majority, as did the buff-shear, useless spec line, and realm pride questions.

2. This change largely impacts melee characters alone.

I would have no problem with it if ALL damage was at the mercy of the RNG, but only melee, archery, and unspecced spell damage is made to suffer....AGAIN? My light ment kicked off the same numbers every time with his spec DD, meanwhile my melee chars and archer are all over the place. Why? If I am to suffer through the RnG trash while speccing 50 in a weapon in melee, why can I avoid it on my casters while only speccing 46 in a line?

Doesn't make sense. Never did.
Wed 14 Oct 2020 6:36 AM by Sepplord
RNG can also go in your favor though, so i wouldn't just call it a nerf

The crit-change being reverted but the nerf being left in place with no explanation at all though...That's just not understandable.
When they nerfed the crit-RAs the explanation was that it was a neccessary sideeffect of the normalization. So why is it not reverted now?
Wed 14 Oct 2020 6:45 AM by gotwqqd
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Wed 14 Oct 2020 6:36 AM
RNG can also go in your favor though, so i wouldn't just call it a nerf

The crit-change being reverted but the nerf being left in place with no explanation at all though...That's just not understandable.
When they nerfed the crit-RAs the explanation was that it was a neccessary sideeffect of the normalization. So why is it not reverted now?
It’s obvious they think the increased chance is too much
Wed 14 Oct 2020 7:36 AM by Sepplord
many "obvious" things have a different and surprising explanation...
i still have hopes that there is a different one than "yeah, we lied about our intentions"
Thu 22 Oct 2020 1:24 PM by oldmanukko
25% of ppl put Minstrel as #1. closing in on 50% put it in their top#5.

* if minstrel drops or loses their pet, the chant pulse is "inactive" for 60 seconds and the pet is immune to mezz/stun? (you tried, you failed, deal with the concequences)
* increase recast timer of instants?
* instead of an insta-stun, perhaps force use of weapon and position to get stun/slow?
* take a pet to fight and die, you lose a lot of faction with it's clan (should it exist)?
* remove Ellyl Sage as a pet or it's ability to either heal or nuke (one or the other, not both)?

don't know what a "fair" nerf would be. very happy that almost half of ppl see they are overpowered too. but, i think if almost half of daoc ppl agree on something about the game itself, it goes from overpowered to over-the-top.
Wed 28 Oct 2020 4:31 AM by Dsai
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:58 PM
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?
You could also ask if people like tooth ache...everybody will say no.
No other damage is put into question.
So why isnt a question if wizard damage is too high? Or why is gtaoe damage too high or the timer too low?

It feels like there is already pre-nerf consideration against archers.
We still suffer from that volley nerf where we lost our unique ra-ability without any comoensation.

Why isnt there a question if archers have enough utility? They are only reduced to a question if there is too much damage.
If you nerf archer damage you can delete archer classes completely so there is nothing left they are able to do.

How many hundreds of posts or threads do you see complaining about Wizard dmg?
Give them stealth and see how many post you get then.
Wed 28 Oct 2020 5:07 AM by easytoremember
Dsai wrote: ↑
Wed 28 Oct 2020 4:31 AM
thirian24 wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:58 PM
Sunkissed wrote: ↑
Tue 6 Oct 2020 8:04 PM
Why is there an explicit question if archer damage is too high?
You could also ask if people like tooth ache...everybody will say no.
No other damage is put into question.
So why isnt a question if wizard damage is too high? Or why is gtaoe damage too high or the timer too low?

It feels like there is already pre-nerf consideration against archers.
We still suffer from that volley nerf where we lost our unique ra-ability without any comoensation.

Why isnt there a question if archers have enough utility? They are only reduced to a question if there is too much damage.
If you nerf archer damage you can delete archer classes completely so there is nothing left they are able to do.

How many hundreds of posts or threads do you see complaining about Wizard dmg?
Give them stealth and see how many post you get then.
you laugh but Bonedancer should have been a valkyn/kobold stealth caster with one spell line and axe/sword
This topic is locked and you can't reply.

Return to Ask the Team or the latest topics