Server Changes - Phoenix Freeshard

When I first read through the scope of style changes being made I was definitely taken aback by the scale of it. After the initial shock wore off I read through them more carefully and honestly if it were trimmed down it would be a healthy change for the server.

My concern now is for the amount of players (very much including myself) who do look forward to updates and changing content within a game to keep it fresh. By the sounds of Gruen's post https://forum.playphoenix.online/get-involved/planned-changes/26586-style-changes?page=18 there will be no more server changes until the population drops off. To me that is a major problem and a huge red flag. In speaking for myself I have no interest in playing on a server that does not update anything aside from bug fixes because things will stagnate.

I get that this is a direct reaction to how toxic the server community can be, which is 100 percent accurate.

I honestly think that this can be fixed. First off, there needs to be better communication, so I don't know if they need to get someone on the team who is better at marketing/communication but they could definitely benefit from clearer lines of dialog. Secondly, it's their server and their vision. I think changes could be rolled out at a slower pace instead of these massive overhauls all at once. By nature people are going to have an adverse reaction to radical change seemingly out of nowhere regardless of what that change may be, so they are setting themselves up for failure from the start. For instance, surgically addressing neglected style lines first would have been an easier pill for the general server population to swallow.

Anyway, this is my direct reaction to them saying no more changes to the server and me panicking. For the record as someone who has poured countless months into the Reaver class the levi nerf initially ticked me off HOWEVER I think that wasn't really my problem with the change. My problem with the change was them making the block chain utterly useless. This is where feedback and discourse would help.

I put this under the suggestion section because I am suggesting they still make changes to the server but approach it in a different manner.

- Tempyst

TLDR; Big sweeping changes bad, server community toxic, please continue to make changes but more gradual, devs can do what they want with their server

Fri 16 Oct 2020 6:23 PM by yepyukon

I agree with most of your post. The biggest issue I see is the the majority of players on this server would pray for rain and then walk outside and bi#$# because it is raining. I think they did a good job of saying what they were planning to do all along and then put out a poll based on what they were suggesting. Most people on the server just don't ever read anything and overwhelmingly complain.

I was really hoping for the style changes. Not because every style needed an adjustment, but because it was something new. I am constantly reading about people who have played since release or played for X years..then why not want a little change? Would it have been perfect at first? Absolutely not. Would it have been a great step in something new to keep old players and maybe draw in new ones or bring some back? Absolutely yes.

Now they plan to release no changes for quite some time and that sucks. There are a lot of good ideas out there that should be looked at, style changes being near the top of the list. Now because of a bunch of whiny brats, we get nothing even though the vast majority wanted a change.

Fri 16 Oct 2020 6:39 PM by hyshash

problem with all current changes/announcements is ... they clearly showed they dont have a clue how do to some minor tweaks that dont mess up the whole game and throw everything over board but instead only fix things that are broken
thats why ppl went overboard with the styles changes ... cause these would have foundamently changed how most melees have to specc/play + grp setups + retemping in some cases etc instead of giving the lines/classes in need a backsnare fixing some things regarding chains and too hit boni etc (btw thats what they talked about way back when they brought up styles changes for the first time ... they never wrote hey we want to implement livelike things because the feedback back then would have been the same we got now)
for example giving merc a 12sec backsnare and reducing the slam dura to 5sec would be a small change that would make the class 8vs8 viable without breaking it or makeing it op and by that hybrid or even melee alb setups could potentionally become viable
instead we see things like the skald or even worse the warden suggestions ...

Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:32 PM by Cotea

yepyukon wrote: ↑
Fri 16 Oct 2020 6:23 PM
I think they did a good job of saying what they were planning to do all along and then put out a poll based on what they were suggesting. Most people on the server just don't ever read anything and overwhelmingly complain.

In their survey, no where did they say they were doing a massive overhaul of the styles, before that they did ask if there was something they could do to the unused melee lines to bring them to par with the popular lines eg. Hammer on midgard is popular, sword and axe are not.

What they did was nothing like this... completely off the mark by a fucking mile!!! So the population while probably overreacting a little, still had a reason to not like this change at all!

Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:45 PM by inoeth

its going to come, let it be, let it flow through you and i bet 99% of you crybabies will love it, just like NF.
new is always better - barney stinson

Sat 17 Oct 2020 1:16 AM by easytoremember

inoeth wrote: ↑
Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:45 PM
its going to come, let it be, let it flow through you and i bet 99% of you crybabies will love it, just like NF.
new is always better - barney stinson

I hate NF and I was right to bitch about it
Old wine really shits on your quote

Sat 17 Oct 2020 1:34 AM by Cotea

Dont worry about server changes....

gruenesschaf
Re: Style Changes
There really is no point for me to continue with the negativity towards all changes and accusing us of being deceptive with the vote, what the fuck did you expect when you voted yes on a vote that explicitly mentioned all weapon lines? That we just plop a backsnare to Ragnarok and call it a day? Oh wait, people actually accuse us of being deceptive with the crit variance vote because we then only changed the crit variance.

Last November we internally decided to announce some major change regarding the future of the server once the eu pt population drops below a certain threshold on a non holiday Sunday. Aside from bug fixes there won't be anymore gameplay changes until then.

Looks like someone got mad...

Sat 17 Oct 2020 3:12 AM by senseless

I get what they are trying to do, and it is commendable. Using an old patch as a baseline has its own set of difficulties in keeping people happy. There is a reason there are other patches that were implemented and frankly, most of us look on 1.65 with rose colored glasses expecting the magic of 2002. The idea to use current (ish) styles is good on paper (ish) because it levels a lot of the disparity that the off meta specs present.

The one poster that stated that the styles were implemented with spell line changes, stat changes, gear differences kind of hit the nail on the head though. There are other mechanics that help distinguish melee classes to a point where you can have relatively homogenized styles across the board. You know you are fighting a Reaver when you get bombed/bane dumped/CL diseased and Levi'd with a spirit Leggy on live. The rear style DD is only one of the defining factors at that point. On Phoenix though, there is less of that uniqueness aside from the imperfections that surround a Reaver's Flex line. I like the idea of giving most melee classes some form of positional snare. Do I think a Reaver's snare should be as impactful as say, Armsman? No. The differences and imperfections in spec lines should be impactful, in a way that gives classes a uniqueness based off of the spec they choose.

1.65 has a lot of that built in, but needs some fine tuning to address the overall viability of off-meta specs. I think just about any melee should have the ability to peel. Straight tanks should probably be the best at it. Light tanks and non-free casting hybrids should probably be decent at it as well. Timer durations could reflect that. RAs like charge could change that, but I fear that it would be too much.

As a whole, I feel like players have to realize the 1.65 they knew is flawed, but there is a fine line to walk between balance and homogenization. I think the Devs, who are unpaid participants here, need to have a little slack cut to them for attempting to change things up in a way that makes classes more accessible. I don't think it was the best idea to go with a completely revamped style change, but at least they are trying to make it a more balanced playing field for a lot of underutilized classes and specs.

People have to understand that the problem with a custom server attempting to relive a particular patch is that there inherently is the belief that it is going to stay that way, but how many MMOs have ever had a life span of success at a particular patch? Changes are what drive a lot of the player base, even in a 19 year old MMO. Some things do need to be adjusted, but everyone basically telling the devs that they will quit their freeshard if large changes are made is a little extreme. Positive criticism should be the name of the game; they are humans, attempting to make changes to their beloved, niche project. We are the ones who get to benefit from these individuals pounding out code in their free time. I love the fact that someone who is way better at coding than I am had dedicated the time and effort to start this project, and attempt to manage it with everyone and their uncle complaining about balance then complaining more when changes are made. I would be more hesitant to feel this way if I was a paid subscriber who expected progress due to the fact that I was paying for it, but just the fact that we have had this server to enjoy our free time on says a lot about the people who have successfully built it in their free time.

TLDR: 1.65 is imperfect. Cut some slack to the guys and gals that have given their time to allow us to enjoy it. We won't agree with all of the changes made, but I think most sane people will agree that burning the Dev team alive for decisions made on their freeshard is not going to get anyone what they want.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 3:40 AM by Illusionist

I know me and my guildies would very much love to see the new style changes added to Phoenix, this would certainly take the best foundations of the game, very closely mirror live (although still not exactly the same) and potentially bring players from Live to Phoenix which could further grow the Phoenix DAOC community. I guess it depends on which group of players you want to keep.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:33 AM by easytoremember

Illusionist wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 3:40 AM
this would certainly take the best foundations of the game, very closely mirror live (although still not exactly the same) and potentially bring players from Live to Phoenix which could further grow the Phoenix DAOC community.

Wonderful way to get Broadsword breathing on Uthred's neck again~
For the goldfish entertaining this idea it is why the frontiers mysteriously had invisible volumes patched in the live client and broke the border keeps

Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:54 AM by inoeth

easytoremember wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 1:16 AM
inoeth wrote: ↑
Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:45 PM
its going to come, let it be, let it flow through you and i bet 99% of you crybabies will love it, just like NF.
new is always better - barney stinson
I hate NF and I was right to bitch about it
Old wine really shits on your quote

uhm how about no? everything is better than old fz, it sucked!

Sat 17 Oct 2020 7:42 AM by easytoremember

inoeth wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:54 AM
easytoremember wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 1:16 AM
inoeth wrote: ↑
Fri 16 Oct 2020 11:45 PM
its going to come, let it be, let it flow through you and i bet 99% of you crybabies will love it, just like NF.
new is always better - barney stinson
I hate NF and I was right to bitch about it
Old wine really shits on your quote

uhm how about no? everything is better than old fz, it sucked!

What you like I may not like and what I like you may not like. I'm saying I knew I hated NF on live, I thought I would hate NF on phoenix, and I do hate NF on phoenix.
It makes things much less bewildering when you got two people watching the same fight and the first commends you for it while the other condemns you as a scumbag

In the same sense two people evaluating the proposed melee change can and are going to have different conclusions- and in this case I like the current styles, I voted yes to the worthless spell lines getting bumped up and no to the all melee lines viable question. Even so, I'm welcome to bumping up the shittier weapon lines, even so far as class-specific love within melee lines, and what I'm against is fucking around with the stuff that's already good. Back then, that was OF [zones], and now, it's the nature of melee

Sat 17 Oct 2020 8:10 AM by Astaa

I think there are a lot of ungrateful people around. We get to play DAOC in a much better form than live, for free. The devs and GMs do this on their own time and any and all changes are made with the best intentions by people that do actually care about the server and DAOC in general.

The devs and GMs don't always get things right and shouldn't be expected to but there is absolutely no need for all the toxic whining and shouting that has gone on, especially recently. They can't please everyone. People should feel free to give their opinion, in a constructive way. Shouting, screaming and name calling is not how you get your voice heard.

I don't blame them for basically saying "up yours then" and I think they have shown a lot of restraint. I hope they reconsider, once the dust has settled and continue their work for us in trying to breath a bit of life into DAOC. Stagnation is unhealthy, worthwhile change is good.

Edit. I also think the vast majority of the playerbase really do appreciate all the work that is done for us. Not just in the patching, changes, additions etc but the day to day help available from the support team. You can usually get hold of support very quickly, often immediately. That is very much taken for granted.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM by Noashakra

It's their server, but they have a player base.
I think a lot of people love this server and that's why they are passionate about the topic. Don't forget that, even if it's their server, they need players to keep it alive.

The thing is, we saw already a few times changes annonced with almost no notice, that were obviously broken. The player base told the dev, who ignored them.
Results of that? A good idea implemented without testing. the stack of bleed until 200 dmg.
A quick fix was done, but everyone on the topic said it was too high, and they still went with it. Kudos to the dev, they fixed the problems within few hours.
Now the bleed effects are a nice mechanic, with the 50 cap. Do you see people complaining about it?

Same thing with archery, instead of going step by step, they buffed the line way too high and had to fix it, and it took days.

Now imagine that, but with hundread of styles. It was obvious for anyone looking at the charplan that, some styles or classes would become broken (the VW for exemple). On top of that, some classes playstyles would change drastically, and they already sank a lot of hours in a class that would not play the same as they knew.

And they anounced the changes thursday night to monday, using the survey that lots of people understood in a different way (most wanted some lines buffed, not a complete overhaul), as proof that those changes were wanted. No discussion.

And when the backlash came they closed the discussion. Some people weretoxic no doubt about that, most begged them to not change and explained why it would be a bad idea. Lots of people here act like if all the replies were from toxic people, it wasn't the case. People expressed their concens and the consequences of those changes. Me, it was clear. Those changes would be the end of my phoenix adventure. So I should have stayed quiet and quit on monday, like a lot of people?

Instead of asking "what went wrong, why people react like this, let's take a step back and analyse the situation", the staff ego was hit and they switched to "ok guys, you get what you want, no more changes" when people want changes, not the ones they proposed.

People are not ungrateful, look at all the positivity for the 1-50 instance even. Lots of people praised them (even if a few complained). But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 1:54 PM by tyrantanic

Having played this game from release, I think the new styles are way better than the old ones. I don't care about playing classic DAoC. I've done that. I want something different. While the new styles would have mirrored Live, the patch setting is still very different. They could have easily tweaked styles based on our feedback but it's clear players here don't want that. They want the same boring game from 19 years ago trying to capture a moment in time that simply can't be replicated. Nostalgia is one hell of a drug for this community.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 2:13 PM by imweasel

Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
It's their server, but they have a player base.
I think a lot of people love this server and that's why they are passionate about the topic. Don't forget that, even if it's their server, they need players to keep it alive.

The thing is, we saw already a few times changes annonced with almost no notice, that were obviously broken. The player base told the dev, who ignored them.
Results of that? A good idea implemented without testing. the stack of bleed until 200 dmg.
A quick fix was done, but everyone on the topic said it was too high, and they still went with it. Kudos to the dev, they fixed the problems within few hours.
Now the bleed effects are a nice mechanic, with the 50 cap. Do you see people complaining about it?

Same thing with archery, instead of going step by step, they buffed the line way too high and had to fix it, and it took days.

Now imagine that, but with hundread of styles. It was obvious for anyone looking at the charplan that, some styles or classes would become broken (the VW for exemple). On top of that, some classes playstyles would change drastically, and they already sank a lot of hours in a class that would not play the same as they knew.

And they anounced the changes thursday night to monday, using the survey that lots of people understood in a different way (most wanted some lines buffed, not a complete overhaul), as proof that those changes were wanted. No discussion.

And when the backlash came they closed the discussion. Some people weretoxic no doubt about that, most begged them to not change and explained why it would be a bad idea. Lots of people here act like if all the replies were from toxic people, it wasn't the case. People expressed their concens and the consequences of those changes. Me, it was clear. Those changes would be the end of my phoenix adventure. So I should have stayed quiet and quit on monday, like a lot of people?

Instead of asking "what went wrong, why people react like this, let's take a step back and analyse the situation", the staff ego was hit and they switched to "ok guys, you get what you want, no more changes" when people want changes, not the ones they proposed.

People are not ungrateful, look at all the positivity for the 1-50 instance even. Lots of people praised them (even if a few complained). But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Exactly. Everything they do is with a heavy hand. I also expressed my fear that this was going to happen with the style changes.

I guess some dev's egos just can't let things go...

Sat 17 Oct 2020 2:41 PM by WildWilbur

Well, it could be anticipated that such drastic changes won't be welcomed by the community with open arms. But I think the devs put a lot of thought and work in those style changes so why in the world they not just implement them for 4 weeks ("NEW STYLE-EVENT! COME AND TRY OUT!) and let the folks decide then if they want to keep it with an ingame vote?

Because as we all know: Sometimes you have to eat something to know if you like it. (lousy translation of "Der Appetit kommt manchmal mit dem essen!"

And acting like a prima donna won't lead us anywhere either.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 3:11 PM by Shamissa

Well i think not only players but Devs especially acted very immature in this case. “ If not gonna update anymore, not only myself but my whole guild and alliance are ready to leave next month. “ and i assure you all a lot more are going to leave because the immaturity of the Devs how they showed yesterday in phoenix discord all day long was really childish.
It’s their server, but they cant keep going without players, and players don’t like to be treated the way was treated yesterday, so Devs think just because the game is free, players should kneel on them and its not how works , we players have the right to let them know when stuff aren’t gonna work well and ask for a test at least. What i saw yesterday was actually disappointing, they could just have just said “ok folks we gonna hold off on this one for now “. But not cry in Phoenix discord along with the players , that to me show how immature some of them are.

Xoxo

Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM by

gruenesschaf

Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:27 PM by jonl

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

maybe it's time you guys need to admit that the current people making decisions aren't making the right ones and get help from a council of players who can collectively make good changes?

there's no need to take offense to people saying your changes are bad, majority of people just wanna play fun and balanced daoc (plus it makes u look immature)

Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:35 PM by BiGmAn

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

problem is you based your change ideas off the survey which was answered by people with zero clue about how the game is meant to work and whats good/bad etc. People thought wardens were the most underpowered class on hib with already improved cast speed to majors (3.2 to 2.5), access to cures and cure ns and MOTA (1,65 they didnt have any of these). Really shows the level of player answering this survey.

My suggestion would be to ask the more competitive players ideas on future changes rather than the whole community

Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:52 PM by soremir

I actually really like this approach. Introduce the changes, see how they work, and then vote on it. We can always revert back.

Also as Phoenix players, we just need to treat each other better. Don't be snarky. Don't be mean. Don't demand that somebody "debates you" all the time. Just be polite and leave people be. The Devs have put together this amazing DAOC for us, they maintain the server, and they take the heat for it. We should be polite to them when we are here and positive and constructive in our criticism.

Some of the stuff on these forums for the RR5 and style changes were downright mean and accusatory, and most of it was certainly not constructive. "This won't work because of "X"" is not constructive or helpful, and as players, we should engage with their ideas and proposed changes and offer suggestions for how it can be improved or tweaked. Start from the assumption that it will happen, and then we can make the suggestions for how it can be made to work.

So Devs, I at least am sorry for how these last two sets of proposed changes went. I am sorry that we were not constructive in our feedback and I am sorry for all the crap you took for trying to keep the game fresh. After what we saw over the past month, I wouldn't be inclined to work on this server anymore either if I was you, but please do be better than me!

Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:17 PM by Tashkent

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

Mid spear would have seen an overhaul too, I guess, to be in line with CD?

Front root comparable to frozen comet/stop, front ASD style, perforate as a 5s stun, razors edge to regular snare, AF debuff after evade...

Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:49 PM by inoeth

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

and sadly you listened to the ppl now who bring nothing but hate to the game.
this style change was needed so bad....

Sat 17 Oct 2020 6:24 PM by Shamissa

inoeth wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:49 PM
and sadly you listened to the ppl now who bring nothing but hate to the game.

Thats not true at all....people actually love this game.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 6:47 PM by inoeth

Shamissa wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 6:24 PM
inoeth wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:49 PM
and sadly you listened to the ppl now who bring nothing but hate to the game.

Thats not true at all....people actually love this game, now can you ask them why they got so mad at the players for not agreeing with something like a child? when mommy tell them time out? that was just silly from their part yesterday very immature. Is their server but they need people to play , dont they?

as IF they would not play afterwards.... before NF it was the same .. many were crying and in the end alot agreed that nf is far better than of...
this game is full of old ppl 40+ and in that age ppl tend to blocke everything thats "new" ... hell knows why.
if ppl want a "classic" server, there is an alternative, and guess what ... nobody plays there, why?

Sat 17 Oct 2020 7:53 PM by easytoremember

BiGmAn wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
My suggestion would be to ask the more competitive players ideas on future changes rather than the whole community

broadsword 2.0

Sat 17 Oct 2020 8:41 PM by The Skies Asunder

easytoremember wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 7:53 PM
BiGmAn wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
My suggestion would be to ask the more competitive players ideas on future changes rather than the whole community
broadsword 2.0

Indeed. Asking competitive players to have more input than casual ones is a recipe for disaster.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 8:45 PM by Forlornhope

Tashkent wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:17 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.
Mid spear would have seen an overhaul too, I guess, to be in line with CD? Front root comparable to frozen comet/stop, front ASD style, perforate as a 5s stun, razors edge to regular snare, AF debuff after evade...

The changes on mid spear would have been small, but something they very much need. The evade reactionary was made an 18 ASR and the followup was made a bleed. As someone who plays melee hunter that would have been such a game changer imo. Would allow me to actually use the 44 after back stun followup rather than stunning and having to use the side style for an ASR. The reason why spear's update looks lackluster compared to CD for rangers is because at this time they had a pet that could disease and stun I believe. But man, even just adding those two simple changes would have been enough to put hunter closer to par with most of the targets I end up fighting on a solo melee hunter.

Sat 17 Oct 2020 8:57 PM by BiGmAn

The Skies Asunder wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 8:41 PM
easytoremember wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 7:53 PM
BiGmAn wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
My suggestion would be to ask the more competitive players ideas on future changes rather than the whole community
broadsword 2.0

Indeed. Asking competitive players to have more input than casual ones is a recipe for disaster.

why? surely the cream of the crop players (boyos) know more about balancing the game than someone who sticks the pilz/polemo zerg every day

Sat 17 Oct 2020 10:23 PM by Astaa

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

That's a real shame. I can understand where you are coming from but please remember that the majority, by far, appreciate what you and the GMs do.

FWIW, I quite liked the look of the Celtic Spear changes...

Sun 18 Oct 2020 12:58 AM by ExcretusMaximus

jonl wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:27 PM
maybe it's time you guys need to admit that the current people making decisions aren't making the right ones and get help from a council of players who can collectively make good changes?

there's no need to take offense to people saying your changes are bad, majority of people just wanna play fun and balanced daoc (plus it makes u look immature)

Maybe you should pay the hundreds of dollars a month in upkeep for this free game and then you can make some changes.

I swear to God, you people think that because it's free for you it's free for everyone. Bandwidth and server upkeep cost real world money, and it's not a small amount, but all you can do is whine.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 1:09 AM by Higach

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

The problem is you proposed the changes without ANY of the common sense or flagrant problems addressed. Its only after everyone points them out in a surge of negative feedback that you adjust the proposed plan.. and then you go and say things like "well obviously this would have been changed even before testing..." Why even propose it then with flagrant issues still present that anyone with a mediocre sense of DAoC balance can see a mile away?

I know you're not dumb, so you SURELY should understand why your recent two large changes caused the effect they did. I refuse to believe someone intelligent enough to run this server cant see clear as day where things went wrong.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 5:39 AM by Hedien

The post above reflects a bit of the spirit of negativity that has been pointed out. To call someone as having "no common sense" - well, what do you expect? Happiness and motivation? Instead to say "I have seen this scenario where it might be problematic, maybe if we did... what do you think?" is a much better format and simply better manner.

My subjective view:
- Changes are good and are the reason why many people stick with Phoenix. To change away from this formula is not doing the server a favor.
- Changes are best gradual, in the longer term you might want to implement them all. But step by step is best, focusing on UP/OP perceptions as you gathered via the poll. Since less peeps feel concerned, less emotion.
- Moderate negative expression by clear forum mute for days/week with reason "politeness/respect". It is not enough to lead someone to quit the game, but enough to improve the forum life and next posts from said persons.

@Grue
In the end my advice is, take the same plan you had for changes. Break it down to a class, then do 1-2 week 1 class. It will maintain fresh change, give enough testing feedback and prevent uproar/emotional community feedback.

Fat/Saturday

Sun 18 Oct 2020 6:56 AM by Amarath

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.

Doubt that. Maybe the 50% abs debuff but youll only get a few of them off an entire fight (90 end cost) The healing debuff is 125 end and it works on the HEALERS not the target so you really only debuff 1 source of healing maybe 2 if lucky.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 7:02 AM by Amarath

BiGmAn wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
problem is you based your change ideas off the survey which was answered by people with zero clue about how the game is meant to work and whats good/bad etc. People thought wardens were the most underpowered class on hib with already improved cast speed to majors (3.2 to 2.5), access to cures and cure ns and MOTA (1,65 they didnt have any of these). Really shows the level of player answering this survey.

So you play a warden? Because they are so OP right? Who really enjoys a warden, they do what they always have done (even on live with better styles/options then the current ones offered) they pulse bubble and heal(poorly butter ST now), with a bit of peel. Trying to give them another option or more tools isn't way op. Sure are they more than viable 1v1 or some small man sure. Then again plenty of classes just suck 1v1 or small man does that mean we should buff them massively no becuase then they will be OP in RvR / 8 man. End of day thats how this game is balanced (and these changes wouldn't have put them even near say minst or scout levels so why the QQ r/t to wardens).

If you took bubble away from warden who would play them? Bubble carries them as just a thing most groups want.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 7:04 AM by Amarath

Hedien wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 5:39 AM
The post above reflects a bit of the spirit of negativity that has been pointed out. To call someone as having "no common sense" - well, what do you expect? Happiness and motivation? Instead to say "I have seen this scenario where it might be problematic, maybe if we did... what do you think?" is a much better format and simply better manner.

My subjective view:
- Changes are good and are the reason why many people stick with Phoenix. To change away from this formula is not doing the server a favor.
- Changes are best gradual, in the longer term you might want to implement them all. But step by step is best, focusing on UP/OP perceptions as you gathered via the poll. Since less peeps feel concerned, less emotion.
- Moderate negative expression by clear forum mute for days/week with reason "politeness/respect". It is not enough to lead someone to quit the game, but enough to improve the forum life and next posts from said persons.

@Grue
In the end my advice is, take the same plan you had for changes. Break it down to a class, then do 1-2 week 1 class. It will maintain fresh change, give enough testing feedback and prevent uproar/emotional community feedback.

Fat/Saturday

This really is constructive feedback. Thanks.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 7:46 AM by Forlornhope

Amarath wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 7:02 AM
BiGmAn wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:35 PM
problem is you based your change ideas off the survey which was answered by people with zero clue about how the game is meant to work and whats good/bad etc. People thought wardens were the most underpowered class on hib with already improved cast speed to majors (3.2 to 2.5), access to cures and cure ns and MOTA (1,65 they didnt have any of these). Really shows the level of player answering this survey.

So you play a warden? Because they are so OP right? Who really enjoys a warden, they do what they always have done (even on live with better styles/options then the current ones offered) they pulse bubble and heal(poorly butter ST now), with a bit of peel. Trying to give them another option or more tools isn't way op. Sure are they more than viable 1v1 or some small man sure. Then again plenty of classes just suck 1v1 or small man does that mean we should buff them massively no becuase then they will be OP in RvR / 8 man. End of day thats how this game is balanced (and these changes wouldn't have put them even near say minst or scout levels so why the QQ r/t to wardens).

If you took bubble away from warden who would play them? Bubble carries them as just a thing most groups want.

To be fair, I was planning on temping my 50 warden for the changes and started working on it to prepare for the changes. Since they didn't go through I tweaked the temp and am playing the standard group warden 10 blade spec and am having a lot of fun with it.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 12:37 PM by Higach

Hedien wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 5:39 AM
The post above reflects a bit of the spirit of negativity that has been pointed out. To call someone as having "no common sense" - well, what do you expect? Happiness and motivation? Instead to say "I have seen this scenario where it might be problematic, maybe if we did... what do you think?" is a much better format and simply better manner.

My subjective view:
- Changes are good and are the reason why many people stick with Phoenix. To change away from this formula is not doing the server a favor.
- Changes are best gradual, in the longer term you might want to implement them all. But step by step is best, focusing on UP/OP perceptions as you gathered via the poll. Since less peeps feel concerned, less emotion.
- Moderate negative expression by clear forum mute for days/week with reason "politeness/respect". It is not enough to lead someone to quit the game, but enough to improve the forum life and next posts from said persons.

@Grue
In the end my advice is, take the same plan you had for changes. Break it down to a class, then do 1-2 week 1 class. It will maintain fresh change, give enough testing feedback and prevent uproar/emotional community feedback.

Fat/Saturday

Read my post again. I never said they lack common sense. I said the common sense ISSUES weren't addressed until after the post went up and the complaints started.

This is a perfect example where people see negativity = bad and didn't even comprehend the post.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:08 PM by Beepbop

I apologize in advance for my terrible english, hope google will helps me well through this.

In my opinion (probably unpopular one) implementing styles from live on a 1.65 scaled server without nerfing most of them is a bad idea at start, it's like adding nitro on your crappy bicycle basically.
Change is fine, adjusting is better. The staff already done that in the past for the friar (adding few styles/spells) to get the class more competitive. Same for the paladin by adding more pts per level or adding cure nearsight on most of support classes. Having all classes doing - more or less - the same thing is boring (talking about tanks, for the most part) and that is not what people asked for, I believe.

People asked for adjustments, balances and not confirmity. Some classes in our lovely server are still lacking of love (thinking immediatly about the Thane, who would love to have more pts per level, for example, like the paladin did) and this can be easily fixed. People are waiting for ages to see their impossible 4 part styles chains get reduced to 2 (with some nerfs/adjustements or course) as well.

Let's be honest, everyone knows that and such changes on styles would haven't helped at all with adjustments and would have unbalanced more things (I can't remember how stupid the VW looked like but it was just pure nosense at least on Phoenix) That is why people complained really hard on it, pure logic.

I guess people like how the styles were developped and created back in time and love to have basics styles, without absurds effects like reducing heals, ABS debuff, both snare/ASR reduction at once or crap like that. That's the spirit of Old DAOC I believe.

I encourage the staff to do many changes (or not) as they want, big or small ones. People won't care as long it's done properly and for adjustementing/balancing purposes.
Keep this up ladz, you did fine until then.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:32 PM by

gruenesschaf

Beepbop wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:08 PM
In my opinion (probably unpopular one) implementing styles from live on a 1.65 scaled server without nerfing most of them is a bad idea at start, it's like adding nitro on your crappy bicycle basically.

This is for the most part uninformed / unfounded fear. If you look at the styles you'll see that aside from reaver / vw dd delves the buffs and debuffs are dealing with percentages or values that would have a very comparable effect like the 50 af debuff after evade or the increased bleed values. Most percentages, aside from a handful of outliers are also in the 5% range making them practically indistinguishable from variance, and those that are above 5% either have a short duration or were already mentioned as something that would be monitored.

Beepbop wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:08 PM
Having all classes doing - more or less - the same thing is boring (talking about tanks, for the most part) and that is not what people asked for, I believe.

That is already the case for the most part because people are / feel forced to spec in a way that they have the required things. A couple classes would have received access to snares and zerk / merc would have received a side stun, that's pretty much it in terms of everyone doing the same that wasn't the case before already.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:49 PM by

gruenesschaf

Higach wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 1:09 AM
The problem is you proposed the changes without ANY of the common sense or flagrant problems addressed. Its only after everyone points them out in a surge of negative feedback that you adjust the proposed plan.. and then you go and say things like "well obviously this would have been changed even before testing..." Why even propose it then with flagrant issues still present that anyone with a mediocre sense of DAoC balance can see a mile away?

Why propose the style change like that? For one thing to avoid the general concept becoming tainted by favoritism, we made precisely one such change beforehand: not giving ranger a frontal root as nobody even needs a hint of more ranger buffs and so the intent was to leave it for the most part untouched before the introduction and then have the sensible changes that we know will happen be voiced by the community and then implement them as good suggestions, maybe with some direction from us by calling them out in some form.
To this day people claim we gave out the RAs like ichor / st etc because we felt like doing it in that way to favor whatever realm the claimant is not, instead we literally took the distribution as it was in 1.124 while accepting that we have fewer classes but aside from st on menta it looked like it should work out quite well simply because of the typical group compositions.

Pointing out issues is not and has never been the problem, for the most part I don't even care about the tone in those cases if the argument has merit (and hasn't been mentioned by us already as something we are aware of).
The primary problem is really just the feeling based complaints that point to nothing in particular and by definition can't be fixed and are usually the most negative as it's just feeling based.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:59 PM by labra

I suggest you put up the style change by monday and let people play it for some time.
Then put a survey asking if people want:
Go back to former styles and adjust the broken/underplayer one
Keep new ones and adjust some to keep balance

I believe that's something done for of/nf, let people play and test both then decide.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:59 PM by Beepbop

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:32 PM
This is for the most part uninformed / unfounded fear. If you look at the styles you'll see that aside from reaver / vw dd delves the buffs and debuffs are dealing with percentages or values that would have a very comparable effect like the 50 af debuff after evade or the increased bleed values. Most percentages, aside from a handful of outliers are also in the 5% range making them practically indistinguishable from variance, and those that are above 5% either have a short duration or were already mentioned as something that would be monitored.

The thing is you had to nerf these things already, it was kinda logic to do and you knew that before it was even started. Specially for base damages procs from styles like Thane/Friar/Reaver/VW etc... I don't know how you proceed for that if you do have... I don't know, a dedicated server for testing or it such a thing is possible or not ; I'm not an expert on that but most of the games are doing that. Because people are scared to play with unbalanced things with their "real characters" you know ?

Specially if it takes a long time to fix.

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:32 PM
That is already the case for the most part because people are / feel forced to spec in a way that they have the required things. A couple classes would have received access to snares and zerk / merc would have received a side stun, that's pretty much it in terms of everyone doing the same that wasn't the case before already.

And I guess it was too much ALREADY for people. Players asked to not be forced to play hammer on mid to get access to snares, for example. I don't know but maybe just adding a snare or two in axe/sword spec would be enough ? In that way, people would not feel forced to spec in a certain spec anymore to have basic things, like a melee snare for example. (Which is mandatory if you want to have a good time in RvR as melee)
I mean, people are not asking for such drastic changes (at least for now) a direct snare is just basic and some weapon lines just need one to be playable in RvR.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 6:28 PM by Lokkjim

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:49 PM
Higach wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 1:09 AM
The problem is you proposed the changes without ANY of the common sense or flagrant problems addressed. Its only after everyone points them out in a surge of negative feedback that you adjust the proposed plan.. and then you go and say things like "well obviously this would have been changed even before testing..." Why even propose it then with flagrant issues still present that anyone with a mediocre sense of DAoC balance can see a mile away?

Why propose the style change like that? For one thing to avoid the general concept becoming tainted by favoritism, we made precisely one such change beforehand: not giving ranger a frontal root as nobody even needs a hint of more ranger buffs and so the intent was to leave it for the most part untouched before the introduction and then have the sensible changes that we know will happen be voiced by the community and then implement them as good suggestions, maybe with some direction from us by calling them out in some form.
To this day people claim we gave out the RAs like ichor / st etc because we felt like doing it in that way to favor whatever realm the claimant is not, instead we literally took the distribution as it was in 1.124 while accepting that we have fewer classes but aside from st on menta it looked like it should work out quite well simply because of the typical group compositions.

Pointing out issues is not and has never been the problem, for the most part I don't even care about the tone in those cases if the argument has merit (and hasn't been mentioned by us already as something we are aware of).
The primary problem is really just the feeling based complaints that point to nothing in particular and by definition can't be fixed and are usually the most negative as it's just feeling based.

I'll be honest, I'd be alright if you just put the change in. Granted, I might not like it at first and I'm sure I'd like to see a lot of things change. And therein lies a problem, a change of that magnitude will have numerous requests and while you might accept some of those changes, it will take time to implement them which people will just have to suffer through until the change comes.

I think that is one big fear of a lot of people playing. We know maintaining this server is a lot of work and we thank you for it, but waiting for a change can be torture sometimes. Not because we think you should work faster or anything like that, but because we are looking forward to it and then it gets put on the backburner because something more important came up or some unforeseen difficulty. And I can't stress this enough, we (I at the least) do not fault/blame you for this.

I think what would make life a little bit easier would be to tell everyone these changes are coming, but give it a timeframe of 2 weeks or more, and allow people to make suggestions on changes before they happen. For example, I saw that Celtic Dual got a side snare and a rear snare, while Dual Wield only got a side snare, and Left Axe got a side and frontal snare which were both the second part in a chain. I think that should have been evened out in some way. This way everyone can review the changes to their classes/playstyles and have an opportunity to be heard.

Thinking more about it, I'd suggest 2 weeks for people to give their input and then give yourselves a time frame to implement those changes and then put it in the game. Thank you for the work you do put into this game.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 8:56 PM by Saroi

Beepbop wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:59 PM
And I guess it was too much ALREADY for people. Players asked to not be forced to play hammer on mid to get access to snares, for example. I don't know but maybe just adding a snare or two in axe/sword spec would be enough ? In that way, people would not feel forced to spec in a certain spec anymore to have basic things, like a melee snare for example. (Which is mandatory if you want to have a good time in RvR as melee)
I mean, people are not asking for such drastic changes (at least for now) a direct snare is just basic and some weapon lines just need one to be playable in RvR.

That is the problem. People think giving certain lines a snare or like you said 2 for axe/sword would be enough. No it would not. Mid hammer back snare has no to hit and is also the damage styles with 2 part. Do others in sword/axe get to hit? If yes, you need to change hammer. Will hammer and sword be viable then? No, because that would be axe with having 2 snares then, a good anytimer and a Side ASR with 34% making it far superior over the others. Just by that you have another balance issue and need more fixing. Sword won't be viable anyways because the back style, Ragnarok is level 50. If you give it a snare instead of the ASR then you still have the problem that most can't really spec that high.

This problem is just one realm, you still have Alb and Hibernia to consider. You can just look at the Light tanks. Berserker have Side and Backsnare but only in hammer and have crappy defense and no easy stun access. BM Pretty much has Side and Backsnares, easy stun but their styles have crappy growth combared to Bers/Merc and probably the most garbage anytimers. Merc have strong damage styles, stuns but no good snares. So basically if you give Merc access to the snares you will have a circle of changing BM to better styles to compensate and also giving berserker stuns or some defense too for them to be on the same level.

Same as people want anytimers for Reaver/VW/Savage. Those classes are designed to have a bad anytimer because they have the best parry/evade/side/back damage styles with a lot of free stuns and high growth rates and effects. Giving them what people want with anytimer will open up a big pandoras box. The live styles has them with anytimers but greatly reduced the damage on the other styles like Levi tuned down etc.

So you see, the issue is far greater than people think. I can understand that Devs thought about doing live styles were most issues are solved with snares, anytimers, side or backstuns etc. and would just need a few adjustments. Because changing the styles on their own will take a big deal of time. There are also a lot of styles that are useless, like block styles on classes that have no shield spec and so on.

In the end, if you really go for what people want, it will make most the same. I mean some people complain about the live styles making too much the same, but if you demand viable specs for other weapon lines having access to side and/or back snare and good anytimer well guess what? They will turn out to be the same too.

Sun 18 Oct 2020 11:32 PM by easytoremember

Saroi wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 8:56 PM
That is the problem. People think giving certain lines a snare or like you said 2 for axe/sword would be enough. No it would not. Mid hammer back snare has no to hit and is also the damage styles with 2 part. Do others in sword/axe get to hit? If yes, you need to change hammer. Will hammer and sword be viable then? No, because that would be axe with having 2 snares then, a good anytimer and a Side ASR with 34% making it far superior over the others. Just by that you have another balance issue and need more fixing. Sword won't be viable anyways because the back style, Ragnarok is level 50. If you give it a snare instead of the ASR then you still have the problem that most can't really spec that high.

---

In the end, if you really go for what people want, it will make most the same. I mean some people complain about the live styles making too much the same, but if you demand viable specs for other weapon lines having access to side and/or back snare and good anytimer well guess what? They will turn out to be the same too.

Nah I voted against messing with melee because I assumed the proposed solution was going to be throwing snares into every line

I agree as Beepbop said that is just conformity and it's boring. The live styles are a more severe form of that

Having all classes doing - more or less - the same thing is boring (talking about tanks, for the most part) and that is not what people asked for, I believe.

That is already the case for the most part because people are / feel forced to spec in a way that they have the required things. A couple classes would have received access to snares and zerk / merc would have received a side stun, that's pretty much it in terms of everyone doing the same that wasn't the case before already.

I read it as him comparing classes becoming identical, not specs of a single class being picked a certain way. The meta certainly pushes people into snaring but the meta is based around making use of what you think allows you to win
---

When you buff melee styles, buff them with an overall goal in mind but not an immediate objective. Like, if you wanted to give the Berserker love in LA and went with attaching a Crush proc on the 3rd style (so that SB sees no change & magic resists do not factor), set the damage amount with 'this is the last style of a 3-back chain' in mind, not 'this is where the zerk will deal 40% of his burst'

The players deciding to make use of changes will find one use or another for them. There are also cases where people aren't necessarily using a spec because it's the best or good. The only reason I ever pick up Air on theurg is for the spirit nuke being cool

For your approach on Scout, a lot of the negative stems from there being no other melee snare that delves high enough to halt movement no matter the duration. The other bit is it muddles the image of the scout as the scout cause they're suddenly 'rooting' people in place

The live styles are that muddle on a bigger scale

---
On bleeds, originally I thought they were going to be similar to a DoT where reusing the same style refreshes the duration but does not apply more damage. With that, it would be of benefit having use of many different bleed
styles instead of spamming one (and thereby uncapped).
Especially with the original bleed values in mind, reaching 200 was unthinkable. Was that not possible to do? Or an issue of headache?

Mon 19 Oct 2020 1:01 AM by bculpepper

Style Changes

I think the idea of style updates is fine, but the proposed changes made an assumption that the 1.91 styles present a better starting point than the styles as they are today. I just can't see how this would be true. I think by using the 1.91 styles you just substitute one set of problems for another. With the current styles you have years of experience and feedback to make them better. If the 1.91 styles are implemented on Phoenix you are going to get so much feedback it will be impossible to sort the constructive from the meaningless. I've been a software developer for 25 years and a dev manager for the past 10. You need a solid baseline to measure progress and swapping every style at once destroys your baseline.

I've played a lot of classes and all the realms 15 years ago, but my experience on Phoenix is limited to Shadowblade so I'll give an easy example using what I know today. On Phoenix, Shadowblades and Nightshades get 3253 spec points (2.2 multiplier) and Infiltrators get 3706 spec points (2.5 multiplier). On live servers the numbers are 4143 (2.8) and 4290 (2.9). There is a large % and total difference in points on phoenix that doesn't exist on live. This is fine with current styles, but the new set of styles includes a massive anytime style in the CS line at spec 45 that is so much better than anything else its pretty much a must-have. Infiltrators can spec to 45 easily, but SBs would need to drastically reduce LA (and total dmg) to get to 45 CS. It isn't like this on live as the spec point difference on Phoenix is 14% more for Infiltrators and on live it is only 3.5% more. I don't have enough experience with other classes on Phoenix, but I suspect similar issues would come up.

Overall

Overall, I think the Phoenix team has done masterful job of managing the server. The QoL changes are fantastic and the events have all been well received. The Phoenix feather system was well constructed and has a great balance between needing some effort and not being crazy difficult. From what I have seen, the community has been very receptive to content changes - but really isn't interested in large-scale class changes.

Thanks for your work - it is greatly appreciated.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:07 AM by gotwqqd

Saroi wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 8:56 PM
Beepbop wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:59 PM
And I guess it was too much ALREADY for people. Players asked to not be forced to play hammer on mid to get access to snares, for example. I don't know but maybe just adding a snare or two in axe/sword spec would be enough ? In that way, people would not feel forced to spec in a certain spec anymore to have basic things, like a melee snare for example. (Which is mandatory if you want to have a good time in RvR as melee)
I mean, people are not asking for such drastic changes (at least for now) a direct snare is just basic and some weapon lines just need one to be playable in RvR.

That is the problem. People think giving certain lines a snare or like you said 2 for axe/sword would be enough. No it would not. Mid hammer back snare has no to hit and is also the damage styles with 2 part. Do others in sword/axe get to hit? If yes, you need to change hammer. Will hammer and sword be viable then? No, because that would be axe with having 2 snares then, a good anytimer and a Side ASR with 34% making it far superior over the others. Just by that you have another balance issue and need more fixing. Sword won't be viable anyways because the back style, Ragnarok is level 50. If you give it a snare instead of the ASR then you still have the problem that most can't really spec that high.

This problem is just one realm, you still have Alb and Hibernia to consider. You can just look at the Light tanks. Berserker have Side and Backsnare but only in hammer and have crappy defense and no easy stun access. BM Pretty much has Side and Backsnares, easy stun but their styles have crappy growth combared to Bers/Merc and probably the most garbage anytimers. Merc have strong damage styles, stuns but no good snares. So basically if you give Merc access to the snares you will have a circle of changing BM to better styles to compensate and also giving berserker stuns or some defense too for them to be on the same level.

Same as people want anytimers for Reaver/VW/Savage. Those classes are designed to have a bad anytimer because they have the best parry/evade/side/back damage styles with a lot of free stuns and high growth rates and effects. Giving them what people want with anytimer will open up a big pandoras box. The live styles has them with anytimers but greatly reduced the damage on the other styles like Levi tuned down etc.

So you see, the issue is far greater than people think. I can understand that Devs thought about doing live styles were most issues are solved with snares, anytimers, side or backstuns etc. and would just need a few adjustments. Because changing the styles on their own will take a big deal of time. There are also a lot of styles that are useless, like block styles on classes that have no shield spec and so on.

In the end, if you really go for what people want, it will make most the same. I mean some people complain about the live styles making too much the same, but if you demand viable specs for other weapon lines having access to side and/or back snare and good anytimer well guess what? They will turn out to be the same too.

The problem with reaver/VW is that chains, especially three and four parts as these classes have, are severely hampered by the ‘fix’ to the rng for hitting.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:51 AM by imweasel

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 2:49 PM
Higach wrote: ↑
Sun 18 Oct 2020 1:09 AM
The problem is you proposed the changes without ANY of the common sense or flagrant problems addressed. Its only after everyone points them out in a surge of negative feedback that you adjust the proposed plan.. and then you go and say things like "well obviously this would have been changed even before testing..." Why even propose it then with flagrant issues still present that anyone with a mediocre sense of DAoC balance can see a mile away?

Why propose the style change like that? For one thing to avoid the general concept becoming tainted by favoritism, we made precisely one such change beforehand: not giving ranger a frontal root as nobody even needs a hint of more ranger buffs and so the intent was to leave it for the most part untouched before the introduction and then have the sensible changes that we know will happen be voiced by the community and then implement them as good suggestions, maybe with some direction from us by calling them out in some form.
To this day people claim we gave out the RAs like ichor / st etc because we felt like doing it in that way to favor whatever realm the claimant is not, instead we literally took the distribution as it was in 1.124 while accepting that we have fewer classes but aside from st on menta it looked like it should work out quite well simply because of the typical group compositions.

Pointing out issues is not and has never been the problem, for the most part I don't even care about the tone in those cases if the argument has merit (and hasn't been mentioned by us already as something we are aware of).
The primary problem is really just the feeling based complaints that point to nothing in particular and by definition can't be fixed and are usually the most negative as it's just feeling based.

Why the secrecy? Why not come out and tell everyone up front that you were going to implement styles from live? Not just boost under used lines, but changing ALL the lines.

What was the point in not making a public announcement of/on/about the plan? Why divulge the details late instead of in the beginning?

I don't think you understand at all the core issue your player base had with this attempted implemention.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 6:58 AM by inoeth

imweasel wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:51 AM
Why the secrecy? Why not come out and tell everyone up front that you were going to implement styles from live? Not just boost under used lines, but changing ALL the lines.

What was the point in not making a public announcement of/on/about the plan? Why divulge the details late instead of in the beginning?

I don't think you understand at all the core issue your player base had with this attempted implemention.

i dont think most complainers actually took a deep look into the new styles, just complaining for no reason. thus it would not have changed a thing to announce that beforehand. ppl would still have complained for no reason....

plz bring new styles!

Mon 19 Oct 2020 9:20 AM by fleshcutter

Cotea wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 1:34 AM
Dont worry about server changes....

gruenesschaf
Re: Style Changes
There really is no point for me to continue with the negativity towards all changes and accusing us of being deceptive with the vote, what the fuck did you expect when you voted yes on a vote that explicitly mentioned all weapon lines? That we just plop a backsnare to Ragnarok and call it a day? Oh wait, people actually accuse us of being deceptive with the crit variance vote because we then only changed the crit variance.

Last November we internally decided to announce some major change regarding the future of the server once the eu pt population drops below a certain threshold on a non holiday Sunday. Aside from bug fixes there won't be anymore gameplay changes until then.

Looks like someone got mad...

That was exactly what i was expecting from the question in the survey actually. So am i fucking stupid because of that? Nowhere in the phrasing of that question was it made clear that it was about a complete overhaul of all weapon lines to how it is on live, or at least how it was last time i played there.

Personally i am for change but the proposed changes were huge and not what I and many like me expected.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 10:57 AM by Sepplord

fleshcutter wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 9:20 AM
gruenesschaf
Re: Style Changes
There really is no point for me to continue with the negativity towards all changes and accusing us of being deceptive with the vote, what the fuck did you expect when you voted yes on a vote that explicitly mentioned all weapon lines? That we just plop a backsnare to Ragnarok and call it a day? Oh wait, people actually accuse us of being deceptive with the crit variance vote because we then only changed the crit variance.

Last November we internally decided to announce some major change regarding the future of the server once the eu pt population drops below a certain threshold on a non holiday Sunday. Aside from bug fixes there won't be anymore gameplay changes until then.

Looks like someone got mad...

That was exactly what i was expecting from the question in the survey actually. So am i fucking stupid because of that? Nowhere in the phrasing of that question was it made clear that it was about a complete overhaul of all weapon lines to how it is on live, or at least how it was last time i played there.

Personally i am for change but the proposed changes were huge and not what I and many like me expected.

Yeah, that's what i also don't understand.
I get that a ton of people and their comments are way overboard and should be more constructive, but sadly that's not the world we live in. It's obvious IRL and people don't suddenly evolve to rational and critical thinkers when they join a gaming forum

Imo it is completely reasonable to assume that the survey question was geared towards the initial style change announcement and it's discussion, and would not be a copy/paste from live including changes like a general snare nerf from 60% to 40%, the introduction of new 3-chains or any buffs to the meta-stylelines.

I get their explanantion, i disagree with it but that's a different issue. Opinions differ.
But being surprised that people connected the style-change question in the survey to previous announcements being made about stylechanges is mindboggling to me.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 11:20 AM by labra

While I agree the survey question wasn't clear about chaging all lines (I was assuming there talked about few lines and reducing long chains), our reaction was way too much aggressive.

I'm ok with people getting different opinions but look how much topic have been opened just to talk (I should say whine/rant) about it, and how aggressive people were.
I agree, the change wasn't expected, or at least not like this, but the reaction we had was inappropriate. I'm not even talking about MP Gruene can have recieved or how it was on Discord...

We have forgotten dev play and keep this server alive for free, on their spare time.
Yes, parsing every single weapon line to adress long chain, adding some buff on style could have been done. It would take a long time, and i one line is released before others, there could be class balance issues.
Chosing to take "live-like" styles might be easier for devs to implement. It even adressed the style/tooltip issue. We could have let the style change come and report every class balance issue (we could even have done this before, pacifically).

It's sad

Mon 19 Oct 2020 2:23 PM by Sepplord

labra wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 11:20 AM
our reaction was way too much aggressive.

I disagree. It wasn't "OUR" reaction as a playerbase that was too aggressive. Most people voiced their disagreement more/less civil. Not necessarily constructively.
Plenty of comments were abusive and too aggressive, i completely agree on that, though. But (even if sad) that is to be expected when interacting with a huge bunch of people that are from all over the world.
It's why interacting with your customer community is tiring and straining and even some professional studios have stopped doing so completely. Longterm community managers of big games have quit over the abuse and exploitation of the people they are paid to deal with. And staff here is doing all without pay.
We are living in a world where one of the biggest economies in the world is being lead by someone who only communicates this way, with tons of people believing that it is completely okay to behave like that IRL. And the internet historically has not tamed anyones behaviour down, ever....quite the contrary.

I can completely understand the devs stance to try and please everyone and it must be a frustrating hell if your efforts seem to get appreciated by noone.
The blame "we" as a community have to take is that we need to condemn exploitive and hurtful language more instead of clicking "like" on someones hatred filled words, just because we agree on the point they are trying to make with it. Call people out and mostly you are just the new target, and even others join in telling you "that's just how the internet is"

Mon 19 Oct 2020 2:35 PM by inoeth

if anyone remembers: the official EU daoc forums were shut down early because of massive flaming

Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:10 PM by imweasel

labra wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 11:20 AM
While I agree the survey question wasn't clear about chaging all lines (I was assuming there talked about few lines and reducing long chains), our reaction was way too much aggressive.

I'm ok with people getting different opinions but look how much topic have been opened just to talk (I should say whine/rant) about it, and how aggressive people were.
I agree, the change wasn't expected, or at least not like this, but the reaction we had was inappropriate. I'm not even talking about MP Gruene can have recieved or how it was on Discord...

We have forgotten dev play and keep this server alive for free, on their spare time.
Yes, parsing every single weapon line to adress long chain, adding some buff on style could have been done. It would take a long time, and i one line is released before others, there could be class balance issues.
Chosing to take "live-like" styles might be easier for devs to implement. It even adressed the style/tooltip issue. We could have let the style change come and report every class balance issue (we could even have done this before, pacifically).

It's sad

I think there was some very poorly made wording choices in the critique of the proposed style changes, but I don't think there was to much aggression.

Just take a look at the recent history of proposed changes and how different (and in some cases radical) some of the results wound up being with many of them.

1) Bleed stacking.

A cap of 200 value. Who in the world thought that was a good value to start with? It was quickly criticized as to much before implementation and was toned severely down (by 75%) shortly after release.

2) Archery damage.

In an effort to make spec'ing high in archery worth the investment, damage was boosted. I don't know, once again, who thought that the amount of increased damage at the start was a good idea, but the boost was way to high. Then the boost was reduced. Then eventually was reduced to almost pre patch levels. And for rvr, not worth spec'ing high in archery.

3) Jewel crafting.

An excellent idea. We had one system that was ok. More or less an RNG lottery. Then an about face and the retool wound up as a completely new system. Cost is extremely high in the new system so, IMHO, barely functional and probably not worth the effort the team put into it.

Now just add on the stealth "nerf", volley nerf nerf (and I did mean nerf nerf), the free handing out of not just level 1, but level 2 RA that was going to specifically free 9 rps to primarily two classes(?) that took it (for rvr), RR5 abilities and style "review" and we get to the point where we are at today. I don't find the player base apprehension to changes at this point unfounded in the slightest.

Couple this with miscommunication and misinterpretation and the secrecy about what is actually in the teams mind about where they are going we wind even further away from the goal, whatever that is.

Myself and some friends in our discord chamnel predicted that all that should/would come out of this is just some bug fixes.

And here we are.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:15 PM by imweasel

inoeth wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 2:35 PM
if anyone remembers: the official EU daoc forums were shut down early because of massive flaming

And? I'm not going to be surprised if that happens as well. It seems to follow whatever the course the team is on now.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:19 PM by

gruenesschaf

imweasel wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:10 PM
I think there was some very poorly made wording choices in the critique of the proposed style changes, but I don't think there was to much aggression.

Just take a look at the recent history of proposed changes and how different (and in some cases radical) some of the results wound up being with many of them.

Neither the bleed stacking change nor the archery change were really different, just lower numbers. The concepts for both remained: bleeds no longer breaking cc and stacking in damage while removing first tick on reapplication, archer combined spec above 52 having some benefit.
Jewelcrafting as mentioned did indeed become an addition instead of replacement.

However, for the style changes the core concept would have been the fixing of loads of issues and this time the negative comments came against that very concept because it's such a huge change to have to press a differently colored / named button as anytimer or reactionary. To be comparable with the style / archery change the negative comments would have had to focus on warden effects / vw delve / reaver delve or anything in particular really, changing the values / effects here would have been minor adjustments while keeping the concept of the change.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:32 PM by imweasel

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:19 PM
imweasel wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:10 PM
I think there was some very poorly made wording choices in the critique of the proposed style changes, but I don't think there was to much aggression.

Just take a look at the recent history of proposed changes and how different (and in some cases radical) some of the results wound up being with many of them.

Neither the bleed stacking change nor the archery change were really different, just lower numbers. The concepts for both remained: bleeds no longer breaking cc and stacking in damage while removing first tick on reapplication, archer combined spec above 52 having some benefit.
Jewelcrafting as mentioned did indeed become an addition instead of replacement.

However, for the style changes the core concept would have been the fixing of loads of issues and this time the negative comments came against that very concept because it's such a huge change to have to press a differently colored / named button as anytimer or reactionary. To be comparable with the style / archery change the negative comments would have had to focus on warden effects / vw delve / reaver delve or anything in particular really, changing the values / effects here would have been minor adjustments while keeping the concept of the change.

Well when has the team ever done a "minor change"? And if this is so obvious from the get go, why is it being implemented in the first case if all it requires are some "tweaks".

Most of the changes made are never minor. The teams ideas are wrapped in secrecy. I guess if the team can't see the core reasons for the player bases apprehension on changes in general, I don't know how to address the issues in a more constructive manner.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:21 PM by hyshash

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:19 PM
Neither the bleed stacking change nor the archery change were really different, just lower numbers. The concepts for both remained: bleeds no longer breaking cc and stacking in damage while removing first tick on reapplication, archer combined spec above 52 having some benefit.
Jewelcrafting as mentioned did indeed become an addition instead of replacement.

However, for the style changes the core concept would have been the fixing of loads of issues and this time the negative comments came against that very concept because it's such a huge change to have to press a differently colored / named button as anytimer or reactionary. To be comparable with the style / archery change the negative comments would have had to focus on warden effects / vw delve / reaver delve or anything in particular really, changing the values / effects here would have been minor adjustments while keeping the concept of the change.

these numbers are the base to differentiate between something beeing op, good or meaningless and you guys seem to go over the top with every single of your changes ... having to lower the stackable bleed dmg by 75% isnt some minor change to the original concept - lowering it by 5-10% would have been in this context(why is it even stackable ... noone asked for stackable bleeds only for them to not break cc ... ).

also by presenting the changes to every single melee class under the hood of "style changes" will lead to ppl critizing the whole concept instead of only critizing part of it ... if you wanted dedicated reviews you could have done patch notes the way live did it and more ppl would have reacted to dedicated parts but by telling everyone "here are the style changes" allways leads to ppl voiceing their opinion to the whole thing

Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:32 PM by labra

change was revealed on 15 oct. for a release on 19oct with a charplan already updated.

That would have left plenty of time to discuss and adress some styles, such as leviathan and conflagration

Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:34 PM by Bradekes

hyshash wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:21 PM
these numbers are the base to differentiate between something beeing op, good or meaningless and you guys seem to go over the top with every single of your changes ... having to lower the stackable bleed dmg by 75% isnt some minor change to the original concept - lowering it by 5-10% would have been in this context(why is it even stackable ... noone asked for stackable bleeds only for them to not break cc ... ).

also by presenting the changes to every single melee class under the hood of "style changes" will lead to ppl critizing the whole concept instead of only critizing part of it ... if you wanted dedicated reviews you could have done patch notes the way live did it and more ppl would have reacted to dedicated parts but by telling everyone "here are the style changes" allways leads to ppl voiceing their opinion to the whole thing

I see you judging and criticizing the devs for their ideas. Where's your comprehensive list of style changes that should be made? You seem like you know what should or shouldn't be added to the game, so let's hear it. I'm sure you've got more than criticism in that head of yours.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:04 PM by Tyrlaan

tyrantanic wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 1:54 PM
Having played this game from release, I think the new styles are way better than the old ones. I don't care about playing classic DAoC. I've done that. I want something different. While the new styles would have mirrored Live, the patch setting is still very different. They could have easily tweaked styles based on our feedback but it's clear players here don't want that. They want the same boring game from 19 years ago trying to capture a moment in time that simply can't be replicated. Nostalgia is one hell of a drug for this community.

The problem has never been tweaking styles. That´s what people expected from the style changes. Tweaks to a couple styles/spec lines to make them worthwhile. The problem was to announce a full style overhaul which instead of doing the above - fix a couple spec lines/classes - would introduce a whole lot more to fix. The argument that fixing the couple of styles without introducing 1.91 styles would be more work than introducing 1.91 styles only to fix those cannot hold water.

That´s like first shuffling abilities only to sort them out later. Can you imagine what would happen if they did the same to spell lines? Change all the effects (CC, pets) and damage until people can barely recognize the classes they once knew only to see what happens, then have a vote, then change some more?

Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:24 PM by

gruenesschaf

Tyrlaan wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:04 PM
That´s like first shuffling abilities only to sort them out later. Can you imagine what would happen if they did the same to spell lines? Change all the effects (CC, pets) and damage until people can barely recognize the classes they once knew only to see what happens, then have a vote, then change some more?

This is either arguing in bad faith or just being uninformed of how little the style rework would have actually changed in practice for most classes. You make it sound like a class that had access to snares and keeps access to snares is a completely different class because that snare button potentially changed its icon and name. Feel free to replace snare with anytimer or reactionary.
The only real gameplay affecting change would have been the removal of anytime snares and direct after evade stuns and 2, maybe 3, highly effective style debuffs where the uptime / practicality however is still in question.

Tyrlaan wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:04 PM
The problem has never been tweaking styles. That´s what people expected from the style changes. Tweaks to a couple styles/spec lines to make them worthwhile. The problem was to announce a full style overhaul which instead of doing the above - fix a couple spec lines/classes - would introduce a whole lot more to fix. The argument that fixing the couple of styles without introducing 1.91 styles would be more work than introducing 1.91 styles only to fix those cannot hold water.

Tweaks would not have fixed a single line becoming the dominant line for a whole realm just change which one it is. The style change would have given preference to a line on a per class basis resulting in pretty much all lines being used by at least one class while making the alternative lines usable and not that much worse off (unless your class has a unique line like reaver or svg).
Tweaks would not have fixed the client side icon issue.
Tweaks would not have fixed the non sensical to hit / growth rate distribution unless you want to literally rework every style at which point yes, it would have become much much more work than using the later styles and changing / removing the 4 or 5 "offending" effects.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:29 PM by hyshash

Bradekes wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:34 PM
I see you judging and criticizing the devs for their ideas. Where's your comprehensive list of style changes that should be made? You seem like you know what should or shouldn't be added to the game, so let's hear it. I'm sure you've got more than criticism in that head of yours.

Merc backsnare 12sec
arms anytimer snare dura increase to 19 sec or delete the anytimer snare and introduce a 19 sec backsnare
hero backsnare to 19 sec
pala getting a 19 sec backsnare
mid hammer backsnare on any class but warri/thane to 12 sec
warri/thane hammer backsnare to 19 sec
zerker getting a 5 sec sidestun
vw 2 chain dd but reduced dmg by like 50%
reaver flex backsnare and levi dmg reduction by ~20%

after thinking for like 1sec ... if one would actually put a bit of effort into this there would certainly be more details but im 100% sure most ppl who voted yes for style changes had these kind of changes or at least this level of difference compared to the current styles in mind when voting

Mon 19 Oct 2020 7:45 PM by bculpepper

hyshash wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:29 PM
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:34 PM
I see you judging and criticizing the devs for their ideas. Where's your comprehensive list of style changes that should be made? You seem like you know what should or shouldn't be added to the game, so let's hear it. I'm sure you've got more than criticism in that head of yours.
Merc backsnare 12sec
arms anytimer snare dura increase to 19 sec or delete the anytimer snare and introduce a 19 sec backsnare
hero backsnare to 19 sec
pala getting a 19 sec backsnare
mid hammer backsnare on any class but warri/thane to 12 sec
warri/thane hammer backsnare to 19 sec
zerker getting a 5 sec sidestun
vw 2 chain dd but reduced dmg by like 50%
reaver flex backsnare and levi dmg reduction by ~20%

after thinking for like 1sec ... if one would actually put a bit of effort into this there would certainly be more details but im 100% sure most ppl who voted yes for style changes had these kind of changes or at least this level of difference compared to the current styles in mind when voting

I'm not an expert so I don't have an opinion on those specific changes, but totally agree with the concept.

Rather than deal with 1300 styles, If the staff came up with 20 changes and then put those 20 to a vote. Implement the top 10 vote getters and let it rest for 2-weeks. Then adjust as necessary and potentially vote on 10 more. I would bet 10-20 total style changes are all that are really wanted/needed.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 9:42 PM by jhaerik

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 4:16 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 12:03 PM
But in term of game design, free FA2, 5L RAs and this styles changes, lots or people saw and told them the obvious problems they posed, like the bleed 200 cap.

Free FA2 would have lead to more complaints about minstrel and skald being able to use them "in combat" as, just like with poisons and weapon switching via /switch, an ancient mechanic is now common place showing that it is an issue. These complaints would have been found valid and changes would have been made thereby making free FA2 a qol in terms of disease cure while at the same time a minor minstrel and skald solo nerf.

5L RAs would have seen at least two more changes before even a test, one being eld rr5 either gone or only available to wizard, eld, rm and necro would also have lost access to cc immune pet and in general some more changes either before or shortly after their introduction. And consider that there would have been a vote afterwards.

The style changes would have seen a nerf to the absorb debuff and heal debuff if warden with these specs were successfully integrated into groups making them a problem, vw would likely have see a nerf to the dd delve, reaver levi would likely have seen a small rise in dd delve.
In the end what looks like a huge change would have ended up pretty tame for everyone with the biggest unknown being 60% -> 40% snare reduction which could have gone either way.
Since everyone already specs in a way to have the required effect, e.g. snares in 8v8, the style overhaul would have just been a fix for a couple paper cuts, making lines other than hammer viable, add some interesting fluff to hybrids like thane and as the only real change remove garotte and arms anytime snare or direct after evade stuns.

In case you missed it, this is pretty much how every change has gone. The difference however is the level and tone of negativity in the recent months and sorry but I really can't be bothered anymore to even try if every change is made out to be the biggest change ever that has to be fought tooth and nail with the corresponding level of vitriol.

I mean just because the music is too quite set to 3... doesn't mean the you need to turn it to 11.
Just a thought.

It's something I've seen with every private server for every game. Instead of small gradual changes and letting things settle that decide to "go big" and no one ever likes that.
I mean live did that. How did it work out for them? There was just zero reason to mess with existing meta melee style lines. All you had to do was add a snare or two, or a stun or two on the less picked lines, maybe up a few growth rates, give VW a 0.60 GR medium hit chance anytime, and call it a day. Instead you went the "lets dick every melee in the games temp for the lulz" route. I mean how can you really think it was going to go over well?

I'm pretty sure 95% of the community could come up with more reasonable styles changes while taking a particularly long shit.

Mon 19 Oct 2020 9:42 PM by easytoremember

bculpepper wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 7:45 PM
hyshash wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 5:29 PM
Bradekes wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:34 PM
I see you judging and criticizing the devs for their ideas. Where's your comprehensive list of style changes that should be made? You seem like you know what should or shouldn't be added to the game, so let's hear it. I'm sure you've got more than criticism in that head of yours.
Merc backsnare 12sec
arms anytimer snare dura increase to 19 sec or delete the anytimer snare and introduce a 19 sec backsnare
hero backsnare to 19 sec
pala getting a 19 sec backsnare
mid hammer backsnare on any class but warri/thane to 12 sec
warri/thane hammer backsnare to 19 sec
zerker getting a 5 sec sidestun
vw 2 chain dd but reduced dmg by like 50%
reaver flex backsnare and levi dmg reduction by ~20%

after thinking for like 1sec ... if one would actually put a bit of effort into this there would certainly be more details but im 100% sure most ppl who voted yes for style changes had these kind of changes or at least this level of difference compared to the current styles in mind when voting

I'm not an expert so I don't have an opinion on those specific changes, but totally agree with the concept.

Rather than deal with 1300 styles, If the staff came up with 20 changes and then put those 20 to a vote. Implement the top 10 vote getters and let it rest for 2-weeks. Then adjust as necessary and potentially vote on 10 more. I would bet 10-20 total style changes are all that are really wanted/needed.

Sounds cool

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 2:23 PM
We are living in a world where one of the biggest economies in the world is being lead by someone who only communicates this way, with tons of people believing that it is completely okay to behave like that IRL.

enjoy the next 4 years cutie
I agree with the rest of your post with the exception that it's a negative thing. Cruel honesty is far more valuable than a polite farce and grucheff did nothing wrong

Tue 20 Oct 2020 1:35 AM by gotwqqd

hyshash wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 4:21 PM
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 3:19 PM
Neither the bleed stacking change nor the archery change were really different, just lower numbers. The concepts for both remained: bleeds no longer breaking cc and stacking in damage while removing first tick on reapplication, archer combined spec above 52 having some benefit.
Jewelcrafting as mentioned did indeed become an addition instead of replacement.

However, for the style changes the core concept would have been the fixing of loads of issues and this time the negative comments came against that very concept because it's such a huge change to have to press a differently colored / named button as anytimer or reactionary. To be comparable with the style / archery change the negative comments would have had to focus on warden effects / vw delve / reaver delve or anything in particular really, changing the values / effects here would have been minor adjustments while keeping the concept of the change.

these numbers are the base to differentiate between something beeing op, good or meaningless and you guys seem to go over the top with every single of your changes ... having to lower the stackable bleed dmg by 75% isnt some minor change to the original concept - lowering it by 5-10% would have been in this context(why is it even stackable ... noone asked for stackable bleeds only for them to not break cc ... ).

also by presenting the changes to every single melee class under the hood of "style changes" will lead to ppl critizing the whole concept instead of only critizing part of it ... if you wanted dedicated reviews you could have done patch notes the way live did it and more ppl would have reacted to dedicated parts but by telling everyone "here are the style changes" allways leads to ppl voiceing their opinion to the whole thing

Actually stacking bleeds was needed. Whole lines were based on bleeds, and what was the point of three part chain if they simply over wrote the previous? Sometimes better bleed?
It was a start to making mid axe line competent

Tue 20 Oct 2020 6:34 AM by Sepplord

easytoremember wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 9:42 PM
honesty

That's a wierd way to spell "lies"
And while i certainly will enjoy the next years, i am also living on the other half of the world, far away from the third world country america is degrading itself to, "cutie"

And sorry, but this:

jhaerik wrote: I'm pretty sure 95% of the community could come up with more reasonable styles changes while taking a particularly long shit.

doesn't qualify as "honesty" neither.
Seriously, Jhaerik, your main point is that the staff knows no medium and "turns the music to 11 from 3" instead of applying small changes after another.
But you yourself go completely overboard in your complaint and comparisons.

95% would make a better style change? Come on...DAoC players aren't some special entity, where 95% are well educated critical thinkers. Half the playerbase couldn't even write down all styles of a single specline of a single class

and while taking a shit? did you write that for some particular reason that helps the discussion and makes your comment heard? Profanity for profanities sake?

Tue 20 Oct 2020 6:49 AM by inoeth

easytoremember wrote: ↑
Mon 19 Oct 2020 9:42 PM
enjoy the next 4 years cutie
I agree with the rest of your post with the exception that it's a negative thing. Cruel honesty is far more valuable than a polite farce and grucheff did nothing wrong

honesty LOL trump is the most honest person. man do you really think like that? sad.

OT: bring new styles like you brought NF, do a one week test phase and let ppl actually try it out themselves. im sure most of the rant boyz will like it, like they did with NF.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 10:09 AM by easytoremember

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 6:34 AM
---

I was talking in general- like here on the forum in this thread.
But on that guy you'll get a good idea on the 3rd

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 6:34 AM
and while taking a shit? did you write that for some particular reason that helps the discussion and makes your comment heard? Profanity for profanities sake?

An expression on how simple it is to come up with something during the most routine activities of life. Good or bad it's something to work with, pull inspiration from, or dismiss with no loss

Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:16 AM by

Uthred

bluefalcon420 wrote: ↑
Sat 30 May 2020 10:04 PM
This, to me, rates among the stupidest changes this server has decided to implement.

When did you guys take on the broadsword team to make decisions for you?

JaggedOne wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 1:48 AM
The solution being worse than the problem is starting to be commonplace on this shard....

Here's a thought: how 'bout scrapping this terrible idea, and then using some of the time and resources that you were gonna devote to it to changing the housing search tool to search by UTILITY ?!?!?!?!

Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 9:06 AM
bluefalcon420 wrote: ↑
Sat 30 May 2020 10:04 PM
This, to me, rates among the stupidest changes this server has decided to implement.

When did you guys take on the broadsword team to make decisions for you?

I've noticed this for quite some time.

Kimahri wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 9:11 AM
Another shitty idea makes its way thru the pipeline when there are more pressing issues to deal with. Heads buried in the sand I tell you

Wakefield wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 9:26 AM
What a horrible idea.

The way it works now is fine, doesn't need anything doing to it imo.

Go fix the dead PvP zone(never been there I just see it when I check /u and laugh) or the other stuff that is wrong at the moment. But we all needed horses right?

I personally have had enough with all the stuff which I voted against appearing on the server so taking a casual approach now, with all I do in this game is craft AC via craftqueue whilst I eat, put it on my house merchant at cheap prices, then log for the day.

Not bad to say I used to play constantly, even before this Covid made us all stay indoors

cglang wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 2:56 PM
I have made my entire system of money making around gem cutting and spellcrafting. i will say its a broken system and terribly thought out as there are TONS of trash items . I can say this new idea is NOT thought out any better. For one, the amounts of things required to upgrade 10 points is ridiculous and the majority of people on the server cant farm feathers in the first place. My vault is stacked with remnants because i buy all them off housing 2x a day. All my hard work will be gone to waste in this new system and it might be the last straw for me, there are so many other mmorpgs to play that dont have DEVS playing the game unfairly. IMO you should fix your server lag issues before trying to add or rework the game mechanics. Please also maybe fix the radar abuse in rvr ??? It is almost like the DEVS are willing to just trash and scrap the current system instead of refine and fix it! I can send your statistics i've gathered from gem cutting and lets just say the method you guys are using is trash and its apparent why i've only gotten 8 MP items and they all rog low as fuck as like 70ish util. My HIGHEST util rogg i made was 91 util from a 98 qual....... in my personal opinion i believe this shard had a lot more things that should be fixed prior to reworking the game. Your shard had a huge increase in players due to the current state of our world but as people start going back to normal life you're turning them off with ruining their work and wasting their time they spent over the past few months

Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Mon 1 Jun 2020 7:09 AM
Wow. Another one of my posts just got quietly deleted. How often do you guys do this to everyone here on the boards? It's at least 5 or 6 of mine that I can remember. What happened to free speech? No one is yelling fire in a crowded theatre.

pistu wrote: ↑
Tue 2 Jun 2020 8:30 AM
bad idea.......vadavialcu e fatevi un 74 (Translation: ‘go fuck yourself and do a 74)

As many are saying that we made the #nochanges announcement just because of some negativity in the "styles" and "rr5" threads, i listed a best of, in this case the rework of the gemcutting changes. Too lazy to do this for all the other planned changes threads, but im pretty sure i could find similiar constructive and well thought out feedback in any of those.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:31 AM by Noashakra

Some replies are really questionnable and full of ignorance (fix the lag, yeah as if you could rewrite the whole net code and fix the problems of people playing worldwide on a german server) and toxic. Those people should be called out. But the last one deserves a ban

.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:51 AM by bigne88

Noashakra wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:31 AM
SBut the last one deserves a ban .u

Honestly I'm surprised that Uthred can speak Milanese dialect.
And what is a 74?

Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:58 AM by Sepplord

bigne88 wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:51 AM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:31 AM
SBut the last one deserves a ban .u

Honestly I'm surprised that Uthred can speak Milanese dialect.
And what is a 74?

i assume knowing that would make it even worse

Tue 20 Oct 2020 12:19 PM by Bradekes

bigne88 wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:51 AM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:31 AM
SBut the last one deserves a ban .u

Honestly I'm surprised that Uthred can speak Milanese dialect.
And what is a 74?

I'm guessing he meant 86 not 74. As I never heard that slang before.

86ing someone can also be code for killing them.. he was probably attempting to say to kill yourself and that's pretty messed up and that guy has some psychological issues.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/86_%28term%29

Tue 20 Oct 2020 12:37 PM by Soukou

Bradekes wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 12:19 PM
bigne88 wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:51 AM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:31 AM
SBut the last one deserves a ban .u

Honestly I'm surprised that Uthred can speak Milanese dialect.
And what is a 74?

I'm guessing he meant 86 not 74. As I never heard that slang before.

86ing someone can also be code for killing them.. he was probably attempting to say to kill yourself and that's pretty messed up and that guy has some psychological issues.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/86_%28term%29

That is a serious stretch there buddy...........

Tue 20 Oct 2020 12:57 PM by Bradekes

Soukou wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 12:37 PM
That is a serious stretch there buddy...........

I mean unless you can tell us the use of the number 74 in that sentence I'd say it's not really that much of a stretch.. Even if 74 has a significant use as slang it's got to be similar to that of 86.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 3:10 PM by Kwall0311

Uthred wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:16 AM
As many are saying that we made the #nochanges announcement just because of some negativity in the "styles" and "rr5" threads, i listed a best of, in this case the rework of the gemcutting changes. Too lazy to do this for all the other planned changes threads, but im pretty sure i could find similiar constructive and well thought out feedback in any of those.

The problem is you are listening to the opinions of people on the forums, many who probably shouldnt even have an opinion on the server. I can already point out two names in the ones you provided that dont even play on this server, they play paper daoc on the forums, nothing more. Thats the problem with the survey system you did. You should have made it IN game, RR5 vote eligible.

I bet you could have announced some change that already was a part of the game, and people would still complain not knowing anything about it. Just complaining to complain. Dont go internal and stop being creative based off what these these idiots say on the forums. But definitely take some time away from the negativity if thats whats needed.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 4:55 PM by Lokkjim

Uthred wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:16 AM
As many are saying that we made the #nochanges announcement just because of some negativity in the "styles" and "rr5" threads, i listed a best of, in this case the rework of the gemcutting changes. Too lazy to do this for all the other planned changes threads, but im pretty sure i could find similiar constructive and well thought out feedback in any of those.

I'm using the newest Style Changes thread under Planned Changes for this with a total of 178 posts. I didn't take the time to read every post in-depth, just scanned most for any vitriol or over-the-top negativity, didn't factor in any likes or quotes supporting overly negative posts, and I'm rounding up in favor of your point of view. I'm sure there are a few more factors, but I'm not taking all that time.

With that, I counted about 40 posts that were over-the-top negative out of 178. That's about 23% of the entire thread. To me, that is an acceptable amount. In a large group of people, there are always going to be those that will use an overly negative stance in their arguments, especially in today's world. Don't let those people influence your decisions and instead focus on the middle (people not overly negative or positive).

Either way, I hope you all will take this as a break and decide to come back and implement more changes.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 5:43 PM by

Uthred

Lokkjim wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 4:55 PM
With that, I counted about 40 posts that were over-the-top negative out of 178. That's about 23% of the entire thread. To me, that is an acceptable amount. In a large group of people, there are always going to be those that will use an overly negative stance in their arguments, especially in today's world. Don't let those people influence your decisions and instead focus on the middle (people not overly negative or positive).

Add another 20 that you dont see anymore as we deleted them.

But anyways, that wasnt the point of my post at all. I just wanted to show that even a topic, which isnt a huge game changer, some people just go through the roof for no reason.

You dont have to like what we are doing and you dont have to agree on our changes. But if you really want to help the server, then your feedback should at least be reasonable. Im going to quote myself from that thread to clarify this:

Uthred wrote: ↑
Mon 1 Jun 2020 8:25 AM
Examples (good):
I like the new system, because XXXX
I dont like the new system, because XXX
This might be bad for new players, because XXX
This might be great for templating, because XXX

Examples (bad):
Lol, devs breaking the game again. get your other stuff fixed ....
insert random Meme here
you are like Broadsword, Im saying this all the time, THIS WILL BE LIVE SOON, ....
LOL, they are deleting my posts, censorship, QQ ....

Tue 20 Oct 2020 6:17 PM by Shamissa

inoeth wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 6:47 PM
Shamissa wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 6:24 PM
inoeth wrote: ↑
Sat 17 Oct 2020 5:49 PM
and sadly you listened to the ppl now who bring nothing but hate to the game.

Thats not true at all....people actually love this game.

as IF they would not play afterwards.... before NF it was the same .. many were crying and in the end alot agreed that nf is far better than of...
this game is full of old ppl 40+ and in that age ppl tend to blocke everything thats "new" ... hell knows why.
if ppl want a "classic" server, there is an alternative, and guess what ... nobody plays there, why?

Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:04 PM by Cadebrennus

Uthred wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 11:16 AM
bluefalcon420 wrote: ↑
Sat 30 May 2020 10:04 PM
This, to me, rates among the stupidest changes this server has decided to implement.

When did you guys take on the broadsword team to make decisions for you?
JaggedOne wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 1:48 AM
The solution being worse than the problem is starting to be commonplace on this shard....

Here's a thought: how 'bout scrapping this terrible idea, and then using some of the time and resources that you were gonna devote to it to changing the housing search tool to search by UTILITY ?!?!?!?!
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 9:06 AM
bluefalcon420 wrote: ↑
Sat 30 May 2020 10:04 PM
This, to me, rates among the stupidest changes this server has decided to implement.

When did you guys take on the broadsword team to make decisions for you?

I've noticed this for quite some time.
Kimahri wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 9:11 AM
Another shitty idea makes its way thru the pipeline when there are more pressing issues to deal with. Heads buried in the sand I tell you
Wakefield wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 9:26 AM
What a horrible idea.

The way it works now is fine, doesn't need anything doing to it imo.

Go fix the dead PvP zone(never been there I just see it when I check /u and laugh) or the other stuff that is wrong at the moment. But we all needed horses right?

I personally have had enough with all the stuff which I voted against appearing on the server so taking a casual approach now, with all I do in this game is craft AC via craftqueue whilst I eat, put it on my house merchant at cheap prices, then log for the day.

Not bad to say I used to play constantly, even before this Covid made us all stay indoors
cglang wrote: ↑
Sun 31 May 2020 2:56 PM
I have made my entire system of money making around gem cutting and spellcrafting. i will say its a broken system and terribly thought out as there are TONS of trash items . I can say this new idea is NOT thought out any better. For one, the amounts of things required to upgrade 10 points is ridiculous and the majority of people on the server cant farm feathers in the first place. My vault is stacked with remnants because i buy all them off housing 2x a day. All my hard work will be gone to waste in this new system and it might be the last straw for me, there are so many other mmorpgs to play that dont have DEVS playing the game unfairly. IMO you should fix your server lag issues before trying to add or rework the game mechanics. Please also maybe fix the radar abuse in rvr ??? It is almost like the DEVS are willing to just trash and scrap the current system instead of refine and fix it! I can send your statistics i've gathered from gem cutting and lets just say the method you guys are using is trash and its apparent why i've only gotten 8 MP items and they all rog low as fuck as like 70ish util. My HIGHEST util rogg i made was 91 util from a 98 qual....... in my personal opinion i believe this shard had a lot more things that should be fixed prior to reworking the game. Your shard had a huge increase in players due to the current state of our world but as people start going back to normal life you're turning them off with ruining their work and wasting their time they spent over the past few months
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Mon 1 Jun 2020 7:09 AM
Wow. Another one of my posts just got quietly deleted. How often do you guys do this to everyone here on the boards? It's at least 5 or 6 of mine that I can remember. What happened to free speech? No one is yelling fire in a crowded theatre.
pistu wrote: ↑
Tue 2 Jun 2020 8:30 AM
bad idea.......vadavialcu e fatevi un 74 (Translation: ‘go fuck yourself and do a 74)

As many are saying that we made the #nochanges announcement just because of some negativity in the "styles" and "rr5" threads, i listed a best of, in this case the rework of the gemcutting changes. Too lazy to do this for all the other planned changes threads, but im pretty sure i could find similiar constructive and well thought out feedback in any of those.

If you're going to quote someone from months ago just to make yourself feel better about the current backlash then you need to post it in context. If there existed a high horse for you to sit on you just killed it and buried it in a shallow grave. All you did was make yourself look bad.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:35 PM by Lokkjim

Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:04 PM
If you're going to quote someone from months ago just to make yourself feel better about the current backlash then you need to post it in context. If there existed a high horse for you to sit on you just killed it and buried it in a shallow grave. All you did was make yourself look bad.

Ignore this post please, it's unproductive and counter-intuitive.

As for the negativity you got in the style changes thread, it's because we had 4 days to review a massive overhaul. A lot of people aren't going to have or want to take the time to review those styles.

With a big change, we need an appropriate amount of time to see and theorycraft. We had no time so a lot of people were negative. Players decided to stick with what they had instead of risking a change where they couldn't see the outcome.

Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:42 PM by ExcretusMaximus

Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:04 PM
If you're going to quote someone from months ago just to make yourself feel better about the current backlash then you need to post it in context. If there existed a high horse for you to sit on you just killed it and buried it in a shallow grave. All you did was make yourself look bad.

Anyone who wants context can click on the arrow by the quote and get it.

You're just being incredibly douchey right now. If you hate the server so much, leave. If you've already left, why are you still here on the forums? Is your life that empty?

Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:54 PM by watbrif

Tbh I don't think people are ever going to change - online/forum behaviour wasn't that much better 20 years ago (a certain German daoc forum had a certain nickname for a reason). I think most people here are very grateful for being able to revel in old memories and would say that you've done quite the impressive job. If I were in charge, I would simply ignore what's going on here; if you need feedback, involve certain players that can be relied upon, know the game and its quirks, and represent different parts of the player base. Otherwise just do what *you* as the devs want to do with this server - because your instincts have been (mostly:p) spot on.

Wed 21 Oct 2020 1:53 AM by easytoremember

ExcretusMaximus wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:42 PM
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Tue 20 Oct 2020 9:04 PM
If you're going to quote someone from months ago just to make yourself feel better about the current backlash then you need to post it in context. If there existed a high horse for you to sit on you just killed it and buried it in a shallow grave. All you did was make yourself look bad.

Anyone who wants context can click on the arrow by the quote and get it.

You're just being incredibly douchey right now. If you hate the server so much, leave. If you've already left, why are you still here on the forums? Is your life that empty?

Can you point out for me where in that post he so much as suggests he hates the server?

Wed 21 Oct 2020 10:43 AM by byron

Usually who writes in any forum posts negative feedbacks and not positives. If you are happy you don't write, so we need to take in consideration that all not Phoenix players are active here so the feedback could be very different if all of us would be active in the forum. Then the negative feedbacks always come from who has some personal interest on it.
Why my ministrel with red casting pet needs to be nerfed ? I like to roam solo and kill others easily. Why my reaver than can kill anyone with 3 back style needs to be nerfed ? Why I need to change the play style of my perfect cast group that is able to defeat everyone ? Why I have to change my melee group that is able to snare all the enemies forever without any immunity to it ?
The feedbacks are personal and are not made to improve the game on Phoenix, let's be honest. So it's why the devs should consider them (it is very good to have a two way communication with them) but not decide only in base of them.

Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:07 AM by Noashakra

byron wrote: ↑
Wed 21 Oct 2020 10:43 AM
Usually who writes in any forum posts negative feedbacks and not positives. If you are happy you don't write, so we need to take in consideration that all not Phoenix players are active here so the feedback could be very different if all of us would be active in the forum. Then the negative feedbacks always come from who has some personal interest on it.
Why my ministrel with red casting pet needs to be nerfed ? I like to roam solo and kill others easily. Why my reaver than can kill anyone with 3 back style needs to be nerfed ? Why I need to change the play style of my perfect cast group that is able to defeat everyone ? Why I have to change my melee group that is able to snare all the enemies forever without any immunity to it ?
The feedbacks are personal and are not made to improve the game on Phoenix, let's be honest. So it's why the devs should consider them (it is very good to have a two way communication with them) but not decide only in base of them.

It's wrong. Don't put everyone in one bag. The red pet is OP in solo AND in groups. I think it should be nerfed in an objective way (I also have a ministrel, and god it is OP...). I play solo, and never anywhere do I ask for a levia nerf (and Yarna has a 100% win rate against me 1vs1).
I don't play against solo champions, and I think something needs to be done with the debuffs vs pot buffs.

You can be objective about subjects that affect you.

Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:30 AM by byron

Noashakra wrote: ↑
Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:07 AM
You can be objective about subjects that affect you.

Sure you can but it is not so common. Obviously ministrels and reavers are just examples, didn't want to hit any particular class. Since it is a freeshard we don't have a test server to try the changes so I would like to be positive on changes, if something is not working as expected, a rollback is always possible. As a general rule I find that more the fight is longer , more I have fun even if I loose. So I'm positive to any change to reach this objective that includes decrease some damage of some classes, increase the survival of the group, increase some utility for some class not so played in all 3 realms, decrease some mechanism a little broken in my opinion like debuff+cast or the abuse of the snare styles ...

Wed 21 Oct 2020 1:12 PM by Sepplord

while i agree that longer fights usually are a lot of fun, the reason is mostly because a lot of stuff happens and it goes back and forth a few times with people on the edge of dieing, or both sides using all their gimmicks to counter each other.

That doesn't mean that making fights longer will increase the fun though. If the game ran at half speed then all fights would take twice as long, but would it be more fun?
Longer fights also mean more chance to get added on, and THAT being the only deciding factor to the previous stalemate...also mostly not that fun

Wed 21 Oct 2020 2:11 PM by ExcretusMaximus

easytoremember wrote: ↑
Wed 21 Oct 2020 1:53 AM
Can you point out for me where in that post he so much as suggests he hates the server?

Read his post history sometime, all he does is tell people you don't need 42 shield (and if you do you're "bad" ) , they don't understand DW mechanics, and the devs are horrible at their jobs.

Wed 21 Oct 2020 2:26 PM by labra

@uthred and @gruenne now that everyone has rested his mind, any chance you've decided either set another poll regarding style changes or simply add them and see how it's go?

Wed 21 Oct 2020 3:31 PM by Spiegal

I think we realized that a pole here can gives you information but should not gives you guidance. The dominant force and popular classes will vote in their favors, which will result in bad decisions, and further increase the gap between balancing.

Wed 21 Oct 2020 4:54 PM by Lerox

Noashakra wrote: ↑
Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:07 AM
It's wrong. Don't put everyone in one bag. The red pet is OP in solo AND in groups. I think it should be nerfed in an objective way (I also have a ministrel, and god it is OP...). I play solo, and never anywhere do I ask for a levia nerf (and Yarna has a 100% win rate against me 1vs1).
I don't play against solo champions, and I think something needs to be done with the debuffs vs pot buffs.

You can be objective about subjects that affect you.

You say minstrel is OP but you avoid fighting champions? You should be able to beat every champion if played correctly even without the kite and dd tactic. If you avoid them because you don't want to waste RAs I an agree with that.
I agree that the minstrel is really strong and probably the strongest solo class in the game but most people just surrender or are pretty bad when they fight against minstrels.
Furthermore most minstrels I face with my skald aren't too good either.

Wed 21 Oct 2020 9:33 PM by Noashakra

Lerox wrote: ↑
Wed 21 Oct 2020 4:54 PM
Noashakra wrote: ↑
Wed 21 Oct 2020 11:07 AM
It's wrong. Don't put everyone in one bag. The red pet is OP in solo AND in groups. I think it should be nerfed in an objective way (I also have a ministrel, and god it is OP...). I play solo, and never anywhere do I ask for a levia nerf (and Yarna has a 100% win rate against me 1vs1).
I don't play against solo champions, and I think something needs to be done with the debuffs vs pot buffs.

You can be objective about subjects that affect you.

You say minstrel is OP but you avoid fighting champions? You should be able to beat every champion if played correctly even without the kite and dd tactic. If you avoid them because you don't want to waste RAs I an agree with that.
I agree that the minstrel is really strong and probably the strongest solo class in the game but most people just surrender or are pretty bad when they fight against minstrels.
Furthermore most minstrels I face with my skald aren't too good either.

I don't fight champions because I play only solo on hib. I still think their debuffs should be adjusted for pot buffs...

Thu 22 Oct 2020 4:50 AM by imweasel

labra wrote: ↑
Wed 21 Oct 2020 2:26 PM
@uthred and @gruenne now that everyone has rested his mind, any chance you've decided either set another poll regarding style changes or simply add them and see how it's go?

All things being equal, after the teams reaction, it's much better to go with nothing but bug fixes.

Sun 25 Oct 2020 1:35 PM by Hedien

Just an anecdote to add a bit of pragmatism to this discussion:

I came back to daoc pulled by my brother irl. We had fun, got acquainted again with new/old classes and server updates.
Then pretty quickly, the usual suspects kicked in: repetitive grind, difficulties to find appropriate action (smallman in our case) and increasing frustration over getting rolled over or facing classes that are just a bit too much. (our perception, and from the poll... the server perception too)

With the new changes in the open, there was another "light" in my brother eyes - what about this spec? what about getting swords from the market, etc.

With this #NoChange, this week was basically it... "it is just frustrating to always face the same, not much pleasure" to quote him. I am guessing he is mostly done.
When my brother is done, I lose an important tether to the server and I usually continue a while but not long.

I am not saying that he would have stayed forever if the changes went through, but that it was highly likely that he would have stayed much longer.
I am also not saying "if you don't, then I will leave", I am just sharing what has actually happened.

If you apply this concept across players who feel like him, and players that are linked to those players (like me), well - you do get departures.
I agree with the "emotional" phase. We all know that daoc players are toxic, especially "LEET" ones. Sometimes, when you are passionately involved in a project you tend to get emotional. (been there) But I don't think anyone will blame you for reviewing a decision after a while.

Sat/Faturday

Sun 25 Oct 2020 2:10 PM by

gruenesschaf

Hedien wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 1:35 PM
If you apply this concept across players who feel like him, and players that are linked to those players (like me), well - you do get departures.
I agree with the "emotional" phase. We all know that daoc players are toxic, especially "LEET" ones. Sometimes, when you are passionately involved in a project you tend to get emotional. (been there) But I don't think anyone will blame you for reviewing a decision after a while.

There was no reasonable way out.

In the face of the received feedback had we gone forward with it, even if it would have been a net positive change, people would scream you don't listen.

If we don't do it, it will be used in the next proposal against us as an example of how the community avoided a bad idea and this being another bad idea confirmed by it not having been implemented.
The best example here is probably norad and the by now ancient stuff regarding being able to respec the primary / secondary / tertiary stat and taking the easily preventable primary dex on bards as example it's portrayed as a change that would have a meaningful impact. However, with simply restricting dex to at most raise one tier (e. g. from no dex to tertiary, from tertiary to secondary, from secondary to primary) all really impactful effects are gone and you're left with having fixed a broken design (aka useless stats increasing). Is that required? No but what's the point in keeping something so obviously broken by design.

This is a perfect example of a no win situation and hence we refused to continue playing.

Sun 25 Oct 2020 2:49 PM by DJ2000

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 2:10 PM
In the face of the received feedback had we gone forward with it, even if it would have been a net positive change, people would scream you don't listen.

If we don't do it, it will be used in the next proposal against us as an example of how the community avoided a bad idea and this being another bad idea confirmed by it not having been implemented.

This is a perfect example of a no win situation and hence we refused to continue playing.

As a pessimist, you are correct.
People will even call a simple 2-sided Coin biased, when the other side flipped.
If you degrade your mentality to that way of thinking, then there will never be a "win"-situation for you ever again.
As an optimist, you are wrong.
And yet; i know exactly where you are coming from, and why i can emphasize with this decision.

Allow me to ask some simple Questions as a pessimist:
Is the Server on his Deathbed ?
What exactly are we going to expect from this Server in the foreseeable future ?
Will this Server be abandoned by the end of this Year/Contract ?

Allow me to ask some simple Questions as an optimist:
How long will your #NoChange hiatus be ?
Will there be an improved "Demons Breach"-Event coming soon ?
Will the Playerbase be further involved in future Server Developments ?

Sun 25 Oct 2020 3:27 PM by

gruenesschaf

DJ2000 wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 2:49 PM
As a pessimist, you are correct.
People will even call a simple 2-sided Coin biased, when the other side flipped.
If you degrade your mentality to that way of thinking, then there will never be a "win"-situation for you ever again.
As an optimist, you are wrong.
And yet; i know exactly where you are coming from, and why i can emphasize with this decision.

Allow me to ask some simple Questions as a pessimist:
Is the Server on his Deathbed ?
What exactly are we going to expect from this Server in the foreseeable future ?
Will this Server be abandoned by the end of this Year/Contract ?

Allow me to ask some simple Questions as an optimist:
How long will your #NoChange hiatus be ?
Will there be an improved "Demons Breach"-Event coming soon ?
Will the Playerbase be further involved in future Server Developments ?

Over the last couple months the tone against any kind of change has pretty much become much more negative, had we now gone forward with the change despite the received feedback (I firmly believe the change by itself without the drama surrounding it would have been a net positive effect) it would have lead to much more toxicity towards changes and the staff in general which would have poisoned all kinds of ingame / game related chats as well, even more than is currently already the case.

This general negative sentiment regarding changes has to be reset and the only way to do that is to simply show that the alternative to changes, aka no changes, is no alternative at all.
Once that has been established there will be immediate actions, both in terms of policy wrt toxicity / negativity going forward as well as gameplay changes.

Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:01 PM by imweasel

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 3:27 PM
DJ2000 wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 2:49 PM
As a pessimist, you are correct.
People will even call a simple 2-sided Coin biased, when the other side flipped.
If you degrade your mentality to that way of thinking, then there will never be a "win"-situation for you ever again.
As an optimist, you are wrong.
And yet; i know exactly where you are coming from, and why i can emphasize with this decision.

Allow me to ask some simple Questions as a pessimist:
Is the Server on his Deathbed ?
What exactly are we going to expect from this Server in the foreseeable future ?
Will this Server be abandoned by the end of this Year/Contract ?

Allow me to ask some simple Questions as an optimist:
How long will your #NoChange hiatus be ?
Will there be an improved "Demons Breach"-Event coming soon ?
Will the Playerbase be further involved in future Server Developments ?

Over the last couple months the tone against any kind of change has pretty much become much more negative, had we now gone forward with the change despite the received feedback (I firmly believe the change by itself without the drama surrounding it would have been a net positive effect) it would have lead to much more toxicity towards changes and the staff in general which would have poisoned all kinds of ingame / game related chats as well, even more than is currently already the case.

This general negative sentiment regarding changes has to be reset and the only way to do that is to simply show that the alternative to changes, aka no changes, is no alternative at all.
Once that has been established there will be immediate actions, both in terms of policy wrt toxicity / negativity going forward as well as gameplay changes.

After reading this, I'm fine with no changes, ever.

Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:12 PM by Lokkjim

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 2:10 PM
Hedien wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 1:35 PM
If you apply this concept across players who feel like him, and players that are linked to those players (like me), well - you do get departures.
I agree with the "emotional" phase. We all know that daoc players are toxic, especially "LEET" ones. Sometimes, when you are passionately involved in a project you tend to get emotional. (been there) But I don't think anyone will blame you for reviewing a decision after a while.

There was no reasonable way out.

In the face of the received feedback had we gone forward with it, even if it would have been a net positive change, people would scream you don't listen.

Why isn't putting it to a vote again (with descriptive and clear intentions between choices) an option?

Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:14 PM by Noashakra

Again, people are not against changes, they were against the changes you chose and the way you announced it.
I'll just take an example :

The CS line
you remove the snare on the garrot (you remove the snare on all the anytimers, but not the one from scout, already it's a huge deal, and it makes no sense to let them have this powerful tool when the others don't). You remove a powerful too that allowed the assassins to kite or not get kitted. Ok already annoying. Especially because now all the tanks have a back snare, so if you poison snare them, you will go nowhere... Then you rememove the debuff ASR on the follow-up, meaning you force the NS to go 39 blade instead of 52 composite, and also forcing them to go 50 CS to have the last style on evade that remove armors, without any changes in the points they get per level. it was a HUGE buff for the infiltrator in the sin war.

Cherry on the cake is, the best styles are now a side chain when you don't evade, which means all the sins will straff to try to use the pincer chain instead of using the anytime chain. This is not my idea of fun, especially when people will high ping living in NA will suffer from this change, leaving us EU players with a huge 1vs1 advantage. They were already having a hard time to PA first, and with the changes you wanted their chances to win a fight would again diminish.

I am not againt changes, I was againt those changes.

Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:32 PM by evert

I think the message is, don’t mess with existing stuff - people like what they have. But new stuff isn’t bad.

Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:35 PM by Noashakra

evert wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:32 PM
I think the message is, don’t mess with existing stuff - people like what they have. But new stuff isn’t bad.

Especially when the balance is already quite good on this server, while we still have diversity on the realms and classes.
Now as an example all the asn would be the same, all of them with stun on 2nd evade style, all of them would have to spec CS (50LA was dead with this update).

Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:39 PM by ExcretusMaximus

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 3:27 PM
Once that has been established there will be immediate actions, both in terms of policy wrt toxicity / negativity going forward as well as gameplay changes.

I know I've been one of those negative voices from time to time, but overall (90%) I love this server and what you have done with it.

The bit I quoted above makes me love it even more.

Sun 25 Oct 2020 11:01 PM by imweasel

evert wrote: ↑
Sun 25 Oct 2020 4:32 PM
I think the message is, don’t mess with existing stuff - people like what they have. But new stuff isn’t bad.

No. I believe the message is that the server is fine. It's great as a matter of fact.

Change is good. Huge and sweeping changes are not.

They simply refuse to think (for whatever reason) that the server is really fantastic. That it requires complete overhauls in certain areas.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Then they are somewhat cryptic about changes they want to bring/make. Certainly they could be more to the point and less obtuse.

This is a recipe for a disaster. Then they are surprised when this disaster occurs.

After seeing some of the dev team's posts, I am and will be completely ok with NO CHANGES and fixing bugs.

God alone knows how much time that would take the team to make.

Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:18 AM by carlwinslow

IMO this server is pulling a reverse Uthgard. Uthgard made no changes whatsoever but on this server they went way too heavy handed with changes that nobody wanted. People wanted classic here so going back to more of a classic feel would be refreshing. Server was really fun for awhile but since NF its been really stale, the only thing you can do is lame dock battles and keep zerg etc. No good gank spots for solo players.

Mon 26 Oct 2020 4:35 AM by imweasel

carlwinslow wrote: ↑
Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:18 AM
IMO this server is pulling a reverse Uthgard. Uthgard made no changes whatsoever but on this server they went way too heavy handed with changes that nobody wanted. People wanted classic here so going back to more of a classic feel would be refreshing. Server was really fun for awhile but since NF its been really stale, the only thing you can do is lame dock battles and keep zerg etc. No good gank spots for solo players.

That nobody wanted is an exaggeration. Heavy handed is a very accurate description.

There is zero need to introduce sweeping changes. Tweak some yes.

Replace the entire melee style system? No.

After seeing the debacle that was the 'archery review' I was afraid of what the 'style review' was going to reveal. Those fears were born true.

Also mentioned in the 'survey' was whether a review of poor/unused caster spec lines.

I would be deathly afraid of any changes made but for now, I don't have to worry about that.

Mon 26 Oct 2020 5:20 PM by boomber

carlwinslow wrote: ↑
Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:18 AM
IMO this server is pulling a reverse Uthgard. Uthgard made no changes whatsoever but on this server they went way too heavy handed with changes that nobody wanted. People wanted classic here so going back to more of a classic feel would be refreshing. Server was really fun for awhile but since NF its been really stale, the only thing you can do is lame dock battles and keep zerg etc. No good gank spots for solo players.

100% agree. It seems like the population has just continued to bleed ever since NF was brought in (causing my entire guild to quit phoenix). I just don't enjoy NF nearly as much as OF, especially, as you mentioned, mostly a solo player. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

Mon 26 Oct 2020 5:24 PM by Runental

So how did you pass amg/mmg in your beloved bottleneck OF?

No thx

Mon 26 Oct 2020 6:58 PM by boomber

Runental wrote: ↑
Mon 26 Oct 2020 5:24 PM
So how did you pass amg/mmg in your beloved bottleneck OF?

No thx

Obviously, people have different opinions on OF vs NF

In my personal opinion, OF is more appropriate for a "classic" server and is a big reason many people came here to play in the first place. Again, just my opinion. I just hate seeing the population so low.

Mon 26 Oct 2020 8:15 PM by ExcretusMaximus

boomber wrote: ↑
Mon 26 Oct 2020 6:58 PM
In my personal opinion, OF is more appropriate for a "classic" server and is a big reason many people came here to play in the first place. Again, just my opinion. I just hate seeing the population so low.

Swapping to NF didn't create an outflux of players, swapping to OF isn't going to create an influx of players.

And the player base voted for NF by a pretty good margin if memory serves.

Mon 26 Oct 2020 8:59 PM by MisterCotton

boomber wrote: ↑
Mon 26 Oct 2020 5:20 PM
carlwinslow wrote: ↑
Mon 26 Oct 2020 12:18 AM
IMO this server is pulling a reverse Uthgard. Uthgard made no changes whatsoever but on this server they went way too heavy handed with changes that nobody wanted. People wanted classic here so going back to more of a classic feel would be refreshing. Server was really fun for awhile but since NF its been really stale, the only thing you can do is lame dock battles and keep zerg etc. No good gank spots for solo players.

100% agree. It seems like the population has just continued to bleed ever since NF was brought in (causing my entire guild to quit phoenix). I just don't enjoy NF nearly as much as OF, especially, as you mentioned, mostly a solo player. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

Your guild left and my guild came back, so that's moot. The whole server overwhelmingly voted for NF.

I honestly do not understand the appeal, besides nostalgia, for OF. The terrain is awful, leading to massive LOS issues for casters and healers. The choke points from the mile gates were disgusting. The keeps were bland, ugly, impractical, and frankly boring.