Balance Changes #6

Started 18 Apr 2021
by gruenesschaf
in Planned Changes
Enchanter:
- experimental: new spell, enchanting baseline, pet casted single target disease
- experimental: new spell, enchanting baseline, pet casted single target root
- new spell, enchanting baseline, pet demez

Mechanics (Necromancer, now also Enchanter):
- pet casted spells now consume mana once the pet finished the cast instead of when they are enqueued.
- pet casted spells now benefit from the mana cost reductions in case of resists and similar mechanics.

The two new pet casted spells on the enchanter are instant casts that enqueue a 2ish second cast on the pet, this mechanic is similar to the necromancer pet casted mana drain (and some other necro spells). These spells work with all enchanter pets.
The mana consumption at the end of the pet cast change is for the most part a QoL change.

The spells above will be added as only a single high level version for now, lower level variants for the disease and root will be added later if it works out.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:11 AM by Tyrlaan
- So Chanters get a root and disease too as I understand it. Baseline. Pet-casted but still for every one of them.

- And baseline pet demezz. Why not for other pet casters like the Cabalist and most of all BD who are much more reliant on their pets than Chanters?

- And all of them baseline so it doesn´t increase the value of speccing Enchantments but will buff the Mana Chanters out there.

Balance Changes has been a misnomer throughout the series. They´ve all been Hib buffs basically (sometimes along with some scraps for Mids and a nerf to Albs).
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:13 AM by Lundarian
Giving the on-paper best pet self-debuffing caster 2 VERY strong tools that the PET will cast is absurd, please reconsider.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:17 AM by raghh
The demez i can live with. But the rest will simply make the enchanter too powerful depending on mechanics......
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:18 AM by Lail
Interesting idea, and definetly a good approach regarding the current situation of hib casters.

Curious to see how this plays out!
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:27 AM by Noashakra
Pet demez is nice.
Disease seems ok, the root we have to see.
Funny to have people already complaining about cabalist not being up
How many hib caster with enchanter do you see in 8vs8 and gvg?
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:29 AM by Lundarian
If anything Enchanter needs Nerf, not buffs.

Allow me to clarify, the cookie-cutter Enchanter spec is 45/48 mana, rest light to debuff the baseline HEAT type nuke, and leftover points in light will help negate damage variance from sub 50 composite light.

That is already strong by itself. Now add the fact the baseline stun is also HEAT based, so a heat debuffed stun will last longer.

The Underhill Companion pet casts a DD/snare nuke that is also HEAT based, allowing them to not only snarekite, but interrupt their targets at range while moving.

THAT is what makes them the top-tier pet caster, they also get a strong PBaoE from the mana line as icing on the cake.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:31 AM by Noashakra
top tier caster lmao...
debuff bot for the eld/mentalist, and it's way worse than the alb debuff train.
Yeah...
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:33 AM by genova
Nice .. 0 change to mid !!

Give back absorb 2/3 melee damage/bolt on SM pet ……………….
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:39 AM by Tyrlaan
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:27 AM
Pet demez is nice.
Disease seems ok, the root we have to see.
Funny to have people already complaining about cabalist not being up
How many hib caster with enchanter do you see in 8vs8 and gvg?

Yeah because they buffed Mentalists beyond stupid and switched the main debuff train to body/energy (which increased the share of Mentalists and Animists in groups) .
Chanters already had that snare pet and don´t need a root and disease (and pet demezz, at least not before other classes).

Funny how the answer to the stupid OPness of stun nukes has always been "but they can´t root" (which is better open field but won´t get you nearly as many kills at structures) and now they´re slowly introducing more and more roots to Hib. More Ichors than everybody else, tanglers every corner, Bard root, Chanter root...
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:42 AM by Lundarian
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:31 AM
top tier caster lmao...

Top tier PET caster, there are plenty of non-pet casters with situationaly stronger tools, my point was that they are VERY self-sufficient.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:53 AM by Noashakra
Lundarian wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:42 AM
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:31 AM
top tier caster lmao...

Top tier PET caster, there are plenty of non-pet casters with situationaly stronger tools, my point was that they are VERY self-sufficient.

My bad for that.
Still in GvG there are 0 groups with enchanters since months. The enchanter needs a buff.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:56 AM by evert
Seems OP for smallman (and solo but chanters don't solo so not a big deal).
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:12 AM by Rillifane
So playing against Hib not only means standing in tangler root all time but now also in Enchpet root... NICE - BALANCE THE SERVER TO DEAD
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:15 AM by Tyrlaan
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:53 AM
Still in GvG there are 0 groups with enchanters since months. The enchanter needs a buff.

Sole reason people exclude Chanter from GvG is:
The body/energy debuff setup (Mentalists, tangler Animists, Mana Elds) needs a nerf. And a big one.
Then we´ll see more groups build around the heat debuff again.

We definitely don´t need Hib casters buffed just because other Hib casters got buffed in one of the previous "Balance changes".
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:30 AM by Noashakra
Tyrlaan wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:15 AM
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:53 AM
Still in GvG there are 0 groups with enchanters since months. The enchanter needs a buff.

Sole reason people exclude Chanter from GvG is:
The body/energy debuff setup (Mentalists, tangler Animists, Mana Elds) needs a nerf. And a big one.
Then we´ll see more groups build around the heat debuff again.

We definitely don´t need Hib casters buffed just because other Hib casters got buffed in one of the previous "Balance changes".

Hib caster isn't playedi n GvG since month, way before the debuff changes... Hib caster (with heat debuff) is the weakest of all the 8 mans on phoenix since the HP change and we were the only group running it (not gvg), and for a good reason. It's really weak. The enchanter brings nothing to the comp, except the debuff.

I agree the mentalist debuff + animist is a bit too strong at the moment, but it's another story.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:41 AM by Kurdy
Lundarian wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:29 AM
If anything Enchanter needs Nerf, not buffs.

Allow me to clarify, the cookie-cutter Enchanter spec is 45/48 mana, rest light to debuff the baseline HEAT type nuke, and leftover points in light will help negate damage variance from sub 50 composite light.

That is already strong by itself. Now add the fact the baseline stun is also HEAT based, so a heat debuffed stun will last longer.

The Underhill Companion pet casts a DD/snare nuke that is also HEAT based, allowing them to not only snarekite, but interrupt their targets at range while moving.

THAT is what makes them the top-tier pet caster, they also get a strong PBaoE from the mana line as icing on the cake.

you definitely don't know what you are talking about, from now chanter was only grped for his debuff, that all he got.

most of the first target you will have to face are tank, your argument with magical stun make no sense.

His pet is a joke compare to any other caster pet, casting speed is very slow ( you target will be easily out of range before your pet finish the cast, so he has to move to get closer and wait 3,5 sec to land a spell) on the other hand , cabalist's pet instant stun target without immunities, should i mention the SM's pet ?

What will you do with a Pbae ? bombing 8vs8 ? good luck with that

Compare to any other caster chanter have NO TOOLS !
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:41 AM by Kyllikki
Good changes imo, thanks for your work.

However I'm not sure it will be enough, most of time heat debuff train will face red resists vs mids AND albs (because of friar buffs, most of grp play with one and have red heat resist).

This is not the case with spirit/energy/matter and even cold train on other realms.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:45 AM by Noashakra
Kyllikki wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:41 AM
Good changes imo, thanks for your work.

However I'm not sure it will be enough, most of time heat debuff train will face red resists vs mids AND albs (because of friar buffs, most of grp play with one and have red heat resist).

This is not the case with spirit/energy/matter and even cold train on other realms.

That's why the triple debuff is 50% and not 40% like the alb body train.
Even with that, the comp is still way worst than the alb debuff train.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:55 AM by Rapunzelam
This is Aprils fools? if not... well ..if not then im better speechless or else gonna get banned for talking out loud what i think
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:56 AM by Tyrlaan
Kurdy wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:41 AM
Lundarian wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:29 AM
If anything Enchanter needs Nerf, not buffs.

Allow me to clarify, the cookie-cutter Enchanter spec is 45/48 mana, rest light to debuff the baseline HEAT type nuke, and leftover points in light will help negate damage variance from sub 50 composite light.

That is already strong by itself. Now add the fact the baseline stun is also HEAT based, so a heat debuffed stun will last longer.

The Underhill Companion pet casts a DD/snare nuke that is also HEAT based, allowing them to not only snarekite, but interrupt their targets at range while moving.

THAT is what makes them the top-tier pet caster, they also get a strong PBaoE from the mana line as icing on the cake.

you definitely don't know what you are talking about, from now chanter was only grped for his debuff, that all he got.

most of the first target you will have to face are tank, your argument with magical stun make no sense.

His pet is a joke compare to any other caster pet, casting speed is very slow ( you target will be easily out of range before your pet finish the cast, so he has to move to get closer and wait 3,5 sec to land a spell) on the other hand , cabalist's pet instant stun target without immunities, should i mention the SM's pet ?

What will you do with a Pbae ? bombing 8vs8 ? good luck with that

Compare to any other caster chanter have NO TOOLS !

And you definitely don´t know what you´re talking about.

Root, disease and pet demezz won´t even make Hib 8mans run Chanters again (they switched to body energy debuff, remember).
It will just make an already strong solo/smallman/BG class even stronger.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 11:23 AM by ulf
forget it , hibernia dont need up , all players on phoenix think about hibernia realm = Very easy mode

you want to dev something, change old style :

left axe , sword, axe on midgard

remove the triple debuff spell too
Sun 18 Apr 2021 11:40 AM by Noashakra
It's because people like to cry and think the other realm is easy mode. It's ridiculous. I see it everyday when I play alb.
You just have to check the GvG list night after night. Alb >>> mid >= hib.
Hib heat debuff groups = 0 since more than a year.

The strongest comp always have the most play.

forget it , hibernia dont need up , all players on phoenix think about hibernia realm = Very easy mode

Yeah all the biased players. Argumentum ad populum falacy.

Some numbers :
https://herald.playphoenix.online/characters/realmpoints?time-frame=this-week&filter=caster
22 out of the 50 top caster in term of RPs are albs this week (almost 50%), 16 hibs 10 mids.
Hib the OP realm

Changing the enchanter with a small patch doesn't mean something for other class and realms are not coming.
I play on the three realms, and alb is the strongest by a landslide.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 12:05 PM by Kurdy
Tyrlaan wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 10:56 AM
And you definitely don´t know what you´re talking about.

Root, disease and pet demezz won´t even make Hib 8mans run Chanters again (they switched to body energy debuff, remember).
It will just make an already strong solo/smallman/BG class even stronger.

Please don't be off the topic.

he said chanter is the top tiers caster, which is wrong.

did i say this up will make the chanter run again 8vs8 ? don't think so...

at least i'm reading post before replying
Sun 18 Apr 2021 12:06 PM by Teisiphone
How dare you breaking the classic immersion with chanters having more than two spells.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 12:26 PM by Bokkz
- experimental: new spell, enchanting baseline, pet casted single target disease
- experimental: new spell, enchanting baseline, pet casted single target root
- new spell, enchanting baseline, pet demez

If you think that's a good idea then why did you butcher the Animist shrooms in the first place ?
Ench pet can be set to attack a target instantly and at twice the range as opposed to a tangler with 5s cast time.
And then a tangler will even refuse to interrupt targets with root immunity and just sleep 2 seconds.
Also one can move and the other is static.
You need to start fixing your mistakes of the past before you make new ones.
Just fix the tangler algorithm and unbreak the Z-axis check please.
BTW Ani could also use the shroom demezz spell.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:34 PM by Shamissa
I have played enchanter and they definitely dont need anymore than just demez a pet? Why did you leave behind the BD’s and other classes that cant demez their pets? This is not cool and i hope you know whatch you doing.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:36 PM by ExcretusMaximus
The amount of people in these threads who still don't understand these changes are for 8v8 and that Phoenix devs do not care about your zerging is mindblowing. It's been almost five months of 8v8 changes and yet every round is full of zergers complaining about zerg balance. You cannot balance a zerg, because it's all about numbers, not abilities, so they are focussing on balancing the part of the game they deem the most balance-intensive, group vs group combat.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:46 PM by Tyrlaan
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:36 PM
The amount of people in these threads who still don't understand these changes are for 8v8 and that Phoenix devs do not care about your zerging is mindblowing. It's been almost five months of 8v8 changes and yet every round is full of zergers complaining about zerg balance. You cannot balance a zerg, because it's all about numbers, not abilities, so they are focussing on balancing the part of the game they deem the most balance-intensive, group vs group combat.

And yet, this change will not bring back the heat debuff train (and thus Chanters in 8v8 groups).
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:54 PM by Shamissa
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:36 PM
The amount of people in these threads who still don't understand these changes are for 8v8 and that Phoenix devs do not care about your zerging is mindblowing. It's been almost five months of 8v8 changes and yet every round is full of zergers complaining about zerg balance. You cannot balance a zerg, because it's all about numbers, not abilities, so they are focussing on balancing the part of the game they deem the most balance-intensive, group vs group combat.

How about you tell that to your little friends Devs , create a separate thread for 8v8 changes only? That way others who like to Zerg your ass down dont get involved. Thank you for reading.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 3:17 PM by Ceen
Shamissa wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:54 PM
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:36 PM
The amount of people in these threads who still don't understand these changes are for 8v8 and that Phoenix devs do not care about your zerging is mindblowing. It's been almost five months of 8v8 changes and yet every round is full of zergers complaining about zerg balance. You cannot balance a zerg, because it's all about numbers, not abilities, so they are focussing on balancing the part of the game they deem the most balance-intensive, group vs group combat.

How about you tell that to your little friends Devs , create a separate thread for 8v8 changes only? That way others who like to Zerg your ass down dont get involved. Thank you for reading.
The zerglings are getting more and more each day so who cares apparentaly zerg is already balanced and what 90 % of all players do.
The rest is more or less a waste land.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 3:57 PM by easytoremember
Shamissa wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:34 PM
I have played enchanter and they definitely dont need anymore than just demez a pet? Why did you leave behind the BD’s and other classes that cant demez their pets? This is not cool and i hope you know whatch you doing.
bd, necro, caba, ani would be too strong with demez
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:00 PM by Tyrlaan
easytoremember wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 3:57 PM
Shamissa wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:34 PM
I have played enchanter and they definitely dont need anymore than just demez a pet? Why did you leave behind the BD’s and other classes that cant demez their pets? This is not cool and i hope you know whatch you doing.
bd, necro, caba, ani would be too strong with demez

Not anymore than classes who can release their pet to break roots/snares (both on themselves/group members or their pet by damaging it) and mezzes.

Heck, Chanters and Cabas can just release/reclaim and resummon their pet if CC bothers them too much. Back to almost full functionality. SMs get a demezz however it´s root/snare that kills all their pet functionality (being melee pets they can´t rupt if they can´t move and they also can´t stay with their caster to intercept).

If anything, BDs need a pet demezz. Way too easy to remove all 4 of them from a fight already and no way somebody can get them up again (nvm the power cost).
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:08 PM by easytoremember
Tyrlaan wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:00 PM
easytoremember wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 3:57 PM
Shamissa wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 1:34 PM
I have played enchanter and they definitely dont need anymore than just demez a pet? Why did you leave behind the BD’s and other classes that cant demez their pets? This is not cool and i hope you know whatch you doing.
bd, necro, caba, ani would be too strong with demez

Not anymore than classes who can release their pet to break roots/snares (both on themselves or their pet by damaging it) and mezzes.

Heck, Chanters and Cabas can just release/reclaim and resummon their pet if CC bothers them too much. Back to almost full functionality. SMs get a demezz however it´s root that kills all their pet functionality (being melee pets they can´t rupt if they can´t move and they also can´t stay with their caster to intercept).

If anything, BDs need a pet demezz. Way too easy to remove all 4 of them from a fight already and no way somebody can get them up again (nvm the power cost).
kill and summon is significantly different from demezzing a caba pet,
and for a bd no matter what spec they choose they have instant interrupt every 6 seconds
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:13 PM by Tyrlaan
easytoremember wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:08 PM
kill and summon is significantly different from demezzing a caba pet,
and for a bd no matter what spec they choose they have instant interrupt every 6 seconds
And for a Chanter no matter what spec they choose they have an instant interrupt every 5 seconds...
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:56 PM by Noashakra
Tyrlaan wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:13 PM
easytoremember wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:08 PM
kill and summon is significantly different from demezzing a caba pet,
and for a bd no matter what spec they choose they have instant interrupt every 6 seconds
And for a Chanter no matter what spec they choose they have an instant interrupt every 5 seconds...

And those are the people complaining about balance...
Chanter instants are debuffs, and they don't rupt.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 6:03 PM by Magesty
Why are balance changes not accompanied by an explanation as to why the change is being made? This is fairly standard procedure, and allows the resulting conversation to be more focused and meaningful. Given the immediate response to the toy debacle, I assume feedback is viewed and taken into account. As it stands right now any attempt to comment on this change from an "outside" perspective has to make a number of assumptions about why this particular implementation was put into place.

I can say that I dislike these particular changes, and the "balance changes" more broadly for a number of reasons. It seems that any sort of class flavor is being tossed aside in favor of homogenization to match the existing/assumed meta. In so doing the resulting gameplay becomes regressive.

Caster need big debuff boom boom. Caster need disease and root give big utility. Why bard no root when other root!?

What you have is vast, empty chalkboard to create, change, and shake up the meta. Instead of exploring the void you are allowing your hands to guide the chalk to the same grooves it has followed so many times before. What if instead of tracing the powerful and familiar shapes of root, disease, and debuff, a new shape is made instead? How does the typical fight for a Hib 8 man that includes an enchanter play out? Where are key points that the player could affect the gameplay in a manner that is as powerful as something like a disease or root? How can this fit meaningfully into the enchanter's primary themes of shit like light, bedazzlement, arcane magic, and concerningly lifelike pets?

It just seems unfortunate in light of the countless hours that have gone into this project, and the considerable skill of the team behind it, that the changes we are seeing come forward are so uninspired and regressive. Root, disease, and debuffs are all extremely powerful abilities. Let's not pretend some line is being toed in regards to keeping things "classic". This is an enormous amount of power being added to baselines across multiple classes. So why not take the chance to add comparably powerful abilities to shake up the meta instead of continuing to perpetuate it.

Perhaps the issue lies in seeing the meta as simply a matter of group compositions and performance rather than as an overarching picture of gameplay patterns and strategy. Honestly, it is really hard to formulate a concrete opinion when there is a dearth of narrative.
Sun 18 Apr 2021 7:00 PM by Tyrlaan
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 5:56 PM
And those are the people complaining about balance...
Chanter instants are debuffs, and they don't rupt.
And those are the people playing Hib.
Chanter melee debuff does rupt. It´s at Light spec lvl 11, something every Chanter has at least subspecced. You might want to check it out.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 7:42 AM by Astaa
With all this constant caster boosting in one way or another it might be worth asking. Do the devs want people to play heavy tanks at all?
Mon 19 Apr 2021 8:18 AM by Irkeno
Astaa wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 7:42 AM
With all this constant caster boosting in one way or another it might be worth asking. Do the devs want people to play heavy tanks at all?

Never been any tank buffs have there. None at all. Not even hp boosts, causing this need for caster love?
Mon 19 Apr 2021 8:19 AM by inoeth
still no hunter style adjustment.....
Mon 19 Apr 2021 8:38 AM by skipari
Irkeno wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 8:18 AM
Astaa wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 7:42 AM
With all this constant caster boosting in one way or another it might be worth asking. Do the devs want people to play heavy tanks at all?

Never been any tank buffs have there. None at all. Not even hp boosts, causing this need for caster love?

You know that hp boosts are a double edged sword since all, also caster, got boosted. Before that you could easily just instapop a caster with a train if it reaches the target, now caster have far more time to get guard/heals and thanks to unlimited endu can easier kite out. One of the direct implications of this is that pet casters are far stronger since you often have to kill the pet now before instead just the caster.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:06 AM by byron
I understand and appreciate the work behind these changes, they are trying to increase the popularity of the classes less played. But let's take this last change : are the enchanters weak or simply the boost to the mentalists is so big that Hibs are now playing Mentalists, tangler Animists, Mana Elds instead of Enchanter ? Increasing a lot the strength of class leads to play that class (everyone wants to win) so continuing to boost other classes is not always the right solution imho since it will never have an end.
Another example : paladin is not so popular in 8vs8. Do paladins now need celerity, atomic bombs and viper to be popular ? Or simply revisiting how end potions work in a group will make them necessary in any alb group ? And maybe it will balance also a little more the dps that an albion group can land compared to the dps of Mid and Hib group ?
I think that the balance sometimes is not just adding new stuff to a class but revisiting the mechanics around that class.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:12 AM by Hattrick
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:53 AM
Lundarian wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:42 AM
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:31 AM
top tier caster lmao...

Top tier PET caster, there are plenty of non-pet casters with situationaly stronger tools, my point was that they are VERY self-sufficient.

My bad for that.
Still in GvG there are 0 groups with enchanters since months. The enchanter needs a buff.

GvG is a poor basis for what needs buffed because dedicated 8 man groups will only run what is the current best set up. I mean non-pickup 8 mans seldom run thanes or champs, should those classes be buffed also? Of course not, they are strong already when in their element. Besides, these pet changes here are not going to make any 8 man groups decide to start including enchanters all of sudden.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:20 AM by Ceen
Hattrick wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:12 AM
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:53 AM
Lundarian wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:42 AM
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:31 AM
top tier caster lmao...

Top tier PET caster, there are plenty of non-pet casters with situationaly stronger tools, my point was that they are VERY self-sufficient.

My bad for that.
Still in GvG there are 0 groups with enchanters since months. The enchanter needs a buff.

GvG is a poor basis for what needs buffed because dedicated 8 man groups will only run what is the current best set up. I mean non-pickup 8 mans seldom run thanes or champs, should those classes be buffed also? Of course not, they are strong already when in their element. Besides, these pet changes here are not going to make any 8 man groups decide to start including enchanters all of sudden.
And no one in a zerg will see an effect on this either, it's more or less a small men buff and no one plays small men here. So this patch doesn't change much.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:23 AM by Sepplord
there will never be a meta where all classes fit a group equally, and even if the changes were GODLY at balancing making all groupsetups and builds perfectly viable, you would have a few players claiming differently due to personal bias and that would form the meta anyways

shoehorning in mentalist, which pushed out enchanters, and now enchanters need buffs which will either not change anything at all or switch the meta again and mentalist will be pushed out...
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:26 AM by Hattrick
@Ceen, I agree, I don't think these are very impactful changes. I do wonder why they chose the enchanter to give pet de-mez to though. I would argue that bone dancers are the pet class that relies most heavily on their pets to do damage for them, especially dark and BA specs and because there is no /formation command here, it's stupidly easy to catch all 4 pets with a single AE mez.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 11:37 AM by dcj
NO WAY!
Mon 19 Apr 2021 11:54 AM by DJ2000
Sepplord wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:23 AM
there will never be a meta where all classes fit a group equally, and even if the changes were GODLY at balancing making all groupsetups and builds perfectly viable, you would have a few players claiming differently due to personal bias and that would form the meta anyways

shoehorning in mentalist, which pushed out enchanters, and now enchanters need buffs which will either not change anything at all or switch the meta again and mentalist will be pushed out...

It went from Ench, Eld, Ment to Ment, Eld Ani.
So, no. The Ment would not be pushed out, nor was he shoehorned in.

Your first statement is true though and i agree to 100%
Mon 19 Apr 2021 11:56 AM by Tyrlaan
Hattrick wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:26 AM
@Ceen, I agree, I don't think these are very impactful changes. I do wonder why they chose the enchanter to give pet de-mez to though. I would argue that bone dancers are the pet class that relies most heavily on their pets to do damage for them, especially dark and BA specs and because there is no /formation command here, it's stupidly easy to catch all 4 pets with a single AE mez.

I disagree, these pet spells are worse than giving these spells to the caster herself because you can order your pet to root/disease somebody while running. It isn´t that much of an issue with Necromancers handing out absorb buffs while passing an xper but it certainly is when somebody can hard CC while kiting (on top of ordering the pet to snare nuke somebody already - and yes I know Minstrels can already mezz on the move... disease on the move is kinda stretching it though). Also Chanters got dropped out of groups because Mentalist body/energy debuffs took over, not because they were lacking overpowered pet spells.

And yeah, BDs need a pet demezz way before Chanters (who can just release/resummon pet to have it purged of all CC and start snare nuking again). But BDs aren´t a Hib class.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:08 PM by Hattrick
Tyrlaan wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 11:56 AM
Hattrick wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 10:26 AM
@Ceen, I agree, I don't think these are very impactful changes. I do wonder why they chose the enchanter to give pet de-mez to though. I would argue that bone dancers are the pet class that relies most heavily on their pets to do damage for them, especially dark and BA specs and because there is no /formation command here, it's stupidly easy to catch all 4 pets with a single AE mez.

I disagree, these pet spells are worse than giving these spells to the caster herself because you can order your pet to root/disease somebody while running. It isn´t that much of an issue with Necromancers handing out absorb buffs while passing an xper but it certainly is when somebody can hard CC while kiting (on top of ordering the pet to snare nuke somebody already - and yes I know Minstrels can already mezz on the move... disease on the move is kinda stretching it though). Also Chanters got dropped out of groups because Mentalist body/energy debuffs took over, not because they were lacking overpowered pet spells.

That's the thing though, you can't command your pet to cast anything unless you are a necro. You can only command it to attack or disengage a target, the pet chooses how it will attack it. You won't be able to root or disease on demand, not really. If you need a target rooted RIGHT NOW, your pet is not likely to do it for you and even if you get lucky and it does, it will just immediately break it unless you pull it off the target quickly, leaving that target immune to further root attempts.

Furthermore, they didn't say which enchanter pets get these spells. Is it all of them? Just the caster pets? My enchanter is only level 11 so I can't go test that myself.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:22 PM by Tyrlaan
Hattrick wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:08 PM
That's the thing though, you can't command your pet to cast anything unless you are a necro. You can only command it to attack or disengage a target, the pet chooses how it will attack it. You won't be able to root or disease on demand, not really. If you need a target rooted RIGHT NOW, your pet is not likely to do it for you and even if you get lucky and it does, it will just immediately break it unless you pull it off the target quickly, leaving that target immune to further root attempts.

Uhh have you even used these spells? Because I have. RIGHT NOW would be instant. If you cast that pet spell while running, your target will be rooted about 1 to 1.5 seconds later. Your pet will take care of doing that (it can even stay passive/on follow otherwise, just like the necro pet handing out buffs). And of course root and disease (even more in such a powerful form) are making a difference. It won´t make people magically include Chanters into GvG again (there´s just too much gained from running a body energy debuff train) but it will make an already strong class even stronger.

Meanwhile, BDs dont get a pet demezz. And Earth Wizards had their AoE DoT removed, GTAE and bolts nerfed and now are just a self debuff nuke class (just like many others) without a pet and with shitty RAs (much like the RM, no NM/TWF/Ichor/ST). But somehow I don´t see any efforts to make it GvG compatible. Wrong realm I guess.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:30 PM by Algarakai
And on Midgard??
Any changes??
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:45 PM by chewchew
Magesty wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 6:03 PM
Why are balance changes not accompanied by an explanation as to why the change is being made? This is fairly standard procedure, and allows the resulting conversation to be more focused and meaningful. Given the immediate response to the toy debacle, I assume feedback is viewed and taken into account. As it stands right now any attempt to comment on this change from an "outside" perspective has to make a number of assumptions about why this particular implementation was put into place.
qft

i think this would help so much regarding a better forum-discussion.
it doesnt even have to be a full blown explanation on how you chose this particular implementation (eg. in this case of the enchanter changes why its a cast on the pet and not ench itself).
you could even leave out what potential downsides you will have in mind and leave it open to a bit more focused forum-discussion by adding something small like:
'how do you players think these new changes will affect your preferred playstyle? please watch out in rvr and report back in this thread'
icing on the cake would be a follow-up edit from you guys after a few weeks how from your pov the changes turned out regarding your intentions for the change when implementing. i see how this could mean more work for you guys but i think it would really help the discussion even if you keep it short.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:45 PM by chewchew
Magesty wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 6:03 PM
Why are balance changes not accompanied by an explanation as to why the change is being made? This is fairly standard procedure, and allows the resulting conversation to be more focused and meaningful. Given the immediate response to the toy debacle, I assume feedback is viewed and taken into account. As it stands right now any attempt to comment on this change from an "outside" perspective has to make a number of assumptions about why this particular implementation was put into place.
qft

i think this would help so much regarding a better forum-discussion.
it doesnt even have to be a full blown explanation on how you chose this particular implementation (eg. in this case of the enchanter changes why its a cast on the pet and not ench itself).
you could even leave out what potential downsides you will have in mind and leave it open to a bit more focused forum-discussion by adding something small like:
'how do you players think these new changes will affect your preferred playstyle? please watch out in rvr and report back in this thread'
icing on the cake would be a follow-up edit from you guys after a few weeks how from your pov the changes turned out regarding your intentions for the change when implementing. i see how this could mean more work for you guys but i think it would really help the discussion even if you keep it short.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:13 PM by Uthred
chewchew wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:45 PM
i think this would help so much regarding a better forum-discussion.
it doesnt even have to be a full blown explanation on how you chose this particular implementation (eg. in this case of the enchanter changes why its a cast on the pet and not ench itself).
you could even leave out what potential downsides you will have in mind and leave it open to a bit more focused forum-discussion by adding something small like:
'how do you players think these new changes will affect your preferred playstyle? please watch out in rvr and report back in this thread'
icing on the cake would be a follow-up edit from you guys after a few weeks how from your pov the changes turned out regarding your intentions for the change when implementing. i see how this could mean more work for you guys but i think it would really help the discussion even if you keep it short.

Just check the other Balance Changes #1-5. You will see that we explained a lot there and you will also see, nothing changes feedbackwise.

This change is to mainly buff the enchanter a bit as the rvr-utility of the enchanter is very low. We discussed several options in the team and inside the player council. As always, depending on feedback and our monitoring this may gets changed or not.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:23 PM by soremir
Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:13 PM
This change is to mainly buff the enchanter a bit as the rvr-utility of the enchanter is very low. We discussed several options in the team and inside the player council. As always, depending on feedback and our monitoring this may gets changed or not.

Again, in the interest of transparency, who is on the player council?
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:24 PM by Uthred
There are about 15 players, from all playstyles. 8 men, solos, zergers. From any realm and/or multit-realm players.

When creating the council we decided to not name them in public as this might cause a lot of troubles because they may could get harrased or changes might get a negative feedback because of knowing who is a member.

I know that same members told by themselfes, that they are members of the council. Thats up to them, if they want to tell, they are free to do so.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:50 PM by soremir
Well would be great if you could ask the soloers on this council what we are expected to do against a hib caster that will have stun, disease, and root, two of which can be casted while it kites.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:53 PM by skipari
Not sure if even more utility was really needed, it feels more like an arms race now to get again over the menta and the somewhat fresh energy train.

The ench has already:
- caster pet (which made rooting it already not that efficient)
- debuff + baseline on same damage
- aoe/single haste debuff
- single instant 5s melee damage debuff which interrupts
- the usual hib stun
- newish group power proc

Now he gets baseline a parallel castqueue for root/disease which are independent of the own CC status and also a demezz for a pet which is already not that impressed by roots.

I don't think the ench will replace the menta anytime soon in a full caster setup, except it gets hillarious overtuned. But i think for solo/small this was a huge boost, and for hybrids, if those get ever a thing in hib, the ench is one of the stronger classes which bring a lot on the table if its now providing the debuff for elds/mentas or having a more bonedancer like role as solo caster which can rupt fairly well and also provides a decent power proc and melee counter. Also in general i would hope if those new spells stay that they get specs in the enchancement line actually.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:57 PM by Astaa
Oh god, a select few players having a say on balance changes. Because that worked so well on live.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:09 PM by Uthred
Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:13 PM
Just check the other Balance Changes #1-5. You will see that we explained a lot there and you will also see, nothing changes feedbackwise.

Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:24 PM
When creating the council we decided to not name them in public as this might cause a lot of troubles because they may could get harrased or changes might get a negative feedback because of knowing who is a member.

soremir wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:50 PM
Well would be great if you could ask the soloers on this council what we are expected to do against a hib caster that will have stun, disease, and root, two of which can be casted while it kites.

Astaa wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:57 PM
Oh god, a select few players having a say on balance changes. Because that worked so well on live.

q.e.d.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:23 PM by soremir
Hahahaha respect. I do always appreciate the humour though.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:26 PM by gotwqqd
skipari wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 1:53 PM
Not sure if even more utility was really needed, it feels more like an arms race now to get again over the menta and the somewhat fresh energy train.

The ench has already:
- caster pet (which made rooting it already not that efficient)
- debuff + baseline on same damage
- aoe/single haste debuff
- single instant 5s melee damage debuff which interrupts
- the usual hib stun
- newish group power proc

Now he gets baseline a parallel castqueue for root/disease which are independent of the own CC status and also a demezz for a pet which is already not that impressed by roots.

I don't think the ench will replace the menta anytime soon in a full caster setup, except it gets hillarious overtuned. But i think for solo/small this was a huge boost, and for hybrids, if those get ever a thing in hib, the ench is one of the stronger classes which bring a lot on the table if its now providing the debuff for elds/mentas or having a more bonedancer like role as solo caster which can rupt fairly well and also provides a decent power proc and melee counter. Also in general i would hope if those new spells stay that they get specs in the enchancement line actually.
You portray it as chanter can do so many things....check the other classes. And now most can debuff and cast baseline nuke if they wish.

And I’d say chanter pet is subpar compared to others. Cabby pet has speed, spirit pet intercepts.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:56 PM by Lollie
Algarakai wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:30 PM
And on Midgard??
Any changes??

The devs read this and looked at each and said "whats a Midgard?"
Mon 19 Apr 2021 3:27 PM by Nephamael
The idea seems very interesting, can't wait to test it, will let you know my findings

Something had to be done, enchanters were pretty much extinct in gvg already before this happened.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 4:26 PM by byron
genova wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:33 AM
Nice .. 0 change to mid !!

Give back absorb 2/3 melee damage/bolt on SM pet ……………….

Midgard is fine. As you can see on the herald, Mid has 6 players on the first 100 positions in the last 48h (it is zoomed out just to show how much blu there is in this chart....) . Too many maybe

Mon 19 Apr 2021 4:51 PM by ExcretusMaximus
Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:09 PM
q.e.d.

So bringing up valid concerns is now somehow a bad thing? I didn't see anyone insulting anyone in your quoted responses, but you seem to be implying that those responses aren't appropriate.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 5:23 PM by Anothal
Now i haven't played an Enchanter on this server yet, so let me pose a few questions. Since the mechanics will be similar to necromancer pet casting, what sort of casting speed does the enchanter pet have buffed and unbuffed?
A couple ideas after reading through the posts so far would be limiting range of the pet spells sort of reverse of the necromancer player/pet spell ranges. Putting them into spec lines, as in separate lines. Maybe even slower cast speed to give the target a chance to interrupt. While it doesn't help as much the melee that would be chasing, it would limit the impact of changes such as these so that they don't get abused to much outside the intended fallout of a change to a class.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 5:25 PM by Uthred
I quoted because they prove what I was saying before:

1. It doesnt matter if we give any explanations, some players will just not accept it and always think, the changes are made for the worst reasons. See also the quote below, which has been shortly posted after the my quotes:
Lollie wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:56 PM
Algarakai wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:30 PM
And on Midgard??
Any changes??

The devs read this and looked at each and said "whats a Midgard?"

2. As soon as we would publish any names, any changes would be commented on with: you only did this because player xyz123 is on the council and he is playing that class/realm that just got buffed.

No, a post doesnt have to be insulting to be inappropriate.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 5:57 PM by Hattrick
Tyrlaan wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:22 PM
Hattrick wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:08 PM
That's the thing though, you can't command your pet to cast anything unless you are a necro. You can only command it to attack or disengage a target, the pet chooses how it will attack it. You won't be able to root or disease on demand, not really. If you need a target rooted RIGHT NOW, your pet is not likely to do it for you and even if you get lucky and it does, it will just immediately break it unless you pull it off the target quickly, leaving that target immune to further root attempts.

Uhh have you even used these spells? Because I have. RIGHT NOW would be instant. If you cast that pet spell while running, your target will be rooted about 1 to 1.5 seconds later. Your pet will take care of doing that (it can even stay passive/on follow otherwise, just like the necro pet handing out buffs). And of course root and disease (even more in such a powerful form) are making a difference. It won´t make people magically include Chanters into GvG again (there´s just too much gained from running a body energy debuff train) but it will make an already strong class even stronger.

No I haven't used them. I thought I made that clear in the part of my post that you omitted where I mentioned my enchanter was only level 11. Maybe you didn't read that part in your rush to tell me I was wrong though

If these are actual player casted spells through the pet, yeah, I don't like that. That is a mechanic found only on the necromancer and that is how it should stay. I'm not against balance changes, but when you start tinkering with the mechanics of the classes, that can quickly make this into a different game altogether like the mess the live servers are now. If they simply gave the pet the ability to cast those spells in a sequence like BD buffer pets do upon being summoned, I wouldn't have a big problem with it (but of course enchanters would probably think that useless.)
Mon 19 Apr 2021 6:13 PM by easytoremember
The point was not to mess with the original pet while adding something. If you don't use the disease the pet won't try to cast it. If the spell had been added directly to the pet(s) they'd diminish their original role. The snare-nuker functions as DD+slow. Having the pet cast and reapply a disease on its own would be an improvement to kiting yes, but this changes situations such as the target crawling at 2% with disease expired as he is about to finish off the enchanter- instead of the pet killing him with one last cast he applies disease. Having the spell only attempt to cast upon the Enchanter's command preserves the original function of the pet(s), and also makes it possible to designate as something to spec into instead of having by default.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 9:36 PM by Tommylad
Balance? oh let me see......My Scout on Ywain ..Standard Shot 9, Critical Shot 9, Point Blank Shot 8, Power Shot 8, Fire Shot 9, Cold Shot 9, Poison Shot 8, Acid Shot 8, Siege Shot 8, Volley 8 with 30 sec re-use, plus Long Shot and rapid shot, plus all the buffs, plus speed..........and on Phoenix......er......er........oh yeah they nerfed volley which left me with...........er.........er.........yeah.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 9:44 PM by Nephamael
This is a gvg patch and won't affect zerg at all

So far i can say, you got a lot more to do than before as ench, we will see how things work out and if the patch gets enchs back into at least some gvg groups.

I will keep yall updated as soon as i have more fact based feedback.
Mon 19 Apr 2021 9:52 PM by Ceen
Tommylad wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 9:36 PM
Balance? oh let me see......My Scout on Ywain ..Standard Shot 9, Critical Shot 9, Point Blank Shot 8, Power Shot 8, Fire Shot 9, Cold Shot 9, Poison Shot 8, Acid Shot 8, Siege Shot 8, Volley 8 with 30 sec re-use, plus Long Shot and rapid shot, plus all the buffs, plus speed..........and on Phoenix......er......er........oh yeah they nerfed volley which left me with...........er.........er.........yeah.
Ok bye
Mon 19 Apr 2021 11:23 PM by Magesty
Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 5:25 PM
1. It doesnt matter if we give any explanations, some players will just not accept it and always think, the changes are made for the worst reasons. See also the quote below, which has been shortly posted after the my quotes:

Obviously, giving out the names of the players on the Player Council is a laughably bad idea. Any reasonable person can see why that position doesn't need to be defended.

That being said you're always going to have dissenting voices on a forum, and I don't understand why you would let that determine your approach to explaining changes and design philosophy. If you're confident in the overarching vision and put effort into conveying what that is I think you're going to have a much more open-minded response in total. Unfortunately, I'm sure there is likely a strong correlation between the type of person who plays an MMORPG from 2001 twenty years later and the type of person who is enraged by any sort of change in their life.

I went back through the other balance change posts and I don't really see how you think that the provided "explanations" are filling the gaping void in most of our skulls with an understanding of what the goal is.

Let's just take the first post as the "gold standard" of balance change posts as the emotional and mental fatigue of reading the responses had not set in yet.

gruenesschaf wrote:
Thu 31 Dec 2020 1:58 PM
After some discussions with the new player council, the first set of changes will go in tomorrow, on the 1st.

Changes aimed at the viability of the Alb Tanker / Hybrid Setup
The current Friar self endurance consumption reduction buff will become a group pulse without mana cost.
For Merc only, penumbra (currently alternative follow up to shadow's edge, a back opener) will become a back opener with a snare component and have its values adjusted appropriately.

Why are changes being made to the alb tanker / hybrid set up? Are they deficient in some way? What is the goal with the changes? General balance, gameplay patterns, class inclusion etc. Why is the merc being targetted compared to a class that might have trouble actually getting a slot? These are rhetorical questions.

gruenesschaf wrote:
Thu 31 Dec 2020 1:58 PM
Changes aimed at the viability of Mid / Hib Caster and Hybrid Setups
Alternative baseline nukes will be added
- A spirit nuke in the midgard suppression line of bd /rm / sm
- An energy nuke in the hibernia mana line of eld / ench / menta
- A matter nuke in the albion matter line of sorc / cab
This also means a minor reshuffling of some of the resist debuffs, an example here would be the yellow hib eld energy debuff which will become available a couple spec levels earlier as well as a duration reduction of the relevant debuffs in each realm.

Same as above, why are these set ups being improved specifically? What is the goal with adding baseline nukes and how does it fit into the overall vision of the Player Council/Dev team? Are you looking to facilitate specific specs or builds? How do you see this affecting all of the different styles of play specifically? (because it did)

You have to assume the average forum user is a troglodyte like myself with only a basic understanding of how the game works and absolutely no way to interpret your vision outside of what we experience in game and the extremely limited information in these types of patch notes.

Think of it like when you're driving a car-- it is so easy to assume the worst of other people on the road because you have no insight into their decision making or state of mind. It's frustrating when they do something that doesn't make sense to you, and it is really hard to put yourself in their shoes without being able to interface with them on a meaningful level. They are nameless, faceless metal boxes that have a direct impact on how you're experiencing the world. It shouldn't come as a surprise that some people assume the worst when given no information. It is human nature. It is road rage.

Look, I'm not making a case to say that we as players playing a free game that you have put time into are owed anything. It's your collective call with how you want to handle things. I'm just trying to point out that there is a dearth of communication regarding changes, whether it is apparent to you or not, and the overall reactions and conversation will likely be much more productive if the vision is made clear to all of us.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 3:09 AM by ExcretusMaximus
Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 5:25 PM
No, a post doesnt have to be insulting to be inappropriate.

I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, I an genuinely attempting to understand your viewpoint, but I can't wrap my mind around it because to me, with this conversation in particular, it seems that if anyone disagrees with you then their post is inappropriate. Now, I'm positive that's not what you mean, but that's what I'm reading, and so I am confused.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 6:38 AM by Astaa
Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 5:25 PM
2. As soon as we would publish any names, any changes would be commented on with: you only did this because player xyz123 is on the council and he is playing that class/realm that just got buffed.

That's not the point. Absolutely these players should remain anonymous, they wouldn't be able to enjoy the game at all if people knew their characters, same as the GMs/Devs etc. As it turns out I think I know one of them, he was calling people who aren't in this select group "retards" I thought he was lying but who knows... I did send a screenshot to a GM at the time. You end up with people who think they know best and are incapable of seeing any other perspective other than their own and look down on other players...exactly what happened on live.

The point is. Asking some sort of clique what they think is best for the server just doesn't work and has been proven time and again, not just in DAOC, in loads of games. Some recent changes show this, where you have dropped some OP change out of the blue then rowed back.

I'm all for new ideas and I realise we are ultimately all testers and players, you don't have the facilities or the people to fully test some things before they go live, but some things are just so obviously overpowered that I just don't understand how they make it through whatever decision process there is (those pots for example) and are then rowed back a week later, lately we seem to be in an endless cycle of things being boosted then nerfed, any sort of stability has gone out the window. Meanwhile, there are genuine reasoned concerns for large amounts of players that just get ignored, to the point where there is absolutely no point in commenting on anything, positively or not.

Edit, it's a 20 year old game, it's not going to be attracting many new people (though there are some) we have all been there, done that, so sensibly you should be trying to engage with as many people as possible, for the good of the game and the server.

Edit, edit and no, you can't please everyone and every playstyle, but lately the focus does appear to be on 8v8 mechanics that only a small percentage of players regularly engage with. There are obvious exceptions such as the events, which are hugely popular and while they aren't really my cup of tea are obviously good for the server, some of these recent changes, just aren't.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 6:57 AM by Sepplord
Menta got overbuffed and repressed enches. At the same time Albtanker is dominating so more snare-utility onto their enemy casters. Preferably slows/snares/desease.
Initially it seemed every hibcaster had their own niche.

If you wanted NS you got an eld
If you wanted desease you got an eld
If you wanted debuffs you got an ench
If you wanted second demezz you got menta
if you wanted ghettoheals/static you got a menta

Menta got a few of the other casters utility and now those classesa ren't picked as much. Now Ench gets more utility from other casters....and in a few weeks, guess which caster will be in the same boat.
Seriously, maybe i am missing something....but is there anything unique to take an Eld for now? So, what will Elds get in a few weeks? What will become their reason to exist?
Tue 20 Apr 2021 7:00 AM by Astaa
I should also add that just because people are passionate about something should not be taken in as something negative. We all must be in some way or another passionate about playing a 20-year-old game, or we wouldn't bother. I am sure we are all hugely grateful for what you do for us, please don't take any criticism of the overall work you do the wrong way but the game and the server would be nothing without its players.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 8:14 AM by DJ2000
@Sepplord
c'mon now.
Are you serious?

The typical 8man Menta was Light spec 46 or 50.
He was (or is) the muscle, the DPS, in the Heat debuff setup.
Plus an oj/red Charmed Pet, for obvious reasons.

The Eldritch was the utility spot, and that didn't change in the Energy/Body/Spirit setup.

The Mentalism Mentalist took over the debuff spot of the Mana Enchanter, while the (Arb) Animist took over the DPS spot of the Light Mentalist.


@And to the Enchanter changes:

Wisdom of the Ancients:
There can always be an improvement, for someone or something.
Not every change will result in an improvement.
Not every improvement will lead to a better result.
If something or someone could not or didn't need to be improved, you will only know, once it was changed.
But without any change, there can never be an improvement.

- Every fortune cookie ever.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:13 AM by Sepplord
Yes, i am serious. I don't just troll around, and usually when i joke i mention that.
That doesn't mean i must be right though
I don't claim to have extensive balance knowledge, i don't. That's why i am asking. And follow up questions don't mean "hah, you are wrong, i knew i could get you with something" they are, "okay, but i still can't understand that explanation when looking at it from POV xyz...so how does that fit into the picture"

DJ2000 wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 8:14 AM
The Eldritch was the utility spot, and that didn't change in the Energy/Body/Spirit setup.

What utility does he have left, that isn't covered by alternatives after this patch?
If menta was the muscle in the heat debuff...that makes the question of why they needed these HEAVY buffs even less understandable to me
Why were they needed? To make animist more than a tangler-bot?
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:26 AM by Uthred
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 3:09 AM
Uthred wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 5:25 PM
No, a post doesnt have to be insulting to be inappropriate.

I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, I an genuinely attempting to understand your viewpoint, but I can't wrap my mind around it because to me, with this conversation in particular, it seems that if anyone disagrees with you then their post is inappropriate. Now, I'm positive that's not what you mean, but that's what I'm reading, and so I am confused.

You dont have to agree on any of these changes. Free free to even hate them. That is not the point. We are pretty aware of the fact that always some people are going to complain. That is a given since the start of Alpha.

But.

It gets inappropriate if people totally ignore the reasons why we do changes, if people are telling lies, if people are making any assumptions towards the staff being biased a realm.

Pretty easy example:

Good:
I dont like the change, because ...
Thats not the Daoc I like to play, because ...
That makes class/realm op, because ...

Bad:
Staff is playing <insert random realm here>
Staff forget about my realm
Staff hates <insert random realm here>
Staff only makes changes because they want to cater <insert random playstyle here>

I dont know how I often I already posted this on the forum: But we arent biased to any playstyle, realm, class, whatever. Our main goal, which is basically the reason behind any change, is to make the game fun for as many players as possible. Some times we are pretty good in this, some times we have to adjust things. But we never ever do any change with any kind of bad intention.

So once again, a post doesnt need to be insulting to be very inappropriate.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:42 AM by Tyrlaan
With the introduction of the triple debuffs a heat debuff train (consisting of an Ench/Light Eld/Light Menta core) would have 2 spec nukes off a debuff - that´s more than any of the other realms gets (not to mention the 50% debuff where others get less). And the heat debuff train was never bad utility-wise either, 2 pets (one red-con), NS, debuffs, demezz, all classes (PB)AEs to pet clear or tower camp, NM/Ichor/ST distributed between all classes. Mid would love to have such a powerhouse combo with its three casters, and Alb with all its utility on casters has much lower utility on its support (most notably Cleric). An Alb caster group might have pets to deal with but it doesn´t come with 4+ classes that can heal, just saying...

But then these "Balance Changes" gave Mentalists (who were not lacking utility-wise even if Light spec) NS, triple debuff and an energy nuke to nuke off it, stat debuffs, a pet even if they don´t spec Light, also allowing them to spec into the major heal/mezz line instead. Yes it was that ridiculous, you could create an entirely new class off these changes instead of adding them. Everybody running body energy debuff train now instead of heat debuff train is quite telling how powerful the body energy train has been made (because the heat debuff train was never weak to begin with).

And now they´re buffing Chanters because their heat debuff got dropped out of groups? Really? Of all the classes not getting into 8v8 groups (anymore), they focussed on Chanters? Row back on the Mentalist changes perhaps?
Tue 20 Apr 2021 10:27 AM by Sepplord
Uthred wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:26 AM
You dont have to agree on any of these changes. Free free to even hate them. That is not the point. We are pretty aware of the fact that always some people are going to complain. That is a given since the start of Alpha.

But.

It gets inappropriate if people totally ignore the reasons why we do changes, if people are telling lies, if people are making any assumptions towards the staff being biased a realm.

Pretty easy example:

Good:
I dont like the change, because ...
Thats not the Daoc I like to play, because ...
That makes class/realm op, because ...

Bad:
Staff is playing <insert random realm here>
Staff forget about my realm
Staff hates <insert random realm here>
Staff only makes changes because they want to cater <insert random playstyle here>

I dont know how I often I already posted this on the forum: But we arent biased to any playstyle, realm, class, whatever. Our main goal, which is basically the reason behind any change, is to make the game fun for as many players as possible. Some times we are pretty good in this, some times we have to adjust things. But we never ever do any change with any kind of bad intention.

So once again, a post doesnt need to be insulting to be very inappropriate.

I believe the reason so many people jump to those arguments is because we just don't understand many proposals/changes. Add in being emotional because you fear that what you love was made worse, and it makes sense that people want to voice their fears. And how do you voice them when you have no idea why something happens?

It is understandable that you would ignore that feedback, it isn't understandable why often more reactions/explanations from the staffteam focus on explaining what is good and what is bad feedback, or that some emotional accusation is wrong....instead of investing that time/effort into the root cause and give thorough explanations.
If you are confident in the decisionmaking process, why not be transparent how you came to some decisions. You can even mention "xyz might be a problem, but for now we think the upsides outweigh that issue".

You say that it doesn't matter and feedback will be bad either way...but if that's the case, why engage at all? Why explain again and again that you aren't biased, instead of showing the decisionmaking process so reasonable people can see it for themselves. And the flamers will always flame either way.


That said, here my try at "good feedback":
I don't like the change, because it seems to be a slippery slope of powercreep.
From my POV the enchanter change is a result of the mentalist changes. Which in the big picture seems to be a devils circle of buffs about to happen. I don't see the meta settling on "just pick whatever casters" EVER. And if you keep buffing one setup, then the other will be played less. And then you buff that other setup and that will make the first setup be played less...repeat ad infinitum.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 10:38 AM by Sepplord
Btw. Uthred
I believe you when you say you are not realm biased. I believe you when you say you are not playstyle biased.
But that doesn't mean that you are never making biased decisions or come to biased conclusions.
It also heavily clashes with the claim that you make changes that satisfy as many players as possible.
Since the playstyles have vastly different populations, it is basically impossible to be unbiased towards a playstyle and satisfy the most players at the same time (and i am mentioning that not for any "gotcha"-moment...i am mentioning it as explanation why sometimes people react as they do)

Just for example:
As smallman player it is just really hard to understand why the current utility bomb of bard/druid/mentalist was created in its current form. I really don't want to list all the utility this trio packs, as you know the game better than i do and will have a list in your head while you read this sentence anyways.
Imo, it isn't unreasonable for me to explain that with "smallman balance isn't a high priority...zerg or 8man balance is more important" which is fine and understandable. There are very few smallman players. But when i then read "we support all playstyles equally" that kind of clashes with a lot of changes that happened here in the last years.
Someone else might think, well if they care about smallman balance as much as they say, then this can only be explained by realm bias...and while that feels unfair to you, it isn't an out of this world assumption from that persons POV
Tue 20 Apr 2021 11:19 AM by gruenesschaf
Tyrlaan wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:42 AM
With the introduction of the triple debuffs a heat debuff train (consisting of an Ench/Light Eld/Light Menta core) would have 2 spec nukes off a debuff - that´s more than any of the other realms gets (not to mention the 50% debuff where others get less). And the heat debuff train was never bad utility-wise either, 2 pets (one red-con), NS, debuffs, demezz, all classes (PB)AEs to pet clear or tower camp, NM/Ichor/ST distributed between all classes. Mid would love to have such a powerhouse combo with its three casters, and Alb with all its utility on casters has much lower utility on its support (most notably Cleric). An Alb caster group might have pets to deal with but it doesn´t come with 4+ classes that can heal, just saying...

But then these "Balance Changes" gave Mentalists (who were not lacking utility-wise even if Light spec) NS, triple debuff and an energy nuke to nuke off it, stat debuffs, a pet even if they don´t spec Light, also allowing them to spec into the major heal/mezz line instead. Yes it was that ridiculous, you could create an entirely new class off these changes instead of adding them. Everybody running body energy debuff train now instead of heat debuff train is quite telling how powerful the body energy train has been made (because the heat debuff train was never weak to begin with).

And now they´re buffing Chanters because their heat debuff got dropped out of groups? Really? Of all the classes not getting into 8v8 groups (anymore), they focussed on Chanters? Row back on the Mentalist changes perhaps?

That might be your view.

Our view is that the hp changes hit hib caster especially hard as they pretty much relied on instant blapping people and this instant blapping is precisely the reason the hp changes were made in the first place. The alb and mid caster / hybrid groups were and still are less reliant on the instant blap due to more utility / control stuff like the theurgist, bd or minstrel.

The triple debuff and alternative baseline nukes are somewhat orthogonal with the intent just being to allow more compositions / casters to become viable. The additional menta changes then were intended to make the energy train viable. These chanter changes are now aimed at making the heat train viable again which it pretty much hasn't been since the hp changes but without returning to the instant blapping via increased damage and the only way to do that is to add more control stuff.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 11:48 AM by DJ2000
Sepplord wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:13 AM
What utility does he have left, that isn't covered by alternatives after this patch?
If menta was the muscle in the heat debuff...that makes the question of why they needed these HEAVY buffs even less understandable to me
Why were they needed? To make animist more than a tangler-bot?
The Eldritch playstyle and role is identical in both setups.
Just because the Menta has a NS too, doesn't mean its his "main" job to-do. The mentalism Mentas #1 job is the debuff assist with the Animist (+eld, if he is free).
That is also the same job the Mana enchanter has to do with the Light Menta (+eld, if he is free)


To the Enchanter:
An example:
In a 8man scenario, this would be a self-assist for the Enchanter/Mentalist, to disease the assist target, and does lighten the burden the Eld has to carry in an Elemental debuff setup.
It does not take away the Eldritch's Role to disease(aoe), Ns, debuff, rupt, clear pets, ichor, assist and support.
To ensure that the Enchanter is able to do this somewhat reliably, the de-mezz was given.
(for the time being at least)

Why the spiritual debuff assist is currently the favored one, when compared to the elemental, is for a multitude of reasons. It is not just because of that "1" thing.
So is the delicacy of "balance" of certain Playstyles not hinged on that 1 thing keeping it together
What may be good to one playstyle, may not be that great for another, and vica verca.
As an example:
It was the small-man playstyle that "caused" the shortening of Bard's amnesia range.
That lead probably to the decision to add the Root to the Bard's arsenal.

Do you think that, if the Enchanter had gotten the Nearsight Spell in his Mana line, and not the Mentalist, the Hib groups would still play Heat/Cold/Matter?
Would that change something for the small man community? Bard-Druid-Ench?

IMHO, i think the Pet-disease spell seems fine, while the Pet-root i feel is a bit too much.
If the Bard didn't already have Root, i would have been all for it, as it would add value to the Heat setup.
The Pet demezz is an icebreaker in my opinion, if it's given out here and stays as is, it will lead to be eventually handed out to all the pet-classes in the future.
(example: The cure Nearsight Spell for the supports Friar/Warden/Shaman)
Tue 20 Apr 2021 11:51 AM by skipari
gruenesschaf wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 11:19 AM
Tyrlaan wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:42 AM
With the introduction of the triple debuffs a heat debuff train (consisting of an Ench/Light Eld/Light Menta core) would have 2 spec nukes off a debuff - that´s more than any of the other realms gets (not to mention the 50% debuff where others get less). And the heat debuff train was never bad utility-wise either, 2 pets (one red-con), NS, debuffs, demezz, all classes (PB)AEs to pet clear or tower camp, NM/Ichor/ST distributed between all classes. Mid would love to have such a powerhouse combo with its three casters, and Alb with all its utility on casters has much lower utility on its support (most notably Cleric). An Alb caster group might have pets to deal with but it doesn´t come with 4+ classes that can heal, just saying...

But then these "Balance Changes" gave Mentalists (who were not lacking utility-wise even if Light spec) NS, triple debuff and an energy nuke to nuke off it, stat debuffs, a pet even if they don´t spec Light, also allowing them to spec into the major heal/mezz line instead. Yes it was that ridiculous, you could create an entirely new class off these changes instead of adding them. Everybody running body energy debuff train now instead of heat debuff train is quite telling how powerful the body energy train has been made (because the heat debuff train was never weak to begin with).

And now they´re buffing Chanters because their heat debuff got dropped out of groups? Really? Of all the classes not getting into 8v8 groups (anymore), they focussed on Chanters? Row back on the Mentalist changes perhaps?

That might be your view.

Our view is that the hp changes hit hib caster especially hard as they pretty much relied on instant blapping people and this instant blapping is precisely the reason the hp changes were made in the first place. The alb and mid caster / hybrid groups were and still are less reliant on the instant blap due to more utility / control stuff like the theurgist, bd or minstrel.

The triple debuff and alternative baseline nukes are somewhat orthogonal with the intent just being to allow more compositions / casters to become viable. The additional menta changes then were intended to make the energy train viable. These chanter changes are now aimed at making the heat train viable again which it pretty much hasn't been since the hp changes but without returning to the instant blapping via increased damage and the only way to do that is to add more control stuff.

Thanks for the explanation, but isn't then the parallel disease pet cast not quite opposite to the goal to prevent instant blap? I.e. Albs have to use an dps caster to provide this, which can't do damage for that second and mid has to reduce rupt on non focused targets in the meanwhile.

Also since the bd was called, the ench already has an 5s instant rupt which is like half of the bd rupt capabilities. Instead an additional lifeleech rupt, which is awesome don't get me wrong, the ench has the debuff+nuke option for i.e. petclear or joining the train in hybrids, which is a fair exchange already imho.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:09 PM by Ceen
Since the pet disease is single target you can pick a target without caring about mezz but at the cost of a pet spell which is not as "crisp" as a self casted spell.
It's more like if it is on the target it's a nice bonus but I think you can not rely on it and your pet will not rupt the healer at the same time as it casts on your target.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:18 PM by skipari
Ceen wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:09 PM
Since the pet disease is single target you can pick you a target without caring about mezz but as the cost of a pet spell which is not as "crisp" as a self casted spell.
It's more like if it is on the target it's a nice bonus but I think you can not rely on it and your pet will not rupt the healer at the same time as it casts on your target.

Why would you want to have disease on the healer instead the target? I mean spreadheal okay, but that one costs a ton of power and is more a shortterm solution if for whatever reason no cure can be applied in-time. Also if the healer is in 1.5k range you could just use the insta rupt of the ench.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:28 PM by Sepplord
DJ2000 wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 11:48 AM
Sepplord wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:13 AM
What utility does he have left, that isn't covered by alternatives after this patch?
If menta was the muscle in the heat debuff...that makes the question of why they needed these HEAVY buffs even less understandable to me
Why were they needed? To make animist more than a tangler-bot?
The Eldritch playstyle and role is identical in both setups.
Just because the Menta has a NS too, doesn't mean its his "main" job to-do. The mentalism Mentas #1 job is the debuff assist with the Animist (+eld, if he is free).
That is also the same job the Mana enchanter has to do with the Light Menta (+eld, if he is free)

The thing is, you are not restricted to only having one menta. You can just pick a second menta over the eld and make it THAT mentas main-job to NS. The question isn'T "okay, we have one menta and one eld, how do we distribute the workload" the question is "we have X slots in our group to fill, what do we want to pick" and/or "i want to play a caster, which will i pick"... especially the last one seems to not favor eld in many (any?) cases. Why would you decide to play a class that has a single role in a group, and that roll can be filled by another class too? Wouldn't you just pick that other class and be happy that you can switch between roles as neccessary? I know i would


That said:
Thanks for the other explanations, also towards gruenesschaf and their explanation post.
I don't totally agree on all things, and others i have to accept as i just don't know myself, but it does help seeing posts like that, and the more of those we get the better i feel feedback could go as people would have a baseline train of thought to start their own comment from.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:53 PM by Centenario
I think it’s time to give baseline stun to alb and mid.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:54 PM by Tyrlaan
gruenesschaf wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 11:19 AM
Tyrlaan wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:42 AM
With the introduction of the triple debuffs a heat debuff train (consisting of an Ench/Light Eld/Light Menta core) would have 2 spec nukes off a debuff - that´s more than any of the other realms gets (not to mention the 50% debuff where others get less). And the heat debuff train was never bad utility-wise either, 2 pets (one red-con), NS, debuffs, demezz, all classes (PB)AEs to pet clear or tower camp, NM/Ichor/ST distributed between all classes. Mid would love to have such a powerhouse combo with its three casters, and Alb with all its utility on casters has much lower utility on its support (most notably Cleric). An Alb caster group might have pets to deal with but it doesn´t come with 4+ classes that can heal, just saying...

But then these "Balance Changes" gave Mentalists (who were not lacking utility-wise even if Light spec) NS, triple debuff and an energy nuke to nuke off it, stat debuffs, a pet even if they don´t spec Light, also allowing them to spec into the major heal/mezz line instead. Yes it was that ridiculous, you could create an entirely new class off these changes instead of adding them. Everybody running body energy debuff train now instead of heat debuff train is quite telling how powerful the body energy train has been made (because the heat debuff train was never weak to begin with).

And now they´re buffing Chanters because their heat debuff got dropped out of groups? Really? Of all the classes not getting into 8v8 groups (anymore), they focussed on Chanters? Row back on the Mentalist changes perhaps?

That might be your view.

Our view is that the hp changes hit hib caster especially hard as they pretty much relied on instant blapping people and this instant blapping is precisely the reason the hp changes were made in the first place. The alb and mid caster / hybrid groups were and still are less reliant on the instant blap due to more utility / control stuff like the theurgist, bd or minstrel.

The triple debuff and alternative baseline nukes are somewhat orthogonal with the intent just being to allow more compositions / casters to become viable. The additional menta changes then were intended to make the energy train viable. These chanter changes are now aimed at making the heat train viable again which it pretty much hasn't been since the hp changes but without returning to the instant blapping via increased damage and the only way to do that is to add more control stuff.

What? "Relied on instant blapping"? And here I thought the hp changes were exactly so you didn´t die instantly (even as a tank) after a debuff but your group had time to react... Is that a hint at your vision of how Hib groups should win fights?

Also Hib groups have quite the control stuff themselves (tanglers, various CC and instant rupts on many classes) and far more suppression than e.g. Mid groups as well as the highest resists, resist debuffs and most classes to suppress so targets can´t get a heal of some sort. For Albion and Mid it´s pretty easy, shut down the Cleric/Friar/Healer and your enemy dies. Or "instant blaps" if you will.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 1:10 PM by Centenario
Hib assist mage:
Bard amnesia/mezz/root/cure/heal
Menta debuff resist + stun + DD could also mezzcure and heal
Eld debuff sc + disease + DD + NS + stun
Now enchanter can do all of the above, except amnesia and mezz. You could simply use a macro to have your pet cast disease whenever you stun a target.
+Druid buff heal root

If we compare to alb, which I know better
The sorc has amnesia long range interrupt while it should be in the assist, it’s a lot better to have that on a healerclass, for the aggressive phases. The sorc is a bard that cannot heal and becomes useless if the opponent used SoS and purged, which is every fight.
You have to run away, wait for cure NS, which the healer don’t have time to. Does the cleric have to come to 1500 range to use stun on the assist?
Maybe give baseline stun to the sorc and give double instant amnesia to the cleric? Only 2krange
Tue 20 Apr 2021 1:22 PM by Sepplord
Tyrlaan wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:54 PM
What? "Relied on instant blapping"? And here I thought the hp changes were exactly so you didn´t die instantly (even as a tank) after a debuff but your group had time to react... Is that a hint at your vision of how Hib groups should win fights?

You even quoted gruenes adressing EXACTLY that....come on.
When devs finally open up and give explanations, at least put in 5seconds effort to read everything properly.
Our view is that the hp changes hit hib caster especially hard as they pretty much relied on instant blapping people and this instant blapping is precisely the reason the hp changes were made in the first place.

We can agree or disagree on that reasoning, and i agree with a few points you made in your last paragraph, but the reasoning is not contradicting itself
Tue 20 Apr 2021 1:51 PM by DJ2000
Centenario wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 12:53 PM
I think it’s time to give baseline stun to alb and mid.
There is already baseline stun in Alb and Mid.

Centenario wrote: If we compare to alb, which I know better
1. The sorc is a bard that cannot heal ...
2. ...and becomes useless if the opponent used SoS and purged, which is every fight.
1. Beside being the main Mezz class, even though the spells are not even alike, they share basically nothing in common.
2. Which class doesn't become useless and which class does become useless. Please explain to me.

Centenario wrote: Hib assist mage:
Bard amnesia/mezz/root/cure/heal
Menta debuff resist + stun + DD could also mezzcure and heal
Eld debuff sc + disease + DD + NS + stun
Now enchanter can do all of the above, except amnesia and mezz. You could simply use a macro to have your pet cast disease whenever you stun a target.
+Druid buff heal root
...oh man, the Enchanter is OP ! Oh wait...

Sepplord wrote: 1. The thing is, you are not restricted to only having one menta.
2. You can just pick a second menta over the eld and make it THAT mentas main-job to NS.
3. The question isn'T "okay, we have one menta and one eld, how do we distribute the workload" the question is "we have X slots in our group to fill, what do we want to pick" and/or "i want to play a caster, which will i pick"... especially the last one seems to not favor eld in many (any?) cases. Why would you decide to play a class that has a single role in a group, and that roll can be filled by another class too? Wouldn't you just pick that other class and be happy that you can switch between roles as neccessary? I know i would
1. Correct.
2. You could do that, yes. What do you reckon should the second Menta do after he applied NS (active/immu/cleared) on everyone? Which other spell does he share with the Eld?
3. Simple counter question. Would you rather eat your meal with a Fork or with a Knife in hand? Which one do you consider best: 2 Forks, 2 Knives or 1 Fork + 1 Knife?

The Goal is to make as many classes viable as possible. Regardless of the Realm. Certain classes may never be (stealthers in general) while others are staples that cannot be left out no matter what.
"The triple debuff and alternative baseline nukes are somewhat orthogonal with the intent just being to allow more compositions / casters to become viable. "
Were the changes overall too much? Maybe yes, maybe not.
The "old" setups had a lot of shortcomings, that were ...lets say "fixed"...in the new setups.

When was the last time you saw a Heat/Cold/Matter setup in Albion? Basically never. This is something that may have to be addressed in the future.
When was the last time you saw a Heat/Cold/Matter setup in Midgard? None, since the introduction of the Energy/Body/Spirit setup. Not a true Mage setup anyway, its mostly Hybrid.
When was the last time you saw a Heat/Cold/Matter setup in Hibernia? None, since the introduction of the Energy/Body/Spirit setup.

The end goal should be clear, try to make different setups for a Realm viable to compete. There are only 2 ways to accomplish that.
1. Tune down the stronger setups to the level of the weaker ones.
2. Strengthen the weaker setups to the level of the stronger ones.

Being able to hit the exact spot of equilibrium is almost impossible. You can only try.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 2:11 PM by mattymc
It really seems there is NO rhyme nor reason to so many of these balance changes......it would be nice to see what demonstrates the effectiveness of the changes. Instead we are left to wonder what actually drove them and what makes them successful -- other than certain classes whining less for a short period of time.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 2:37 PM by byron
DJ2000 wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 1:51 PM
When was the last time you saw a Heat/Cold/Matter setup in Hibernia? None, since the introduction of the Energy/Body/Spirit setup.

The end goal should be clear, try to make different setups for a Realm viable to compete. There are only 2 ways to accomplish that.
1. Tune down the stronger setups to the level of the weaker ones.
2. Strengthen the weaker setups to the level of the stronger ones.

Being able to hit the exact spot of equilibrium is almost impossible. You can only try.

I agree with that but not always adding stuff to classs less played is a good thing (especially in this case since the ench is less played thanks to the changes to the mentalist, not because it is a weak class). And since the utility is identified with CC , we have a lot of classes that can do it already very well. If you want to give, for example, more CC utility to the enchanter you should delete some CC to other classes to balance the amount of CC a group can do. Otherwise it will be unbalanced.
It's like giving Thanes (they are played more or less only in zerg and not in 8vs8 groups) a disease effect with AOE hammers and NS effect with the single instant dd. For sure they will be played a lot more in 8vs8 but the global result will not balanced.
Sometimes to give appeal to a class it is not only giving new tools but balance the game mechanic around it. And now for sure CCs are more easier in Hib than before since another class can do what other classes were already able to do. Continue to give only new CCs or snares to classes is not the only answer to give more appeal to a class. I would prefer something : do you want more control and utility ? Take a mentalist in the group but you'll give up on some damage. Do you want more damage but less utility ? Take an enchanter in the group. Btw for sure now Mid is another step far behind in CCs abilities (including pets count) and mostly of them are concentrated in few classes. And since these classes are needed (so played), it means that they are already balanced and fine ?
Tue 20 Apr 2021 2:53 PM by Sepplord
DJ2000 wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 1:51 PM
2. You could do that, yes. What do you reckon should the second Menta do after he applied NS (active/immu/cleared) on everyone? Which other spell does he share with the Eld?

3. Simple counter question. Would you rather eat your meal with a Fork or with a Knife in hand? Which one do you consider best: 2 Forks, 2 Knives or 1 Fork + 1 Knife?

3. doesn't seem to be an appropriate analogy. The answer is obviously clear, and the distinctive difference between forks/knifes is much clearer than between elds/mentas/chanters imo. If you included an option of a knife, that can morph into a fork at a small cost, then the choice would be just as obvious, but the result of the analogy would change to the opposite.

Regarding 2. that surely depends on the situation. Demezz targets in need, heal targets in need? Did you want to hear things that the menta could do that the eldritch can't? Imo it is the wrong approach. It isn't about what can the menta do that the eldritch can also. It is about what can the Eldritch do that noone else can and how does that compare to the additional stuff the menta brings. Before menta-patch it was nearsight and desease. After Menta-patch it was desease.

I don't claim to have full knowledge of what an eldritch does after applying nearsight...my 8vs8 experience in the last few years is maybe 20hours. So i appreciate some of the remarks and reminders that can sometimes be found on the forum. Sadly, mostly people only get told that they are wrong and need to git gud. Seldom is there information about what constitutes that in particular.
From my POV it seems that the eldritch CAN be the nearsighter, but Menta can do it too. Seems like it is ichor+desease+statdebuffs VS static+demezz+pet+heals+confusion
Tue 20 Apr 2021 3:02 PM by Astaa
gruenesschaf wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 11:19 AM
Tyrlaan wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 9:42 AM
With the introduction of the triple debuffs a heat debuff train (consisting of an Ench/Light Eld/Light Menta core) would have 2 spec nukes off a debuff - that´s more than any of the other realms gets (not to mention the 50% debuff where others get less). And the heat debuff train was never bad utility-wise either, 2 pets (one red-con), NS, debuffs, demezz, all classes (PB)AEs to pet clear or tower camp, NM/Ichor/ST distributed between all classes. Mid would love to have such a powerhouse combo with its three casters, and Alb with all its utility on casters has much lower utility on its support (most notably Cleric). An Alb caster group might have pets to deal with but it doesn´t come with 4+ classes that can heal, just saying...

But then these "Balance Changes" gave Mentalists (who were not lacking utility-wise even if Light spec) NS, triple debuff and an energy nuke to nuke off it, stat debuffs, a pet even if they don´t spec Light, also allowing them to spec into the major heal/mezz line instead. Yes it was that ridiculous, you could create an entirely new class off these changes instead of adding them. Everybody running body energy debuff train now instead of heat debuff train is quite telling how powerful the body energy train has been made (because the heat debuff train was never weak to begin with).

And now they´re buffing Chanters because their heat debuff got dropped out of groups? Really? Of all the classes not getting into 8v8 groups (anymore), they focussed on Chanters? Row back on the Mentalist changes perhaps?

That might be your view.

Our view is that the hp changes hit hib caster especially hard as they pretty much relied on instant blapping people and this instant blapping is precisely the reason the hp changes were made in the first place. The alb and mid caster / hybrid groups were and still are less reliant on the instant blap due to more utility / control stuff like the theurgist, bd or minstrel.

The triple debuff and alternative baseline nukes are somewhat orthogonal with the intent just being to allow more compositions / casters to become viable. The additional menta changes then were intended to make the energy train viable. These chanter changes are now aimed at making the heat train viable again which it pretty much hasn't been since the hp changes but without returning to the instant blapping via increased damage and the only way to do that is to add more control stuff.

Props for using the word 'blapping' a word under used in my opinion!
Tue 20 Apr 2021 4:35 PM by DJ2000
I don't mind a little back and forth, as long as everything is in good faith.

"Did you want to hear things that the menta could do that the eldritch can't?"
No, i have no interest in that. You are the one that wants to trade away the eld for a Mentalist. If anything, i want the other way around, what the eld can and the Menta doesn't.
How is adding more of the same better, than adding more variety/options?

Nearsight is just 1 Tool they have in common now, even though the Eld's is usually higher spec.

Let's continue with the example you brought up, that there are 2 mentalists, 1 specifically for the rupt/Ns, the other being part of the debuff assist.
AoE disease, AoE Stat debuffs (S/C and D/Q), PBaoe, AoE DD/Snare, AoE Mezz, Ichor - Mana/Light Eld
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism Menta
vs
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism Menta
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz*, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism Menta

AoE disease, AoE Stat debuffs (S/C and D/Q), PBaoe, AoE DD/Snare, AoE Mezz, Ichor - Mana/Light Eld
(high) Pet, Cure Mezz, spec DD, spec AoE DD, Static* - Light Menta
vs
(high) Pet, Cure Mezz, spec DD, spec AoE DD, Static* - Light Menta
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism/Mana Menta (no nearsight, if he goes Light to have a stable baseline DD)

It's really rather simple. The setup gains nothing of value with a 2nd Menta.
You lose a lot off options by limiting yourself with a second Menta in the setup.
The Kit of the menta, as good as it is, does barely add anything to the utility value by being 2x in it, and thus suffers by crossing the threshold of diminishing returns.
You cannot hope to control/rupt an enemy back- or frontline with a single target Nearsight spell. It matters 0 to any Melee, it's of no use if immu/cured.
The confuse spell is not practical enough to be of use (long cast time, single target) and in most cases used to get rid of Pets that are easier to dispatch with an aoe DD/pbaoe, while it already exists on the Bard.
Static in open field is almost entirely wasted, ...it can somehow work, but you would have to really reach out to construct a scenario where it could help in a meaningful way.
It really is just adding more of the same with a 2nd Mentalist.
The 2nd Mentalist simply lacks any abilities after the nearsight to do anything meaningful, that the other Mentalist cant do himself.

Thats why i brought up the analogy with using 2 forks, 2 knives.
1 of them adds a lot to the experience, but adding a second adds almost nothing.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 4:58 PM by skipari
DJ2000 wrote:
Tue 20 Apr 2021 4:35 PM
...
Let's continue with the example you brought up, that there are 2 mentalists, 1 specifically for the rupt/Ns, the other being part of the debuff assist.
AoE disease, AoE Stat debuffs (S/C and D/Q), PBaoe, AoE DD/Snare, AoE Mezz, Ichor - Mana/Light Eld
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism Menta
vs
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism Menta
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz*, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism Menta

AoE disease, AoE Stat debuffs (S/C and D/Q), PBaoe, AoE DD/Snare, AoE Mezz, Ichor - Mana/Light Eld
(high) Pet, Cure Mezz, spec DD, spec AoE DD, Static* - Light Menta
vs
(high) Pet, Cure Mezz, spec DD, spec AoE DD, Static* - Light Menta
(low) Pet, good Single Heal, Cure Mezz, single Mezz, Confuse*, Static* - Mentalism/Mana Menta (no nearsight, if he goes Light to have a stable baseline DD)
...

I tried to read this now several times, but why exactly would you do two menta mentas in an energy train? If even then it is one menta menta for the debuff itself, and a mana menta as assist buddy which provides an higher nearsight.
Also never underestimate the menta pet since it makes the menta basically CC immune, combined with the demezz itself it is on its own a heavy factor.
Tue 20 Apr 2021 5:10 PM by DJ2000
Sepplords idea/thought was to use them interchangeably, so that either one could do what the other can do.
otherwise, i wouldn't have listed it like that.
But even if mana sepc, his amount of tools would not change.

cc immune to himself /and teammates.
yeah i know. but regardless if he is or not, the (eld) role he has to accomplish does not benefit from that fact.
Wed 21 Apr 2021 7:03 AM by Sepplord
yeah, i was thinking about them respeccing (respeccs are so cheap, it is neglible comapred to having a different char and level their RR too)
I assumed you listed all combinations for completion, so both options are covered. If they are both the same specc it exacerbates your point even further

Thanks for the details and explaining that the situation isn't as bad for elds as it seemed to be from my paperdaoc POV.
Wed 21 Apr 2021 7:42 PM by Greenangel
I just done /serverinfo in prime time.

There are 40 enchanters online the 11th highest played class on at moment

at bottom

Blademaster 10

Valewalker 10

champion 13

Hero 16

Then Armsmen Mercnary both on 17

the lowest played 6 classes on server are all tanks or light tanks and bottom 4 on server are hibernia tanks in straight row

You wish to buff a class that does not seem be struggling in NUMBERS strange..

i done same later on AFTER PRIME TIME only 31 enchanter on now but only 28 mentalist in comparison with 326 hibs online. at bottom is savage with 11 then valewalker 12 champion 14 blademaster 14 armsmen 14 Hero 15 in that order at bottom
Wed 21 Apr 2021 8:01 PM by easytoremember
Greenangel wrote:
Wed 21 Apr 2021 7:42 PM
I just done /serverinfo in prime time.

There are 40 enchanters online the 11th highest played class on at moment

at bottom

Blademaster 10

Valewalker 10

champion 13

Hero 16

Then Armsmen Mercnary both on 17

the lowest played 6 classes on server are all tanks or light tanks and bottom 4 on server are hibernia tanks in straight row

You wish to buff a class that does not seem be struggling in NUMBERS strange.
someone tell the minstrels to stay offline for a few days
Wed 21 Apr 2021 8:39 PM by Ele
Greenangel wrote:
Wed 21 Apr 2021 7:42 PM
You wish to buff a class that does not seem be struggling in NUMBERS strange.

The balance changes are designed around 8vs8/gvg fights, and in those, Enchanters/hib caster groups were rarely played, because they are by far the weakest caster comp since the HP changes. The introduction of the triple debuff helped in promoting hib caster setups in general, but in basically any setup the Ench got replaced by a debuffing Menty. The latest change was an attempt to bring Ench back into Hib setups, but - at least for most EU pt groups - it looks like it didn't help. Only Pale ran Ench for one or two evenings I think and then swapped back to Eld/Eld/Menty. In Zerg/open RvR scenarios, Ench might be fine, but in 8vs8 they still lack utility when compared to other possible comps.
Thu 22 Apr 2021 12:07 AM by mattymc
Ele wrote:
Wed 21 Apr 2021 8:39 PM
Greenangel wrote:
Wed 21 Apr 2021 7:42 PM
You wish to buff a class that does not seem be struggling in NUMBERS strange.

The balance changes are designed around 8vs8/gvg fights, and in those, Enchanters/hib caster groups were rarely played, because they are by far the weakest caster comp since the HP changes. The introduction of the triple debuff helped in promoting hib caster setups in general, but in basically any setup the Ench got replaced by a debuffing Menty. The latest change was an attempt to bring Ench back into Hib setups, but - at least for most EU pt groups - it looks like it didn't help. Only Pale ran Ench for one or two evenings I think and then swapped back to Eld/Eld/Menty. In Zerg/open RvR scenarios, Ench might be fine, but in 8vs8 they still lack utility when compared to other possible comps.

While I don't doubt your logic, this is true of a ton of classes untouched or ignored .... balancing 8 is fine but it should be more of balancing 8 NOT solely for 8 v 8 --- it's not supposed to be solely an 8 v 8 game...this is the general flaw in the logic. While most of the realm 'rewards' have been neutered and it does often feel like the whole concept of RvR is being relegated to something other than the primary goal of the game; balancing this way has become a never ending tail chase given the total number of classes and realms.
Thu 22 Apr 2021 12:25 AM by gotwqqd
Greenangel wrote:
Wed 21 Apr 2021 7:42 PM
I just done /serverinfo in prime time.

There are 40 enchanters online the 11th highest played class on at moment

at bottom

Blademaster 10

Valewalker 10

champion 13

Hero 16

Then Armsmen Mercnary both on 17

the lowest played 6 classes on server are all tanks or light tanks and bottom 4 on server are hibernia tanks in straight row

You wish to buff a class that does not seem be struggling in NUMBERS strange..

i done same later on AFTER PRIME TIME only 31 enchanter on now but only 28 mentalist in comparison with 326 hibs online. at bottom is savage with 11 then valewalker 12 champion 14 blademaster 14 armsmen 14 Hero 15 in that order at bottom
Ever consider enchanters numbers are artificially high atm as players are unshelving them to check out the changes? And likely the numbers will be dropping as days go by?
Thu 22 Apr 2021 2:14 AM by gruenesschaf
mattymc wrote:
Thu 22 Apr 2021 12:07 AM
While I don't doubt your logic, this is true of a ton of classes untouched or ignored .... balancing 8 is fine but it should be more of balancing 8 NOT solely for 8 v 8 --- it's not supposed to be solely an 8 v 8 game...this is the general flaw in the logic. While most of the realm 'rewards' have been neutered and it does often feel like the whole concept of RvR is being relegated to something other than the primary goal of the game; balancing this way has become a never ending tail chase given the total number of classes and realms.

Balancing on this level for anything but a fixed and fair / the same group size is absolutely futile. Daoc happens to have a group size of 8 and hence the target for class balancing decisions is 8v8 for the most part. You can't reasonable add anything that would help in 12 vs 40 encounter and even if you could, you shouldn't.
Pretty much all changes done with 8v8 in mind don't really have an effect by themselves in larger fights, certainly not on those with uneven amounts of players on either side. The only potential effects on those fights might come from the changes shifting how much a given class is played. E. g. you might now have seen more enchanter in the recent days to check out those spells but neither the single target disease nor the single target root should by itself have any meaningful effect when outnumbered or outnumbering the enemy realm.

The zerg / keep fight relevant class changes were pretty much limited to reducing the effects of field ras, e. g. you can only be affected by one twf and one st at the same time, or reducing the effects of some ae spells, like the wizard ae dot or the general gtae / assist mechanic.
Thu 22 Apr 2021 7:05 AM by Lollie
I can understand not being able to balance around zerg warfare but maybe you could look at some small things? Heavy tanks need some touches, the 6 sec 100% melee increase to seiges on a timer would be descent, you could possibly add the ability to pass on thier 50% seige damage reduction if they are wearing a large sheild and are close enough to thier groupmates?

Also the pailintones that are furthest away from the front gate are pretty much redundant as you cant target anything, could change them to catapults or mini trebs with reduced damage?
Thu 22 Apr 2021 8:35 AM by Ele
mattymc wrote:
Thu 22 Apr 2021 12:07 AM
While I don't doubt your logic, this is true of a ton of classes untouched or ignored .... balancing 8 is fine but it should be more of balancing 8 NOT solely for 8 v 8 --- it's not supposed to be solely an 8 v 8 game...this is the general flaw in the logic. While most of the realm 'rewards' have been neutered and it does often feel like the whole concept of RvR is being relegated to something other than the primary goal of the game; balancing this way has become a never ending tail chase given the total number of classes and realms.

Thanks for your response! I'd like to add a few thoughts on one of your statements:

mattymc wrote:
Thu 22 Apr 2021 12:07 AM
[...] this is true of a ton of classes untouched or ignored [...] balancing this way has become a never ending tail chase given the total number of classes and realms.

When I take a look at /gvg list classes during EU PT, it looks like it worked. Apart from stealthers, the only classes you (almost) never see included in any kind of setup are paladin (exception: Ctrl+Alt+Canc and Blutfalken), wizard (except for Premade when trolling) and ench. In regards of balancing around the groupsize 8 and in promoting a broad variety of setups and thus classes, Devs did a pretty good job. Don't get me wrong, there are still things that are unbalanced in 8vX scenarios, like the synergies of sorc/theu (even after the pet duration nerf)/merc/merc and alb casters in general, but adjusting this without breaking the classes looks impossible to me.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 1:48 PM by Centenario
gruenesschaf wrote: Balancing on this level for anything but a fixed and fair / the same group size is absolutely futile. Daoc happens to have a group size of 8 and hence the target for class balancing decisions is 8v8 for the most part. You can't reasonable add anything that would help in 12 vs 40 encounter and even if you could, you shouldn't.
Pretty much all changes done with 8v8 in mind don't really have an effect by themselves in larger fights, certainly not on those with uneven amounts of players on either side. The only potential effects on those fights might come from the changes shifting how much a given class is played. E. g. you might now have seen more enchanter in the recent days to check out those spells but neither the single target disease nor the single target root should by itself have any meaningful effect when outnumbered or outnumbering the enemy realm.

The zerg / keep fight relevant class changes were pretty much limited to reducing the effects of field ras, e. g. you can only be affected by one twf and one st at the same time, or reducing the effects of some ae spells, like the wizard ae dot or the general gtae / assist mechanic.

When you say 8v8 do you mean à studied 8v8 or any 8v8 scenarios?
What do you consider to be an 8-man grp?
Is it?
Endo + long dur mezz + clear mezz *2 + slam + peel+ spec buff + base buff + speed + NS + s/c Debuff+ Amnesia + disease + root + bubble + all sec resists?

For hib it would mean:
Bard+menta+bm/champ/hero+Druid+warden+eld
So you get it all with 6classes including 3healers

For alb it would mean:
Sorc+minst+arms/merc+paladin+theurg+tricab/wizzearth+cleric+friar
So you need 8classes and you got only 2healers and no real caster assist.

For mid it would be:
Skald+war/thane+rm + shaman + healer + healer
So 6 classes and you got 3healers.

It’s quite clear imo that alb has to see changes to become similar to the other 2 realms: having all the necessary 8-man core abilities with 6-man team that includes 3healers.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 2:07 PM by skipari
Centenario wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 1:48 PM
For hib it would mean:
Bard+menta+bm/champ/hero+Druid+warden+eld
...
For alb it would mean:
Sorc+minst+arms/merc+paladin+theurg+tricab/wizzearth+cleric+friar
...
For mid it would be:
Skald+war/thane+rm + shaman + healer + healer

Please at least be consistent, if you field bm/champ/hero or war/thane as slam/peel then you can also write arms/merc/pala without artificial bolstering the numbers

also
Centenario wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 1:48 PM
Endo + long dur mezz + clear mezz *2 + slam + peel+ spec buff + base buff + speed + NS + s/c Debuff+ Amnesia + disease + root + bubble + all sec resists?

is a very personal amount of options, someone else would maybe add "+ petcaster" or whatever else to bolster the alb numbers just to make it look supporting the own argument.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 2:14 PM by Centenario
For example:
I could see the paladin switching between speed and endo to remove the need for minstrel.
I could see the paladin getting access to the healing line instead of the shield line.
I could see theurg getting mezz clear in wind to remove need of minstrel.
I could see the theurg getting access to NS in cold spec.
I could see the cleric getting access to instant bard-style amnesia and removing it from the sorc.
I could see the cleric getting a aoe instant and aoe casted stun and root. Instead of the smite line.
I could see the friar getting casted disease lvl 6
I could see the reaver getting disease offensive procs

We could then run:
Theurg (like rm) + Sorc + pala (some kinda warden/minst) + cleric (some kinda healer/bard)+ friar (some kinda Shaman) +arms/merc

That would be 6-man 3healing with all core abilities.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 2:24 PM by Centenario
skipari wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 2:07 PM
Please at least be consistent, if you field bm/champ/hero or war/thane as slam/peel then you can also write arms/merc/pala without artificial bolstering the numbers
I was fair and consistant.
Pala peel potential is on side/2chains and here he is filling the endo role.
Pala is vastly inferior to arms/merc/hero/skald/champ/war/zerk etc... for peel/slam.

I could see the pet removed from cab/sorc/theurg in exchange to better core skill distribution.

Also it’s a question, with my point of view added for understanding.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 3:02 PM by Magesty
Just going to drop in quickly and say that changes can easily be made to improve solo/duo/small man gameplay that don't affect 8v8 balance.

There are still a ton of dead specs/classes out there that could easily be brought to life. I'm a little disappointed that whoever is representing visible solos on the Player Council didn't speak up when the Paladin changes went through. The class is just miserable in both solo and small man play, and a buff that scales with group numbers clearly does nothing to improve that situation. In fact, it serves to actively discourage the Paladin from participating in solo/duo/small man. I'd be curious to know why this limitation was put on the abilities when the class has such obvious struggles, and even when at full power the instant heal likely wouldn't be enough to push them into fringe solo viability.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 4:17 PM by byron
Endo potions = if you are solo or grouped with max other 3 persons, you'll have the blue one like now (solos and smallmen). If you are grouped more than 4, it will give you no effects. Paladins is fixed and also a little more the DPS output betwwen the 3 realms. Next one...
Fri 23 Apr 2021 5:25 PM by Magesty
byron wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 4:17 PM
Endo potions = if you are solo or grouped with max other 3 persons, you'll have the blue one like now (solos and smallmen). If you are grouped more than 4, it will give you no effects. Paladins is fixed and also a little more the DPS output betwwen the 3 realms. Next one...

Im not sure I even understand what you’re trying to say, but if I’m guessing right I think you are completely off base.

Making Paladins’ desirability tied to being an endurance regen bot isn’t good design. If anything, changes should be made to move as far away from this strategy as possible. Why, when the design space is nearly unlimited, would you seek to make a boring and weak class a necessary inclusion for a group to function? Both the group and the Paladin player should feel good about what the class brings to the table. It shouldn’t a situation where people find themselves asking, “okay, who has to play the Paladin? We have to have end regen.”

Plus, in no way does this address Paladins’ problems in solo and small man.

There is definitely a conversation to be had regarding why the class didn’t receive more meaningful buffs/abilities above and beyond weaponskill once it was decided that endurance potions would be this powerful. It was clear from the day that decision was made that the class would be nearly useless.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 5:42 PM by ExcretusMaximus
byron wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 4:17 PM
Endo potions = if you are solo or grouped with max other 3 persons, you'll have the blue one like now (solos and smallmen). If you are grouped more than 4, it will give you no effects. Paladins is fixed and also a little more the DPS output betwwen the 3 realms. Next one...

Your fix for Paladins makes twisting on Bard mandatory, which means Hib groups are more vulnerable to initial CC than the other two realms.
Fri 23 Apr 2021 9:06 PM by mattymc
gruenesschaf wrote:
Thu 22 Apr 2021 2:14 AM
mattymc wrote:
Thu 22 Apr 2021 12:07 AM
While I don't doubt your logic, this is true of a ton of classes untouched or ignored .... balancing 8 is fine but it should be more of balancing 8 NOT solely for 8 v 8 --- it's not supposed to be solely an 8 v 8 game...this is the general flaw in the logic. While most of the realm 'rewards' have been neutered and it does often feel like the whole concept of RvR is being relegated to something other than the primary goal of the game; balancing this way has become a never ending tail chase given the total number of classes and realms.

Balancing on this level for anything but a fixed and fair / the same group size is absolutely futile. Daoc happens to have a group size of 8 and hence the target for class balancing decisions is 8v8 for the most part. You can't reasonable add anything that would help in 12 vs 40 encounter and even if you could, you shouldn't.
Pretty much all changes done with 8v8 in mind don't really have an effect by themselves in larger fights, certainly not on those with uneven amounts of players on either side. The only potential effects on those fights might come from the changes shifting how much a given class is played. E. g. you might now have seen more enchanter in the recent days to check out those spells but neither the single target disease nor the single target root should by itself have any meaningful effect when outnumbered or outnumbering the enemy realm.

The zerg / keep fight relevant class changes were pretty much limited to reducing the effects of field ras, e. g. you can only be affected by one twf and one st at the same time, or reducing the effects of some ae spells, like the wizard ae dot or the general gtae / assist mechanic.

Agree to disagree ---- your basically making groups by adding specific changes promoting classes and, in effect, diminishing other <classes> rather than looking at abilities and ensuring abilities and counters are available across the realms thereby making folks choose and adjust --- granted a much harder proposition. Additionally, when you focus your balance on specifically an 8 man fight, which is virtually ALWAYS Open field, less AOE oriented and more CC dependent, you do tend to ignore the Realm War --- which is now governed more by PvE of keeps and task completion rather than fighting large scale fights <which it should be>much more in need of AOE and PBAOE. Ultimately it IS your game, but it certainly seems that there is a hugely narrow view taken of what is actual balance in the 8 v 8 world and what MOE's you choose to use to make and/or rescind changes.
Sat 24 Apr 2021 6:31 AM by gruenesschaf
mattymc wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 9:06 PM
Agree to disagree ---- your basically making groups by adding specific changes promoting classes and, in effect, diminishing other <classes> rather than looking at abilities and ensuring abilities and counters are available across the realms thereby making folks choose and adjust --- granted a much harder proposition. Additionally, when you focus your balance on specifically an 8 man fight, which is virtually ALWAYS Open field, less AOE oriented and more CC dependent, you do tend to ignore the Realm War --- which is now governed more by PvE of keeps and task completion rather than fighting large scale fights <which it should be>much more in need of AOE and PBAOE. Ultimately it IS your game, but it certainly seems that there is a hugely narrow view taken of what is actual balance in the 8 v 8 world and what MOE's you choose to use to make and/or rescind changes.

Any change to a class is either directly "promoting" that class, that's called a buff, which given that we that we don't have unlimited group slots is obviously going to diminish other classes or it is a direct diminishing of a class, also called a nerf, which at the same time is a promotion for all other classes (that fit the setup / role) of that realm in terms of groupability.
That's neither unexpected, surprising or anything really.

In terms of balancing about the availability of abilities and counters, that's also nonsensical if one setup has counters to abilities only available in setups that aren't run at all because those setups aren't run as while they might have unique / nice abilities, they might still be lacking in general. This general lack or being in general too good is precisely what we are working on.

In terms of ignoring the realm war, again nothing can reasonably be done to further help in 20vs40 fights or similar settings. The tools to win these engagements exist, the tools to counter these tools exist as well, there really isn't a need to introduce new things helping smaller groups vs larger groups like for example bainshee ae bolts or warlock chambered pbae or banelord / reaverbombs would do.
Sat 24 Apr 2021 8:34 AM by Centenario
gruenesschaf wrote:
Sat 24 Apr 2021 6:31 AM
In terms of balancing about the availability of abilities and counters, that's also nonsensical if one setup has counters to abilities only available in setups that aren't run at all because those setups aren't run as whilethey might have unique / nice abilities, they might still be lacking in general. This general lack or being in general too good is precisely what we are working on.
Example how do you counter an Get Mezzed - Purge - SoS - MoC +Celerity - AoE Stun, while healer in back is curing NS and spamming amnesia, while shaman is spamming diseases if he doesn’t have to heal.

Let’s say the same situation on alb.
We all get mezzed, we purge and SoS we just have to run away, cause we don’t have celerity to clear fast as melee. We have useless cleric/friar in the back that cannot do anything except heal and cannot get away from sticking target (no instant mezz/root/stun) and no instant pbaoe disease or even nothing’s to cast from range to interrupt or prepare for inc as a friar.
Sat 24 Apr 2021 10:42 AM by keen
Centenario wrote:
Sat 24 Apr 2021 8:34 AM
gruenesschaf wrote:
Sat 24 Apr 2021 6:31 AM
In terms of balancing about the availability of abilities and counters, that's also nonsensical if one setup has counters to abilities only available in setups that aren't run at all because those setups aren't run as whilethey might have unique / nice abilities, they might still be lacking in general. This general lack or being in general too good is precisely what we are working on.
Example how do you counter an Get Mezzed - Purge - SoS - MoC +Celerity - AoE Stun, while healer in back is curing NS and spamming amnesia, while shaman is spamming diseases if he doesn’t have to heal.

Let’s say the same situation on alb.
We all get mezzed, we purge and SoS we just have to run away, cause we don’t have celerity to clear fast as melee. We have useless cleric/friar in the back that cannot do anything except heal and cannot get away from sticking target (no instant mezz/root/stun) and no instant pbaoe disease or even nothing’s to cast from range to interrupt or prepare for inc as a friar.
Watch streams, there are several 8men streaming almost every night. Not sure what you expect here. You seem so far away from running 8men, maybe it's just not the playstyle for you.
Sat 24 Apr 2021 1:22 PM by byron
Magesty wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 5:25 PM
Im not sure I even understand what you’re trying to say, but if I’m guessing right I think you are completely off base.

Making Paladins’ desirability tied to being an endurance regen bot isn’t good design. If anything, changes should be made to move as far away from this strategy as possible. Why, when the design space is nearly unlimited, would you seek to make a boring and weak class a necessary inclusion for a group to function? Both the group and the Paladin player should feel good about what the class brings to the table. It shouldn’t a situation where people find themselves asking, “okay, who has to play the Paladin? We have to have end regen.”


This change will make Paladins necessary as it should be since it is the class choosen by Mhytic to be the end regen class in Albion, here a potion has taken the place over a class and it is not correct both for that class and for the balance over other groups of other realms. It should be the first step to make paladin necessary. Then, when it will be played more there is the possibility to evaluate if this class needs additional changes or not (like giving him a snare style in the crush line or something like that).

ExcretusMaximus wrote: Your fix for Paladins makes twisting on Bard mandatory, which means Hib groups are more vulnerable to initial CC than the other two realms.


It should be like that as design... then a Bard as 2000 range instant amnesia.

Then this is my personal opinion and I don't pretend to have the absolute right here but in Mid shaman is necessary (it is the primary buffer class and it is one of the few that has some CCs), while in the other two realms the end potion canceled a class (Paladin) or make playing another one more easier (Bard). It's like giving only to Midgard a powerful buff potions so that a Mid group can play without shaman and invite another healer/sm/rm/etc.. without having any downside... it will be wrong.
Sun 25 Apr 2021 11:00 AM by Siouxsie
Lollie wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:56 PM
Algarakai wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:30 PM
And on Midgard??
Any changes??

The devs read this and looked at each and said "whats a Midgard?"

Probably no actual Midgard players on the council, or if there are, they are secretly Alb and Hib players.
Sun 25 Apr 2021 2:22 PM by Sagz
Siouxsie wrote:
Sun 25 Apr 2021 11:00 AM
Lollie wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 2:56 PM
Algarakai wrote:
Mon 19 Apr 2021 12:30 PM
And on Midgard??
Any changes??

The devs read this and looked at each and said "whats a Midgard?"

Probably no actual Midgard players on the council, or if there are, they are secretly Alb and Hib players.

I agree. There has been 1 major flaw with Midgard that has been around since the beginning of this server, and it has NEVER been addressed.

Midgard is the ONLY realm than cannot field a group with all of the same race! (unless of course you dont want a shammy/healer/skald in your group).

Total nerf by the devs!

Dwarf shamans matter!
Sun 25 Apr 2021 3:23 PM by Tyrlaan
gruenesschaf wrote:
Sat 24 Apr 2021 6:31 AM
In terms of balancing about the availability of abilities and counters, that's also nonsensical if one setup has counters to abilities only available in setups that aren't run at all because those setups aren't run as while they might have unique / nice abilities, they might still be lacking in general. This general lack or being in general too good is precisely what we are working on.

In terms of ignoring the realm war, again nothing can reasonably be done to further help in 20vs40 fights or similar settings. The tools to win these engagements exist, the tools to counter these tools exist as well, there really isn't a need to introduce new things helping smaller groups vs larger groups like for example bainshee ae bolts or warlock chambered pbae or banelord / reaverbombs would do.

Actually there is quite the imbalance in 40vs40, 80vs80 or similar fights, with Mid trailing in AoE RAs/damage and Hib massively overpowered in any keep setting (Chanters are pretty strong there, fyi, about 3.14x stronger than the Theurgists you nerfed). Nobody likes to go against a defended Hib keep for many reasons and Hib is the only realm which can comfortably hold more than their own relics (and has done so for most of this server´s existence) even if it has the other two realm BGs roaming in their frontier and a 20+% RP bonus (from supposedly being underpopulated).

Also you´re kinda contradicting yourself here because "the tools to win these engagements exist" applied well before handing out extra abilities to make strong classes even stronger (e.g. Hib casters already had a class they could have included to body/energy debuff if they wanted to, there´s plenty roots and disease in Hib more than in other realms etc). They have not enough impact though if they aren´t run (like on otherwise bland classes or specs or are straight inferior to other realm counterparts you buffed) or the enemy still has double the archers, stun debuff nukes, AoE interrupts, PBAE or healing on less players.
Sun 25 Apr 2021 4:01 PM by Sagz
Tyrlaan wrote:
Sun 25 Apr 2021 3:23 PM
gruenesschaf wrote:
Sat 24 Apr 2021 6:31 AM
In terms of ignoring the realm war, again nothing can reasonably be done to further help in 20vs40 fights or similar settings. The tools to win these engagements exist, the tools to counter these tools exist as well, there really isn't a need to introduce new things helping smaller groups vs larger groups like for example bainshee ae bolts or warlock chambered pbae or banelord / reaverbombs would do.

Actually there is quite the imbalance in 40vs40, 80vs80 or similar fights, with Mid trailing in AoE RAs/damage and Hib massively overpowered in any keep setting (Chanters are pretty strong there, fyi). Nobody likes to go against a defended Hib keep for many reasons and Hib is the only realm which can comfortably hold more than their own relics (and has done so for most of this server´s existence) even if it has the other two realm BGs roaming in their frontier and a 20+% RP bonus (from supposedly being underpopulated).

Open field albs win (in numbers are close to equal), the range is soo much better. I would beg to differ though for the Hibs, while enchanters are nice n all, Mids ST and aoe stun > Hibs in defending a tower/keep fight. And until the GTAOE change, Albs dominated keeps/towers because of the amount of wizards in a BG.

Every realm has its advantages and disadvantages, just have to learn how to adapt.
Sun 25 Apr 2021 8:41 PM by Ceen
Reading this thread I approve changes are done by the staff and not by the average forum warrior

Good entertainment though.
Tue 27 Apr 2021 3:04 PM by brandonb
Noashakra wrote:
Sun 18 Apr 2021 9:27 AM
Pet demez is nice.
Disease seems ok, the root we have to see.
Funny to have people already complaining about cabalist not being up
How many hib caster with enchanter do you see in 8vs8 and gvg?

Not very many. How many actual 8v8 and gvg do you even see anymore? It's mostly zerg siege and in THOSE I see a lot of enchanters... Why justify making a class too strong with "well people don't play it" FYI I am not saying this is making enchanter OP but it seems to a pretty hefty buff there.
Tue 27 Apr 2021 7:33 PM by jonny290
What are the range limits (from pet and caster) on the new root/disease spells? Not in charplan yet.
Tue 27 Apr 2021 10:50 PM by Tyrlaan
Sagz wrote:
Sun 25 Apr 2021 4:01 PM
Every realm has its advantages and disadvantages, just have to learn how to adapt.

That´s kind of an empty statement. If every realm has its advantages and disadvantages, why change something and not ask people to adapt instead?

I adapt by playing Hib more. It´s one thing to see the realm get buff after buff but the denial displayed in this thread when called out for reasons is disheartening.

Especially if the people defending this shit don´t even know about the Chanter instant interrupt or downplay the strength of the class...
Wed 28 Apr 2021 12:11 AM by gotwqqd
Considering the absence of wide scale complaints on the forums I’d say the changers to enchanter are fine.
Wed 28 Apr 2021 7:25 AM by Centenario
People will have to understand that we let those change go through because we expect to get some changes to our classes too.
I don’t mind to buff enchanter, I hope that cabalistique will be buffed next.
Wed 28 Apr 2021 9:50 AM by DJ2000
Centenario wrote:
Wed 28 Apr 2021 7:25 AM
People will have to understand that we let those change go through because we expect to get some changes to our classes too.

? ? ?

What are you referring too?
Wed 28 Apr 2021 7:43 PM by Centenario
In my opinion the Devs have planned to change a few things, and just drop them little by little, check the feedback and react.
I think to buff enchanter is okay, cause I believe alb and mid will get their buffs too sometimes soon.
Already root on bard, and no nerf to double instant amnesia must mean that alb & mid will receive substantial buffs sometimes soon.
Now another buff to hib, makes it even more likely that alb and mid will be buffed soon.
Alb also received a nerf to wiz, so even more likely to receive a buff on alb!
I can’t wait to see how they plan to raise alb and mid to hib levels ^^ it will most likely be an earthquake change seeing how hib is so over the top now.
Ranger are best Archers.
Bard are best mezzer.
Hib casters are fully complementary and interchangeable too!
They have bubble on a healing class too!
Animist are so much better than necro or reaver in rvr!
Champ is great compared to paladin and thane.

Sounds like a ton of buffs are coming to alb IMO and I’m excited, can’t wait to read them!
Wed 28 Apr 2021 10:19 PM by skipari
So i had finally a chance to see it in action, and i think a precisly timed npc disease is too much. Even if i think that the ench itself is okay, i wouldn't mind some other ability instead of the disease since the armsrace somewhat force a buff on it to compete the menta.
Thu 29 Apr 2021 6:14 AM by Sepplord
Centenario wrote:
Wed 28 Apr 2021 7:43 PM
I think to buff enchanter is okay, cause I believe alb and mid will get their buffs too sometimes soon.

That's what many thought, but the balancing cycle so far hasn't worked that way...
and the explanations regarding the menta/ench buffs were always: Hibernia doesn't have many groups in 8vs8 so they need buffs

i wouldn't hold my breath if i were you, especially regarding alb buffs. There were tons of class specific buffs in albion and albgrps have historically been and still are by far the strongest 8man-setups (at least according to hear say). Midgard mostly got buffed in the general changes that affected all realms, but 8man people told me that some of those buffs favored midgard the most. Midgard also got celerange and also has a few classes with specific custom changes.
Thu 29 Apr 2021 10:36 AM by Centenario
Sepplord wrote:
Thu 29 Apr 2021 6:14 AM
i wouldn't hold my breath if i were you, especially regarding alb buffs. There were tons of class specific buffs in albion and albgrps have historically been and still are by far the strongest 8man-setups (at least according to hear say).

I would like them to change Theurgist - Paladin - Sorc - Cleric - Friar:

Theurgist
Apparently Theurg is strong in combination with Sorc because Sorc can use spec AoE Mezz at 1875 range and then from 2000 range, the Theurg will throw pets 3 pets on the target, while being unreachable.
Theurg is also in the back with Bubble running, has haste buff and damage add buff.
Can also throw in some DD in the assist.
The problem with Theurg is that he has the bubble so is almost necessary for 8v8 - this means that the 2k range pets will be there in every fight.
The Theurg is one of the priority target of the opposing party, together with Sorc (demezz, CC, Amnezia, Assist Matter) and Earth Wizard(NS, Assist Matter)
One way to make it easier to fight against alb would be to concentrate more of the power on one class.
If Theurg would have NS, then Alb might not be running Earth Wizz anymore and move toward a more hybrid melee compo, instead of assist Matter.
The Sorc will also have to debuff cold, for the Theurg and maybe a Reaver or an Ice Wizz.
You would take out the Sorc from the assist matter/body.
Also if the NS is in the cold line, the Theurg will have to choose between high bubble and cold assist/higher NS.
Finally if the Theurg would have cure mezz at 28 Air spec, like a mentalist he would be more enclined to go 3-spec.
A theurg with 35 earth - 28 Air and 29 Ice with cure mezz, blue bubble, and blue NS could see his pet cast range reduced to 1875, maybe have the higher lvl pet spells have higher cast range, from 1500(rank1) to 2000(rank7).

By giving cure mezz to Theurg we could explore alb not running a minstrel:
This would mean that somebody else needs minstrel speed 5 and SoS instead.

Paladin
Give Paladin access to Speed 5 and SoS instead of Minstrel
The speed 5 should work like the endo chant, meaning you can either twist endo and speed or just run speed while moving (with endo pot for sprinting) and endo while in combat.
Paladin is a poor peeler like the minstrel and the Reaver. He is close to the warden on mid, and similar to a non-hammer skald on mid.
The paladin would become similar to a warden, you'd have to lower his damage table to 18 like warden.
You'd have to remove the paladin shield line, so no longer best PvE tank, and no longer slambot. So that Merc/Arms are still needed for physical stun and peeljob.
Give him instead a healing line.

The difference with Warden would be that he has access to two-handed weapon, to the twisting mechanic, he would not be able to buff, but he would have access to SoS and speed 5.

Friar
The Friar would be very similar to Paladin now, except that he wields a staff instead of 2-handed weapon, and he can buff/resists.
Friar also doesnt have speed/SoS.
The Friar should move more toward the shaman/valewalker/champion: instant roots/diseases, offensive disease proc
The friar should really have something to do from range, as he can be the only second healer in a group (cleric+friar) and compared to shaman/healer/bard/druid/cleric (not warden) he is lacking from range.
I would suggest to remove amnesia from the sorc, who already has plenty to do.
Instead give casted or instant (like bard) amnesia ability to the friar.
Valewalker like disease proc.
Champion like instant snare.
Bard like double instant amnesia.


The friar would become a 1v1 killing machine, with snare + heal + amnesia + offensive proc disease, to counter this killing machine status he would need to be nerfed offensively or defensively: evade chance or damage table or growth rates or anytime styles. or make some abilities require higher point investments.
You'd also remove the offensive heal proc.
Then compared to shaman he will become a lot more OP. This means that Shaman could become the target of a similar style buff.

Sorcerer
Removed amnesia to give it to the friar instead.
I would also remove all forms of roots from the sorcerer. Instead I would give it casted stun "hib-caster style," or "cleric-like"
The cleric is not supposed to move to 1500 range to become part of the caster assist, and the sorc should instead manage the s/c debuff and casted stun if needed. Also since minstrel isnt supposed to be part of 8-man anymore, alb would lose the on-cd insta magic stun of the minst.

Cleric
Cleric smite line is very poor.
The instant pbaoe mezz is lackluster compared to healer instant or casted aoe stun, or instant mezz or casted root. Or compared to druid roots.
The best would be for alb to run Pala(33rejuv)-Friar(40 rejuv)-Cleric(42buff-heal)
To make the cleric smite line worth something, you'd need to give him some survivability to melee train inc, which Friar/paladin would not have.
The best would be for the cleric to just get access to some baseline spells in smite line, maybe move the instant pbaoe mezz to baseline, and give him targeted root like druid/healer.

Group would become:
Core Grp (3 healing classes)
1. Pala = 2nd or 3rd healer /endo bot/speed bot/poor peelz/no more slam or guard
2. Theurg = 2nd demezz/assist cold or spirit/NS/bubble
3. Sorc= Mezz/no more roots/scdebuff/magicstun/assist matter/body
4. Friar = Resist/buff/Heal/CureNS/Amnesia
5. Cleric = Could maybe become Assist spirit if pala and friar handle the healing.
6. Arms/Merc = Guard/peelz

2 Mix spots like other realms.
Cabalist for disease & assist & some NS & root debuff spirit/body/energy
Wizard matter/cold assist & some NS & root, debuff matter/heat/cold
Minstrel for interrupt and 3rd demezz and double SoS.
Reaver for coldtrain/guard/slam
Necro for assist spirit/debuff AF
Another Merc/Arms
Thu 29 Apr 2021 11:00 AM by Blitze
44thrust Pala is a good peeler
Thu 29 Apr 2021 11:55 AM by inoeth
theurg buff and pala with speed+sos
trolololol
Thu 29 Apr 2021 12:32 PM by byron
inoeth wrote:
Thu 29 Apr 2021 11:55 AM
theurg buff and pala with speed+sos
trolololol

I would increase mezz range of sorcs to 4000 units, 1 time every 10 they loose the first mezz war on inc so they need to be buffed too. Since Paladins will receive speed 5, I would suggest also to give access to lvl 75 pets to ministrels so they can remain competitive.
Thu 29 Apr 2021 2:33 PM by Centenario
Blitze wrote:
Thu 29 Apr 2021 11:00 AM
44thrust Pala is a good peeler
Good peel is back-peel or anytime peel or front-peel.
2-style chain peel with no hit bonus is bad peel.
Thu 29 Apr 2021 10:57 PM by Tyrlaan
Centenario wrote:
Thu 29 Apr 2021 2:33 PM
Blitze wrote:
Thu 29 Apr 2021 11:00 AM
44thrust Pala is a good peeler
Good peel is back-peel or anytime peel or front-peel.
2-style chain peel with no hit bonus is bad peel.
It´s a long duration peel but it isn´t a Paladin only thing.

Also the fact that heavy tanks already get good defensive group RAs (on top of being stoicism and higher dps tanks) kinda treads on Paladin turf (who are also one of the 2 hybrids not getting a good offensive CC-like RA like ST, TWF, Ichor - heck even the supposedly more defensive more healy Warden gets one - while Friars can´t really make use of ST as much as slam tanks, baseline stun debuff nukers or aoe dps classes can).

And I have yet to see changes which give Paladins a niche (outside PvE) where they are a class people want to play/include. The spells only useful in groups of 8 left me shaking my head when Paladins have little place in every form of RvR (solo, smallman, BG alike).
Fri 30 Apr 2021 3:55 PM by mattymc
gruenesschaf wrote:
Sat 24 Apr 2021 6:31 AM
mattymc wrote:
Fri 23 Apr 2021 9:06 PM
Agree to disagree ---- your basically making groups by adding specific changes promoting classes and, in effect, diminishing other <classes> rather than looking at abilities and ensuring abilities and counters are available across the realms thereby making folks choose and adjust --- granted a much harder proposition. Additionally, when you focus your balance on specifically an 8 man fight, which is virtually ALWAYS Open field, less AOE oriented and more CC dependent, you do tend to ignore the Realm War --- which is now governed more by PvE of keeps and task completion rather than fighting large scale fights <which it should be>much more in need of AOE and PBAOE. Ultimately it IS your game, but it certainly seems that there is a hugely narrow view taken of what is actual balance in the 8 v 8 world and what MOE's you choose to use to make and/or rescind changes.

Any change to a class is either directly "promoting" that class, that's called a buff, which given that we that we don't have unlimited group slots is obviously going to diminish other classes or it is a direct diminishing of a class, also called a nerf, which at the same time is a promotion for all other classes (that fit the setup / role) of that realm in terms of groupability.
That's neither unexpected, surprising or anything really.

In terms of balancing about the availability of abilities and counters, that's also nonsensical if one setup has counters to abilities only available in setups that aren't run at all because those setups aren't run as while they might have unique / nice abilities, they might still be lacking in general. This general lack or being in general too good is precisely what we are working on.

In terms of ignoring the realm war, again nothing can reasonably be done to further help in 20vs40 fights or similar settings. The tools to win these engagements exist, the tools to counter these tools exist as well, there really isn't a need to introduce new things helping smaller groups vs larger groups like for example bainshee ae bolts or warlock chambered pbae or banelord / reaverbombs would do.

It's your game --- that is clear and I see nothing much is going to change your mind., regardless of the state of the game. If you actually think the stated methods are the only way to change the realm war, then perhaps you should expand your horizons.
Sat 1 May 2021 10:49 AM by Arkeon
Centenario wrote:
Wed 28 Apr 2021 7:43 PM
In my opinion the Devs have planned to change a few things, and just drop them little by little, check the feedback and react.
I think to buff enchanter is okay, cause I believe alb and mid will get their buffs too sometimes soon.
Already root on bard, and no nerf to double instant amnesia must mean that alb & mid will receive substantial buffs sometimes soon.
Now another buff to hib, makes it even more likely that alb and mid will be buffed soon.
Alb also received a nerf to wiz, so even more likely to receive a buff on alb!
I can’t wait to see how they plan to raise alb and mid to hib levels ^^ it will most likely be an earthquake change seeing how hib is so over the top now.
Ranger are best Archers.
Bard are best mezzer.
Hib casters are fully complementary and interchangeable too!
They have bubble on a healing class too!
Animist are so much better than necro or reaver in rvr!
Champ is great compared to paladin and thane.

Sounds like a ton of buffs are coming to alb IMO and I’m excited, can’t wait to read them!

I hope you are right, but also that it happens very soon considering the current situation.
Sat 1 May 2021 11:17 AM by Tyrlaan
Nah expect more Chanter buffs because this change is not gonna accomplish their goal of more Chanters in 8v8 groups. Can only be cynical at this point.
Too much is gained by going the body/energy debuff route, Mentalists and Mana Elds, debuffs for Animists and all CC but baseline stuns, tanglers all over the place etc.
No way some pet spells are gonna make people switch back to heat debuff trains. It made Chanters much more powerful solo and in smallmans however.

I wonder when Alb and Mid are gonna get a con debuff now that all Hib casters can stat debuff (for a higher delve than some remaining points in Void offered). I wonder when Alb and Mid get at least some stun debuff nuker now that Hib is handed out roots. When will Alb and Mid duos and trios get the same utility as Bard+X (add class you recently packed with dps and utility). When will Clerics, Shamans and Skalds get something to close the utility gap to the 3 Naturalist group core? Where´s Mid´s 2nd NS class (not that Wizards play much of a role in 8v8, unlike Mentalists and Elds). Why were Earth Wizards and Runecarvers nerfed?

There was some idea and delicate balance behind differences between realms. That seems lost. But obviously Hib can have plenty relics for most of the time and easily defend them and still gonna get buffs under the guise of balance changes because it is ultra-important that Chanters get a 8v8 group slot.
Sat 1 May 2021 6:45 PM by Tyrlaan
TBH all it needs for the Chanter to see a return to 8v8 is to remove at least the triple debuff from Mentalists.

After the addition of the mana base DDs, the Void Eld pretty much offers the Darkcarver skillset (bolts, GTAE, AoE damage as well as being a debuffer for their own and group´s base DDs with a lowlevel NS to rupt) plus AoE disease, Ichor and the stat debuffs the other Hib casters didn´t have. That is a balanced class with a purpose in BG RvR and 8mans (before all this power creep Darkcarvers were actually on the stronger side of casters and popular for their versatility). But it certainly can´t compete with that other class that after all these changes provides the same debuff to base DDs (and CC), a higher NS... and major heals and mezz and demezz and a pet as well as gaining the Void Eld stat debuffs.

The Mana Chanter/Light Eld/Light Menta combo is far from weak and also got stronger with the changes allowing 2 spec and 1 base DDs off the debuff - the Light Menta also gained a lowlevel NS to rupt. But I sure hope you´re not trying to elevate it to beyond current Hib body/energy train levels. The amount of utility added to Hib casters is insane for how much they get on their Naturalists already. Delicate balance, affecting more than just 8v8.
Sun 2 May 2021 12:28 AM by Babajaga
Centenario wrote:
Thu 29 Apr 2021 2:33 PM
Blitze wrote:
Thu 29 Apr 2021 11:00 AM
44thrust Pala is a good peeler
Good peel is back-peel or anytime peel or front-peel.
2-style chain peel with no hit bonus is bad peel.

Good peel is a long duration peel.

And tbh, 90% of melee peeler on phoenix are fuckn bad.
Snaring right after slam is pointless and useless.
Mon 3 May 2021 5:35 AM by averok83
Enchanters with , stun , root, disease, speed, pet, self DD debuff are unkillable by most classes w/o slam Like friars for exampke. They stun you, you puge, than root + disease and finally kite you and kill Easy.

That class was already OP in solo before, now Is a rofl dumb class.

Reconsider those chsnges. Are not balanced.
Mon 3 May 2021 7:00 AM by Irkeno
Honestly it puts chanters up at BD levels of mind numbingly dumb overpoweredness for soloing but thats not what the change is for and I’d guess soloing would be considered acceptable collateral damage at some point.
Tue 4 May 2021 3:08 PM by Magesty
Irkeno wrote:
Mon 3 May 2021 7:00 AM
Honestly it puts chanters up at BD levels of mind numbingly dumb overpoweredness for soloing but thats not what the change is for and I’d guess soloing would be considered acceptable collateral damage at some point.

I'm assuming comparing Enchanters to BDs is hyperbole, but there is no question that solo play is acceptable collateral damage.

That is to say, visible solo play is acceptable collateral damage. I'm sure assassins are quite pleased at the prospect of a few more people foolishly trying to solo on a caster for a couple of days until they realize how miserable it is with the current solo class distribution.

The devs have stated their main concern is balancing around 8v8 as a baseline. There is no getting around that, and, as much as I disagree with it (and think I can make a convincing case as to why it is a poor decision), it isn't an unreasonable position to take.

As a visible who played through Mythic/EAs attempts to balance around 8 man play on the OG classic servers let me tell you the types of changes the Phoenix team are implementing are far less damaging to solo balance than they could be. Sure getting insta gibbed by small mans with two casters is really stupid, and these Enchanter changes are obviously pretty toxic if you're caught by one in an open area, but at least they aren't trying to cram every class into a DPS role by giving them proc styles. THAT is disruptive to solo play.

I suppose "it could be worse" isn't the best consolation, but man, it could be, and has been, a lot worse.
Wed 5 May 2021 5:58 PM by Astaa
16 pages of arguing over yet more caster changes/boosts.
Sat 8 May 2021 11:58 PM by mattymc
Magesty wrote:
Tue 4 May 2021 3:08 PM
Irkeno wrote:
Mon 3 May 2021 7:00 AM
Honestly it puts chanters up at BD levels of mind numbingly dumb overpoweredness for soloing but thats not what the change is for and I’d guess soloing would be considered acceptable collateral damage at some point.

I'm assuming comparing Enchanters to BDs is hyperbole, but there is no question that solo play is acceptable collateral damage.

That is to say, visible solo play is acceptable collateral damage. I'm sure assassins are quite pleased at the prospect of a few more people foolishly trying to solo on a caster for a couple of days until they realize how miserable it is with the current solo class distribution.

The devs have stated their main concern is balancing around 8v8 as a baseline. There is no getting around that, and, as much as I disagree with it (and think I can make a convincing case as to why it is a poor decision), it isn't an unreasonable position to take.

As a visible who played through Mythic/EAs attempts to balance around 8 man play on the OG classic servers let me tell you the types of changes the Phoenix team are implementing are far less damaging to solo balance than they could be. Sure getting insta gibbed by small mans with two casters is really stupid, and these Enchanter changes are obviously pretty toxic if you're caught by one in an open area, but at least they aren't trying to cram every class into a DPS role by giving them proc styles. THAT is disruptive to solo play.

I suppose "it could be worse" isn't the best consolation, but man, it could be, and has been, a lot worse.

They are balancing around 8 v 8 and foregoing ANYTHING else and there are fantastic arguments against it --- Mythic/EA balanced using 8 as the model but , initially, balanced around RvR --- a more ability and counter approach --- which they did ok until they, too, abandoned it. It's their game but it's not really DAOC -- it's just an 8/small fight in a DAOC world.
Sun 9 May 2021 5:56 AM by ExcretusMaximus
mattymc wrote:
Sat 8 May 2021 11:58 PM
They are balancing around 8 v 8 and foregoing ANYTHING else and there are fantastic arguments against it --- Mythic/EA balanced using 8 as the model but , initially, balanced around RvR --- a more ability and counter approach --- which they did ok until they, too, abandoned it. It's their game but it's not really DAOC -- it's just an 8/small fight in a DAOC world.

8v8 is the only world where balance exists, because it's the only world where the numbers are the same and it's about class abilities and player skill.

If you can't understand that, well, there's no hope for you.

And if you hate the server so much, leave.
Sun 9 May 2021 8:43 AM by easytoremember
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Sun 9 May 2021 5:56 AM
mattymc wrote:
Sat 8 May 2021 11:58 PM
They are balancing around 8 v 8 and foregoing ANYTHING else and there are fantastic arguments against it --- Mythic/EA balanced using 8 as the model but , initially, balanced around RvR --- a more ability and counter approach --- which they did ok until they, too, abandoned it. It's their game but it's not really DAOC -- it's just an 8/small fight in a DAOC world.

8v8 is the only world where balance exists, because it's the only world where the numbers are the same and it's about class abilities and player skill.

If you can't understand that, well, there's no hope for you.
the amount of times any phoenix zerg has been comprised of 8mans is 0. The doublethink brought on by '8man' is treating most full groups as if they are running optimal setups where the pool of online players never permits it. Whether or not centering things around the practical 8-slot group is the best approach I don't know, but it's absolutely not the only means of balance in DAoC because of the nature of RvR
Sun 9 May 2021 5:53 PM by Siouxsie
Tyrlaan wrote:
Sat 1 May 2021 11:17 AM
Nah expect more Chanter buffs because this change is not gonna accomplish their goal of more Chanters in 8v8 groups. Can only be cynical at this point.
Too much is gained by going the body/energy debuff route, Mentalists and Mana Elds, debuffs for Animists and all CC but baseline stuns, tanglers all over the place etc.
No way some pet spells are gonna make people switch back to heat debuff trains. It made Chanters much more powerful solo and in smallmans however.

I wonder when Alb and Mid are gonna get a con debuff now that all Hib casters can stat debuff (for a higher delve than some remaining points in Void offered). I wonder when Alb and Mid get at least some stun debuff nuker now that Hib is handed out roots. When will Alb and Mid duos and trios get the same utility as Bard+X (add class you recently packed with dps and utility). When will Clerics, Shamans and Skalds get something to close the utility gap to the 3 Naturalist group core? Where´s Mid´s 2nd NS class (not that Wizards play much of a role in 8v8, unlike Mentalists and Elds). Why were Earth Wizards and Runecarvers nerfed?

There was some idea and delicate balance behind differences between realms. That seems lost. But obviously Hib can have plenty relics for most of the time and easily defend them and still gonna get buffs under the guise of balance changes because it is ultra-important that Chanters get a 8v8 group slot.

I'd argue that Alb is still pretty overpowered in a lot of situations, but, this post is spot on.

Sun 9 May 2021 11:40 PM by mattymc
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Sun 9 May 2021 5:56 AM
mattymc wrote:
Sat 8 May 2021 11:58 PM
They are balancing around 8 v 8 and foregoing ANYTHING else and there are fantastic arguments against it --- Mythic/EA balanced using 8 as the model but , initially, balanced around RvR --- a more ability and counter approach --- which they did ok until they, too, abandoned it. It's their game but it's not really DAOC -- it's just an 8/small fight in a DAOC world.

8v8 is the only world where balance exists, because it's the only world where the numbers are the same and it's about class abilities and player skill.

If you can't understand that, well, there's no hope for you.

And if you hate the server so much, leave.

One day you may learn comprehension of the written word --- one day. Balancing is more than 8 similar abilities and player 'skill'; if you can't understand that --- try harder.
Mon 10 May 2021 1:04 PM by Centenario
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Sun 9 May 2021 5:56 AM
8v8 is the only world where balance exists, because it's the only world where the numbers are the same and it's about class abilities and player skill.

If you can't understand that, well, there's no hope for you.

And if you hate the server so much, leave.
NO INSULTS, edited by Uthred

From my point of view balancing around 8v8 would mean that slowly they would homogenize all three realm. Its the destiny of 8v8 balancing 100%.
If they don't want to homogenize, but instead harmonize then they shouldnt balance around 8v8 but instead for the whole ecosystem.
The changes they have been making are hovering around ecosystem balancing more than 8v8 balancing.
If they would have done 8v8 balancing it would mean giving right away 29 hammer snare with same duration to each realm and celerity to each realm and double amnesia instant to each realm, and baseline stun to casters on each realm, standardization of mezz range and duration for each realm. That would be real 8v8 balancing.

Their style of balancing is more to harmonization than homogenization so its not 8v8 balancing. Can't have butter and the money of the butter, you cant balance around 8v8 cause its measurable and fair, yet want to not homogenize cause its also measurable and fair.

BTW, many fallacies in this text. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
Wed 12 May 2021 1:42 AM by mattymc
Centenario wrote:
Mon 10 May 2021 1:04 PM
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Sun 9 May 2021 5:56 AM
8v8 is the only world where balance exists, because it's the only world where the numbers are the same and it's about class abilities and player skill.

If you can't understand that, well, there's no hope for you.

And if you hate the server so much, leave.
NO INSULTS, edited by Uthred

From my point of view balancing around 8v8 would mean that slowly they would homogenize all three realm. Its the destiny of 8v8 balancing 100%.
If they don't want to homogenize, but instead harmonize then they shouldnt balance around 8v8 but instead for the whole ecosystem.
The changes they have been making are hovering around ecosystem balancing more than 8v8 balancing.
If they would have done 8v8 balancing it would mean giving right away 29 hammer snare with same duration to each realm and celerity to each realm and double amnesia instant to each realm, and baseline stun to casters on each realm, standardization of mezz range and duration for each realm. That would be real 8v8 balancing.

Their style of balancing is more to harmonization than homogenization so its not 8v8 balancing. Can't have butter and the money of the butter, you cant balance around 8v8 cause its measurable and fair, yet want to not homogenize cause its also measurable and fair.

BTW, many fallacies in this text. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."

While I don't necessarily disagree with your point, if you balance around 8 v 8 in an RvR sense, you have to make it worthwhile to have large scale fights and balance with that in mind --- this is, in my view, where the focus is or, has been, lost ... Realm V Realm is an after thought where it once was the focus and strength of DAOC.. as in live, it has, in my view , been lost.
Wed 12 May 2021 9:40 PM by gruenesschaf
mattymc wrote:
Wed 12 May 2021 1:42 AM
While I don't necessarily disagree with your point, if you balance around 8 v 8 in an RvR sense, you have to make it worthwhile to have large scale fights and balance with that in mind --- this is, in my view, where the focus is or, has been, lost ... Realm V Realm is an after thought where it once was the focus and strength of DAOC.. as in live, it has, in my view , been lost.

As I've asked multiple times by now, what does balancing for large scale fights even look like when they almost always have widely varying numbers of players on either side. What exactly does balancing for a 60vs80, 20vs40 etc look like, what's the expected outcome of any change you make for it? And just a reminder, we've done quite a bit of zerg fight balancing or rather we've toned down abilities that had a dominating / oppressive impact in those fights.
Wed 12 May 2021 11:55 PM by mattymc
gruenesschaf wrote:
Wed 12 May 2021 9:40 PM
mattymc wrote:
Wed 12 May 2021 1:42 AM
While I don't necessarily disagree with your point, if you balance around 8 v 8 in an RvR sense, you have to make it worthwhile to have large scale fights and balance with that in mind --- this is, in my view, where the focus is or, has been, lost ... Realm V Realm is an after thought where it once was the focus and strength of DAOC.. as in live, it has, in my view , been lost.

As I've asked multiple times by now, what does balancing for large scale fights even look like when they almost always have widely varying numbers of players on either side. What exactly does balancing for a 60vs80, 20vs40 etc look like, what's the expected outcome of any change you make for it? And just a reminder, we've done quite a bit of zerg fight balancing or rather we've toned down abilities that had a dominating / oppressive impact in those fights.

First, it should be more valuable RP wise then tasks -- 2nd, Make defense valuable and possible <movable siege, defensible positions, etc.>. 60 v 80 and 20 v 40 are winnable fights <it's been done often> when people are rewarded for them and don't avoid them because it's simply easier to get more points doing less actual fighting -- that would be a good place to start. That's just a start, if you keep task system have it stop rotating to the dominated realm, greater bonuses for realm pop imbalances -- there are myriad ways to affect the RvR portion of the game; not limited to looking at the negative effects other things do to RvR <dbl feathers in PvE, specific events, etc> -- it's not that you have to NOT do those things, but you can make temporary adjustments so you don't have one realm run over everything while the other 2 are participating in events...just considerations.

Balancing large scale fights looks at effects and counters first and numbers as a factor at some point numbers always win, to be sure, but the general rule is it should take a significant advantage to overtake a defensible position --- there really isn't one the way things are now.
Thu 13 May 2021 3:39 AM by ExcretusMaximus
mattymc wrote:
Wed 12 May 2021 11:55 PM
Balancing large scale fights looks at effects and counters first and numbers as a factor at some point numbers always win, to be sure, but the general rule is it should take a significant advantage to overtake a defensible position --- there really isn't one the way things are now.

In the real world, sure, but it makes for a shitty and boring video game.
Thu 13 May 2021 6:46 AM by Astaa
Last night Mids wouldn't even attempt to take Nott, despite having double the number of defenders, they just fell for trap after trap after trap at towers. Someone mentioned 140+ attackers at one point.

That isn't because of game mechanics, it is because of poor leadership choices, where was the intel coming from?

You can't balance on varying numbers, right now Mid/Hib have the numbers, a month or two back it was Alb dominating.

Some things could and should be changed, tanks should be given more to do, there should be more to sieges than just bashing a wooden door.
Thu 13 May 2021 11:12 AM by Tyrlaan
gruenesschaf wrote:
Wed 12 May 2021 9:40 PM
And just a reminder, we've done quite a bit of zerg fight balancing or rather we've toned down abilities that had a dominating / oppressive impact in those fights.

You´ve nerfed GTAE, bolts and removed stacking of some RAs and AoE DoT from Wizards. In essence you nerfed Earth Wizards (who as a class have little use outside of BGs) and Runecarvers.

Nothing has been done about:
- Rangers (especially when they assist and can defend a keep from a BG)
- stun nukes (now with a debuff on Mentalists too) and shroom fields (for extra damage or as an extra barrier to block inc)
- Hibs highest resist debuffs (that´s what made the bias most obvious IMO, there´s no rational argument for the same spells to have different delves in different realms)
- Hibs highest resist buffs that matter (Body/Spirit/Energy, the damage types all realms predominantly use now for damage and CC), on 1.0x classes in Alb/Mid
- Hibs with the most AoE damage field RAs, most (PB)AE spells and most healing capacity

That´s not to say Alb and Mid have no strong classes in BGs or sieges (every realm can try to compensate with numbers, try to include a couple inferior heal or AoE classes and carry their RPs to the Hib keeps) but the misbalance and general outcome is pretty clear. Hib has extra relics for most of the time, can defend them against both Alb and Mid BGs even if /underpop registers a 10-20% RP bonus to Hib for having less numbers and the Alb and Mid BGs usually just avoid defended Hib keeps and go fight each other instead. That has been a pretty obvious pattern for years...

And then you keep buffing Hib classes...
Thu 13 May 2021 11:48 AM by DJ2000
Tyrlaan wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 11:12 AM
You´ve nerfed GTAE, bolts and removed stacking of some RAs and AoE DoT from Wizards. In essence you nerfed Earth Wizards (who as a class have little use outside of BGs) and Runecarvers.

Nothing has been done about:
- Rangers (especially when they assist and can defend a keep from a BG)
- stun nukes (now with a debuff on Mentalists too) and shroom fields (for extra damage or as an extra barrier to block inc)
- Hibs highest resist debuffs (that´s what made the bias most obvious IMO, there´s no rational argument for the same spells to have different delves in different realms)
- Hibs highest resist buffs that matter (Body/Spirit/Energy, the damage types all realms predominantly use now for damage and CC), on 1.0x classes in Alb/Hib
- Hibs with the most AoE damage field RAs, most (PB)AE spells and most healing capacity

That´s not to say Alb and Hib have no strong classes in BGs or sieges but the misbalance and general outcome is pretty clear. Hib has extra relics for most of the time, can defend them against both Alb and Mid BGs even if /underpop registers a 10-20% RP bonus to Hib for having less numbers and the Alb and Mid BGs usually just avoid defended Hib keeps and go fight each other instead. That has been a pretty obvious pattern for years...

And then you keep buffing Hib classes...
You are one of those guys, aren't you?

Something has been done about:
- Rangers (overall damage reduction, further changes specific to rangers still pending)
- stun nukes (overall HP increase) and shroom fields (max 15 per zone, range and hight reduction in keep/tower, 2nd LOS check, less enemy checks, visual cues, prolly more i dont remember atm)
- Hibs highest resist debuffs (??? its -50% for all 3 realms. Only the alb Body debuff is -40%, that's 1 out of 18)
- Hibs highest resist buffs that matter (Body/Spirit/Energy, Delve the same for all ?), on 1.0x classes in Alb/Hib (i guess u mean Mid and not Hib? But you know what? Alb has with Friar the only class with more than 1.0x for the Heat/cold/Matter Buffs. favorism much?)
- Hibs with the most AoE damage field RAs (...what? Albion has 4x NM, while Hib has 3x and mid only 2x; other AoE damage field RAs are the same only Volcanic Pillar is 2x albion and 1x each hib/mid, ONLY Thornweed Field is 3x hib and 2xalb and 1xmid.....but that is more a CC AoE than a damage one.....w/e), most (PB)AE spells and most healing capacity (i give up....otherwise i'll be writing for 2h....consider that a win if you want, idc)

You are still salty about the Wizard losing the AoE DoT ? You want the stacking Caba, necro and Wiz DoTs back?
Tell me then, Mr. hypocrite, why that is in your eyes balanced when compared to the other realms?
Thu 13 May 2021 12:04 PM by Tyrlaan
First learn to address readers properly. Or grow up.

Second the point was that they keep nerfing AoE capabilities in Alb/Mid while buffing Hib casters. When actually Alb/Mid need more of it (to suppress the Hib caster and Ranger pest, to clear shrooms etc.)

Third you are wrong on so many accounts. Mid resist debuffs are 45% instead of 50%, Alb Body debuff is 40%. You counter with Friars resist buffs when I specifically wrote that elemental resists have taken a backseat with all the changes? It´s many more Ichors and STs in Hib not TWFs (which is not just a CC RA but killing people regularly in towers/keeps especially if stacked with ST, NMs and other (PB)AE damage). And you even dare mention 2H in response to a post that talks about BG and siege RvR?
Thu 13 May 2021 12:31 PM by Centenario
Either you don't play anything than hib @DJ2000 or you are those: "insincere" "deceptive" "dishonest"

- Ranger: pretty obvious that assist ranger are a thing, so is assist scout. It would be dishonest to say that hib rangers assist have not continuously been a problem. At least on Alb people leave the bg after calling them out, when they see an assist scout playing.
- Stun nukes: Nobody in his right mind can say that baseline stun on caster is not OP, it would be dishonest to say the opposite. You are dismissing with hp increase, does hp increase do something against casters assisting you for 1200 dmg per round and stun lasting at least 1 round. The shroom are bug fixes not balance changes.
- resist debuff: he is obviously talking about spec-wise. You will never see a cabalist going higher than 33 spirit, or a sorc going higher than 33 body debuff only the wiz could go 45debuff earth for matter train. Void eld> Earth wiz with baseline stun, with last AoE DD earlier, still blue ns, both d/q and s/c debuff. You could see mentalist going full debuff too.
- resist buff: the same its spec-wise. 43 druid/warden get access to body/heat resist, while friar would be 46-48-49 and cleric 45-47-48, maybe shaman okay with 43 heat res @ 24 delve. On alb you could have friar go 49 buff and get full t3 resists (heat, cold, matter) while the debuff is running spirit/body/energy... compared to warden running 49 buff with the right resists. If you don't understand this you are either are dishonest or you don't have real experience of RvR.
- AoE damage means also the mana spec AoE that does more damage than 45 spec DD on guards/keeplord for low mana cost. The healing on warden/menta is great with much utility on the side. You cannot be blind to all this.
Thu 13 May 2021 12:47 PM by Astaa
All caster damage is out of sync, HP increase or not.
Thu 13 May 2021 12:50 PM by mattymc
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 3:39 AM
mattymc wrote:
Wed 12 May 2021 11:55 PM
Balancing large scale fights looks at effects and counters first and numbers as a factor at some point numbers always win, to be sure, but the general rule is it should take a significant advantage to overtake a defensible position --- there really isn't one the way things are now.

In the real world, sure, but it makes for a shitty and boring video game.

Sometimes I wonder if you even understand what YOU write --- Consider the first decade or so of DAOC -- was THAT boring?
Thu 13 May 2021 1:13 PM by Tyrlaan
Centenario wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 12:31 PM
- resist debuff: he is obviously talking about spec-wise

No I´m talking about the highest triple resist debuff spells getting different delves in the realms. Hib has them all at 50%, Mid at 45%, Alb has 40% on the Body/Spirit/Energy and 50% on the Heat/Cold/Matter debuffs. Supposedly for 8v8 balance when in reality it´s hardly balanced (especially if Hib casters nuking off these 50% resist debuffs regularly get another 5+% bonus on damage and healing from relics and their Warden already provides higher resists vs. the damage types their enemies use and debuff).

Alb caster groups are strong but these casters also kinda provide the utility Clerics and Paladins don´t get. Meanwhile the Naturalists core AND the Hib casters are taking turns in getting buffs. Also you kinda have to bring casters to BGs and siege yet those are the most prone to the stun nuke and assist archery BS.
Thu 13 May 2021 6:20 PM by ExcretusMaximus
mattymc wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 12:50 PM
Sometimes I wonder if you even understand what YOU write --- Consider the first decade or so of DAOC -- was THAT boring?

You mean the era when defenders could PBAE through walls and kill 50 people rushing the lord room because they were stuck in circular stairways eating bombs from 20 casters who couldn't be retaliated against? No, it wasn't boring, but it was shitty. Take off your nostalgia glasses and use your brain.
Thu 13 May 2021 7:17 PM by mattymc
ExcretusMaximus wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 6:20 PM
mattymc wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 12:50 PM
Sometimes I wonder if you even understand what YOU write --- Consider the first decade or so of DAOC -- was THAT boring?

You mean the era when defenders could PBAE through walls and kill 50 people rushing the lord room because they were stuck in circular stairways eating bombs from 20 casters who couldn't be retaliated against? No, it wasn't boring, but it was shitty. Take off your nostalgia glasses and use your brain.

Clearly you simply dont understand; if you like the game the way it is today -- good for you, many don't and see better possibilities
Thu 13 May 2021 7:36 PM by Astaa
It was different, not bad, but NF is definitely better than OF, faster action for one thing.

Mixed feelings on OF RAs vs NF RAs.
Thu 13 May 2021 8:55 PM by Ele
Centenario wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 12:31 PM
- resist debuff: he is obviously talking about spec-wise. You will never see a cabalist going higher than 33 spirit, or a sorc going higher than 33 body debuff only the wiz could go 45debuff earth for matter train.
Small correction: for hybrid & caster grps, red debuff is the common spec (46 spirit/25 body/11 matter for caby, 45 body/27matter/12mind for body sorc if you run matter train). In some cases, caby can go tri spec, but having red debuff is the norm, not the exception on an alb group.
Thu 13 May 2021 10:20 PM by DJ2000
@centarino

Well, actually i play Midgard atm.
Last year around this Time, when Hibernia had 6 relics ( ~ may-june), i was playing in Albion.
Pretty rough playing against hibs with 4-6 Relics in their back. Especially rough when they get all the realm hoppers/Relic players joining them too; and you know that some of these players among the hib masses were on your side, on the day before.
But i also could be "insincere" "deceptive" "dishonest", lol.

The Ranger thing was pure madness at their peak, before the archery nerfs.
It's better now, not great, but better. But let's get some things cleared first:
- Where did i "downplay" the ranger assist?
- Where did i "downplay" the Stun assist?
- The resist debuff thing i was clearly wrong about. Mid is 50/45/50 heat/cold/matter and 45/45/50 Body/Spirit/Energy. I still had the Alb numbers in mind. I did f... up, my bad. ETA on further Meta balance on this would be nice though.
- Not sure what you are on about with the Resis buffs. Midgard had to use an 46 Aug Healer for the highest Body buff since...almost forever. This doesn't fit in your anti-Albion policy, so we sweep that under the rug i guess? Get off your Albion goggles. The sham has access to a Heat buff at 43, is this now considered anti-Hibernia? If you want to mirror every realm that much, maybe DaoC with the 3 different Realms may be too much for you. If i remember correctly, "Realm mirroring" is not something you asked for in the past, so iam kinda confused why you are beating this point so vehemently.
- Mana spec AoE ? You mean the Eld? They usually don't go higher than 39 Mana ( ~ 39/37). You mean the lvl34 Spec AoE 96.8 Delve? This does more damage than a lvl 45 specc DD? Whose Specc DD are we talking about? Eld AoE DD/Snare equivalent is in the Earth Wizz and Supp RM lines. Please elaborate on this one.
- Warden with 40+ regrowth and Friar with 40+ reju are comparable i would say. The rest of the kit is not comparable, but that's not part of the question here.
- Mentalism Mentalist is a beast on its own. Not sure where or when i ever denied this. Feel free to point me out where you see me do that.

The statement of Tyrlaan was that "nothing" was done by the Devs to help/address any of his points. Which i declined by stating some moves that were infact done by the dev team, just to show that "something" was done, contrary to his statement.
I did not say if they were good changes or bad changes, or if they were enough to alleviate the problem in question.
You may like or dislike every change that was done by the Dev team, but you can't just hand wave away work/time they put into this Game and accuse them of doing nothing.

"Insincere" "deceptive" "dishonest"

You may point out that you think that the changes were not enough, or on another spectrum were maybe too much.
Yes. That, you can contest. I do that too.
Fri 14 May 2021 6:29 AM by Astaa
The major cause of population imbalance is obviously the relic tourists jumping on the bandwagon every couple of weeks. There is no incentive for sticking to one realm for a prolonged period of time, which can't be good for overall, long term server population. Solution, .5% extra RPs/gold/feathers for every day you are on a realm, hitting a maximum of 10% bonus, which resets if you engage in RvR on another realm, and restarts on that new realm.

This would make people stay in a realm longer than relics stay in a realm. There needs to be an overall goal in BG RvR, that means something, which is the relics. Perhaps even change relics from +magic/melee damage to other bonuses

...and I get the argument that sticking to one realm you are only playing a 3rd of the game etc but in an always on competitive sandbox having such huge swings in population is a problem.
Fri 14 May 2021 6:29 AM by Centenario
Ele wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 8:55 PM
Centenario wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 12:31 PM
- resist debuff: he is obviously talking about spec-wise. You will never see a cabalist going higher than 33 spirit, or a sorc going higher than 33 body debuff only the wiz could go 45debuff earth for matter train.
Small correction: for hybrid & caster grps, red debuff is the common spec (46 spirit/25 body/11 matter for caby, 45 body/27matter/12mind for body sorc if you run matter train). In some cases, caby can go tri spec, but having red debuff is the norm, not the exception on an alb group.
Are you sure? maybe one of the 3 cabs okay, but not all cabs.
And on usual groups not running gvg, but casual 8-man roam, you'd never see nor matter assist, nor body assist, nor whatever assist. Just simply can we get mezzer pls? can we get a ns maybe? we never get a bubble. Sometimes not even running minstrel speed.

You always bring the gvg pov Ele, and I appreciate it, but is that what most player experience is like? I doubt it, maybe only 5% of players are playing gvg.
Fri 14 May 2021 6:39 AM by ExcretusMaximus
Ele wrote:
Thu 13 May 2021 8:55 PM
Small correction: for hybrid & caster grps, red debuff is the common spec (46 spirit/25 body/11 matter for caby, 45 body/27matter/12mind for body sorc if you run matter train). In some cases, caby can go tri spec, but having red debuff is the norm, not the exception on an alb group.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one.

In my experience, most Cabbies respecced out of the red debuff after about a week of playing with it post-nerf, because that extra 10% damage isn't worth the exchange of what you can get now by going deeper into Matter or Body. Sure, there are still some holdouts, but I'm willing to bet that if we could see server analytics, they'd show that 46 Spirit spec isn't anywhere near as popular as it was six months ago.
Fri 14 May 2021 8:17 AM by Noashakra
Usually it's 1 caby with the last debuff and 1 tri spec.
Even with the 40% debuff instead of 50%, it's still the best 8man group in the game. Can't believe people are crying about it.

Meanwhile, hib has the tri debuff up for the chanter, the pet that roots and disease, and there are still 0 chanter in gvg! And don't get me wrong, I am not of fan of the chanter changes.
And people think devs are biased and only up hib... Smh.

Polemo went to mid and suddently, mid had relics and was zerging efficiently, while albion was no doing as well as before.
In zerg, it's not a game balance at all, it's all about if the realm has a zerg leader or not.
Fri 14 May 2021 9:36 AM by Centenario
I could care less about the chanter changes, i just want changes to be logical; the logical change up to me is to nerf hib caster (baseline stun -> give to druid, give single root to hib casters instead like other 2 realms). So to me the expected logical change is a nerf to hib caster, but we get a buff to hib caster. Ok it might be niche-logical, let's say we don't disagree right, but when the baseline stun to hib caster will be implemented, everybody is gonna cry and it won't go through, so they will have let the small chanter buff go through but the real balance change won't go through. It's like you go to the car dealership to fix your suspension, he tells you: "you also need an oil change" he offers you a discount for the car suspension of 20%, so you accept to do the oil change a little more pricey. You pay for the cheap suspension fix and its not really fixed. So in the end you have paid the pricey oil change, have not fixed the suspension problem and even waste time and money for all that.
Fri 14 May 2021 10:44 AM by Noashakra
Tbh, I would love the root on my mentalist, it would be such a buff for 8vs8. The stun is only annoying to play against in keeps fights. In open field fights, rooting a tank or pet is far more superior if you need to kite (I know it's better to peel, but sometimes your peeler isn't around).

But yeah it's funny to me how people want to remove the stun from the hib mages, and then also complain about how we are mirroring realms at the same time.
This topic is locked and you can't reply.

Return to Planned Changes or the latest topics