BM is too much - Phoenix Freeshard

BM is so strong, there's no reason to play anything else in serious rvr group. More damage output than any other hib tank, 9 sec shield slam, etc. . Isnt that throwing the balance out for hib? Should dual wielding hybrids get a 9 sec slam?

Mon 26 Nov 2018 11:30 AM by Sei

Barricade

Mon 26 Nov 2018 11:53 AM by Druth

No one should have 9 sec slam.

Mon 26 Nov 2018 2:13 PM by cortexqc

Dual wielder have a slam at the cost of no defense when using 2 weapons. 42 shield spec is 21% less parry. CC stun is part of daoc and of all mmorpg in general. No one like stun in all games. It's frustrating mechanics. When stunned you got 6 time cc timer immunity. In general there is around 2 slammer class per group. It's a MMO call the assist to give time to your heal To burst heal you, like all ready say use purge up to 5mn cd is up near all fight. Daoc it not a balanced 1on1 game.

If you take this in consideration what can be done?
Lower slam timer? Not on a 42 spec skill.
Change 50 vs 42 skillmaking bigger invest making weapons line really low? Maybe
Make slam front style? Maybe a good idea too making more tricky to hit in rvr and can't be slammed from side or behind without the good style but not nerf the pve.

So give idea instead of just crying about "slam"

Wed 28 Nov 2018 7:21 AM by Koljar

Aaand: You're claiming that the BM is too strong and want to take away slam from ALL dual wielders. So you want the merc nerfed because the BM is too strong...

Solutions? Well - slam always was like that until I stopped playing and ppl never really cared. Why? Propably because there was no /Switch command. Maybe - even tho it's some real QOL - this is what should be removed?

jm2c

Wed 28 Nov 2018 8:57 AM by Druth

Koljar wrote: ↑
Wed 28 Nov 2018 7:21 AM
Aaand: You're claiming that the BM is too strong and want to take away slam from ALL dual wielders. So you want the merc nerfed because the BM is too strong...

Solutions? Well - slam always was like that until I stopped playing and ppl never really cared. Why? Propably because there was no /Switch command. Maybe - even tho it's some real QOL - this is what should be removed?

jm2c

Several reasons why slam was not a problem:

1) No perma endo, so slam would actually drain your endo and leave you without endo faster.
2) Fewer assisted, people have gotten better at the game.
3) Better equipment, you have higher hp's, but the damage output has gone up more. Just test a fight with both buffed and both unbuffed, you will die faster when both are buffed.
4) Switch likely affects it to.

But of all the above, endo is the biggest sinner to why slam is so strong. It's a style with absolutely no drawbacks in a endo-rich enviroment.
In every other aspect of the game, chosing the right tool at the right time wins fights, positional/reactionary styles, no root but snare tanks, debuffing before nuking. Slam is the best stun, and has no requirements apart from speccing 42 shield, and it's a guaranteed style for anyone starting fight. Numb is a fun gimmick, but 2 secs is so low time that few even manage to react and purge it, and also to low to land snare.

The 3 highest damage "first in line" styles in the game is Levi (reaver), PA (assassins) and Defenders Rage (armsman) and the first requires being behind target, second being stealthed and front and the last requires target styling on you. These are examples of great design, with results being directly affected by effort/circumstance, the game rewards you for picking the right tool at the right time.
Slam is an example of horrible design, and I can not think of any other aspect in the game where you are rewarded the most (I really disregard Brutalize for the "must spec 50, must be attacked for only 1 extra sec" reason) result with the least effort.

Imagine if we had a class that had an anytime style with 1.3 growth rate.

Wed 28 Nov 2018 9:11 AM by Druth

Oh and yes, slam is what makes BM so strong.

Hero, paladin, champ would all have better stuns if slam was nerfed across the board.

Warrior and merc would be hit the hardest, but keep in mind you'd still have a 8 sec sidestun in shield line.

Fri 30 Nov 2018 12:31 AM by Severa

Im pretty sure everyone is in agreement but for some reason they dont want to change it.. should be 5 sec and then hero is viable but until then its not

Fri 30 Nov 2018 7:35 AM by Ceen

Severa wrote: ↑
Fri 30 Nov 2018 12:31 AM
Im pretty sure everyone is in agreement but for some reason they dont want to change it.. should be 5 sec and then hero is viable but until then its not

Yeah same 10 people reposting the 9 sec is bad idea is "everyone"

Sat 1 Dec 2018 2:08 AM by Severa

whats the downside ? more class diversity ? There is really no reason to play a hero other than its not a BM

Sat 1 Dec 2018 2:59 AM by cortexqc

Severa wrote: ↑
Sat 1 Dec 2018 2:08 AM
whats the downside ? more class diversity ? There is really no reason to play a hero other than its not a BM

yes there is reasons to play hero.
Master of the Hunt?
Scale armor?
LW gameplay?
Soldier's Barricade (melee ABS for group)
Dashing Defense (Shared block + parry for group )

and yes
The downside to put 5s stun for non tank like the live server is unbalance all hybrid cause they have old gameplay with old spec line skills/spells not good and balanced.
if you take the live for exemple to justify a nerf of the slam, take all the side changes for all hybrid in consideration.

who is going to group a Champion with 5s stun when hero can : 9s stun + dps harder with LW when full buffed and with best hp pool and stoicism?

But yes maybe devs can nerf slam for non tank, and boost/change hybrid gameplay (thane, champ, pal,reaver) making them more groupable front of tank/light tank

Sat 1 Dec 2018 7:20 AM by Cadebrennus

If Slam is reduced to 5 seconds or less and the longer Shield stuns are positionals the only people who are going to whine about no longer having an easy 9 second stun are the keyboard face-mashers.

Sat 1 Dec 2018 7:38 AM by Ceen

Played classic setting for years, hero was in every grp. People didnt notice that they changed to NF RAs I guess.

There is no old RA Prevent flight anymore.
There is no charge.
They have dashing defense which is a key RA for def tank.
They have 50 shield spec.
With Battery + BOF + SOS + AM + DD + PD as passive thats a complete set of def RAs which stops the 1 sec insta kill fights and enhances the need for an actual def tank.
Before a caster was dead anyway.

Sat 1 Dec 2018 8:10 PM by Severa

Ceen wrote: ↑
Sat 1 Dec 2018 7:38 AM
Played classic setting for years, hero was in every grp. People didnt notice that they changed to NF RAs I guess.
There is no old RA Prevent flight anymore.
There is no charge.
They have dashing defense which is a key RA for def tank.
They have 50 shield spec.
With Battery + BOF + SOS + AM + DD + PD as passive thats a complete set of def RAs which stops the 1 sec insta kill fights and enhances the need for an actual def tank.
Before a caster was dead anyway.

the first 2 mean nothing to the discussion since its everyone with that
Dashing defense is good so i give you that 1 ra... you can spec 50 shield on any class with a shield, so basically there just as good because of 1 timed ra?
Pretty sure most would rather have more evade and advanced evade as well as more dps (dual+tripple+flury) over a little bit better armor.

I think a trade off would just give main tanks more hp or passive resists like live.. at least then they could take a few more nukes at least and would be one other small reason to give them a spot over another bm

Sun 2 Dec 2018 11:14 PM by Falken

all I can think is devs play light tanks, hence the no differentiation to lowering their slam timer, there really is no reason for them to have easy mode weapon swap with a 9 sec anytime stun. nerf to 5s and let heavy tanks keep 9s stun to let them shine a little brighter

Sun 2 Dec 2018 11:16 PM by Cadebrennus

Falken wrote: ↑
Sun 2 Dec 2018 11:14 PM
all I can think is devs play light tanks, hence the no differentiation to lowering their slam timer, there really is no reason for them to have easy mode weapon swap with a 9 sec anytime stun. nerf to 5s and let heavy tanks keep 9s stun to let them shine a little brighter

That plus the Archery nerf Vs Shields definitely supports your assumption.

I hope they aren't like John at Broadsword. Apparently I stole his lunch money and stuffed him into a locker one too many times while playing my Melee Ranger on live. After that they nerfed Archer melee by a flat 30% (August 2016).

Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:17 AM by Druth

It's what everyone dreams about, nut-jobs supporting your points with conspiracy theories.

I think BM's are this strong because Prince Charles plays BM here, and the MI7 told the devs that it's either keep them strong or end up 10 feet under.

Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:23 AM by Cadebrennus

Druth wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:17 AM
It's what everyone dreams about, nut-jobs supporting your points with conspiracy theories.

I think BM's are this strong because Prince Charles plays BM here, and the MI7 told the devs that it's either keep them strong or end up 10 feet under.

I don't think it's likely here but it actually happened on live. The same patch that they nerfed Archer melee by 30% is the same patch that they removed the minimum distance needed to stealth based on stealth spec. Yup, that's right. They nerfed Cad-dar. The August 2016 patch was specifically aimed at nerfing me and the way that I played, so yes I've seen it happen firsthand. I just hope that Phoenix Devs are better than Broadsword. As a matter of fact I still have some faith that they are.

Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:31 AM by Druth

Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:23 AM
I don't think it's likely here but it actually happened on live. The same patch that they nerfed Archer melee by 30% is the same patch that they removed the minimum distance needed to stealth based on stealth spec. Yup, that's right. They nerfed Cad-dar. The August 2016 patch was specifically aimed at nerfing me and the way that I played, so yes I've seen it happen firsthand. I just hope that Phoenix Devs are better than Broadsword. As a matter of fact I still have some faith that they are.

Don't mean to be pedantic (honestly, I love being pedantic), but did they say they were nerfing you, or did you suspect it?
Because unless they came out and said it outright, or that you have actual solid evidence (and evidence is not opinions), then it's a theory (conspir...).

Edit: And if they actually were stupid enough to admit that, I am really glad I never came back to Live after 2015 (I think I left there for good).

Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:36 AM by Druth

And to return to topic, slam will likely not be nerfed, one reason (the other being risk of shaking up class balance to much) being that opponents are divided in "nerf light-tank slam" and "nerf slam".

Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:41 AM by Cadebrennus

Druth wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:31 AM
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:23 AM
I don't think it's likely here but it actually happened on live. The same patch that they nerfed Archer melee by 30% is the same patch that they removed the minimum distance needed to stealth based on stealth spec. Yup, that's right. They nerfed Cad-dar. The August 2016 patch was specifically aimed at nerfing me and the way that I played, so yes I've seen it happen firsthand. I just hope that Phoenix Devs are better than Broadsword. As a matter of fact I still have some faith that they are.

Don't mean to be pedantic (honestly, I love being pedantic), but did they say they were nerfing you, or did you suspect it?
Because unless they came out and said it outright, or that you have actual solid evidence (and evidence is not opinions), then it's a theory (conspir...).

Actual solid evidence. I was the only person playing low Stealth on live (just like here on Phoenix) and I would spam Stealth on and off until I got the "you are too close to an enemy to stealth!" message. From there I knew that a stealther was within 850 units of me (my minimum range to stealth) and I would do circles until I found them with MOS7. I was literally the only player on the entire server who did this and I was well known as a Stealther hunter because I hated (and still do hate) the stealth zerg.

I was also the hardest hitting player in melee on an Archer because I had maxed melee spec (which is why I had low Stealth) along with maxed everything in melee templated (which also meant that Archery and stealth suffered in template). I was also known for this.

Many people including the inner circle (yes this was a thing) that had the developer's ear constantly complained to the developer that I "wasn't playing an Archer right" and wanted to force that style of play.

The August 2016 patch took care of both issues, one of which (the minimum distance to stealth) is in the patch notes, and the other was not. I discovered the melee nerf on Archers only by extensive testing, same as I do here on Phoenix. The developers were silent on both issues as it was raised in forum.

You made the right choice. Summer 2016 is when a lot of people got fed up with Broadsword and left because they kept changing stuff whilst ignoring feedback. That's what I'm hoping is avoided here on Phoenix.

Mon 3 Dec 2018 9:02 AM by Ceen

Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Sun 2 Dec 2018 11:16 PM
Falken wrote: ↑
Sun 2 Dec 2018 11:14 PM
all I can think is devs play light tanks, hence the no differentiation to lowering their slam timer, there really is no reason for them to have easy mode weapon swap with a 9 sec anytime stun. nerf to 5s and let heavy tanks keep 9s stun to let them shine a little brighter

That plus the Archery nerf Vs Shields definitely supports your assumption.

I hope they aren't like John at Broadsword. Apparently I stole his lunch money and stuffed him into a locker one too many times while playing my Melee Ranger on live. After that they nerfed Archer melee by a flat 30% (August 2016).

Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:41 AM
Druth wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:31 AM
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 8:23 AM
I don't think it's likely here but it actually happened on live. The same patch that they nerfed Archer melee by 30% is the same patch that they removed the minimum distance needed to stealth based on stealth spec. Yup, that's right. They nerfed Cad-dar. The August 2016 patch was specifically aimed at nerfing me and the way that I played, so yes I've seen it happen firsthand. I just hope that Phoenix Devs are better than Broadsword. As a matter of fact I still have some faith that they are.

Don't mean to be pedantic (honestly, I love being pedantic), but did they say they were nerfing you, or did you suspect it?
Because unless they came out and said it outright, or that you have actual solid evidence (and evidence is not opinions), then it's a theory (conspir...).

Actual solid evidence. I was the only person playing low Stealth on live (just like here on Phoenix) and I would spam Stealth on and off until I got the "you are too close to an enemy to stealth!" message. From there I knew that a stealther was within 850 units of me (my minimum range to stealth) and I would do circles until I found them with MOS7. I was literally the only player on the entire server who did this and I was well known as a Stealther hunter because I hated (and still do hate) the stealth zerg.

I was also the hardest hitting player in melee on an Archer because I had maxed melee spec (which is why I had low Stealth) along with maxed everything in melee templated (which also meant that Archery and stealth suffered in template). I was also known for this.

Many people including the inner circle (yes this was a thing) that had the developer's ear constantly complained to the developer that I "wasn't playing an Archer right" and wanted to force that style of play.

The August 2016 patch took care of both issues, one of which (the minimum distance to stealth) is in the patch notes, and the other was not. I discovered the melee nerf on Archers only by extensive testing, same as I do here on Phoenix. The developers were silent on both issues as it was raised in forum.

You made the right choice. Summer 2016 is when a lot of people got fed up with Broadsword and left because they kept changing stuff whilst ignoring feedback. That's what I'm hoping is avoided here on Phoenix.

This is pure gold

Please give us more insight I'm so excited.

Mon 3 Dec 2018 9:14 AM by Druth

Well the stealth "nerf" kinda seems like fixing a broken system

Using stealth/re-stealth to check if someone is near, seems like abusal of the system.
I'm not one to preach, I run through and do sidestuns etc... but if it was fixed I would not complain, I'd fully understand that they wanted to fix it.

Nerfing melee seems wrong, should be a choice un your spec. You just shouldn't get stealth detect with low stealth, but that fix seems justified.

In regards to you being targeted, if you are the only one doing something you are also bound to be the one hit by a fix.

Mon 3 Dec 2018 10:03 AM by Cadebrennus

Druth wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 9:14 AM
Well the stealth "nerf" kinda seems like fixing a broken system
Using stealth/re-stealth to check if someone is near, seems like abusal of the system.
I'm not one to preach, I run through and do sidestuns etc... but if it was fixed I would not complain, I'd fully understand that they wanted to fix it.

Nerfing melee seems wrong, should be a choice un your spec. You just shouldn't get stealth detect with low stealth, but that fix seems justified.

In regards to you being targeted, if you are the only one doing something you are also bound to be the one hit by a fix.

Not having a minimum stealth distance allows a stealther to re-stealth and clear anyone's target on them regardless of how close anyone is to them. The potential for abuse in this direction is even greater with no sacrifice. Low Stealth spec to put more points in other lines with a side benefit of awareness of other stealthed players means that you can't hide well from other with low Stealth. Also the main reason I started hunting stealthzergs with Visis was because stealthers were running in 12man and 20man groups and ganking solos/duos relentlessly. I'd say they brought the stealth hunters like me on themselves. You can see examples of it in this video:

https://youtu.be/jTga15Be3fo

Anyways enough off topic stuff.

Mon 3 Dec 2018 3:25 PM by Sepplord

why did you need "extensive testing" to discover a "30% flat nerf to archer melee"

the more I read stuff from you the more my view is shifting from "this guy really knows what he is talking about" to "this guy really likes to show off what a hotshot he is"

not saying you are straight making it up, but the conclusions you draw are pretentious at best

Mon 3 Dec 2018 7:25 PM by Cadebrennus

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 3 Dec 2018 3:25 PM
why did you need "extensive testing" to discover a "30% flat nerf to archer melee"

the more I read stuff from you the more my view is shifting from "this guy really knows what he is talking about" to "this guy really likes to show off what a hotshot he is"

not saying you are straight making it up, but the conclusions you draw are pretentious at best

I tested for the better part of a week on Pendragon against multiple opponents instead of just playing on live like most people. Broadsword made Mordred rules on Pendragon for easier testing and communication. That's what extensive testing is.

The nerf was ignored and my data was ridiculed until other people did more testing and confirmed it within a couple of weeks. You can look at posts on Postcount in August and September of 2016 to see for yourself.

Tue 4 Dec 2018 2:35 AM by Lawdawg

Stealthers always hijacking somebody's thread....NOW, back to my original topic.

I'm talking strictly about dual wielders with shield spec. Not champs, Paladins, Thanes. And I'm not saying we should nerf slam on dual wielders and give them something else. Buncha Lobbyist.....nerf slam on the BM, period. keep the positionals. I'm not for weapon damage nerfs. They are fine like they are.

Tue 4 Dec 2018 7:55 AM by Koljar

Not sure if I asked that before but: Why not remove /Switch completely?
Yes, it's a QOL but I remember seing a vid where a merc did shieldswitches while fighting waaaay back on live (open inventory, just like assassins with their poisoned weapons). Back then the crush stun (anytime + followup) was the sh*t.

Would also require assassins to manually switch again (remember ppl complaining about the "anytime - switch to new poisoned weapon - anytime - switch to new poisoned weapon - ..." playstile of assassins).

About triple wielding - well there's also dirty tricks (does that actually work or is it as buggy as I remember it from live?) and the hamster. There have to be differences between the classes.

Tue 4 Dec 2018 8:57 AM by Druth

Even with /switch, there are ways to macro/script it.
Even back in 2011 people were using macro to switch weapons from inventory.

But you can say part of their macro policy does include the wording "as well as any other means that allow unattended game-play", so if they remove /switch macroing it would mean ban I guess.

I'm against /switch, but not gonna waste my time trying to change that, to busy debating about slam

Wed 5 Dec 2018 3:50 AM by Sepplord

Druth wrote: ↑
Tue 4 Dec 2018 8:57 AM
Even with /switch, there are ways to macro/script it.
Even back in 2011 people were using macro to switch weapons from inventory.

But you can say part of their macro policy does include the wording "as well as any other means that allow unattended game-play", so if they remove /switch macroing it would mean ban I guess.

I'm against /switch, but not gonna waste my time trying to change that, to busy debating about slam

why would someone macroing weaponswitch somehow without switch be banable?
there aren't any delays needed for that right?

macroing multiple actions together onto one button is ok according to their rules as I understood them...why would weaponswitch be an exclusion?

Wed 5 Dec 2018 4:36 AM by Dimir

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Wed 5 Dec 2018 3:50 AM
Druth wrote: ↑
Tue 4 Dec 2018 8:57 AM
Even with /switch, there are ways to macro/script it.
Even back in 2011 people were using macro to switch weapons from inventory.

But you can say part of their macro policy does include the wording "as well as any other means that allow unattended game-play", so if they remove /switch macroing it would mean ban I guess.

I'm against /switch, but not gonna waste my time trying to change that, to busy debating about slam

why would someone macroing weaponswitch somehow without switch be banable?
there aren't any delays needed for that right?

macroing multiple actions together onto one button is ok according to their rules as I understood them...why would weaponswitch be an exclusion?

I assume because the macro would involve recording mouse movement/clicks and not keyboard presses because you have to drag/drop the weapon from your inventory (for BM or Merc swapping a shield).

Wed 5 Dec 2018 4:05 PM by Sepplord

Dimir wrote: ↑
Wed 5 Dec 2018 4:36 AM
I assume because the macro would involve recording mouse movement/clicks and not keyboard presses because you have to drag/drop the weapon from your inventory (for BM or Merc swapping a shield).

Oh...yeah okay, that makes sense