Revisit the PD nerf - Phoenix Freeshard

It would appear tank damage got reverted somewhere between the end of beta and launch. Light tanks can easily 2-3 hit casters.

Sun 10 Feb 2019 3:25 PM by Zansobar

daocgod wrote: ↑
Sun 10 Feb 2019 4:51 AM
It would appear tank damage got reverted somewhere between the end of beta and launch. Light tanks can easily 2-3 hit casters.

Is PD really going to save you anyway? If they buffed it back to 30% from 20% would that extra bit actually save you if a tank is in your face?

Sun 10 Feb 2019 6:44 PM by Renork

If hybrids can get det9 for 22 RA points, I don't see why PD can't get reverted back? Casters will continue to be squishy and it helps with the 55% cc reduction across the board.

Sun 10 Feb 2019 6:50 PM by Druth

Main, caster.
And no, casters should not get lowered cost PD.

Ranged damage, aoe damage, combined with large scale RvR currently, means casters just have more things to do.
casters are also played a hell lot more than tanks. Suspect lowered PD cost wont reduce caster numbers...

Sun 10 Feb 2019 9:01 PM by defiasbandit

Renork wrote: ↑
Sun 10 Feb 2019 6:44 PM
If hybrids can get det9 for 22 RA points, I don't see why PD can't get reverted back? Casters will continue to be squishy and it helps with the 55% cc reduction across the board.

Exactly.

Sun 10 Feb 2019 9:07 PM by cocio_dk

amd we want dodger back

Mon 11 Feb 2019 7:47 AM by Sepplord

What is conveniently forgotten, is that there is no Charge here, which is a huge nerf to melee-trains

i guess there are loads of lighttanks that would enjoy their actual anti-CC RAs instead of a cheaper DET

Mon 11 Feb 2019 8:10 AM by Ceen

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 7:47 AM
What is conveniently forgotten, is that there is no Charge here, which is a huge nerf to melee-trains

i guess there are loads of lighttanks that would enjoy their actual anti-CC RAs instead of a cheaper DET

So why not make Det cheaper for the charge classes and keep the costs for the rest

Mon 11 Feb 2019 11:51 AM by Renork

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 7:47 AM
What is conveniently forgotten, is that there is no Charge here, which is a huge nerf to melee-trains

i guess there are loads of lighttanks that would enjoy their actual anti-CC RAs instead of a cheaper DET

There was no live like charge back on 1.65. In fact, charge was tweaked several times on live. Also, the reverse is also true, I would love to have det 9 for only 22 ra points on my vw (live). What other anti-CC Ras do you speak of? Higher levels of purge are accessible here too.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 11:52 AM by Renork

cocio_dk wrote: ↑
Sun 10 Feb 2019 9:07 PM
amd we want dodger back

Only for vdubs and friars :^)

Mon 11 Feb 2019 12:00 PM by Sepplord

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 11:51 AM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 7:47 AM
What is conveniently forgotten, is that there is no Charge here, which is a huge nerf to melee-trains

i guess there are loads of lighttanks that would enjoy their actual anti-CC RAs instead of a cheaper DET

There was no live like charge back on 1.65. In fact, charge was tweaked several times on live. Also, the reverse is also true, I would love to have det 9 for only 22 ra points on my vw (live). What other anti-CC Ras do you speak of? Higher levels of purge are accessible here too.

We are not using 1.65 RAs though...so why is that even something to mention. The list off stuff that classes did not have in 1.65 is really long, since all RAs are different in NF (afaik. even the stat-passives scale differently) and afaik PD came with the new RA system, just like charge did.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:40 PM by Renork

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 12:00 PM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 11:51 AM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 7:47 AM
What is conveniently forgotten, is that there is no Charge here, which is a huge nerf to melee-trains

i guess there are loads of lighttanks that would enjoy their actual anti-CC RAs instead of a cheaper DET

There was no live like charge back on 1.65. In fact, charge was tweaked several times on live. Also, the reverse is also true, I would love to have det 9 for only 22 ra points on my vw (live). What other anti-CC Ras do you speak of? Higher levels of purge are accessible here too.

We are not using 1.65 RAs though...so why is that even something to mention. The list off stuff that classes did not have in 1.65 is really long, since all RAs are different in NF (afaik. even the stat-passives scale differently) and afaik PD came with the new RA system, just like charge did.

No such “list” exists, the only realm ability that is missing is the overtuned charge that live currently has. Also, you’re correct in that we are using NF ra’s, so there’s no need for PD to have lower values, especially if determination is being given for a considerably less investment and made accessible to all hybrids. If the argument is that “people don’t run tank groups as it is”, then restoring PD back to its original value is certainly not gonna change the direction of the game (10% is not that significant).

Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:46 PM by Sepplord

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:40 PM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 12:00 PM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 11:51 AM
There was no live like charge back on 1.65. In fact, charge was tweaked several times on live. Also, the reverse is also true, I would love to have det 9 for only 22 ra points on my vw (live). What other anti-CC Ras do you speak of? Higher levels of purge are accessible here too.

We are not using 1.65 RAs though...so why is that even something to mention. The list off stuff that classes did not have in 1.65 is really long, since all RAs are different in NF (afaik. even the stat-passives scale differently) and afaik PD came with the new RA system, just like charge did.

No such “list” exists, the only realm ability that is missing is the overtuned charge that live currently has. Also, you’re correct in that we are using NF ra’s, so there’s no need for PD to have lower values, especially if determination is being given for a considerably less investment and made accessible to all hybrids. If the argument is that “people don’t run tank groups as it is”, then restoring PD back to its original value is certainly not gonna change the direction of the game (10% is not that significant).

uhhh, yeah, i don't think this discussion is worth taking any further into the abusrdity you are turning it into...making up stuff won't convince the devs to revert a decision they consciously made before. I'll chime back in when someone makes an actual argument without made up "facts" ^^

Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:52 PM by Renork

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:46 PM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:40 PM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 12:00 PM
We are not using 1.65 RAs though...so why is that even something to mention. The list off stuff that classes did not have in 1.65 is really long, since all RAs are different in NF (afaik. even the stat-passives scale differently) and afaik PD came with the new RA system, just like charge did.

No such “list” exists, the only realm ability that is missing is the overtuned charge that live currently has. Also, you’re correct in that we are using NF ra’s, so there’s no need for PD to have lower values, especially if determination is being given for a considerably less investment and made accessible to all hybrids. If the argument is that “people don’t run tank groups as it is”, then restoring PD back to its original value is certainly not gonna change the direction of the game (10% is not that significant).

uhhh, yeah, i don't think this discussion is worth taking any further into the abusrdity you are turning it into...making up stuff won't convince the devs to revert a decision they consciously made before. I'll chime back in when someone makes an actual argument without made up "facts" ^^

Wow, such a class way of removing yourself from a conversation when you know you're wrong :^) you get points for that at least.

Making what up? Feel free to prove me wrong, all you have to do is simply list one “realm ability”. You have access to det at a much lower cost, you also have access to up to purge 5. You don’t have cancer charge here, but that realm ability underwent considerable changes and was later given for free to several classes that didn’t necessarily need it (i.e. reavers). Long story short, you’re wrong. If you’re going to attempt to prove someone wrong, make sure you have your story straight so you don’t sound like a doofus.

Also, after reading the archer thread I can see you have plenty of free time on your hands and are simply out to rebute anything you don’t agree with without providing any sensible or credible information. Ladies and gentlemen let's welcome to the game Druth 2.0~

Mon 11 Feb 2019 4:21 PM by Isavyr

Only savages 3-shot people, not all light-tanks. That's a problem with savages, not PD.

I play two casters, and please do not make PD stronger. With PD5, Cloth > Leather. Casters don't need more defense.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:25 PM by Zansobar

Isavyr wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 4:21 PM
Only savages 3-shot people, not all light-tanks. That's a problem with savages, not PD.

I play two casters, and please do not make PD stronger. With PD5, Cloth > Leather. Casters don't need more defense.

Actually with 20% from PD casters should be approaching chain or plate levels...however they won't have the HP to survive like a melee and if they are being constantly interupted they are pretty useless anyway (except for the instant casts like on the BD).

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:32 PM by Renork

Isavyr wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 4:21 PM
Only savages 3-shot people, not all light-tanks. That's a problem with savages, not PD.

I play two casters, and please do not make PD stronger. With PD5, Cloth > Leather. Casters don't need more defense.

Yeah that's not how defenses are calculated in this game, 10% slash/thrust/crush does not bump you up to leather armor, nor do you gain studded by getting an extra 10%. You can't go by resists and discard AF, a caster doesn't gain chain armor with PD9.

This is very analogous to how certain people claim valewalkers are the most "survivable" class next to pallies because they get a "plate absorb buff". Uh no, that's not how things work, you can't disregard AF.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:32 PM by Isavyr

Zansobar wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:25 PM
Actually with 20% from PD casters should be approaching chain or plate levels...however they won't have the HP to survive like a melee and if they are being constantly interupted they are pretty useless anyway (except for the instant casts like on the BD).

I think you misuinderstood what I meant; My point was that casters can get a good upgrade for relatively cheap--PD5 is 10% for 10 points, which puts the caster about leather armor. Yes, PD9 is 20% for 34 points--and may approach plate though I'm not really sure, because of the discrepancies in Armor Factor (AF). At any rate, my point was, casters can get a good upgrade for relatively not too expensive, and certainly don't need more of a boost.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:33 PM by Isavyr

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:32 PM
Yeah that's not how defenses are calculated in this game, 10% slash/thrust/crush does not bump you up to leather armor, nor do you gain studded by getting an extra 10%. You can't go by resists and discard AF, a caster doesn't gain chain armor with PD9.

Correct. But I did an in-vivo comparison, not a mathematical estimation.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:34 PM by Renork

Zansobar wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:25 PM
Isavyr wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 4:21 PM
Only savages 3-shot people, not all light-tanks. That's a problem with savages, not PD.

I play two casters, and please do not make PD stronger. With PD5, Cloth > Leather. Casters don't need more defense.

Actually with 20% from PD casters should be approaching chain or plate levels...however they won't have the HP to survive like a melee and if they are being constantly interupted they are pretty useless anyway (except for the instant casts like on the BD).

The level of ignorance, far too much.

Go level a class that wears chain or plate and have a friend hit you, take a screen shot. Do the same thing with a caster and compare your data. It's not difficult to test and you had ample opportunity to do this during beta, assuming you actually participated.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:37 PM by Renork

Isavyr wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:33 PM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:32 PM
Yeah that's not how defenses are calculated in this game, 10% slash/thrust/crush does not bump you up to leather armor, nor do you gain studded by getting an extra 10%. You can't go by resists and discard AF, a caster doesn't gain chain armor with PD9.

Correct. But I did an in-vivo comparison, not a mathematical estimation.

Myself and plenty of people actually tested the differences in PD, there were very few people who dumped their points in PD9 even before they scaled down PD9 from 30% to 20%. VERY few people went PD9, but those that are terrible at positioning and don't pre-kite benefited from it the most. They allowed the max possible ra points at the end of beta, and even then PD wasn't that enticing. A caster is not going to survive a melee train even with PD9, but it does make fights last slightly longer when you don't have your train all assisting.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:40 PM by Isavyr

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:37 PM
Myself and plenty of people actually tested the differences in PD, there were very few people who dumped their points in PD9 even before they scaled down PD9 from 30% to 20%. VERY few people went PD9, but those that are terrible at positioning and don't pre-kite benefited from it the most. It is however a very hefty investment.

I feel like this paragraph is missing its conclusion. What is the your point, sir?

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:42 PM by Renork

Isavyr wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:40 PM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:37 PM
Myself and plenty of people actually tested the differences in PD, there were very few people who dumped their points in PD9 even before they scaled down PD9 from 30% to 20%. VERY few people went PD9, but those that are terrible at positioning and don't pre-kite benefited from it the most. It is however a very hefty investment.

I feel like this paragraph is missing its conclusion. What is the your point, sir?

My point is, PD5 does not = leather my dear sir. An assumption is not a proven fact, go test it out for yourself and see if your data supports your hypothesis :^)

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:53 PM by Isavyr

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:42 PM
My point is, PD5 does not = leather my dear sir. An assumption is not a proven fact, go test it out for yourself and see if your data supports your hypothesis :^)

This board feels silly at times. In-vivo means in life. I already did the test. There was no assumption. If you don't understand a term, feel free to ask!

Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:58 PM by Renork

Isavyr wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:53 PM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:42 PM
My point is, PD5 does not = leather my dear sir. An assumption is not a proven fact, go test it out for yourself and see if your data supports your hypothesis :^)

This board feels silly at times. In-vivo means in life. I already did the test. There was no assumption. If you don't understand a term, feel free to ask!

Oh sweetheart, you are using incorrect terminology. This is a game, there is nothing "in-vivo" to test, if anything it would be pseudo "in-vitro". I worked in a lab during my undergrad in Molecular Biology, and currently third year medical student. Excellent attempt tho

. PD5 does not = Leather, PD 9 does not = chain, much less plate, lol.

Of course, I would never deliberately bring laboratory and biological terminology to a conversation to try to sound intelligent, especially because it can backfire and have the opposite effect when used out of context (just like in your case). If you need help with how to use words in an appropriate context, please just ask. Until then, try not to behave like the stereotypical wannabe scientist that makes the scientific community look bad, thank you.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 9:38 PM by Sepplord

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:52 PM
simply list one “realm ability”.

Truesight

Pretty ironic ad hominem btw.

Mon 11 Feb 2019 9:56 PM by Renork

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 9:38 PM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 3:52 PM
simply list one “realm ability”.

Truesight

Pretty ironic ad hominem btw.

Oh my, so now we are resorting to strawmanning? Evidently and based on your post history, reading comprehension is not your forte.

It is not ad hominem when it's an accurate statement, do you actually know what the term ad hominem stands for by the way? https://forum.playphoenix.online/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=4941. Not only did you immediately post something completely irrelevant on that thread (hello there lack of knowledge and reading comprehension), but then you just couldn't resist and just HAD to tell the OP TWF doesn't need buffs. Notice however that the poster never said anything about TWF being weak, he simply wanted to know why ST can be used in two different ways, while TWF can only be used by setting up a gt.

I'm not entirely sure why you think it's okay to go berating everyone just because you disagree with their opinions, but your pseudo-dev mentality is quite humorous. You truly think in your mind that your opinion is far more important than others and will say anything to "validate" it. My statement stands, PD 9 is not chain, and it is certainly not plate. You can however continue to think that by posting something irrelevant to the conversation will make my statement wrong if that helps you sleep better at night friend :^)

Tue 12 Feb 2019 12:00 AM by Isavyr

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 9:56 PM
I'm not entirely sure why you think it's okay to go berating everyone just because you disagree with their opinions, but your pseudo-dev mentality is quite humorous.

You don't see the contradiction, do you? You've insulted everyone who disagreed with you in this thread. Pseudo-dev, wannabe scientist. We're just full of assumptions for someone who challenges others not to make assumptions :-)

PS: You were right about in-vivo, it was misused. I apologize and hope we can still continue this conversation, though maybe not today

Tue 12 Feb 2019 5:35 AM by jelzinga_EU

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:32 PM
Isavyr wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 4:21 PM
Only savages 3-shot people, not all light-tanks. That's a problem with savages, not PD.

I play two casters, and please do not make PD stronger. With PD5, Cloth > Leather. Casters don't need more defense.

Yeah that's not how defenses are calculated in this game, 10% slash/thrust/crush does not bump you up to leather armor, nor do you gain studded by getting an extra 10%. You can't go by resists and discard AF, a caster doesn't gain chain armor with PD9.

This is very analogous to how certain people claim valewalkers are the most "survivable" class next to pallies because they get a "plate absorb buff". Uh no, that's not how things work, you can't disregard AF.

You're right, you can't disregard armour-factor. But baseline a cloth-caster has about 500 AF and is neutral to all melee-damage. Baseline leather is approx. 550 AF and has weak/strong melee-resists (depending on their realm). Adding PD into the mix a caster certainly goes up to leather-levels, for example a Slash INF will hit a SB harder than a caster with PD5 and the same happens when a Scout shoots the same targets and uses the correct arrows on their target.

However, they will never reach chain/plate levels, obviously. To compare, I perfed a paladin with my Shadowblade (44 CS) and the perf did 278 mainhand damage. I would perf a typical caster with the same weapon and spec for roughly 460~ or so.

Tue 12 Feb 2019 7:51 AM by Isavyr

Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:42 PM
My point is, PD5 does not = leather my dear sir. An assumption is not a proven fact, go test it out for yourself and see if your data supports your hypothesis :^)

I used three characters:
Elf Caster -no PD
Elf Nightshade -no PD
Celt Caster - PD5

BM used style for 168 thrust damage on Elf Caster (29% thrust resist, 0% armor resist)
BM used style for 168 thrust damage on Elf Nightshade (29% thrust resist, 0% armor resist (?? - not sure))
BM used style for 163 thrust damage on Celt Caster (26% thrust resist, 0% armor resist)

What it looks like to me is that cloth + absorb buff + AF buff > leather armor, without even involving PD. I am unsure of the Hibernian leather table, and whether it's weak, strong, or neutral to thrust.

At any rate, PD didn't seem to be helping as much as I thought it would, and leather appears to be worse than cloth in the first place. Strange finding--maybe I did something wrong.

Tue 12 Feb 2019 9:07 AM by Cadebrennus

Isavyr wrote: ↑
Tue 12 Feb 2019 7:51 AM
Renork wrote: ↑
Mon 11 Feb 2019 6:42 PM
My point is, PD5 does not = leather my dear sir. An assumption is not a proven fact, go test it out for yourself and see if your data supports your hypothesis :^)

I used three characters:
Elf Caster -no PD
Elf Nightshade -no PD
Celt Caster - PD5

BM used style for 168 thrust damage on Elf Caster (29% thrust resist, 0% armor resist)
BM used style for 168 thrust damage on Elf Nightshade (29% thrust resist, 0% armor resist (?? - not sure))
BM used style for 163 thrust damage on Celt Caster (26% thrust resist, 0% armor resist)

What it looks like to me is that cloth + absorb buff + AF buff > leather armor, without even involving PD. I am unsure of the Hibernian leather table, and whether it's weak, strong, or neutral to thrust.

At any rate, PD didn't seem to be helping as much as I thought it would, and leather appears to be worse than cloth in the first place. Strange finding--maybe I did something wrong.

All Hib is neutral to Thrust.

Tue 12 Feb 2019 3:12 PM by

gruenesschaf

Without spec AF leather is very slightly better than cloth + self af buff against the neutral damage type, with an archer / 2h you'd probably see a couple damage as difference, however armor absorb scales with AF buffs whereas absorb buffs don't -> add spec af and you should see a difference, still rather small though.

PD is a secondary resist and as such reduces the final damage by the listed % of the damage after primary resists (but without racial resists, those are at the very end but reduce the damage by the % of the initial damage like primary resists)