The change with buff pots and charges has created a large dex/qui disparity between the three archers. I certainly don't want anything taken away from rangers and hunters, but I have a Luri ranger with all starting points into dex, 48pf and MoA2. His dex is ~360, quick 275. My Saracen scout's starting points are more evenly distributed (str/dex/qui) and has Aug dex4. His dex is 315, qui ~205. I would need to be over rr8 to just make up for the lower stats with aug dex/qui. Now I understand that a ranger needs to invest 48 points into PF to achieve those stats. I'm not asking for anything that would allow scouts to mirror stats that Rangers can achieve. Maybe allow scouts to spend points in MoA to up their buff values a little?
Boost for Scouts
Started 19 Aug 2019
by
Alistre
in
Suggestions
Mon 19 Aug 2019 2:31 PM
by
chois
Good luck i give up with this fight....
Mon 19 Aug 2019 2:37 PM
by
inoeth
my hunter has 299 dex with yellow dex/quick and dex1 and arcana3.... its time to buff hunters!
Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:04 PM
by
inoeth
eyepatch dwarf ofc but doesnt really matter unless you go kobold midgard only has pretty low dex races
what i wanted to say is that scouts lack of spec buffs but they have much higher stats that make up for it
Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:23 PM
by
Alistre
inoeth wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:04 PM
eyepatch dwarf ofc but doesnt really matter unless you go kobold midgard only has pretty low dex races
what i wanted to say is that scouts lack of spec buffs but they have much higher stats that make up for it
In your case, the eyepatch makes up for lower dex.
But to compare apples to apples- If I took a Highlander scout, put 10 points into dex at creation- I'd have 263 dex @ lvl 50 buffed with combined forces w/ no aug dex. That's the same ~30- 40 point disparity between scouts and rangers. That's a pretty significant amount, given the realm ranks needed to close the gap in stats alone.
Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:53 PM
by
Cadebrennus
If you look at the Assassin threads they say that a 30-40 gap in stats doesn't matter at all.
Mon 19 Aug 2019 4:10 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Mon 19 Aug 2019 4:12 PM
by
inoeth
Alistre wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:23 PM
In your case, the eyepatch makes up for lower dex.
But to compare apples to apples- If I took a Highlander scout, put 10 points into dex at creation- I'd have 263 dex @ lvl 50 buffed with combined forces w/ no aug dex. That's the same ~30- 40 point disparity between scouts and rangers. That's a pretty significant amount, given the realm ranks needed to close the gap in stats alone.
and now tell me why anyone would make a highlander scout?
i took a look into the charplanner:
saracene scout with 10 dex/con/quick ends up with
223 str
218 con
293 dex!
218 quick
now if you go quick3 you can increase quick to 230 which seems quite accepteble, add moarms and moblock get decent high shield spec and get dex/quick and str/con debuff weapons...
i really cant understand all the whining about scouts, its like skilling warrior 50 thrown weapons and complain about being gimp
Mon 19 Aug 2019 4:46 PM
by
Alistre
inoeth wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 4:12 PMAlistre wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:23 PMinoeth wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:04 PMeyepatch dwarf ofc but doesnt really matter unless you go kobold midgard only has pretty low dex races
what i wanted to say is that scouts lack of spec buffs but they have much higher stats that make up for it
In your case, the eyepatch makes up for lower dex.
But to compare apples to apples- If I took a Highlander scout, put 10 points into dex at creation- I'd have 263 dex @ lvl 50 buffed with combined forces w/ no aug dex. That's the same ~30- 40 point disparity between scouts and rangers. That's a pretty significant amount, given the realm ranks needed to close the gap in stats alone.
and now tell me why anyone would make a highlander scout?
i took a look into the charplanner:
saracene scout with 10 dex/con/quick ends up with
223 str
218 con
293 dex!
218 quick
now if you go quick3 you can increase quick to 230 which seems quite accepteble, add moarms and moblock get decent high shield spec and get dex/quick and str/con debuff weapons...
i really cant understand all the whining about scouts, its like skilling warrior 50 thrown weapons and complain about being gimp
Why would anyone make a Highlander scout? I dunno, maybe the same reason you'd make a Dwarf hunter.....you do realize they have the same dex / qui...
My scout is 35 stealth, 35 bow, 42 shield, 41 thrust. It doesn't quite align with your thrown weapons warrior analogy.
MoArms and MoArchery is available to all archers, as well as debuff proc weapons. The stat disparity is still there.
I don't see a problem with letting scouts spec into MoArcane. Let everyone for that matter.
Mon 19 Aug 2019 5:58 PM
by
inoeth
Alistre wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 4:46 PMinoeth wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 4:12 PMAlistre wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:23 PMIn your case, the eyepatch makes up for lower dex.
But to compare apples to apples- If I took a Highlander scout, put 10 points into dex at creation- I'd have 263 dex @ lvl 50 buffed with combined forces w/ no aug dex. That's the same ~30- 40 point disparity between scouts and rangers. That's a pretty significant amount, given the realm ranks needed to close the gap in stats alone.
and now tell me why anyone would make a highlander scout?
i took a look into the charplanner:
saracene scout with 10 dex/con/quick ends up with
223 str
218 con
293 dex!
218 quick
now if you go quick3 you can increase quick to 230 which seems quite accepteble, add moarms and moblock get decent high shield spec and get dex/quick and str/con debuff weapons...
i really cant understand all the whining about scouts, its like skilling warrior 50 thrown weapons and complain about being gimp
Why would anyone make a Highlander scout? I dunno, maybe the same reason you'd make a Dwarf hunter.....you do realize they have the same dex / qui...
My scout is 35 stealth, 35 bow, 42 shield, 41 thrust. It doesn't quite align with your thrown weapons warrior analogy.
MoArms and MoArchery is available to all archers, as well as debuff proc weapons. The stat disparity is still there.
I don't see a problem with letting scouts spec into MoArcane. Let everyone for that matter.
because nobody seems to realise that more than 27 bow ist just useless.... spec 50 shield get melee ra spec and go kill
well you can go highlander but than you can not argue that you do not have enough dex ....
btw saracen has also better racial resists than highlander
Tue 20 Aug 2019 1:12 AM
by
Mavella
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:53 PMIf you look at the Assassin threads they say that a 30-40 gap in stats doesn't matter at all.
No one is saying those stats are inconsequential but when the trade off is a 10% and 20% resist advantage over your two most common enemies they don't matter nearly as much.
Lay off the schnapps grandpa.
As for scouts. They are definitely in a tougher spot after the charge nerf and other classes self buffs buff. I don't think they are hurting for group utility but could use something to help their solo viability. They have to work harder than any other stealther when solo imo.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:39 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Mavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 1:12 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:53 PMIf you look at the Assassin threads they say that a 30-40 gap in stats doesn't matter at all.
No one is saying those stats are inconsequential but when the trade off is a 10% and 20% resist advantage over your two most common enemies they don't matter nearly as much.
Lay off the schnapps grandpa.
As for scouts. They are definitely in a tougher spot after the charge nerf and other classes self buffs buff. I don't think they are hurting for group utility but could use something to help their solo viability. They have to work harder than any other stealther when solo imo.
It was said in the Nightshade whine thread that the +30 Strength advantage was inconsequential. So, now which side of the fence do you stand on? Consequently or inconsequential? You can't have your whine both ways.
In other words, in what flavor do you prefer your whine?
Tue 20 Aug 2019 6:47 AM
by
Sepplord
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:39 AMMavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 1:12 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:53 PMIf you look at the Assassin threads they say that a 30-40 gap in stats doesn't matter at all.
No one is saying those stats are inconsequential but when the trade off is a 10% and 20% resist advantage over your two most common enemies they don't matter nearly as much.
Lay off the schnapps grandpa.
As for scouts. They are definitely in a tougher spot after the charge nerf and other classes self buffs buff. I don't think they are hurting for group utility but could use something to help their solo viability. They have to work harder than any other stealther when solo imo.
It was said in the Nightshade whine thread that the +30 Strength advantage was inconsequential. So, now which side of the fence do you stand on? Consequently or inconsequential? You can't have your whine both ways.
In other words, in what flavor do you prefer your whine?
So anything any archer has ever said is a reasonable reply to discredit you whenever i want? At least that's how you apply that logic currently.
Unable to admit fault without having an excuse in combination with whiny bias, what a lovely combination
Back to archers though: the "scout problem" boils down to the general "bow" problem. All three Archers get too much range capability without spending a lot of points. Fixing the bowline would help achieving better archer balance in between archers but also in general.
It's a huge deviation from phoenixs current status quo to rework the whole archery mechanic. The new archery system that mythic implemented had lost a lot of the feel of physically shooting arrows....
Tue 20 Aug 2019 7:51 AM
by
Kampfar
Didnt read the much here. But my upcoming Hunter has no anytime 9 sec Stun. I dont want it removed from scouts but I want it too....
Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:10 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Kampfar wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 7:51 AMDidnt read the much here. But my upcoming Hunter has no anytime 9 sec Stun. I dont want it removed from scouts but I want it too....
Spear is your friend.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:11 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Sepplord wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 6:47 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:39 AMMavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 1:12 AMNo one is saying those stats are inconsequential but when the trade off is a 10% and 20% resist advantage over your two most common enemies they don't matter nearly as much.
Lay off the schnapps grandpa.
As for scouts. They are definitely in a tougher spot after the charge nerf and other classes self buffs buff. I don't think they are hurting for group utility but could use something to help their solo viability. They have to work harder than any other stealther when solo imo.
It was said in the Nightshade whine thread that the +30 Strength advantage was inconsequential. So, now which side of the fence do you stand on? Consequently or inconsequential? You can't have your whine both ways.
In other words, in what flavor do you prefer your whine?
So anything any archer has ever said is a reasonable reply to discredit you whenever i want? At least that's how you apply that logic currently.
Unable to admit fault without having an excuse in combination with whiny bias, what a lovely combination
Back to archers though: the "scout problem" boils down to the general "bow" problem. All three Archers get too much range capability without spending a lot of points. Fixing the bowline would help achieving better archer balance in between archers but also in general.
It's a huge deviation from phoenixs current status quo to rework the whole archery mechanic. The new archery system that mythic implemented had lost a lot of the feel of physically shooting arrows....
You sure did a lot of tapdancing around the subject I brought up. Either address what is said or just shut the hell up.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:45 AM
by
Sepplord
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:11 AMSo anything any archer has ever said is a reasonable reply to discredit you whenever i want? At least that's how you apply that logic currently.
Unable to admit fault without having an excuse in combination with whiny bias, what a lovely combination
Back to archers though: the "scout problem" boils down to the general "bow" problem. All three Archers get too much range capability without spending a lot of points. Fixing the bowline would help achieving better archer balance in between archers but also in general.
It's a huge deviation from phoenixs current status quo to rework the whole archery mechanic. The new archery system that mythic implemented had lost a lot of the feel of physically shooting arrows....
You sure did a lot of tapdancing around the subject I brought up. Either address what is said or just shut the hell up.
[/quote]
Tapdancing? i cut straight to calling you out...the "subject" you brought up is in detail discussed in the thread you mentioned...why would we want to discuss this again here? Where it is off-topic and the thread-topic is still actively being discussed? I even adressed it, as an observant person would have noticed, but didn't want to further encourage your thread-derailment by getting back to the scout discussion.
The irony in this statement is hilarious, considering you are the one making off-topic assassin-remarks in a scout-thread
So...that said: do you have any input ontopic, or did you simply want to push another assassin-whine into the forum?
Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:48 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Sepplord wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:45 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:11 AMSo anything any archer has ever said is a reasonable reply to discredit you whenever i want? At least that's how you apply that logic currently.
Unable to admit fault without having an excuse in combination with whiny bias, what a lovely combination
Back to archers though: the "scout problem" boils down to the general "bow" problem. All three Archers get too much range capability without spending a lot of points. Fixing the bowline would help achieving better archer balance in between archers but also in general.
It's a huge deviation from phoenixs current status quo to rework the whole archery mechanic. The new archery system that mythic implemented had lost a lot of the feel of physically shooting arrows....
You sure did a lot of tapdancing around the subject I brought up. Either address what is said or just shut the hell up.
Tapdancing? i cut straight to calling you out...the "subject" you brought up is in detail discussed in the thread you mentioned...why would we want to discuss this again here? Where it is off-topic and the thread-topic is still actively being discussed? I even adressed it, as an observant person would have noticed, but didn't want to further encourage your thread-derailment by getting back to the scout discussion.
The irony in this statement is hilarious, considering you are the one making off-topic assassin-remarks in a scout-thread
So...that said: do you have any input ontopic, or did you simply want to push another assassin-whine into the forum?
[/quote]
Seriously, you need to cut the bullshit out. Answer the question. Is a 30 point attribute difference between a similar class significant or not?
Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:55 AM
by
inoeth
spear does not have an anytime 9s stun, only 5s rear
btw can we have that rear stun changed to 7s? would be in line with the style changes that makes blade assassins so strong here
Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:00 AM
by
Sepplord
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:48 AMSeriously, you need to cut the bullshit out. Answer the question. Is a 30 point attribute difference between a similar class significant or not?
Yes, i guess. I am not the dude to crunch numbers into small digits...but considering people spend lots of RA-points on much smaller statgains it surely must be a big difference. (btw. i hope you are taking notes on how to answer direct questions, would help if you could actually do that too from time to time).
Here's a question from me to you:
How is that relevant to the current discussion or why do you feel the need to push that talking point multiple times?
Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:08 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Sepplord wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:00 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:48 AMSeriously, you need to cut the bullshit out. Answer the question. Is a 30 point attribute difference between a similar class significant or not?
Yes, i guess. I am not the dude to crunch numbers into small digits...but considering people spend lots of RA-points on much smaller statgains it surely must be a big difference. (btw. i hope you are taking notes on how to answer direct questions, would help if you could actually do that too from time to time).
Here's a question from me to you:
How is that relevant to the current discussion or why do you feel the need to push that talking point multiple times?
You guess what, the difference is significant? Then according to you Norse SBs should have a significant stat advantage compared to Elf and Keen NS's.
You blow a lot of hot air talking about wanting to see short answers yet on two different threads you are talking in circles without actually saying anything. Seriously, YOU GUESS something? Either admit what your opinion is or just admit that you don't know, or that you're simply biased towards wanting easy-mode for your favourite class.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:14 AM
by
Sepplord
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:08 AMSepplord wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:00 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:48 AMSeriously, you need to cut the bullshit out. Answer the question. Is a 30 point attribute difference between a similar class significant or not?
Yes, i guess. I am not the dude to crunch numbers into small digits...but considering people spend lots of RA-points on much smaller statgains it surely must be a big difference. (btw. i hope you are taking notes on how to answer direct questions, would help if you could actually do that too from time to time).
Here's a question from me to you:
How is that relevant to the current discussion or why do you feel the need to push that talking point multiple times?
You guess what, the difference is significant? Then according to you Norse SBs should have a significant stat advantage compared to Elf and Keen NS's.
You blow a lot of hot air talking about wanting to see short answers yet on two different threads you are talking in circles without actually saying anything. Seriously, YOU GUESS something? Either admit what your opinion is or just admit that you don't know, or that you're simply biased towards wanting easy-mode for your favourite class.
Have you made up your mind yet, how this relates to the topic of "Boost for Scouts"?
The answers you seek are already layed out in the relevant assassin thread (in which you have dodged several questions, too). But if you still haven't been able to follow the explanations there, i will happily explain it (and links to dev-comments) AGAIN. But please, ask that question in the relevant Thread, because this one is about Scouts
Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:40 AM
by
Hejjin
The original post in this thread is discussing the potential difference in stats between Scouts and Rangers/Hunters due to the changes to their buffs and Cadebrennus posted after the following post from the OP : (I have highlighted what I consider to be the operative part )Sepplord wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 9:14 AMHave you made up your mind yet, how this relates to the topic of "Boost for Scouts"?
Alistre wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:23 PMsnip...
But to compare apples to apples- If I took a Highlander scout, put 10 points into dex at creation- I'd have 263 dex @ lvl 50 buffed with combined forces w/ no aug dex. That's the same ~30- 40 point disparity between scouts and rangers. That's a pretty significant amount, given the realm ranks needed to close the gap in stats alone.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 11:20 AM
by
Alistre
The more I think about this.... It's not really just about scouts. It's anyone who has to rvr without cleric/druid/shaman buffs after the nerf AND is not a self buffer. Scouts have the misfortune of filling that slot along with being 1 of 3 in the archetype that has to rely on watered down buffs vs the other two who can self buff, buffs higher than delve because of specialization bonus and availability of MoArcane. If they would just roll back the buffing changes I'd be happy. I don't know why they even did that but w/e.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 12:56 PM
by
inoeth
Alistre wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 11:20 AMThe more I think about this.... It's not really just about scouts. It's anyone who has to rvr without cleric/druid/shaman buffs after the nerf AND is not a self buffer. Scouts have the misfortune of filling that slot along with being 1 of 3 in the archetype that has to rely on watered down buffs vs the other two who can self buff, buffs higher than delve because of specialization bonus and availability of MoArcane. If they would just roll back the buffing changes I'd be happy. I don't know why they even did that but w/e.
god no!
Tue 20 Aug 2019 1:32 PM
by
Horus
Scout theme song...
Tue 20 Aug 2019 2:00 PM
by
Hejjin
That seems more appropriate for the Hunter asking for an increased duration for their spear stun :
inoeth wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 8:55 AMspear does not have an anytime 9s stun, only 5s rear
btw can we have that rear stun changed to 7s? would be in line with the style changes that makes blade assassins so strong here
Tue 20 Aug 2019 2:36 PM
by
Horus
Alistre wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 11:20 AMThe more I think about this.... It's not really just about scouts. It's anyone who has to rvr without cleric/druid/shaman buffs after the nerf AND is not a self buffer. Scouts have the misfortune of filling that slot along with being 1 of 3 in the archetype that has to rely on watered down buffs vs the other two who can self buff, buffs higher than delve because of specialization bonus and availability of MoArcane. If they would just roll back the buffing changes I'd be happy. I don't know why they even did that but w/e.
How about rolling back self buff changes and eliminating buff potions altogether so people can't just spend a few gold to get the benefits of another class's spec line?
I'm sure no one would complain about that.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 2:46 PM
by
Alistre
Horus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 2:36 PMAlistre wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 11:20 AMThe more I think about this.... It's not really just about scouts. It's anyone who has to rvr without cleric/druid/shaman buffs after the nerf AND is not a self buffer. Scouts have the misfortune of filling that slot along with being 1 of 3 in the archetype that has to rely on watered down buffs vs the other two who can self buff, buffs higher than delve because of specialization bonus and availability of MoArcane. If they would just roll back the buffing changes I'd be happy. I don't know why they even did that but w/e.
How about rolling back self buff changes and eliminating buff potions altogether so people can't just spend a few gold to get the benefits of another class's spec line?
I'm sure no one would complain about that.
What?
I guess I should have specified rolling back to the 75 str/con, dex/qui charges. I don't know where you're going with this though.
What do you play anyway?
Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:31 PM
by
Mavella
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:39 AMMavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 1:12 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Mon 19 Aug 2019 3:53 PMIf you look at the Assassin threads they say that a 30-40 gap in stats doesn't matter at all.
No one is saying those stats are inconsequential but when the trade off is a 10% and 20% resist advantage over your two most common enemies they don't matter nearly as much.
Lay off the schnapps grandpa.
As for scouts. They are definitely in a tougher spot after the charge nerf and other classes self buffs buff. I don't think they are hurting for group utility but could use something to help their solo viability. They have to work harder than any other stealther when solo imo.
It was said in the Nightshade whine thread that the +30 Strength advantage was inconsequential. So, now which side of the fence do you stand on? Consequently or inconsequential? You can't have your whine both ways.
In other words, in what flavor do you prefer your whine?
Gosh this is so like you. Considering this has been rehashed about a dozen times let's hit the highlights.
NS CHOOSE to go Blades willingly giving themselves a 5% overall weaponskill/base damage disadvantage to have a 10% and 20% dmg type advantage vs their most common enemies in stealth wars. If the base damage and defense penetration was oh so important to them they could go Pierce where they'd have similar or higher WS to an SB.
Every NS with a brain realizes how powerful this is and takes the minor weaponskill hit for such an obvious advantage in stealth wars. The whole argument is against allowing the stealther with the best armor/damage type in stealth wars from further increasing this advantage with another 20 str, 20 con, and an additional 3% slash resist.
Now if they reduced NS resist type advantage to 5-10% rather than 10-20% maybe I'd be willing to say sure let Celt be NS but as it stands right now I don't see the need to give what's already in my opinion the best stealther in stealth wars a buff.
I know you're still under the impression minor amount stats give huge gains(how much block and parry was that 5 dex again??) but lets not derail a legitimate topic with your horseshit.
Now the above scenenario doesn't really apply to Scouts because as we all know archers can select their damage type at will with arrows which is great. Their lack of dex is a result of poorly thought out charge nerfs on the Devs part. I also don't think scouts archery damage is really lagging behind the other archers purely because of this dex disadvantage though. I know I've been on the receiving end of 600+ damage crit shots which I've never seen from a Ranger and can't imagine a hunter is able to push those number no matter the spec.
I think the bigger issues for scouts is of course their melee damage. In a world of everyone having TG chest and Epic albatives scouts melee damage has an extremely difficult time cutting through that. If their melee is low enough I can only imagine a scenario similar to pre-buff hunter pets in that when procs are going off you're doing way more harm than good.
Scouts of course are unparalleled with their utility when partnered or grouped bringing guard and slam to the table. So any potential buffs need to not bring their groupability/utility over the top.
Maybe moving them up a step or two on their melee damage tables might help with their ability to actually slug it out in melee and finish off targets that close the gap on them after getting that initial crit shot off. I don't think they need help with their archery damage and I don't think they need any more utility.
To the people bitching about slam. Get purge 4 or 5. If you're solo looking for a fight with purge off cooldown you deserve to be stunned and killed.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:50 PM
by
Horus
Mavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:31 PMTo the people bitching about slam. Get purge 4 or 5. If you're solo looking for a fight with purge off cooldown you deserve to be stunned and killed.
OK so what you are saying is it quite OK to force me to spend RPs on Purge 5 to be able to mitigate Slam (although this does nothing to mitigate the inherent defensive benefit of a shield) but it is wrong to ask a scout to spend RA points on Aug Dex to increase their dex to get closer to a self buffing class who spent 48 spec points to get the best dex/quick buff.
Right...
But you also think it is fair that someone should also be able to simply have a charged item to get that same 48 spec point buff, so I should not be surprised.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 6:10 PM
by
Mavella
Horus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:50 PMMavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:31 PMTo the people bitching about slam. Get purge 4 or 5. If you're solo looking for a fight with purge off cooldown you deserve to be stunned and killed.
OK so what you are saying is it quite OK to force me to spend RPs on Purge 5 to be able to mitigate Slam (although this does nothing to mitigate the inherent defensive benefit of a shield) but it is wrong to ask a scout to spend RA points on Aug Dex to increase their dex to get closer to a self buffing class who spent 48 spec points to get the best dex/quick buff.
Right...
But you also think it is fair that someone should also be able to simply have a charged item to get that same 48 spec point buff, so I should not be surprised.
I'd shed a tear if you were investing 48 points purely for a buff but you aren't . Every self buffing class gets damaging and utility abilities in addition to those buffs. You also get 1.25x benefit for speccing in the line which is a bonus that pots/charges don't give. Those self buffing classes could also utilize pots/charges and reduce their spec allowing them to increase their martial abilities instead. So honestly, cry me a fucking river sorry you don't get to spend 48 in a line and severely out stats evey non-self buffing class in the game. Maybe you can time travel back to 2001 and tell Mythic to scrap the buff idea.
As for Purge you're paying to not get slammed and shot in the face for 600 + a follow up. No RA in the game offers that kind of damage mitigation/prevention in this situation. It's also allowing you to attack for the next 9 seconds when you wouldn't have been able to. If you don't think it's valuable enough to invest the points to increase your purge readiness don't cry when you get slammed and die when it's on cooldown. It's really that simple.
Tue 20 Aug 2019 7:15 PM
by
Alistre
Horus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:50 PMMavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:31 PMTo the people bitching about slam. Get purge 4 or 5. If you're solo looking for a fight with purge off cooldown you deserve to be stunned and killed.
OK so what you are saying is it quite OK to force me to spend RPs on Purge 5 to be able to mitigate Slam (although this does nothing to mitigate the inherent defensive benefit of a shield) but it is wrong to ask a scout to spend RA points on Aug Dex to increase their dex to get closer to a self buffing class who spent 48 spec points to get the best dex/quick buff.
Right...
But you also think it is fair that someone should also be able to simply have a charged item to get that same 48 spec point buff, so I should not be surprised.
Jfc... everyone who wanders out solo needs purge to keep from dying of stuns, poison etc. You expect me to believe that you need to spec deep into purge just for scouts?? Lol- I know...there's so many of those OP'd fuckers running around.
Reading apparently isn't your forte.. I specifically said that we shouldn't be able to match stat for stat with a self buffing class. Furthermore, I also said that I don't want anything taken away from anyone else. I'm just asking for them to give is something that will allow us to stand our ground in in the current state of this server. You can't tell me that scouts aren't at the very bottom. You have to bring your A game on every class you go up against. Even then you're likely to lose...just be happy you put up a good fight! Have you ever played one here? Probably not, but I bet you would if they were the only self buffing archer..
I think the real issue with you is that you don't want your free arpeez taken away when you do come across a scout.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 5:30 AM
by
jelzinga_EU
I would make a case for the new Archery. This gives scouts their buffs (in Archery) and equalizes range and speed across the board. Then we can find another thing to cry about 
Wed 21 Aug 2019 7:09 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Mavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:31 PMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 5:39 AMMavella wrote: ↑Tue 20 Aug 2019 1:12 AMNo one is saying those stats are inconsequential but when the trade off is a 10% and 20% resist advantage over your two most common enemies they don't matter nearly as much.
Lay off the schnapps grandpa.
As for scouts. They are definitely in a tougher spot after the charge nerf and other classes self buffs buff. I don't think they are hurting for group utility but could use something to help their solo viability. They have to work harder than any other stealther when solo imo.
It was said in the Nightshade whine thread that the +30 Strength advantage was inconsequential. So, now which side of the fence do you stand on? Consequently or inconsequential? You can't have your whine both ways.
In other words, in what flavor do you prefer your whine?
Gosh this is so like you. Considering this has been rehashed about a dozen times let's hit the highlights.
NS CHOOSE to go Blades willingly giving themselves a 5% overall weaponskill/base damage disadvantage to have a 10% and 20% dmg type advantage vs their most common enemies in stealth wars. If the base damage and defense penetration was oh so important to them they could go Pierce where they'd have similar or higher WS to an SB.
Every NS with a brain realizes how powerful this is and takes the minor weaponskill hit for such an obvious advantage in stealth wars. The whole argument is against allowing the stealther with the best armor/damage type in stealth wars from further increasing this advantage with another 20 str, 20 con, and an additional 3% slash resist.
Now if they reduced NS resist type advantage to 5-10% rather than 10-20% maybe I'd be willing to say sure let Celt be NS but as it stands right now I don't see the need to give what's already in my opinion the best stealther in stealth wars a buff.
I know you're still under the impression minor amount stats give huge gains(how much block and parry was that 5 dex again??) but lets not derail a legitimate topic with your horseshit.
Now the above scenenario doesn't really apply to Scouts because as we all know archers can select their damage type at will with arrows which is great. Their lack of dex is a result of poorly thought out charge nerfs on the Devs part. I also don't think scouts archery damage is really lagging behind the other archers purely because of this dex disadvantage though. I know I've been on the receiving end of 600+ damage crit shots which I've never seen from a Ranger and can't imagine a hunter is able to push those number no matter the spec.
I think the bigger issues for scouts is of course their melee damage. In a world of everyone having TG chest and Epic albatives scouts melee damage has an extremely difficult time cutting through that. If their melee is low enough I can only imagine a scenario similar to pre-buff hunter pets in that when procs are going off you're doing way more harm than good.
Scouts of course are unparalleled with their utility when partnered or grouped bringing guard and slam to the table. So any potential buffs need to not bring their groupability/utility over the top.
Maybe moving them up a step or two on their melee damage tables might help with their ability to actually slug it out in melee and finish off targets that close the gap on them after getting that initial crit shot off. I don't think they need help with their archery damage and I don't think they need any more utility.
To the people bitching about slam. Get purge 4 or 5. If you're solo looking for a fight with purge off cooldown you deserve to be stunned and killed.
If I had one, and only one thing to say about you, it is that you certainly know how to use a lot of words but not actually say anything.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 7:12 AM
by
Sepplord
it's sad what you have turned into
Wed 21 Aug 2019 8:05 AM
by
Mavella
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 7:09 AMIf I had one, and only one thing to say about you, it is that you certainly know how to use a lot of words but not actually say anything.
And if I have anything to say about you its that you certainly claim to have a lot of knowledge about DAoC mechanics and yet seem to be wrong time and again. Always the first to hurl elementary insults and only dig your heels in until someone gets sick of your shit enough to do some basic testing and prove you wrong even though you're the one always making the idiotic claims. You'd think after the half dozen times I've seen you be proven wrong in just the past few weeks you would just shut the fuck up. But we all know that's just not in your nature.
Sorry you're not the authority on DAoC mechanics you wish you were. You give terrible advice and reek of desperation of approval from other players and the devs.
You are pathetic.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 11:03 AM
by
Alistre
jelzinga_EU wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 5:30 AMI would make a case for the new Archery. This gives scouts their buffs (in Archery) and equalizes range and speed across the board. Then we can find another thing to cry about
That would be cool but I'm afraid it would open pandora's box on this rule set. I'd be happy if they just let everyone have the option of spec'ing into mastery of the arcane and be done with it.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:38 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Mavella wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 8:05 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 7:09 AMIf I had one, and only one thing to say about you, it is that you certainly know how to use a lot of words but not actually say anything.
And if I have anything to say about you its that you certainly claim to have a lot of knowledge about DAoC mechanics and yet seem to be wrong time and again. Always the first to hurl elementary insults and only dig your heels in until someone gets sick of your shit enough to do some basic testing and prove you wrong even though you're the one always making the idiotic claims. You'd think after the half dozen times I've seen you be proven wrong in just the past few weeks you would just shut the fuck up. But we all know that's just not in your nature.
Sorry you're not the authority on DAoC mechanics you wish you were. You give terrible advice and reek of desperation of approval from other players and the devs.
You are pathetic.
What's pathetic is that you claim that this thing or that thing is better than something else without any actual data, testing, or even basic knowledge about anything. I test stuff, sometimes I get it wrong, and I adjust fire from there. No big deal, because I will always accept new data and publish/accept new information regardless of what it does to the classes I play.
You and Sepplord are on a campaign of purposeful misinformation in order to serve your own agendas, and that is truly pathetic.
.
.
.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:45 PM
by
Isavyr
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:38 PMNo big deal, because I will always accept new data and publish/accept new information regardless of what it does to the classes I play.
Since you're on the subject of being open-minded, I want to confirm: is a slow OH still the superior damage for styling dual-wield users, in your opinion?
Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:48 PM
by
Sepplord
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:38 PMYou and Sepplord are on a campaign of purposeful misinformation in order to serve your own agendas, and that is truly pathetic.
If it is so obvious, could you at least state what my agenda is according to you? Then it would at least be possible to disprove you easily (oh...that's why you don't get specific)
Is it making my assassin overpowered , the one that i have played a combined 30minutes or something similar in the last few weeks?
Or is it discrediting you...i admit that that happens thorugh my posts, but it isn't my agenda, it just happens when you show up with your bias in every balancing-thread
Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:52 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:45 PMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:38 PMNo big deal, because I will always accept new data and publish/accept new information regardless of what it does to the classes I play.
Since you're on the subject of being open-minded, I want to confirm: is a slow OH still the superior damage for styling dual-wield users, in your opinion?
In my opinion yes, but honestly I'm questioning whether it's better to have a slow offhand or fast offhand dependent on the actual DW/CD spec. In the testing that was done before it only considered one spec, and that was 50 DW/CD, and of course doesn't take Left Axe into account at all. For example, on Hib I have 18 CD (Blades for the most part is a much better line growth-rate-wise) but on Alb I have 50 CD. I haven't crunched the numbers to see which spec works better with which weapon speed, so I guess the proper answer here is "I don't know yet." For now I will stick with the slow offhand but I'm keeping some fast offhands in my vault just in case.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:57 PM
by
jelzinga_EU
Alistre wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 11:03 AMjelzinga_EU wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 5:30 AMI would make a case for the new Archery. This gives scouts their buffs (in Archery) and equalizes range and speed across the board. Then we can find another thing to cry about
That would be cool but I'm afraid it would open pandora's box on this rule set. I'd be happy if they just let everyone have the option of spec'ing into mastery of the arcane and be done with it.
Really? MoArcane wouldn't do much for a scout and would not even be close to helping you win a fight you would have lost otherwise ...
Wed 21 Aug 2019 4:37 PM
by
Alistre
jelzinga_EU wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:57 PMAlistre wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 11:03 AMjelzinga_EU wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 5:30 AMI would make a case for the new Archery. This gives scouts their buffs (in Archery) and equalizes range and speed across the board. Then we can find another thing to cry about
That would be cool but I'm afraid it would open pandora's box on this rule set. I'd be happy if they just let everyone have the option of spec'ing into mastery of the arcane and be done with it.
Really? MoArcane wouldn't do much for a scout and would not even be close to helping you win a fight you would have lost otherwise ...
Yeah well there'll always be fights I won't win due to rng, rock paper scissors or plain lack of reflexes/ skills on my part...and that's fine. A small boost in stats from MoA is helpful in shoring up stat disparity. I'm sure that a ranger or hunter rolling out with pots alone with no MoA could tell a difference in performance of their class.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 5:07 PM
by
Mavella
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:38 PMMavella wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 8:05 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 7:09 AMIf I had one, and only one thing to say about you, it is that you certainly know how to use a lot of words but not actually say anything.
And if I have anything to say about you its that you certainly claim to have a lot of knowledge about DAoC mechanics and yet seem to be wrong time and again. Always the first to hurl elementary insults and only dig your heels in until someone gets sick of your shit enough to do some basic testing and prove you wrong even though you're the one always making the idiotic claims. You'd think after the half dozen times I've seen you be proven wrong in just the past few weeks you would just shut the fuck up. But we all know that's just not in your nature.
Sorry you're not the authority on DAoC mechanics you wish you were. You give terrible advice and reek of desperation of approval from other players and the devs.
You are pathetic.
What's pathetic is that you claim that this thing or that thing is better than something else without any actual data, testing, or even basic knowledge about anything. I test stuff, sometimes I get it wrong, and I adjust fire from there. No big deal, because I will always accept new data and publish/accept new information regardless of what it does to the classes I play.
You and Sepplord are on a campaign of purposeful misinformation in order to serve your own agendas, and that is truly pathetic.
.
.
.
Except I'm not advocating for anything except not giving an already buffed Nightshades an additional buff by allowing them to go Celt. You're the one who overblows the effectiveness of flat stats and seemingly lacks the critical thinking skills to look at 20-30 strength in comparison to -10/+10 armor matchup and see which one is superior given both combatants are equal spec, RR, template etc. (hint, its not the stats). Especially when their higher Qui almost neutralizes the strength advantage when looking at DPS. Then Gruen posts that with his testing blade NS do in fact have a win rate advantage over SBs you just bury your head in the sand because it contradicts how important you seem to claim that strength is.
The only changes I'd like to see are giving an SB a 1 off evade stun option and reducing the leather bonus/penalties to +/- 5%. If the win rate disparity is closed then reevaluate Celt NS if the devs deem it necessary.
Keep clinging to the fact you did some testing in beta and "muh calculator" as a foundation for your relevancy however. Honestly, just shut up already.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 5:36 PM
by
Leandrys
Calm down a bit with words like "F" pls.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 6:39 PM
by
Horus
Don't make roll a scout and show you all how it is done. In this target rich environment of squishy, ungrouped hibs running without healers in a BG it would be like shooting fish in a barrel.
Just avoid 1 on 1 melee encounters like I must do with my bow spec Ranger.
Just avoid 1 on 1 melee encounters like I must do with my bow spec Ranger.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 7:07 PM
by
jelzinga_EU
Alistre wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 4:37 PMjelzinga_EU wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:57 PMAlistre wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 11:03 AMThat would be cool but I'm afraid it would open pandora's box on this rule set. I'd be happy if they just let everyone have the option of spec'ing into mastery of the arcane and be done with it.
Really? MoArcane wouldn't do much for a scout and would not even be close to helping you win a fight you would have lost otherwise ...
Yeah well there'll always be fights I won't win due to rng, rock paper scissors or plain lack of reflexes/ skills on my part...and that's fine. A small boost in stats from MoA is helpful in shoring up stat disparity. I'm sure that a ranger or hunter rolling out with pots alone with no MoA could tell a difference in performance of their class.
MoArcane 7 gives you on a combined forces potion:
10 AF
16 STR
16 CON
16 DEX
6 QUI
I'm not saying it is useless, but if you want to give up 20 RA-points for such a stat-boost please spec:
Aug STR 4
Aug DEX 4
Aug QUI 2
Toughness 2
this gives you more STR, more DEX, more QUI, more HP for less RA-points spend, if you insist on spreading your RA-points on passive stats on a scout all across the board.
It is a bad idea to try and balance scouts around this RA, it really is. If you want to win fights as a scout you need to ask for (a lot) more.
Wed 21 Aug 2019 8:13 PM
by
Alistre
Yeah not sure what it would take without creating an imbalance. Leveling up a minstrel to play while we wait for that to get worked out...
Wed 21 Aug 2019 8:20 PM
by
inoeth
Isavyr wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:45 PMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:38 PMNo big deal, because I will always accept new data and publish/accept new information regardless of what it does to the classes I play.
Since you're on the subject of being open-minded, I want to confirm: is a slow OH still the superior damage for styling dual-wield users, in your opinion?
well for low dw/cd spec it actually is
Wed 21 Aug 2019 9:11 PM
by
Cadebrennus
inoeth wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 8:20 PMIsavyr wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:45 PMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 3:38 PMNo big deal, because I will always accept new data and publish/accept new information regardless of what it does to the classes I play.
Since you're on the subject of being open-minded, I want to confirm: is a slow OH still the superior damage for styling dual-wield users, in your opinion?
well for low dw/cd spec it actually is
That's what my gut tells me but I won't give advice based on how I feel. At some point I'll do a test and see how it really shakes out.
Thu 22 Aug 2019 6:47 AM
by
inoeth
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Wed 21 Aug 2019 9:11 PM
That's what my gut tells me but I won't give advice based on how I feel. At some point I'll do a test and see how it really shakes out.
at least excel told me so, but imo that only works for rangers with high pf spec so you have the best dmg add, worked very great (fast mh for 1.5s swing speed and slow offhand) you can basicly autoattack enemys to death
Thu 22 Aug 2019 7:17 AM
by
Cadebrennus
inoeth wrote: ↑Thu 22 Aug 2019 6:47 AM
at least excel told me so, but imo that only works for rangers with high pf spec so you have the best dmg add, worked very great (fast mh for 1.5s swing speed and slow offhand) you can basicly autoattack enemys to death
Neat! Let's take this to PMs because I don't want to derail this thread any further.
This topic is locked and you can't reply.
Return to Suggestions or the latest topics