Curse

tigros · Jan 31, 2008, 10:41 AM // 10:41

To summarize (from what Mitch said):

War: spike + pressure at stand; kill npc in base; skirmishes;
Dervish: spike, kill npc at vod, flagger;
Assassin: kill npc in base;

Okies, now I believe the Dervs and the Assassins could fill in the other roles as well, but I am biased, and so are most of us people... that's why we're humans.

So warriors are the most versatile, add versatility to the other classes to match the warrior and then balance should be better. So Dervishes are insane aoe spike damage, fine, either tone it down or put in a negative to the class to make up for it (lower base armor is one of them already). So Assassins are bad ass gankers, either tone it down or put in a negative to the class to make up for it (again, one example is lower base armor).

The idea is that if you make these three classes the same you achieved nothing. This is not balance. If you level their power to be similar in terms of functionality (and I mean here average, not specific power level in a specific instance/situation of the game) then you have achieved a decent balance.

I come back to the same idea:

Spit out the numbers, put up a table and rank the power of each class then compare them... let's see what's coming out (I am starting to do it, will post it soon, then ppl can add or flame).

tigros · Jan 31, 2008, 10:43 AM // 10:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by la_cabra_de_vida

Warriors, Dervs, and Sins play completely different from each other. Warriors are just the most efficient of them. Highest armor ratings, bullstrike, best ias' in the game, 3 sec kd's, bullstrike, axe crits that hit for 59 damage, probably the best dw skill in the game, bullstrike, and more. Sins combos are fragile as hell, even when there are sins in gvg, when they are not spiking they run for dear life cause 70 al means you die half a second after a monk does. Dervs have mel, but mel is stupid since you use your elite, and its only up half the time. Sure you get wearying and all the advantages, but half the time your useless as dirt. Did i say warriors have bullstrike?

So you're saying dervs and assassins are underpowered or worse than warriors, yet all the shouts are to nerf dervishes or assassins, not much warriors...

la_cabra_de_vida · Jan 31, 2008, 10:48 AM // 10:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigros

So you're saying dervs and assassins are underpowered or worse than warriors, yet all the shouts are to nerf dervishes or assassins, not much warriors...

Im saying warriors are 100x more efficient at what they do. Dervs require you to run mel and sins you need your mesmers, or else they will die in about 10 seconds. Overall warriors are way more powerful then sins or dervs will ever be.

I really dont need to make a chart of anything:

Disrupting Chop
Eviscerate
Executioner's Strike
Bull Strike
Frenzy
Rush
Shock
Res Sig

You give me a derv or sin build that has that much awesomeness in it that can knock you down for 3 seconds and has between 96 and 116al and ill say that sins and dervs have usefulness.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Jan 31, 2008, 11:13 AM // 11:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigros

Okies, now I believe the Dervs and the Assassins could fill in the other roles as well.

You're wrong.

Quote:

So warriors are the most versatile, add versatility to the other classes to match the warrior and then balance should be better. So Dervishes are insane aoe spike damage, fine, either tone it down or put in a negative to the class to make up for it (lower base armor is one of them already). So Assassins are bad ass gankers, either tone it down or put in a negative to the class to make up for it (again, one example is lower base armor).

Nerfing stuff about a class because it excels at (read: is imbalanced) another area is a really REALLY bad mentality when trying to achieve balance, and in fact is the biggest part of why one-dimensional professions came to exist.

Quote:

The idea is that if you make these three classes the same you achieved nothing. This is not balance. If you level their power to be similar in terms of functionality (and I mean here average, not specific power level in a specific instance/situation of the game) then you have achieved a decent balance.

They can have the same roles but have different ways to accomplish this.

Pretty much the whole assassin class is designed with base ganking in mind, this leads to a boring type of play with little variety.

The dervish class is basically 90% shit skills with an elite that makes you immune to conditions and high AoE crits only useful for spiking and farming balled up targets (which since smart players dont ball up that much is only really useful for farming NPCs at VoD).

You can't say something is balanced when it can clear out a base and teleport in/out when people fall back on it just because it doesn't have any other 'function'..

Quote:

I come back to the same idea:

Spit out the numbers, put up a table and rank the power of each class then compare them... let's see what's coming out (I am starting to do it, will post it soon, then ppl can add or flame).

You can't quantify this.

Kaon · Jan 31, 2008, 11:15 AM // 11:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigros

To summarize (from what Mitch said):

War: spike + pressure at stand; kill npc in base; skirmishes;
Dervish: spike, kill npc at vod, flagger;
Assassin: kill npc in base;

Okies, now I believe the Dervs and the Assassins could fill in the other roles as well, but I am biased, and so are most of us people... that's why we're humans.

So warriors are the most versatile, add versatility to the other classes to match the warrior and then balance should be better. So Dervishes are insane aoe spike damage, fine, either tone it down or put in a negative to the class to make up for it (lower base armor is one of them already). So Assassins are bad ass gankers, either tone it down or put in a negative to the class to make up for it (again, one example is lower base armor).

The idea is that if you make these three classes the same you achieved nothing. This is not balance. If you level their power to be similar in terms of functionality (and I mean here average, not specific power level in a specific instance/situation of the game) then you have achieved a decent balance.

I come back to the same idea:

Spit out the numbers, put up a table and rank the power of each class then compare them... let's see what's coming out (I am starting to do it, will post it soon, then ppl can add or flame).

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU??!!! DONT YOU GET IT??!!!

What you just said is if assassins could do the same thing as a warrior then they're balanced. WHAT THE RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO? Then why would i not run a warrior?

It is VERY easy and not hard to understand, but it appears all the pvetards in this topic haven't understood the first post or the point of this thread at all.

The assassin is simply a class that does EVERYTHING worse than a warrior except 1 thing. Next to that the class demotes skillfull play and deteriorates the game. This is because of their design, they'll never be anything less than "a warrior for noobs." If the assassin would be deleted right now, it would actually make the game worse, because of the absolutely horrible balance updates. But if they'd tweak only a few skills, and then delete the assassin, the game would improve incredibly in skill requirement and tactical options.

The same can be said about a ritualist. We already have a support character in the game, it's called an e/mo. We already have a healer/protter character in the game, it's called a monk. Now ritualist does both of these things but in a game deteriorating way. IF the ritualist would be deleted RIGHT now, we'd see more diversion in builds, midline, flaggers, and ultimately strategy.

tigros · Jan 31, 2008, 11:24 AM // 11:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

The problem with these classes is simple: They are fundamentally and completely flawed for GvG. The basic design of their capabilities is something that would never see play in any serious environment. It is the simple and brutal truth that they just plain old fashioned style suck. So why have they seen play at all?

So what's the point of this thread? That we have two classes that are flawed for GVG but despite this they still see play. If we cleared that out I guess we can start debating over it, right? We can express our opinions and we can even debate the topic, right? In a normal debate we use arguments, right?

No need to answer, this is my opinion since you asked me what I don't get...

Why do people switch so quick from arguing against a topic to arguing against an individual? Is it because they are unable to argue against the topic?

Just take a good look at Ensign's posts, they will extremely rarely attack an individual and most of the times hit the topic in the head... we could all learn from him... Just because you don't agree with an argument it doesn't mean you have to attack the owner of that argument...

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

You can't quantify this.

If this is true (which I don't think so) then you cannot objectively state that a profession is better than another (generally, not in a specific instance or for a specific purpose)... it's purely a matter of personal preference...

Of course, making some assumptions that will help you quantify things will induce a level of subjectivity in the measurements, but even with this, I think they're still better than nothing.

If these things weren't quantifiable, how would you balance the game?

IMMORTAlMITCH · Jan 31, 2008, 11:39 AM // 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigros

So what's the point of this thread? That we have two classes that are flawed for GVG but despite this they still see play.

They see play because of imbalanced game mechanics (shadowstepping) for sins and imbalanced skills (ancestor's rage, splinter weapon, weapon spells in general) for rits.

Quote:

If we cleared that out I guess we can start debating over it, right? We can express our opinions and we can even debate the topic, right? In a normal debate we use arguments, right?

Right, we provided our arguments, what are yours..?

Quote:

Why do people switch so quick from arguing against a topic to arguing against an individual? Is it because they are unable to argue against the topic?

It's because individuals fail to grasp the concept, as well as lacking experience in anything that could even be remotely referred to as high level play.

Quote:

Just take a good look at Ensign's posts, they will extremely rarely attack an individual and most of the times hit the topic in the head... we could all learn from him... Just because you don't agree with an argument it doesn't mean you have to attack the owner of that argument...

If you want to argue, you need to know what you're talking about and bring up good points, you did neither.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigros

If this is true (which I don't think so) then you cannot objectively state that a profession is better than another (generally, not in a specific instance or for a specific purpose)... it's purely a matter of personal preference...

You can't, if a certain profession was better than other professions (generally, not in a specific instance or for a specific purpose) then everyone would only play that profession, as this isn't the case you can't say a certain profession is better than another (generally, not in a specific instance or for a specific purpose).

You CAN however say it requires more skill and/or is capable of doing more different things or (generally, not in a specific instance or for a specific purpose more versatile.

Quote:

Of course, making some assumptions that will help you quantify things will induce a level of subjectivity in the measurements, but even with this, I think they're still better than nothing.

If these things weren't quantifiable, how would you balance the game?

This applies when you're comparing skills that serve a similar purpose, those are quantifiable, professions that serve completely different purposes are not.

ensoriki · Jan 31, 2008, 11:47 AM // 11:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

Sins are only useful to quickly kill npcs before people get back to base to save them. THIS IS THEIR ONLY USE

Dervishes are only useful for omega spike builds and npc farming at VoD (functioning as powerflagger before VoD) THESE ARE THEIR ONLY USES

Warriors can spike/pressure at the stand, kill npcs in bases, fight in skirmishes. They are useful in many situations and have a lot of different purposes.

Dervishes and Assassins are one-dimensional, Warriors are versatile.

Versatility is good for the game, one-dimensional templates are not.

You underestimate the dervish and simplify them.
The fact a dervish can flag,serv a role in vod with the npcs and spike is more then one dimensional. So you might as well stop your one dimensional dervish arguement and stick to your assassin one unless you want to simplify the dervish even more.

Quote:

Sins are only useful to quickly kill npcs before people get back to base to save them. THIS IS THEIR ONLY USE

Gank players
That makes 2 uses...you were wrong <(^.^)>
_________

Quote:

Originally Posted by laserlight

stuff and junk and more stuff

Eh, because the warrior is so good, the monk is so good, and the ele,ranger,necro,mesmer,donkey are all good at what they do, A-net tried hybrids.
which is not a bad idea.

Quote:

The problem with these classes is simple: They are fundamentally and completely flawed for GvG. The basic design of their capabilities is something that would never see play in any serious environment. It is the simple and brutal truth that they just plain old fashioned style suck. So why have they seen play at all?

OMFG they dont work in gvg? /slitswrist.
If only gvg was the only thing people played.
Talk about how bad they are for all forms of pvp next and you make your point much stronger.

Quote:

The assassin is simply a class that does EVERYTHING worse than a warrior except 1 thing. Next to that the class demotes skillfull play and deteriorates the game. This is because of their design, they'll never be anything less than "a warrior for noobs." If the assassin would be deleted right now, it would actually make the game worse, because of the absolutely horrible balance updates. But if they'd tweak only a few skills, and then delete the assassin, the game would improve incredibly in skill requirement and tactical options.

The same can be said about a ritualist. We already have a support character in the game, it's called an e/mo. We already have a healer/protter character in the game, it's called a monk. Now ritualist does both of these things but in a game deteriorating way. IF the ritualist would be deleted RIGHT now, we'd see more diversion in builds, midline, flaggers, and ultimately strategy.

lolwut? The game would still be in build wars running the 3-6 "good builds".
The assassin has more than enough potential to make something out of itself, alas the skills that grant that potential at the moment blow ass chunks out of a donkey with type 2 diabetes .

An E/mo you say? Well a ritualist sums that up or at the very least attempts to sum that up into one class, which then allows use for a secondary. The ritualist is an okay idea and it needs tweakage, it doesn't need to leave the game to make the game improved if anything it just needs it's focus put into
anything but spirits.

I don't see whats so hard to grasp.
The ritualist have 3 things going for it, that an Elementalist and a monk don't have.
An ele on his own cannot bring proper healing that a monk has, as an E/mo he can pump out some heal party and some Water magic utility. Monk's also don't use their damage attribute really do they? When you see a monk you know their healing monks from the start, with Ritualist the fact that they can heal decently and do damage decently allows them to be different.
And unlike the monk a ritualist has an unremovable buff. The ele has glyphs, but they can't be cast on others.

DarkNecrid · Jan 31, 2008, 12:39 PM // 12:39

Actually, on thinking on it, I disagree with the opening post completely. Yes they are bad for the game now, but I think if Ritualists stay a support midline role like they are now, and if Assassins returned to how they were during GWFC, we'd be ok.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Jan 31, 2008, 01:09 PM // 13:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

You underestimate the dervish and simplify them.
The fact a dervish can flag,serv a role in vod with the npcs and spike is more then one dimensional.

I don't, and the only reason dervishes make good flaggers (not primary flaggers mind you) is because pious haste and avatar of melandru are both horribly imbalanced.

Farming NPCs at VoD isn't exactly something that should be promoted either.

Quote:

Gank players
That makes 2 uses...you were wrong <(^.^)>

It's still ganking, an assassin at the stand won't accomplish much.

Quote:

Eh, because the warrior is so good, the monk is so good, and the ele,ranger,necro,mesmer,donkey are all good at what they do, A-net tried hybrids.
which is not a bad idea.

Secondaries are there for hybrids, the problem with Sins, Rits, Dervishes and to a lesser extent Paragons and Necros is that there is no clear purpose or the only purpose they have is something that's undesirable:

Assassins: Shadowstep ganking
Ritualists: Spirits that only work en-masse, unremovable Weapon Spells
Dervishes: Retarded Spike/AoE damage (no finesse skills)
Paragons: High ranged damage AND strong Passive Defense
Necros: Only useful in hexover builds and Caster Spikes

Instead of the other 5 professions:

Warriors: Main damage source, KDs and interrupts
Rangers: Conditions, Interrupts, Movement Control and Survivability
Mesmers: Caster shutdown, Energy denial, Interrupts
Elementalists: Support Damage, Defensive Skills
Monks: Healing, Prots

Quote:

OMFG they dont work in gvg? /slitswrist.
If only gvg was the only thing people played.
Talk about how bad they are for all forms of pvp next and you make your point much stronger.

GvG is the competitive gametype, it is the main thing that should be looked out when striving for balance, other gametypes should be taken into account as well but GvG shoul be of paramount importance.

Besides, if something is broken in GvG, chances are it will be broken anywhere else as well..

Quote:

lolwut? The game would still be in build wars running the 3-6 "good builds".
The assassin has more than enough potential to make something out of itself, alas the skills that grant that potential at the moment blow ass chunks out of a donkey with type 2 diabetes .

What skills would that be? Attack chains are a flawed concept in GW making them unblockable doesn't change this, it simply makes them imbalanced.

Quote:

An E/mo you say? Well a ritualist sums that up or at the very least attempts to sum that up into one class, which then allows use for a secondary. The ritualist is an okay idea and it needs tweakage, it doesn't need to leave the game to make the game improved if anything it just needs it's focus put into anything but spirits.

Ritualists are ran in high end PvP for 2 skills, and 2 skills only, Ancestor's Rage and Splinter Weapon. One is a high damage, cheap, fast recharging, uninterruptable spike skill, the other's sole purpose is to farm NPCs come VoD

Quote:

I don't see whats so hard to grasp.
The ritualist have 3 things going for it, that an Elementalist and a monk don't have.
An ele on his own cannot bring proper healing that a monk has, as an E/mo he can pump out some heal party and some Water magic utility. Monk's also don't use their damage attribute really do they? When you see a monk you know their healing monks from the start, with Ritualist the fact that they can heal decently and do damage decently allows them to be different.
And unlike the monk a ritualist has an unremovable buff. The ele has glyphs, but they can't be cast on others.

Your first point is moot, because an E/Mo can bring proper healing fine.

Ritualists dont really do damage outside of Ancestor's Rage (and Splinter Weapon at VoD) and that skill is horribly overpowered.

Unremovable buffs are hardly something I'd call 'good for the game', Rits (read: Restoration and Channeling) actually do have some potential to be useful support characters, however unremovable weapons is not the way to go and they lack robust skills like Gale, Blinding Flash/Surge and Ward Against Melee that Elementalists have.

Kaon · Jan 31, 2008, 01:18 PM // 13:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

You underestimate the dervish and simplify them.
The fact a dervish can flag,serv a role in vod with the npcs and spike is more then one dimensional. So you might as well stop your one dimensional dervish arguement and stick to your assassin one unless you want to simplify the dervish even more.

A warrior can do that too but a dervish does it easymode, simplified, and more boring.

Give me 1 aspect where a dervish requires more skill than a warrior, 1 aspect.

Then give me 1 thing that the dervish actually added to the game and improved the game. I could tell you plenty of things that it did and made the game worse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

lolwut? The game would still be in build wars running the 3-6 "good builds".
The assassin has more than enough potential to make something out of itself, alas the skills that grant that potential at the moment blow ass chunks out of a donkey with type 2 diabetes .

I'm dying to know what potential you're talking about, and what kind of role you have in mind that doesnt make the game suck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

An E/mo you say? Well a ritualist sums that up or at the very least attempts to sum that up into one class, which then allows use for a secondary. The ritualist is an okay idea and it needs tweakage, it doesn't need to leave the game to make the game improved if anything it just needs it's focus put into
anything but spirits.

I don't see whats so hard to grasp.
The ritualist have 3 things going for it, that an Elementalist and a monk don't have.
An ele on his own cannot bring proper healing that a monk has, as an E/mo he can pump out some heal party and some Water magic utility. Monk's also don't use their damage attribute really do they? When you see a monk you know their healing monks from the start, with Ritualist the fact that they can heal decently and do damage decently allows them to be different.
And unlike the monk a ritualist has an unremovable buff. The ele has glyphs, but they can't be cast on others.

Let's look at the ritualist lines shall we?

Channeling magic: Air magic combined with smiting. It adds nothing new to the game, just some extra skills. Most of the direct damage skills are not used now but splinter and ancestors are rofltarded.

Restoration Magic: Healing/protting easymode. Overpowered unremovable weaponspells that still add nothing extra to the game except frustrated warriors and complaining players.

Communing: Lol spirits.

Primary attribute (cant even remember the name of it

) : A mix of spirits, and character enhancing skills like all other primary professions, doesn't add anything to the game.

THE RITUALIST ADDS NOTHING EXCEPT RETARDED UNREMOVABLE WEAPONSPELLS THAT MAKE THIS GAME WORSE!!!!!

tigros · Jan 31, 2008, 01:23 PM // 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

Right, we provided our arguments, what are yours..?

LOL

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

This applies when you're comparing skills that serve a similar purpose, those are quantifiable, professions that serve completely different purposes are not.

LOL again

Try this in Excel, for example:

KPI (Key Performance Indicator)
1 Base Armor
2 Extra Armor
3 Health Pool Size
4 Health Pool Regen
5 Energy Pool Size
6 Energy Pool Regen
7 Weapons Availability
8 Weapons Damage
9 Speed Self
10 Speed Other
11 Heal Self
12 Heal Other
13 Snare
14 Self Energy Mgmt
15 Other Energy Mgmt
16 Support Self
17 Support Team
18 Pressure Potential
19 Spike Potential
20 Cause Conditions
21 Cause Hexes
22 Remove Conditions
23 Remove Hexes
24 Hard Resurrect
25 Hard/Soft Interrupt
...etc...

(this is your leftmost column)

Warrior Dervish Assassin Ranger Paragon Monk Necromancer Mesmer Ritualist Elementalist

(this is your topmost row)

KPI Warrior Dervish Assassin
1 Base Armor 5 3 3
2 Extra Armor 4 4 3
3 Health Pool Size 4 5 4
4 Health Pool Regen 3 4 5

(this is a sample of how it works ratings 1-5, 1 lowest, 5 highest)

Next: plug in numbers based on each profession's ability to perform a specific role, function, whatever you wanna call it. Try to be objective (as in, War base armor score 5 cause is 80 + 16 + whatever else bonus, so highest in the game, while Derv is base 70 so score 3 cause 4 would be Ranger with 70 + 20 vs elem, Assa is 70 so score 3, etc...) - this is simple reasoning, don't bother to dissect it, think it more thoroughly if you want to...

At the end of this exercise you will come up with some average scores that might or might not balance (in the quick kinda random way I did it in my Excel spreadsheet I got a range of scores with like 20 points between min and max, or least powerful to most powerful profession, if you wanna assume it to be this the value judgment you add to this tool). That's your overall profession average.

If you wanna judge specific roles depending on specific KPI's, just pick those you're interested in and compare classes in their abilities to perform them.

If results are pretty similar, I guess that means classes are pretty similar in performing a specific task... so whomever is better at doing it with this or that class is better because of skill and not because of class advantages...

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

It's because individuals fail to grasp the concept, as well as lacking experience in anything that could even be remotely referred to as high level play.

Aye, I do... forgive me I try to apply real life tools to a fantasy game. LOL.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Jan 31, 2008, 01:35 PM // 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigros

Next: plug in numbers based on each profession's ability to perform a specific role, function, whatever you wanna call it. Try to be objective (as in, War base armor score 5 cause is 80 + 16 + whatever else bonus, so highest in the game, while Derv is base 70 so score 3 cause 4 would be Ranger with 70 + 20 vs elem, Assa is 70 so score 3, etc...) - this is simple reasoning, don't bother to dissect it, think it more thoroughly if you want to...

Armor levels and energy max/regen aside, this is pretty subjective and you make up the values 1-5 which means it's qualitative and not quantitative.

Quote:

At the end of this exercise you will come up with some average scores that might or might not balance (in the quick kinda random way I did it in my Excel spreadsheet I got a range of scores with like 20 points between min and max, or least powerful to most powerful profession, if you wanna assume it to be this the value judgment you add to this tool). That's your overall profession average.

If you wanna judge specific roles depending on specific KPI's, just pick those you're interested in and compare classes in their abilities to perform them.

Again, you make up the values, so it's subjective.

Also, theory != practice.

Quote:

Aye, I do... forgive me I try to apply real life tools to a fantasy game. LOL.

I don't argue about say, open heart surgery, because I know nothing about it, you shoudn't argue about GW PvP.

tigros · Jan 31, 2008, 01:52 PM // 13:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

Armor levels and energy max/regen aside, this is pretty subjective and you make up the values 1-5 which means it's qualitative and not quantitative.

Again, you make up the values, so it's subjective.

qualitative - relating to or involving comparisons based on qualities
quantitative - expressible as a quantity or relating to or susceptible of measurement

Assigning a quantitative measure to a qualitative judgment is how you quantify things

as long as you use a coherent range/scale and as long as you define/argument your assumptions (which I think I did, I agreed is a system that has a subjectivity touch to it).

And yes, this is how I argument my debate/opinions, even though I am not expert at GW GVG PVP.

And yes, I do believe that you can analyze and compare different professions based on tools like this in order to judge them if they are or not balanced.

PS Just to give a quick example of the "subjectiveness" of the measure

KPI Warrior Dervish Assassin Ranger Paragon Monk Necromancer Mesmer Ritualist Elementalist
Energy Pool Regen 2 4 4 3 2 4 4 4 4 4

Reasoning (1-5 scale is not even so relevant here, as long the measurement is consistent across all professions): take a wild guess

On a scale from 1 to 5, I score Warrior & Paragon energy regen with 2 (2 pips of regen), Ranger energy regen with 3 (3 pips regen), rest of the professions energy regen score of 4 (4 pips of regen). Now that's "subjective"

. (I hope I don't have to explain that values don't matter so much as long as proportions between professions are kept and are objective

In the end if score is 2 3 4 is as if the score would be 4 6 8).

ensoriki · Jan 31, 2008, 01:56 PM // 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaon

I'm dying to know what potential you're talking about, and what kind of role you have in mind that doesnt make the game suck.

He he.
Laserlight says that Warriors are so good any other melee prof that tries to enter is probably doomed to fail or so.
Assassin's as you know have spells, warriors don't they have a base 25 energy and 4 pips of energy reg. Whats this let an assassin get? Different forms of utility that a warrior Would not be able to use well.

Role I have in mind?
Mobile Melee profession with Spell utility, while this is simplified I really don't want to do some 10 paragraph thing right now >.<

Quote:

THE RITUALIST ADDS NOTHING EXCEPT RETARDED UNREMOVABLE WEAPONSPELLS THAT MAKE THIS GAME WORSE!!!!!

Tell me what weapon spells are used?
Splinter Weapon? What about the rest Warmongers?
okay thats 2.
Weapon spells don't give many problems to the game, the idea of an unremovable buff is exactly the same as a shout, Warriors have shouts, Paragons have shouts you can't remove them.
Shouts stack, last time I checked, which Weapon spells don't. If war monger became a shout or splinter became a shout it would be even more detrimental than if it was a weapon spell. They could be target ally shouts and still be worse, weapon spells in fact are not as bad as people claim and instead your complaining about Imbalanced skills, which happen everywhere not just weapon spells.

"Weapon spells are BAD", If all weapon spells were turned to shouts you'd have more of a problem, sure shouts have some counters, but they stack and weapon spells dont. Thus if weapon spells are hypothetically worse than shouts, than the problem is that the skill is overpowered not the class of skills.

If a Weapon spell is OP, its not that its a weapon spell or at least It's unlikely it's more of they just made it OP. Like OP spells or OP enchants.

if you disagree say something, I like hearing the answers =P

Also About Rit Spirits

Ranger spirits got nerfed/balanced out (or forgotten but who cares right)
Same happened/is going to happen to Rit Spirits

frojack · Jan 31, 2008, 02:03 PM // 14:03

I seriously think some people are grossly under-valuing the ability to stack enchantments. You can't just stick Guardian on someone for example + plus chuck a few heals in and call it a day. This is why rit prot doesn't work amazingly well in the grand scheme of things. It's hot in skirmish sure, but then so is Guardian.
How much enchantment removal do you pack on a ranger? You 'could' do it if there was a scenario which required it (a super-powerful enchantment that owns all physicals and the rest of the known world), but then your playing build-wars when the basic skills any good ranger brings will deal with the problem, whether it's WoW or Guardian.
Shock is also another one that sits on the best warrior bars. It is somewhat marginalised by Aura of Stability, but that is just a retarded skill in the first place (ooh we've made knock-down a joke in the game (sin junk) lets add a counter skill for just that! I so sexy...).

A Rage needs to be nerfed. The situation where Splinter is strong needs to be dealt with. Reality is, this just an enviromental problem. People have seemingly lost faith in Anet's ability to handle the bigger picture and are requesting a 'quick-fix'. This understandable, but it doesn't change the fact that outside of VoD npc-farming, the skill is fine.

Let's be honest. This isn't really going anywhere anymore is it? The reality is all 4 class (and even one of the old) currently cause problems for the game. They won't be removed, so how can we deal with the problem?

Can we start looking at potential solutions instead of banging heads about what kind of overpowered something is. There are a lot of smart and experienced people here, and this is starting to become a venting exercise, or to put it bluntly, a serious waste of time...

wuzzman · Jan 31, 2008, 02:43 PM // 14:43

the four new classes are bad for players not the game.

yesitsrob · Jan 31, 2008, 02:43 PM // 14:43

Quote:

Tell me what weapon spells are used?
Splinter Weapon? What about the rest Warmongers?
okay thats 2.

add weapon of shadow and weapon of warding to that list. Shadow in particular is nothing short of annoying. Unremovable annoying bleh bleh..

_

Quote:

A Rage needs to be nerfed.

It does, but I'm pretty sure some migthy power in anet wants all the classes in the game to be used, and when you take the strongest caster damage skill off the rit, and then remove it's splinter, people just won't use them, which to be fair would be wonderful for a lot of people, i'd love to see rits disappear. As the point of this topic is that they'd need a complete re-doing to be good for the game and considering izzy won't even do a thing about something as retarded as Anc Rage it doesn't exactly suggest he's going to do a thing about rits

I don't think outside of NPC farming splinter is particullary troublesome either, but as long as archers make a nice ball to get farmed it is a pretty big issue.

Kaon · Jan 31, 2008, 02:50 PM // 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

He he.
Laserlight says that Warriors are so good any other melee prof that tries to enter is probably doomed to fail or so.
Assassin's as you know have spells, warriors don't they have a base 25 energy and 4 pips of energy reg. Whats this let an assassin get? Different forms of utility that a warrior Would not be able to use well.

Role I have in mind?
Mobile Melee profession with Spell utility, while this is simplified I really don't want to do some 10 paragraph thing right now >.<

So you're saying a an assassin in the mainfight with powerleak. An idea and possibility yes, but impossible without making the class overpowered and boring in a split aspect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

Tell me what weapon spells are used?
Splinter Weapon? What about the rest Warmongers?
okay thats 2.

First of all even if all their weaponspells were shit you miss my point. My point is that unremovable things are bad for the game. Now to answer the question you forgot weapon of warding and weapon of shadow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

Weapon spells don't give many problems to the game, the idea of an unremovable buff is exactly the same as a shout, Warriors have shouts, Paragons have shouts you can't remove them.
Shouts stack, last time I checked, which Weapon spells don't. If war monger became a shout or splinter became a shout it would be even more detrimental than if it was a weapon spell. They could be target ally shouts and still be worse, weapon spells in fact are not as bad as people claim and instead your complaining about Imbalanced skills, which happen everywhere not just weapon spells.

"Weapon spells are BAD", If all weapon spells were turned to shouts you'd have more of a problem, sure shouts have some counters, but they stack and weapon spells dont. Thus if weapon spells are hypothetically worse than shouts, than the problem is that the skill is overpowered not the class of skills.

If a Weapon spell is OP, its not that its a weapon spell or at least It's unlikely it's more of they just made it OP. Like OP spells or OP enchants.

Comparing weapon spells to shouts is not an argument, and yet again you've gone totally beside the point. Indeed if weapon spells would be instacast it would be even more retarded, but SO WHAT? You fail to adress the point. Everyone knows shouts and chants are stupid.

tigros · Jan 31, 2008, 02:58 PM // 14:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by frojack

Can we start looking at potential solutions instead of banging heads about what kind of overpowered something is. There are a lot of smart and experienced people here, and this is starting to become a venting exercise, or to put it bluntly, a serious waste of time...

I'd like that too, but it seems people have grown tired of proposing changes while not having Anet properly answering them.

From a communication point of view, I'd like to see Anet be more open and more honest with the players, going into a bit of more details why they think this or that skill needs or does not need change, how they see game balance, and so on. If people would have more information and arguments as to why things are as they are, then they would probably could debate more constructively.

Without that information, it's kinda hard... In recruitment there's a test question related to what should you do if you boss tells you to do something you don't agree to or don't like. The accepted answer is to argument why you are against and recommend something you think is better, but in the end if your boss insists you should do what he/she says because of a few key reasons: he/she has the authority and the responsibility and he/she might hold information that is not available to you and that brings a whole different perspective on the overall issue...

This is where players are in the shoes of the employee... they can bitch and whine and flame and all that, but the answer, information and responsibility is with Anet... so that's why they are taking the decisions and not the players...

Of course, more openness wouldn't hurt...