Curse

clawofcrimson · Jun 01, 2007, 10:21 PM // 22:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

That doesn't make them a good idea. Sitting on a bad idea and forcing it into viability is not good game design, and it does not make things more fun. Balance is always more important than role-play, even more important than keeping a dumb, poorly-designed class like the Assassin viable for anything more than training wheels for idiots in RA.

You should tell that to the millions that play online pve games... balance is 'obsolete' without roleplay... why don't we all just play chess? because the idea of being a (ranger, assasin, warrior, etc...) is fun... look at the plans for GW2... are they talking most about the changes in balance?????

Roleplay is the life blood of any rpg game whether the pvp'ers agree or not.

...anyway to the changes suggested. I like most of the ideas, the changes to GFTE and SyG however would hamper the classes effectiveness by more than just a little. The paragon has a very limited number of skill options... very limited... and taking away the skills that do work would obliterate the class altogether.

Ensign · Jun 01, 2007, 10:28 PM // 22:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo-LD

Sure, Aegis is counterable, but then again so is almost everything on your list. The simple fact is that the game would be much better if Aegis didnt exist.

I disagree with that. There is not a lot of defense in the game against diffuse Warrior pressure, and the good teams are adept at dealing with the defenses that there are. In current metagames you're facing 3, 4 physicals in every 8 man build barring hexes, with damage being put everywhere. If defense in this game is supposed to be about prot and proactive defense, which it is, how do you defend against four physicals on different targets? Especially with neccessary nerfs to many of the other proactive defenses (hexes, Paragons) and proposals to hit LoD and other party effects as well.

Aegis is sufficiently priced on Monks for the effect. It's slow and expensive. However it is good specifically because it is strong against strategies and teams that play around all of your other Prot. It is disproportionately good against top teams in 8v8 pressure fights. It is weak in split situations (teams drop some of their Aegises on split friendly maps), weak against spike (a liability against a lot of them actually since it's free shatter bait). It isn't worth the investment against anything with 2 or less physicals. Sure, it's a strong effect. But I don't have any issues with strong effects being in the game, particularly if coupled with high energy, time, and recharge costs.

The only hits I'd want to see to Aegis are ones that make it less attractive for the team to invest in chaining it. Lowering the block chance on lower specced Aegises accomplishes that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pah01

Single long lasting hexes just promotes passive play.

Ok, there's this meme flying around that apparently lumps everything that doesn't support a very reactive, fast paced, twitchy playstyle as "passive play", and anything that is associated with "passive play" is inherently bad.

That simply isn't a fair definition, and that idea simply isn't true. There is plenty of room in the game for skills that don't have fast cast times, fast recharges, and require specific reactive timing to be effective. Those skills are more strategic, and still require timing and positioning, just of a different sort than all of the twitch skills. As long as such skills have sufficient costs and vulnerabilities that such strategic decisions need to be made in their use, they're good for the game.

Speaking from experience, I think there's a lot of interesting gameplay that comes from playing a caster with important 2s cast spells, against a team with Rangers or interrupt Mesmers. I know that I'm constantly watching their interrupters as well as my targets, to know when I'll be able to move in to cast a key spell offensively, when I can cast something defensive in place, or when I'll have to run behind a wall to Aegis or the like. You're still reading the field and making decisions off of it, just of a very different sort than camping a cast to interrupt, or watching for their Warriors to converge to prot a target.

That's why I think that Defensive Anthem is fair at 2c but not 1c. At 1c you can cast it in your opponent's face without any concerns, skills with 1 second cast times are non-trivial to interrupt if you aren't specifically hunting them. 2 second cast times on the other hand are easy interrupts on someone paying attention - and when it is interrupted, they're down 15 energy for no effect on top of the wasted time and long recharge.

One last thing to put out there - it's those high investment, "passive", strategic skills and plays that enable twitchy, reactive play to exist in the first place. If they simply went away, Rangers would disappear from the metagame along with them. After all, what good is a pro interrupter if everything worth interrupting has been removed from the game?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

At least Aegis is reasonably counterable with broad skills like mirror and interrupts. Defensive anthem, watch yourself, and shields up are just trash.

Following up the previous point here, I think it's obvious what the difference is between Aegis and "Watch Yourself!". Aegis is an expensive, juicy interrupt target that begs for active countering. People who cast Aegis in their opponent's faces are punished routinely. When it does go up, there are various counters, such as a direct Mirror to remove the whole thing, or by making is not matter via spiking, or by splitting off characters and making the effect inefficient.

"Watch Yourself!" on the other hand you just spam on recharge, no timing, little positioning (make sure you hit everyone!), no investment (it actually returns energy), no countering. There aren't any decisions to be made by anyone other than 'hit button on recharge', and that's why it's not a skill that's good for the game. It should have a power level reflecting its ease of use and lack of interesting game interactions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

Paragon DPS (and agg refrain) should be more comparable to other midline type toons

My assertion is that if you fix passive Paragon defense, *and* nerf Aggressive Refrain out of the metagame, that the Paragon will no longer be viable in competitive play at all. Do you disagree?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

I think the problem is that current hexes can completely destroy a toon (specifically water spam, faint/reck/sof/pof, migraine), last forever, and can be buried so deep and spammed so fast they are unremoveable.

I don't disagree with this assessment of the current metagame. Many hexes destroy someone completely, last forever, and are very spammable, and that's a problem. That's a very accurate description of what makes a problem hex, actually.

Here's the difference in my mind though. While you're focusing on one type of hex and saying they all should fit that mold, I'm taking a slightly different appraoch. My feeling is that a hex is fair if it only destroys a toon XOR last a long time XOR is spammable. The problem hexes are exclusively hexes that do more than one at once.

But setting up the problem that way implies that there are 3 distinct types of hexes that can be balanced. One, hexes that destroy someone completely, but have short durations and long recharges; two, hexes that last a long time, but are a nuisance and have long recharges; and three, hexes that are spammable, but don't last long and don't destroy a victim.

Under that guise I'm fine with leaving Price of Failure alone, for instance. It lasts a long time, sure - but the effect, on its own, is not a problem (the biggest problem with Price and Spirit is how they amplify other problem skills). It also now has a long recharge on it, so you have to pick where you want to put it. Blurred Vision and Reckless Haste are problematic under that metric, as hexes that last a long time and really wreck their victim. They should either take an uptime hit, or have their effect scaled back into something that's less of a 'must remove' effect.

I hadn't spelled it out as explicitly before, and I'm rethinking several hexes in light of it. Remember, though, that there's more than one way to build a fair hex, and all of them should be explored by the skillset.

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

Anyway:

There are much easier ways to make these skills unplayable trash than reworking their mechanics. Also, I think it's retarded to propose turning robust skills into narrow, conditional crap, when the exact opposite is what would be better for the game's overall health and depth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mokone

this thread is, with one exception (Paragon armor), about SKILL changes only -- meaning that this does not include any kind of game mechanic suggestions.

I hate having to change Paragon AL, because of the huge fit it'd raise. However I think it's required in order to leave their defensive skills viable at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patccmoi

I'd raise Blurred to 75% miss against moving foes (not allies =p) so that it's really a skill that excels to support kiting.

Well, see, you're specced in the Water line, which has a bunch of skills that snare people...do you think snares are good to support allies that are kiting? They seem to be...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lodurr

Just one copy of PoF or SoF on you for 30 seconds means 30 seconds of busted spikes. It's not the single 25% chance to miss, but 25% chance to miss + Aegis or stances or WoW or blinds or wards.

No it doesn't. A single copy of Price or Spirit doesn't do anything to you. Your spike is being busted by Aegis, or Stances, or Blind, not by Price or Spirit. The skill doesn't even need to be removed if it's not in combination with anything else.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Age

I always watch the Monks for the most part in Observer it is like they do is GoLE+Aegis.

If your Ranger can't hit GLE+Aegis consistently (and seriously, the GLE has a big, glowing animation that reads "I am about to cast Aegis"), you need to get a new Ranger. I know that our Monks hate GLE + Aegis, in no small part because the Rangers you fight near the top of the ladder zero in on it.

Peace,
-CxE

Shmanka · Jun 01, 2007, 10:39 PM // 22:39

I do not think that Watch Yourself, Fear Me!, or Steady Stance should be nerfed that hard. Simply because I feel they are a good substitute to the tactic line for warriors and are a good chance in the meta. These types of warriors also fit well into Hex Pressure and other E-Denial builds. Of course there are counters to these and good tactics over come this style of play, just like anything else yet personally I like seeing some variety and pressure with or without your attack being blocked from a warriors perspective.

2 things I think should get the nerf hammer, Signet of Humility and Blind reduced to 75% chance to miss.

I also want alot of things to buff :S

Other then what I mentioned I agree with the proposed changes.

clawofcrimson · Jun 01, 2007, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

"Watch Yourself!" on the other hand you just spam on recharge, no timing, little positioning (make sure you hit everyone!), no investment (it actually returns energy), no countering. There aren't any decisions to be made by anyone other than 'hit button on recharge', and that's why it's not a skill that's good for the game. It should have a power level reflecting its ease of use and lack of interesting game interactions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My assertion is that if you fix passive Paragon defense, *and* nerf Aggressive Refrain out of the metagame, that the Paragon will no longer be viable in competitive play at all. Do you disagree?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I hate having to change Paragon AL, because of the huge fit it'd raise. However I think it's required in order to leave their defensive skills viable at all.

-CxE

Paragon's were made as passive defenders... thats what makes them paragons...

..and btw... the paragon in 'balanced' gameplay would be dropped if you were to nerf...'either' side (offensive vs. defensive) because the paragon in those cases is a 'take it or leave it class' .....which would kill the class in pvp (not to mention the pve effect) Why would you bring a paragon in place of another damage dealer if it were not for his passive defense. No one has argued that the Paragon has 'better' damage capability than a warrior... The class has seen use because of having competitive passive defense and offensive power. ....which is exactly what they are supposed to do...

the fix to the paragon needs to happen... but the solution cannot be discussed in this thread....

Riotgear · Jun 01, 2007, 10:50 PM // 22:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by clawofcrimson

You should tell that to the millions that play online pve games... balance is 'obsolete' without roleplay... why don't we all just play chess? because the idea of being a (ranger, assasin, warrior, etc...) is fun... look at the plans for GW2... are they talking most about the changes in balance?????

Roleplay is the life blood of any rpg game whether the pvp'ers agree or not.

They're talking most about the PvE aspect because you can't describe good balance in a press release, or put it on the back of the box. Remember that the Prophecies box's example of secondary profession synergy was hamstorm. Is hamstorm even marginally effective? No, but it's easy to understand. That's the point. It's something people can relate to and understand, much more so than "Diversion recharge increased to 12 seconds."

GW lost a lot of potential audience by having a shoddy and very short PvE campaign, so they are attempting to tell everyone they're doing better in the second. But when it comes to PvP, balance is top priority.

And furthermore, you are lumping balance in with variety just so you can flame me. Balance and variety can be achieved, if anything, classes and skill sets exist as extensions of play style, so people can enjoy the game doing something that works well for them without having to fight the game mechanics every step of the way.

..... but that doesn't mean that class concepts need to dominate balance. Maybe some players like being able to turn into a god, and since they're a god, like the idea of being able to mash buttons in god form until their target's dead. In fact, you heard that argument before Grenth got nerfed. It was just as retarded then as it is now: Yes, Dervishes can turn into gods, yes, gods are powerful, no, it's not fair, NERFED.

Assassins are supposed to be able to kill their targets so fast no one can react. They are practically described as a walking I Win button. Please tell me how you can make that work and not ruin the game.

Zuranthium · Jun 01, 2007, 10:54 PM // 22:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by clawofcrimson

Paragon's were made as passive defenders... thats what makes them paragons...

Wow, I guess the the Spear Mastery line better just be removed from the game then.

~Z

Age · Jun 01, 2007, 10:59 PM // 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Wow, I guess the the Spear Mastery line better just be removed from the game then.

~Z

Just give Paragons a staff or Wand.Then reduce thier armour to 60al and a buff up the motivation line and maybe the command line.This would but them more in line with spell castors.

Neo-LD · Jun 01, 2007, 11:12 PM // 23:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enisgn

Ok, there's this meme flying around that apparently lumps everything that doesn't support a very reactive, fast paced, twitchy playstyle as "passive play", and anything that is associated with "passive play" is inherently bad

Even though that section wasnt explicitly pointed towards me, I feel I should clarify something about my own views. I dont think that all things must be "twitchy" to require skill (just look at Diversion, or Blackout, or Deep Freeze). Those spells reward facets of skill besides reflexes, namely timing and appraisal for the player casting them, and even reward awareness and reflexes for players on the other side if they can track those spells down and stop them.

@ Aegis

I think that Aegis would be neither necessary nor missed if single target protection spells were buffed sufficiently. Right now they only perform well if you can catch at least two attackers going after the same guy, which doesnt happen a whole lot except when they converge for spikes. However, if say, casting Shielding Hands, on the guy who is being auto-attacked by a single enemy were actually worth it - right now its better to just stare at him and heal it back with GoH - then monks wouldnt "need aegis" (God forbid) to have a chance against heavy physical teams.

Melody Cross · Jun 01, 2007, 11:42 PM // 23:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo-LD

@ Melody

I think you assumed that I would be against buffing other monk skills? Hardly. Minor buffs many monk skills, including almost every single-target protection spell in the game would make me very happy, especially coupled with the destruction of Aegis

Guardian --> 60%, SoA --> scaling by 8s instead of 5s, SH --> 25 damage prevented, and Spell Shield --> 5e, 12r, 1/4c, "for the next 3 seconds, target ally cannot take damage from spells," sound like good fixes to me.

@ Ensign

Sure, Aegis is counterable, but then again so is almost everything on your list. The simple fact is that the game would be much better if Aegis didnt exist. Monks would have to rely on single target prot spells which become steadily more powerful with better timing, awareness, and placement - rewarding player skill at its finest.

I wouldn't mind that at all...until you get to the other side of the coin. Monks would increase their ability to self prot--they'd have to--and become all that much harder to kill in RA and TA.

its some catch that catch 22

Blame the Monks · Jun 02, 2007, 12:20 AM // 00:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Following up the previous point here, I think it's obvious what the difference is between Aegis and "Watch Yourself!" ...

I must have been unclear, as I agree with you. I think aegis balance is perfectly fine -- its easy to interrupt with common, versatile tools, its reasonably removable (mirror, spot removes), and its effect isn't grossly overpowered (reasonably short and against some teams irrelevant). I think its a healthy counterbalance to prevent mass physical teams, actually.

The only thing I don't like about aegis is how it stacks with other passive defense, such as wards, hex crap, shouts, and so on. I think some cap on passive defense is in order, but I don't really have a good solution in mind. But I still think passive defense in general is a problem. But I DON'T have a problem with aegis or gle in any way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

My assertion is that if you fix passive Paragon defense, *and* nerf Aggressive Refrain out of the metagame, that the Paragon will no longer be viable in competitive play at all. Do you disagree?

Well, I suppose you are right. But I'm not sure if the paragon as a concept adds anything interesting to the game, so I don't care about this loss.

I think echos are a problem conceptually. The think defensive shouts are a problem. I think the passive defense is a problem (as you discussed). And finally, the condition vomit crap that paras and dervs introduce (ebon bust, harriers, anthem of flame, crip anthem, etc) I don't like -- I don't think RC should be mandantory because so many classes can pump out retarded condition spam. What else is there? Initially I liked the idea of a ranged physical/condition pressure, but now I don't so much.

Much like spirit spamming rits and aoe nuking dervs, some class concepts are garbage enough that I don't want them in the game at all. Maybe I am being short sighted here, but I can't think of anything interesting about paras. So let me ask for your opinion -- what interesting aspects do paras add to the game?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

But setting up the problem that way implies that there are 3 distinct types of hexes that can be balanced. One, hexes that destroy someone completely, but have short durations and long recharges; two, hexes that last a long time, but are a nuisance and have long recharges; and three, hexes that are spammable, but don't last long and don't destroy a victim.

Ok, I can see this. Under your view, I can see why faint/migraine/reaper are worse offenders than pof/sof/reck. But that isn't how hexes currently exist -- some hexes last a long time AND completely destroy a toon AND are spammable.

I think we also differ in that I think pof/sof is a major effect, and you don't seem to. 25% miss is not trivial, especially when it can often end up on 2 physicals, given a fast recharge, aoe hit, and the fact recharge is less than duration. 25% less pressure means a team doesn't wipe. 25% miss means chances are your adren spike doesn't go thru.

I still think the duration/recharge of pof/sof/faint/migraine/reck need to be nerfed given the reality that removal is impossible. I am fine with nerfing them into either of the categories you suggest -- reduce the effect and leave the duration the same or reduce the duration and leave the recharge long.

clawofcrimson · Jun 02, 2007, 12:41 AM // 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Wow, I guess the the Spear Mastery line better just be removed from the game then.

~Z

...please read my 'entire' post.

As it has been stated many times.... the spear line by itself, while formidible cannot hold the class by itself.... People would choose warriors over paragon's were it not for their defensive/utility skills.... so if you were to take away the (extremely few) skills that make up the paragon's passive defense, what do you have left??

... my point is, having both at the same time is what the class was made to do, and limiting them to only being able to do one of those effectively, would nerf the class from being used... in both pvp and pve.

@roitgear

I was not trying to flame you. In fact 'you' were the one who called the assasin class a bad idea. It is just rediculous to say that balance takes priority over everything. It (from a gaming industry standpoint) ..clearly does not. The assasin class is not a bad idea, (a poorly implemented class...well that's debate-able) if we didn't have diversity of classes then we would have a boring game. The majority of GW players could care less about the balance of gvg and HA... the majority of online gamers everywhere could care less about pvp balance.

@ aegis

I am inclined to agree with ensign, although I would tone it up just a hair.

Patccmoi · Jun 02, 2007, 12:53 AM // 00:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

I don't disagree with this assessment of the current metagame. Many hexes destroy someone completely, last forever, and are very spammable, and that's a problem. That's a very accurate description of what makes a problem hex, actually.

Here's the difference in my mind though. While you're focusing on one type of hex and saying they all should fit that mold, I'm taking a slightly different appraoch. My feeling is that a hex is fair if it only destroys a toon XOR last a long time XOR is spammable. The problem hexes are exclusively hexes that do more than one at once.

But setting up the problem that way implies that there are 3 distinct types of hexes that can be balanced. One, hexes that destroy someone completely, but have short durations and long recharges; two, hexes that last a long time, but are a nuisance and have long recharges; and three, hexes that are spammable, but don't last long and don't destroy a victim.

Under that guise I'm fine with leaving Price of Failure alone, for instance. It lasts a long time, sure - but the effect, on its own, is not a problem (the biggest problem with Price and Spirit is how they amplify other problem skills). It also now has a long recharge on it, so you have to pick where you want to put it. Blurred Vision and Reckless Haste are problematic under that metric, as hexes that last a long time and really wreck their victim. They should either take an uptime hit, or have their effect scaled back into something that's less of a 'must remove' effect.

I hadn't spelled it out as explicitly before, and I'm rethinking several hexes in light of it. Remember, though, that there's more than one way to build a fair hex, and all of them should be explored by the skillset.

This is an interesting way to view it. It's really just logical, but it seems a lot of hexes aren't fitting in those 3 cases, or there is skills that allow to break it (for instance Mantra of Persistence). I think the main reason is that ANet thought some hexes were simply nuisance where in reality they are much harsher than that. Thinking for example of Faintheartedness. When you look at the stats on it (duration, cost, recharge) it's pretty clear that it's meant to be spammable and maintainable. Imo at start they simply thought that 50% slower attack was a slight DPS decrease and not changing all that much, while in practice it takes out any ability you have to truly pressure, even more on warriors as it slows adrenal gain on top. Just like PoF/SoF were supposed to be mere nuisance i think... but in practice is it really 25%?! I mean, it's easy to code and i don't really see how they could've mess it up, but it REALLY feels much higher than 25% even when you have just 1 of them. When i hit someone with a 75% block stance, i consider that i got a lucky hit if it goes through. But when I'm with Price, for it doesn't feel like an unlucky swing when i miss, it feels absolutely expected cause it happens all the time. Maybe it's just a matter of taking notice of what annoys you more than what helps you, but it always seemed broken to me...

If all hexes could be reviewed and make sure that they are fitting in one of those 3 categories, i think it would help balancing a lot.

There's just one thing about hexes i'm not sure personally and it's degen hexes. Like a lot of people talk about how Reaper's Mark is too good, etc., and i won't disagree though i'm not convinced. You have much more experience than i do at high level of play to judge. But when it's just degen, and you don't actually need to remove them but can heal through, when exactly do you consider them balanced? I mean you have skills like Dwayna's Kiss that fit well on a LoD and can often heal for 250 easily for 5E on a target with say 3 hexes and 1 enchant, and ofc skills like LoD or Heal Party that are extremely efficient healing against spread degen. I know that you can say like 'Reaper's Mark is 300 damage for 5E', which is true, but at the same time it has to be on different target (can't hit the same guy for 300 damage more than once every 30s in a sense), it's elite (you could have Spoil Victor, Spiteful, etc. instead. When those aren't removed fast, they can do about as much damage as Reaper's pretty easily, though you do have the option of not doing anything to stop that damage but then they become a very harsh shutdown), forces a high investment in Soul Reaping (though since you have Curses for the rest and that's so awesome you just need those 2 lines it's not really bad) and is limited by degen cap. So really i'm just curious at how you see those and if you have any basis to compare. Total damage/cost? Number of targets you can affect? Or it's just a feeling from experience that it's too good? Cause while you could work on classifying all the debilitating hexes in the 3 categories above, there is no such thing for pure degen. Conjure Phantasm isn't a shutdown or even a nuisance in a sense, it's just DoT. And DoT also means that thing like Heal Sig, Troll, etc. can counter it a bit without monks having to pay too much energy. So it's really just an honest question, what leads you to think Reaper's is deserving of a nerf?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Well, see, you're specced in the Water line, which has a bunch of skills that snare people...do you think snares are good to support allies that are kiting? They seem to be...

There's really nothing to argue here. You're right =p

Lodurr · Jun 02, 2007, 12:53 AM // 00:53

About PoF and SoF, they're more than a small nuisance, and last forever, so I think they violate the three type of hexes rule.

Current balanced spike builds compensate for the existence of Aegis, blinds, Soldier's Defense, and other antimelee skills. When you throw a single PoF or SoF on top of that, it's too much and your spike success rate drops significantly. But the truth is there's generally more than just a single PoF or SoF on you making you miss or otherwise disrupting your spikes.

Running more hex removal is not the answer. My guild ran two copies of Expel the other day and still got overhexed because they had a Panic dom mesmer in the mix.

The only balanced build that can beat hexes right now is one that can split effectively against it, and if you're on Jade there's no solution. Someone prove me wrong.

Riotgear · Jun 02, 2007, 01:05 AM // 01:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by clawofcrimson

It is just rediculous to say that balance takes priority over everything. It (from a gaming industry standpoint) ..clearly does not.

Then would you say that "fun" takes priority over just about everything? Because when PvP is imbalanced, it is not fun. And kind of regardless of balance, I'd say that assassins are bad for "fun".

Quote:

The assasin class is not a bad idea, (a poorly implemented class...well that's debate-able) if we didn't have diversity of classes then we would have a boring game.

I already said that diversity is a good thing, and explained why, but promoting builds that any idiot can play properly and get away with doesn't promote diversity, it just frustrates people out of the game because they're being defeated by button-mashers.

Quote:

the majority of online gamers everywhere could care less about pvp balance.

I kind of explained this earlier, but balance efforts should and do focus on PvP because it's easy to just slap environment changes in if things get too difficult. The only thing that makes a difference in PvE is ensuring that each class remains viable, but that's not the kind of thing that crap like Shadow Prison affects, because you don't need Shadow Prison for PvE. PvP balance requires much more attention, and interest in PvP decays very quickly when balance issues stagnate.

Phades · Jun 02, 2007, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

Making Blurred only effective against moving targets is an interesting suggestion though.

That would make it rather pointless as it lies within a skill line that specializes in movement reduction. To force people to choose between snaring a melee character, which would mean zero damage output until removed unless attacking a knocked down foe, or reducing the damage if the the melee damage dealer is persuing someone who is kiting them seems rather pointless.

Seamus Finn · Jun 02, 2007, 01:14 AM // 01:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

I think echos are a problem conceptually. The think defensive shouts are a problem. I think the passive defense is a problem (as you discussed). And finally, the condition vomit crap that paras and dervs introduce (ebon bust, harriers, anthem of flame, crip anthem, etc) I don't like -- I don't think RC should be mandantory because so many classes can pump out retarded condition spam. What else is there? Initially I liked the idea of a ranged physical/condition pressure, but now I don't so much.

Much like spirit spamming rits and aoe nuking dervs, some class concepts are garbage enough that I don't want them in the game at all. Maybe I am being short sighted here, but I can't think of anything interesting about paras. So let me ask for your opinion -- what interesting aspects do paras add to the game?

It's a little late to try and fix mass conditions, jsut about every physical out there not only CAN pump out lots of devastating conditions, but the most commonly used templates do(Crip Slash, Burning Arrow, Broadhead Arrow -- some of the less complained about classes and templates are condition spammers as well as the Paragons, SP Sins, and far less popular Ebon Dust Dervs). Honeslty I think the game is at a point where RC is pretty much a necesity fine, but I never feel like I am "playing the metagame" by slotting him. RC is clearly one of the top monks elites around with only LoD as a serious contender and maybe Shield a distant third. Since you can run 2 monk elites the choices seem obvious unless you have these essential utilities somewhere else(Thinking Draws, Strong Heal Parties etc.). In this sense I really don't find Paragons to be problematic.

What do Paragons add? Well, they add a nice counter to wards that doesn't require running an AoE Smiter. Having serious damage on a ranged character does add some versatility that the degen pressure from a ranger really doesn't fill. I would say the true good-for-the-game trademark of the Paragon is that he puts the balanced into the balanced pressure based builds. Since he has the energy pool to pump out some rather expensive party utility he gives KGYU style pressure builds a lot more defensive flexability. I think that there is still more about the paragon that hasn't been unearthed quite yet, but I would say this is the most common, good thing I can say about the class.

On another note, I can't totally agree with those stating that Paragons are "midliners and should have more comparable DPS" and such. First, whether or not a Paragon has higher dps than a second warrior(and certain bars might) doesn't really justify running one over a warrior because the Paragon has no access to kds, and this is really why a warrior is such a potent frontliner, in my opinion. The Paragon is really somethign between midliner and frontliner and the character's dps is why you would want to run him over that water ele. Assuming the character's passive defense is hit, as recommended(and I wouldn't really challenge what ensign proposed), the character basically has damage to offer over other midliners and that's pretty much it. You could still run that aegis on the water ele or make him more splittable, so why pick a Paragon if even the strong pressure that he can put out is gone?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lodurr

The only balanced build that can beat hexes right now is one that can split effectively against it, and if you're on Jade there's no solution. Someone prove me wrong.

I can't say that it isn't a build wars mentality, but if you have two strong sources of heal parties(not a GOLE HP, more like a eprod or something and an LoD), most hex builds can't really deal with it. People don't seem to want to run it these days, but when you take into account that the hex build coupe de grace is spread the hexes and humility the LoD, make the team cave and either win outright or take a lot of NPCs out for VoD, the solution seems pretty clear. Of course this really requires you to accept that you will do nothing to the other team and just play to VoD, but it has worked soundly against the hex teams I've played(notably not the strongest hex teams around though, but with the same builds).

Ensign · Jun 02, 2007, 01:25 AM // 01:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

The only thing I don't like about aegis is how it stacks with other passive defense

I don't really like it either, but a cap wouldn't really be effective. Reason being that 50% miss vs 75% miss matters only in a few situations (interrupts), but as far as physical pressure goes the difference is pretty meaningless, you aren't going to die. The problem isn't the stuff stacking, it's how redundant it all is. You have to stop the Aegis and the Wards and shut down the blind and hexes, because any one part of that working makes it very difficult to kill anything. It's easy to nerf stacking, but harder to nerf redundancy.

Maybe what's needed are buffs to skills like Warrior's Cunning, to just say 'for X seconds, all of your redundant miss chance stuff doesn't work' or the like. You need some proactive options to cut through that stuff, not just reactive interrupts and removal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

I think echos are a problem conceptually.

Agreed, they're all either these quasi permanent buffs that you have to jump through hoops to make use of, which aren't all that interesting, or buffs that have their effect multiply with more Paragons and shouters that can't be balanced for anything but giant shout packs. Maintaining a bunch of unending, unremovable buffs on your team with other ending buffs on your team, blech.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

So let me ask for your opinion -- what interesting aspects do paras add to the game?

I like how well they support physical pressure in general, without making things really spikey. I even like a bit of party support on defense, as long as it takes a bit of timing or is somewhat vulnerable. There are a few interesting targeted things like Brace Yourself. But yeah, even when looking over the class for buffs, there are a ton of skills that are 'this skill is bad, and I hope it is always bad'. It's a really shallow profession. =/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

I think we also differ in that I think pof/sof is a major effect, and you don't seem to.

I don't think it destroys you on its own, and is reasonably high investment on 2c20r. It's a good skill to be sure, but I don't consider it to be a problem hex with the longer duration...especially if the big, problem hexes are taken care of.

Faint, Migraine, and Reckless are problems though, and I've suggested hits to all of 'em.

Peace,
-CxE

Zuranthium · Jun 02, 2007, 01:40 AM // 01:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by clawofcrimson

...please read my 'entire' post.

As it has been stated many times.... the spear line by itself, while formidible cannot hold the class by itself.... People would choose warriors over paragon's were it not for their defensive/utility skills.... so if you were to take away the (extremely few) skills that make up the paragon's passive defense, what do you have left??

You have skills that add to the team's OFFENSE. Here is a standard Paragon bar that has 0 passive defense abilities:

P/Me

11+1+1 Spear
11+1 Leadership
8+1 Command

Expel Hexes
Mirror of Disenchantment
Spear of Lightning
Vicious Attack
"Go for the Eyes!"
Anthem of Flame
Agressive Refrain
Signet of Return

Spiking ability, solid DPS, removal, hard rez, a hard counter for Aegis....

That's the kind of Paragon I like to see being played and it's a good build without any of the boring crap.

It would become even more interesting with changes to the Leadership attribute (energy gained per shout/chant is a set amount instead of being limited by # of allies within earshot) and "Go for the Eyes!" (6 adren, but make the effect a little stronger), because then you could use "It's just a flesh wound." as the Elite (although the recharge on it would need to be bumped up to like 4 seconds) and have your Prot Monk be something else besides freaking RC for a change.

So, that's my wish!

~Z

Blame the Monks · Jun 02, 2007, 02:24 AM // 02:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Maybe what's needed are buffs to skills like Warrior's Cunning, to just say 'for X seconds, all of your redundant miss chance stuff doesn't work' or the like. You need some proactive options to cut through that stuff, not just reactive interrupts and removal.

I'm not sure warriors that can make themselves immune to all antimelee is a good thing. Its like a melandru's derv on crack. I see your point, but I think this cure would be worse than the malady. Better recharge on war cun is a start, but I'm leery of expanding it to also include miss AND block.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

I don't think it destroys you on its own, and is reasonably high investment on 2c20r. It's a good skill to be sure, but I don't consider it to be a problem hex with the longer duration...especially if the big, problem hexes are taken care of.

Faint, Migraine, and Reckless are problems though, and I've suggested hits to all of 'em.

I think we see eye-to-eye conceptually, but I still think you underestimate the power of pof/sof/reck and for that matter your proposed nerfed versions of faint. Even after your proposed nerfs, a handway bar could completely knock your warriors out of the game with no chance of removal. Your team still can't function, can't stop the spam, and can't remove the hate. What changes?

Under your three tier approach, I think the long term nuisance hexes MUST be mild enough that if even they sit on you a reasonable balanced team can score kills. I just don't believe that can happen with 33% reduced attack speed, ice snares, blurr, and pof/sof in their current form.

And fundamentally, I'm sick of being forced to bring a veil, a deny hexes, a purge signet, a smite hex, a signet of removal (or hev + shatter hex), and multiple interrupts just to deal with a hex team. I think hexes should be balanced around more reasonable hex removes that the absurd volume of hex removes you have to slot in now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

I like how well they support physical pressure in general, without making things really spikey. I even like a bit of party support on defense, as long as it takes a bit of timing or is somewhat vulnerable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seamus Finn

What do Paragons add? Well, they add a nice counter to wards that doesn't require running an AoE Smiter. Having serious damage on a ranged character does add some versatility that the degen pressure from a ranger really doesn't fill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Spiking ability, solid DPS, removal, hard rez, a hard counter for Aegis.... That's the kind of Paragon I like to see being played and it's a good build without any of the boring crap.

I can see what you all are saying, but I'm not sure I agree.

Zuranthium and I have very different tastes, as cow's similar bar was boring as hell to me. Our version used a sup rune (16s, 12l, 7c) and traded out vicious for harriers. Seems to me it is just another utility midline spiker. I honestly felt like a mindless button smasher. No real judgment or skill required, just stand there in the middle being invincible spiking and spamming your skills on recharge.

I felt like other midline take more skill and provide more interesting options, at least from the perspective of a player. The bar is worthwhile as a team, but its still boring and relatively skillless imo. I don't mind that archtype being in the meta, but I don't think its that worthwhile either. Not to the point of allowing other imba skills. And not to the point where this crowds out other, more interesting and skill based midliners that share similar niches.

But I suppose as a business reality we have to give them something.

clawofcrimson · Jun 02, 2007, 02:36 AM // 02:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

You have skills that add to the team's OFFENSE. Here is a standard Paragon bar that has 0 passive defense abilities:

That's the kind of Paragon I like to see being played and it's a good build without any of the boring crap.

~Z

That's a great build... one I actually play often... one I posted long before it was popular.

but, you do realize that you made a paragon that does two things ....offensive dps 'and' defensive support (hex removal). -exactly what the class was meant to do... (and your secondary skills complement the para's role. ....and if you took away the ability to have a secondary you would be stuck with a class that has decent attack power and (with it's core skills) passive defense.