Blackjack and Strangling Throw Damage Nerf/Change

[Dragonslayer810]

<DIV>Any brigands on test know if the damage change to the blackjack line was reduced significantly or was it just a minor decrease? Also how much was the throwing damage decreased on the Strangling throw line?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks in advance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Oh and here are some of the Brigand update notes on test,</DIV> <DIV> <P>- Brigand: Blackjack - Changed from a 5s stun to a 6s hold direction and</P> <P>root ability. Reduced damage and power cost.</P> <P>- Brigand: Strangling Throw - Reduced damage.</P> <P>- Brigand: Double Up - Double Up list auto-adjusts to use abilities</P> <P>appropriate to the brigand's level.</P></DIV>

[Big Da]

<P>I'd say the changes are fair, though im not sure the ranged attack was doing that much damage to start with.</P> <P>Blackjack id like to see how much less damage but as long as i can still use it to get some flank attacks in (and for 1 second longer) I don't have an issue with this.</P> <P>Being that the notes were a few days out from what went live on test it'll be nice to see if this is indeed what they are testing.</P>

[verydanger]

<p><i>Double Up list auto-adjusts to use abilities appropriate to the brigand's level.</i></p><p>Could this be..??</p><div></div>

[Radigazt]

<P>Ugh, this sounds terrible.  Those two are staples of PvP, and they're both getting nerfed?!?!?!?  Not good.  What is a "hold direction and root ability?"  Root I understand, and I'm fine with changing it from a Stun to a Root, but if it's one of those easily breakable roots that breaks as soon as you attack ... then it will have lost a LOT of its value for PvP.  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  I use this in PvP to catch runners and keep them there until the rest of my group can catch up.  If it is changed to an easily breakable root, they'll be able to flee again almost the second I Root them.  That's lame lame lame.  There's already too much running in PvP ... it's a combat game, not the Marine Corps Marathon!  </P> <P>Obviously none of us like reduction in damage, but as long as Strangling Throw still does the knockdown for the same duration, I can live with a little less damage on that one.  </P> <P>I really really really hope this root on Blackjack isn't easy to break in PvP.  I'm still a little confused ty the "hold direction" business.  Does that mean that they cannot turn around while rooted?  Does that mean we can get behind them and attack them but they cannot attack us?  Does it mean that as soon as the root is broken they'll be locked into traveling one direction for some number of seconds?  This doesn't sound good, but if it is a root that cannot be broken by damage (pls pls pls!) then I'm OK with it.  I Master2'd Blackjack for the extra damage ... that decision is looking a bit iffy now.  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[AratornCalahn]

I wonder if there will be more or less nerf when we see the reqal update notes... <div></div>

[ag]

Why is the damage portion of the combat arts being changed? The adjustment is for stun duration only.

[Grim0]

Since they're going nerf-happy, they figure they might as well add in a few completely random nerfs as well.But hey, if the Blackjack line becomes an UNBREAKABLE root, that'll be on a seperate immunity timer from the stun. Meaning we'll be able to use it, and use a stun as soon as it's over. That'll be fun.Nerfing the damage on our single weak ranged attack makes no sense at all.<div></div>

[verydanger]

<div><blockquote><hr>agra wrote:Why is the damage portion of the combat arts being changed? The adjustment is for stun duration only.<hr></blockquote>A bit curious also why the damage is being reduced. Some 'DPS tier' balancing? Toning down our beloved Dispatch-Assault-Restrain-Double Up combo? I have a feeling we'll get quite a shock when we see the new damage reading on it... before LU13 it was pretty much a stun and nothing else, wont be one bit surprised to see this rolled back to something similar.Also, with this change to the throwing CA and also the mystic disappearance of Negotiation from Double Up, you cant help but to take a hint - we are really not suppose to have any AE or ranged skills. I mean _really_. :pJust me excited about the Double Up change though? It does say it will scale with level now, doesnt it? </div>

[Crimson Dragon]

<div><blockquote><hr>Radigazt wrote:<div></div> <p>What is a "hold direction and root ability?"  </p><hr></blockquote>it's what all roots were when DoF first came out. <span>:smileyvery-happy:</span>so that's probly where they got the trick from. it holds the target in place so that they can't turn.but they'll still be able to attack you.. heck if a mob can <b>backstab</b> you in the face *cough*debilitate*cough* then why can't they stun, stifle, and otherwise molest you while facing the other direction?</div>

[ag]

Honestly if the goal (or side effect, take your pick) is to reduce our ranged and AE effectiveness, take them away and give us to more attacks that are actually good and/or worth using, then.This whole cat-and-mouse game of bait-and-switch is very, VERY old.

[Crimson Dragon]

<div><blockquote><hr>agra wrote:Honestly if the goal (or side effect, take your pick) is to reduce our ranged and AE effectiveness, take them away and give us to more attacks that are actually good and/or worth using, then.This whole cat-and-mouse game of bait-and-switch is very, VERY old.<hr></blockquote>take them away.... just leave the blackjack line the way it was..... /cry</div>

[Carna]

It's a load of bollocks... they've generated such a hue and cry they've nothing to loose by throwing in any nerfs they might feel inclined to do so.... They said they were going to nerf stuns because apparently doing anything except either hitting the mob or being hit by the mob is bad for the challenge of the game, so there was no way we were going to escape it.

[Crimson Dragon]

/useability Feign/em falls to the ground and dies.wake me up when it's over...<div></div>

[Atrocity]

More BS Enough allready with the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] nerfs.  70 levels into the game why is there still the need to tinker with our CAs? <div></div>

[djewt1]

<DIV>I would like to hear a motivation for the nerfs of dmg...</DIV> <DIV>Esp the Blackjack, just bought a lvl 50 adept3 for that... :smileysad:</DIV>

[Kegofbud]

I really hope that the damage reduction on that art isn't destroyed. Also, fantasy game or not, if I can't auto-attack facing a different direction then the mob shouldn't. If I have to be directly behind a mob up close to debilitate, then so should the mobs. The changes that keep getting made to this game almost 2 years in ahve me so bordering cancelling.

[Timesquare]

<DIV>hmm , and not to mention they haven't posted they had/will fix our AE+double up combo </DIV> <DIV>or did i missed it ?</DIV><p>Message Edited by Timesquare on <span class=date_text>05-12-2006</span> <span class=time_text>10:29 AM</span>

[ag]

More bad newsOn Test as of this post date/time:Cheap Shot, Duration is 2 seconds heroic / 4 seconds solo, reduced from 4 seconds heroic / 6 seconds soloDeceitful Blow is still 4 seconds, but I fully expect that to get nerfed, so don't count on it.Restrain is 6 second root/face, no longer a stun. I also expect this ability to be extremely buggy and not be fixed for months.Flashy Throw stun duration is now is 2.5 seconds. Standard knockdown nerf across the board. (same with Deceit line)So, if you count 'em all up, we've gone from 6 + 4 + 5 + 4 (19sec) on solo mobs down to 4 + 4 + 2.5 (10.5sec) which will probably be reduced further when they finally get finished with Deceitful Blow.There are also some of these that affect Epics, which I also expect to get removed, so don't count on that either.A 45% reduction in overall effectiveness for stunning. By far, LU24 is the worst change in EQ2's history for Brigands. Can't see it any other way. Call me selfish. /shrugEDIT: Clarification on Flashy Throw for Grim001's benefit. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><p>Message Edited by agra on <span class=date_text>05-12-2006</span> <span class=time_text>07:25 PM</span>

[Grim0]

What the **** is the point of making our single ranged attack take 150% longer to cast?<div></div>

[DaLurk]

Thank for the feedback Agra.Don't you want to post it on <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board?board.id=testfeed" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board?board.id=testfeed</a> please ?I know that won't change anything, but if Devs surely won't do a clean job, I'll be happy to know that our "so-small" Brigand Community done their.I don't want to break the rules by copy/pasting, cause I'm not on Test, I'm not supposed to feedback, but I guess you can. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><div></div>

[Lockeye]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> agra wrote:<BR><BR>Deceitful Blow is still 4 seconds, but I fully expect that to get nerfed, so don't count on it.<BR>...<BR>So, if you count 'em all up, we've gone from 6 + 4 + 5 + 4 (19sec) on solo mobs down to 4 + 4 + 2.5 (10.5sec) which will probably be reduced further when they finally get finished with Deceitful Blow.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>You are assuming to everyone that I intend on changing this ability. This ability intentionally is not changed.<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> agra wrote:<BR><BR>Restrain is 6 second root/face, no longer a stun. I also expect this ability to be extremely buggy and not be fixed for months.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Have you actually tested this ability to see if it is in fact extremely buggy? That would be more helpful.<BR>

[ag]

Woot! /useability Vaunt worked!(all my characters on Test are <a href="http://oz.cx/eq2/corrupt-character-on-test-2.jpg" target=_blank>corrupt</a> (showing level 15293493943) and impossible to use, otherwise I would have tested them.)So, I'm going to have to rely on all the higher level Brigands on test to provide feedback, cause I won't have time to reach level 70 before LU24.I appreciate that you're reading these messages, Lockeye, but given the current list of bugs on the Brigand list that haven't been fixed since DoF beta, (and months previous) you can't blame me for having a lack of faith.To end on a positive note, again, thanks for the response.EDIT: added link for corrupt character screenshot.<p>Message Edited by agra on <span class=date_text>05-12-2006</span> <span class=time_text>07:52 PM</span>

[Kel]

<blockquote><hr>Lockeye wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> agra wrote:Deceitful Blow is still 4 seconds, but I fully expect that to get nerfed, so don't count on it....So, if you count 'em all up, we've gone from 6 + 4 + 5 + 4 (19sec) on solo mobs down to 4 + 4 + 2.5 (10.5sec) which will probably be reduced further when they finally get finished with Deceitful Blow. <hr> </blockquote>You are assuming to everyone that I intend on changing this ability. This ability intentionally is not changed. <blockquote> <hr> agra wrote:Restrain is 6 second root/face, no longer a stun. I also expect this ability to be extremely buggy and not be fixed for months. <hr> </blockquote>Have you actually tested this ability to see if it is in fact extremely buggy? That would be more helpful.<hr></blockquote>Shhhh! You're ruining his argument with LOGIC! LOGIC of all things? Come on, play fair...<div></div>

[Carna]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Lockeye wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> agra wrote:<BR><BR>Deceitful Blow is still 4 seconds, but I fully expect that to get nerfed, so don't count on it.<BR>...<BR>So, if you count 'em all up, we've gone from 6 + 4 + 5 + 4 (19sec) on solo mobs down to 4 + 4 + 2.5 (10.5sec) which will probably be reduced further when they finally get finished with Deceitful Blow.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>You are assuming to everyone that I intend on changing this ability. This ability intentionally is not changed.<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> agra wrote:<BR><BR>Restrain is 6 second root/face, no longer a stun. I also expect this ability to be extremely buggy and not be fixed for months.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Have you actually tested this ability to see if it is in fact extremely buggy? That would be more helpful.<BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Agra tests a hell of a lot of stuff. He's giving his opinion. Yes it's an assumption, but Agra is reasonably level headed so it's an assumption based upon experience.... with you. You could ask for level headedness but then you took the opportunity to reduce the damage of CAs while tinkering with them. I think that's a bit cynical under the guise of revising crowd control. I futher think tampering with the solo potential of CS is cynical also.</P> <P>I do appreciate you persuing the root/face in order to facilitate the use of Blackjack for backstabs, but I just haven't got enough good will left in me to be overly appreciative.... I think you're barking. I believe you're making your best efforts, but I think your relationship with the game and playerbase has become overly abstracted and I don't think you're fully thinking through what your constant overhauling and the constant state of anxiety it produces in the playerbase is doing to the game. You have a neurotic playerbase (like you did in EQ1) becuase people just don't know when there's going to be a smoking crater where their character used to be.</P> <P>Small changes. Each month small changes and see what happens.... big nerf, slow fix doesn't qualify.</P> <P>It's a big nerf Brigands are taking here. And we could argue the relative power of Brigands back and forth, but we're obviously not powerful enough to have people flocking to roll a Brigand. If you're going to nerf our stun utility simply because we happen to stun a lot whereas another class may not, I'd like some compensation. I'd like you to add a debuff to our flank attack or something. Otherwise we're simply being nerfed because we're the Rogue that stuns a lot and you've decided this week that you don't like stuns. Replace what you're taking away please so that it is a revision of crowd control rather than an opportunity to nerf... and leave the damage of our CAs alone. That damage has nothing to do with crowd control.</P> <P>You can't expect us to treat you like a fair and reasonable person if you don't act in good faith. You're not acting in good faith because you say one thing and do another. Now's your chance to change.</P>

[Nel]

I play a 64 brigand on test and have done a little bit of testing with restrain on some tenebrous mobs.  From what I have seen, the way this will effect the skill is: - you will now have up to 6 seconds of back attacking time as opposed to the throwable 5 second stun (i dont know if the new 6 sec duration is throwable or not) - less power cost using 103 power at master 2 (not too much of an issue anyway imo) - being infront of a melee mob will still get you attacked, otherwise it will just stand there. - casters will still be able to cast on you (have not tested this tho) - master 2 restrain is doing 781-1303 damage now the skill now appears to be better for solo / duo situations and less benefical in group situations. Also the changes appear to be implemented bug free. <div></div>

[ag]

Thanks Nelib.

[Jida]

Well,I don't understand about the damange nerf though.Were we doing way to much damage?Just curious.John<div></div>

[Crimson Dragon]

apparently the fact that restrain (m1) was nearing 2K was too much for them.... /nerfbrigands don't do damage, we just stand around and look good.anyway... all these changes aside... as long as my debuffs are not touched, i will be happy.(though a change in names on abilities wouldn't hurt.... black jack, restrain.... doesn't strike me as a "root that holds direction" sort of ability name<span>:smileytongue:</span>)<div></div>

[Xi]

"root that holds direction" translates to:   "allows target to finish casting evac"joy.<div></div>

[Dutka]

<P>I hope that SOE takes a hard look at this before it gets actually implemented.</P> <P>The Stuns are a major ability of the Brigand class and what they gain in giving up the DPS and Bow of the Assassin class.</P> <P>If they must make the change/nerf for overall CC changes, then perhaps they could give the Brigand a Mez like their Swashy counterpart.  OR add a Stifle component to the skills that use to have Stun.  Something that would keep the class unique after changing a major ability of the class.</P>

[Crimson Dragon]

fear and mezz just don't feel right with a brigand.... i could see a foot to the throat attack for a stifle, though.but the point is to take control <b>away </b>from non-enchanters. (since they're so common and they need more work)<div></div>

[jarnpraetor]

<P>I think this is just another example of SOE doing what they said they would not do, and that is make changes to PvE for the sake of PvP. </P> <P> </P>

[Kegofbud]

<DIV>Ahhh, what's the point. Nevermind.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Kegofbud on <span class=date_text>05-15-2006</span> <span class=time_text>12:42 PM</span>

[Myrcul]

<P>I'm not liking these changes at all, I really disagree vehemently with the design philosophy that for one class to be repaired, others must be made to suffer.  I feel for enchanters, but their repairs are going to 'bust' my class and specifically my ability to play the way I have been playing since releases.</P> <P>I chose Brigand because I wanted to be a reasonable solo class, while also bringing a little something to group.  I'm an Adult, with a full time job, and various responsibilities, so my play time is limited.  Brigands allowed me to play at my convenience, and do what I had time to do, and now with these changes there are going to be massive impacts to my enjoyment of the game.</P> <P>Is it 'right' or 'proper' then to lose other players to help some feel more useful?  Are there not creative ways in which you can address the problems of other classes without damaging the abilities of ours?  Just because our community is the 'smallest' (Outside of Coercers)  doesn't mean that its not a big deal to damage our play experience.</P> <P>The changes being made to the Brigand class are unnecessary.  There was no real call to these changes, the class isn't outperforming other classes, it isn't putting up DPS out of scale like the Ranger class was doing, there are no acknowledged 'uber' factors tot he class that have other players flocking to it in droves because OMG! We need to play a Brigand they are MONSTERS.</P> <P>I for one, and I believe others agree, am upset with Sony's behaviour and actions concerning the recent proposed changes to our class.  I've found my brigand community very willing to accept fixes if/when fixes were needed. We've not been a font of complaints, we've stoically endured a number of bugs for a long time, and this is how we're repaid?</P> <P>Your changes to the class are completely unnecessary and superfluous, they will NOT benefit enchanters in your intended manner and instead you generate ill will and disgruntled players in a group that was generally fairly happy with their class despite its low population.  Our biggest complaint really (the one I hear most grumbling about at least... in all the various venues) is our silly hat.</P> <P>I strongly urge you to rethink these 'fixes' as they will not have the intended benefit to other classes, and they'll damage a class that is already the second lowest populated class (Lowest in overall population, second lowest in # of Level 70's).  You're just creating more work for yourself in the long run as you'll eventually find you'll have to be adding fixes to our class because of increasing complaints and a shrinking population, in addition to the already noted and presented bugs that have yet to be addressed.</P> <P>Do not go through with these completely unnecessary changes.</P> <P> </P> <P>Myrculus of Lucan</P> <P><STRONG><FONT size=3> </FONT></STRONG><A href="http://www.eq2census.com/" target=_blank><STRONG><FONT color=#c8c1b5 size=3>http://www.eq2census.com/</FONT></STRONG></A><BR><STRONG><FONT size=5>Total Fighters</FONT> (1-70): <FONT size=4>414,011</FONT>   (63-70): <FONT size=4>8,964</FONT><FONT size=4>  <FONT size=3>(70):</FONT> </FONT><FONT size=4>5,132</FONT><FONT size=4>    28.0% of Population</FONT></STRONG><BR>Guardian: 75276    1947<BR>Berserker: 83711   1858<BR>Monk: 78095   1269<BR>Bruiser: 44202   851<BR>Shadowknight: 68688   1073<BR>Paladin: 78331   1978<BR><BR><B><FONT size=5>Total Priests</FONT> (1-70):<FONT size=4> 262,270</FONT></B><B>   (63-70): <FONT size=4>8,638  <FONT size=3>(70):</FONT> 4,723    25.8</FONT></B><B><FONT size=4>% of Population</FONT></B><BR>Templar: 57614   2351<BR>Inquisitor: 32999   1112<BR>Warden: 46888   1257<BR>Fury: 64969   1971<BR>Mystic: 39226   1195<BR>Defiler: 28998   762<BR><BR><B><FONT size=5>Total Mages</FONT> (1-70): <FONT size=4>346,960</FONT></B><B><FONT size=4> </FONT></B><B>  (63-70): <FONT size=4>8,919   <FONT size=3>(70):</FONT> 4,930    26.9</FONT></B><B><FONT size=4>% of Population</FONT></B><BR>Wizard: 96384   2627<BR>Warlock: 53331   1283<BR>Illusionist: 37518   831<BR>Coercer: 25971   547<BR>Conjuror: 69154   2004<BR>Necromancer: 76431   1637<BR><B><FONT size=5><FONT size=3><BR></FONT>Total Scouts</FONT> (1-70): <FONT size=4>269,013</FONT>   (63-70): <FONT size=4>5,948   <FONT size=3>(70):</FONT> 3,538    19.3% of Population</FONT></B><BR>Swashbuckler: 44566   931<BR>Brigand: 25903   666<BR>Troubador: 33912   771<BR>Dirge: 37129   877<BR>Ranger: 80170   1717<BR>Assassin: 58294   999</P>

[Crimson Dragon]

<div><blockquote><hr>Myrculus wrote:<div></div><p><strong></strong><strong><font size="4"></font></strong>Guardian: 75276    1947Berserker: 83711   1858Monk: 78095   1269Bruiser: 44202   851Shadowknight: 68688   1073Paladin: 78331   1978<b><font size="4"></font></b>Templar: 57614   2351Inquisitor: 32999   1112Warden: 46888   1257Fury: 64969   1971Mystic: 39226   1195Defiler: 28998   762<b><font size="4"></font></b>Wizard: 96384   2627Warlock: 53331   1283Conjuror: 69154   2004Necromancer: 76431   1637<b><font size="4"></font></b>Swashbuckler: 44566   931Brigand: 25903   666Troubador: 33912   771Dirge: 37129   877Ranger: 80170   1717Assassin: 58294   999</p><p><font color="#ffff00">total: 1274271</font></p><p>Illusionist: 37518   831Coercer: 25971   547</p><p><font color="#ffff00">total: 63489</font></p><hr></blockquote>there are over 20 times as many non-enchanters as there are enchanters (4.7% of the world population is enchanters). it is statistically impossible for every group to have an enchanter.... to say that the changes are "for enchanters" isn't sensible. why would a well-known giant of the mmorpg world make changes to appeal to such a small percent of its players? i don't see this as attracting new players.... new players wouldn't know the difference. the only thing it might do is shift more players into the enchanter classes. but would that really accomplish anything?side note: there are less brigands according to those numbers (25903 brigand vs 25971 coercer)</div>

[Kodros]

<div><blockquote><hr>Myrculus wrote:<div></div> <p>I chose Brigand because I wanted to be a reasonable solo class, while also bringing a little something to group.  </p><hr></blockquote>Eh?  That describes any class in EQ2.  Name one class that isnt a reasonable solo class.  Name one class that doesn't bring "a little something" to a group.  There's so much drama in that post...How is slightly decreasing the damage of two spells a critical change to our class?  How does this break your solo experience?  How do you use the Throw line in a way that it will destroy your solo experience if the damage is decreased?  Do you guys not see that we are very high on the DPS list (I'm usually only out DPS'd by pets) and we also have the best debuffs in the game?  We are low on the population list because people play the characters that they enjoy.  We aren't cattle that just run to the best DPS class.  Some like to play rogues, some dont.  Some like to play clerics, some dont.  Rogues in EQ1 were best DPS'ers and guess what...they were just as rare.  People in general just don't like to play rogues.  </div>

[Kegofbud]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kodros wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Myrculus wrote:<BR> <P>I chose Brigand because I wanted to be a reasonable solo class, while also bringing a little something to group.  <BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Eh?  That describes any class in EQ2.  <FONT color=#cc0033>Name one class that isnt a reasonable solo class.</FONT>  Name one class that doesn't bring "a little something" to a group.  There's so much drama in that post...<BR><BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>Templar.  It's like watching paint dry at the bottom of the ocean.<BR>

[Kodros]

<div><blockquote><hr>Crimson Dragon wrote:<div>there are over 20 times as many non-enchanters as there are enchanters (4.7% of the world population is enchanters). it is statistically impossible for every group to have an enchanter.... to say that the changes are "for enchanters" isn't sensible. why would a well-known giant of the mmorpg world make changes to appeal to such a small percent of its players? i don't see this as attracting new players.... new players wouldn't know the difference. the only thing it might do is shift more players into the enchanter classes. but would that really accomplish anything?side note: there are less brigands according to those numbers (25903 brigand vs 25971 coercer)</div><hr></blockquote>Enchanters should be the "Masters" of stun.  There are so many stuns being tossed out these days that if your group was coordinated, you could basically keep mobs stunned 95% of the fight.  A fight usually lasts ~45seconds and a single brig can bring 16seconds of stun to a group.  You see nothing wrong with that?  This change makes for more challenging encounters while making enchanters more viable for groups.  </div>

[Myrcul]

<DIV>Heh, thanks Keg.. Beat me to it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And if you're so high on the DPS why not provide your data demonstrating that you are Premier DPS only outdamaged by pets.  This means of course you are above the previously stated 'tier 1 dps' classes.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, please, demonstrate in a real world parse where you are doing more DPS then every other class out there excepting pets.  Then show us your gear as well, and how its something that should be considered a 'standard' outfit for the average player and not some fabled heavy amalgam of raid dropped equipment.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Point remains is that the ability to stun has been reduced by nealry 50%.  This is a sizeable chunk of time in which previous CA's used may not be able to be used. Which equates to a significant chunk of DPS lost while soloing or in small groups where the Brigand acts as the minitank. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>M</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>EDIT -- Also.. Who/What is your Brigand Kodos?   I'm admittedly fairly new to the eq2 forums as an active poster, but in your 600+ posts what maybe six were to the Brigands forum and few had anything, if at all, to do with the class itself.    </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm Myrculus, I'm lvl 68, been around since release for the most part, casual player who has solo'd primarily with more recent grouping over the last few months.  I play on Lucan D'Lere server.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So, ellucidate if you will, on your greater understanding of the class, our DPS, and the play of the character.  I'd be more thanhappy to eat a well deserved helping of crow if you can provide it.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Myrculus on <span class=date_text>05-16-2006</span> <span class=time_text>11:14 AM</span>

[Kodros]

<div><blockquote><hr>Myrculus wrote:<div>Heh, thanks Keg.. Beat me to it.</div> <div> </div> <div>And if you're so high on the DPS why not provide your data demonstrating that you are Premier DPS only outdamaged by pets.  This means of course you are above the previously stated 'tier 1 dps' classes.  </div> <div> </div> <div>So, please, demonstrate in a real world parse where you are doing more DPS then every other class out there excepting pets.  Then show us your gear as well, and how its something that should be considered a 'standard' outfit for the average player and not some fabled heavy amalgam of raid dropped equipment.  </div> <div> </div> <div>Point remains is that the ability to stun has been reduced by nealry 50%.  This is a sizeable chunk of time in which previous CA's used may not be able to be used. Which equates to a significant chunk of DPS lost while soloing or in small groups where the Brigand acts as the minitank. </div> <div> </div> <div>M</div><hr></blockquote>I've never had a problem soloing as a templar.My Char: http://eq2players.station.sony.com/en/player.vm?characterId=113812103 (dont have the gear listed though...)  I only have one piece of T6 fabled.  70% of the rest is lengendary and then treasured.  I use the Grizfazzle and Turmindin fang (sp?).  I will get the parses the next time I group up. Where do you get this 50% reduction number at?  </div>

[Myrcul]

<DIV>Thanks for the info.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I got the nearly 1/2 reduction in our ability to stun from the report on page 1 of this thread where it was outlines we've gone from 19seconds of stunning ability to 10.5 seconds. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am just very wary of Devs who balance games based on the output of less than 1% of the population as the greatest majority will never reach that level of output.  I've been in MMO's/Online games as both player and designer since 1989/90 and I've seen this to many times and have grown very weary of the action.  There was no cause, no radical shift in class performance, and those who will be greatest affected (the largest majority of the population) were those who were not seeing the benefits supposedly reaped by the 'fixed' problems in game.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>M</DIV>

[Kegofbud]

<P>1st of all, everyone knows where we stand on the DPS list. 2nd of all, bragging about beating other classes serves no purpose. It's situational. Can we outpares most classes given a good group - sure. </P> <P>Myrculus - I don't discount what he's saying. I can regularly outparse a lot of classes given proper DPS group set up, even when duel weilding. It's situational damage though. You can't be in group 4 of a raid, with only a healer, and beat up on someone in a DPS group.</P> <P>Kodros - I never said you couldn't solo with a Templar. You asked what wasn't a "reasonable" solo class. A templar is not reasonable to solo with. It's doable, but very, very, very slowly. Ask a templar or shaman how long Mark of Awakened solo trial took to do and tell me again how "reasonable" that is. My comment was more tongue in cheek originally, but you can tell it's not reasonable. :smileywink:</P>

[Carna]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kodros wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Crimson Dragon wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR>there are over 20 times as many non-enchanters as there are enchanters (4.7% of the world population is enchanters). it is statistically impossible for every group to have an enchanter.... to say that the changes are "for enchanters" isn't sensible. why would a well-known giant of the mmorpg world make changes to appeal to such a small percent of its players? i don't see this as attracting new players.... new players wouldn't know the difference. the only thing it might do is shift more players into the enchanter classes. but would that really accomplish anything?<BR><BR>side note: there are less brigands according to those numbers (25903 brigand vs 25971 coercer)<BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Enchanters should be the "Masters" of stun.  There are so many stuns being tossed out these days that if your group was coordinated, you could basically keep mobs stunned 95% of the fight.  A fight usually lasts ~45seconds and a single brig can bring 16seconds of stun to a group.  You see nothing wrong with that?  This change makes for more challenging encounters while making enchanters more viable for groups. <BR></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>A Brigand can <EM>theoretically</EM> bring 16 seconds of stun on a single mob to a group.... A Swashbuckler can simply mez the single mob for 20+ sec and have done with it. I see nothing wrong with it because it is part of the design and intended utility of both Rogue classes to be able to provide limited crowd control.</P> <P>After this nerf Swashbucklers will still be able to mez mobs for 20+ seconds and will still under most group circumstances do more dps than a Brigand.</P> <P>I say theoretically because many Brigands dont use their stuns so as to provide maximum stun lock on a single mob. They tend to be used more strategically or tactically; alternated, reserved for emergency, spammed for damage etc etc.</P> <P>As pointed out, there aren't so many enchanters or rogues that the intended fringe utility of rogues in this area is going to impact enchanters... and we still wont be able to mez a mob while a Swashbuckler can every 45sec (it's a coincidence that is the new nerfed recast time) after nerfing.</P> <P>This nerfing is opportunistice, reactionary and ill considered, and from the company that should have learnt a lesson from SWG.</P>

[Kodros]

<div><blockquote><hr>Myrculus wrote:<div></div><div> </div> <div>So, ellucidate if you will, on your greater understanding of the class, our DPS, and the play of the character.  I'd be more thanhappy to eat a well deserved helping of crow if you can provide it.</div> <hr></blockquote>It's all about knowing when to stun and the understanding of how much you can pull off before getting agro.  During a fight, there is a point where you know that you can unload as hard as you can while keeping it stunned till its dead.  Or start it a little early and use Ruse to kill it off.  Be consistant, use Dispatch for one fight and then use Rake and Debilitate lines during the next one unless of course you need to kill off the first mob fast because of adds.  Keep Swindler's luck on at all times...+23 to piercing is awesome and you will hit more.   Be active...we have many positional CAs.  Run to the front and use Revoke as much as you can.  Use 3 poisons at all times (mostly for 60+) and a STR/AGI/INT potion.  Keep multiple sets of gear on you for groups that max out your STR...switch some of your STR gear out for INT gear.   There is no reason for a brig to have good resist numbers after level 55.  Choose stats over Resists/Mit in gear.  Of course, keep gear with good Mit on you for soloing.  Hopefully all brigs are playing their class to the fullest by using the "Beg for Mercy" line which has saved my groups from wipeing many of times.  Note, I didnt say that I am always top of the DPS list since certain classes will be better for certain things (like AE'ing mages).  </div>

[Kodros]

<div><blockquote><hr>Myrculus wrote:<div>Thanks for the info.</div> <div> </div> <div>I got the nearly 1/2 reduction in our ability to stun from the report on page 1 of this thread where it was outlines we've gone from 19seconds of stunning ability to 10.5 seconds. </div> <div> </div> <div>I am just very wary of Devs who balance games based on the output of less than 1% of the population as the greatest majority will never reach that level of output.  I've been in MMO's/Online games as both player and designer since 1989/90 and I've seen this to many times and have grown very weary of the action.  There was no cause, no radical shift in class performance, and those who will be greatest affected (the largest majority of the population) were those who were not seeing the benefits supposedly reaped by the 'fixed' problems in game.</div> <div> </div> <div>M</div><hr></blockquote>That info is kinda incorrect though.  Yes, we have a 1/2 reduction in stun but you aren't including the 6 second directional root that we still have.  Using that, we can still jump behind the mob and use backstabs, etc, with out worrying about getting hit.  As a solo'er, nothing has really changed.  In a group however, the mob will still be hitting who ever is infront and closest. </div>

[Kegofbud]

<P>  Also, I'm guessing if it's a caster it'll still be able to cast on us. </P> <P>I don't really mind the stun portion change of Restrain, but I do mind the damage nerf.</P>

[Gyilok]

<DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kegofbud wrote:<BR> <P>1st of all, everyone knows where we stand on the DPS list. <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>incorrect, everyone knows where HE/SHE is on the dps list, you can forget about the infamous dps tier list, especially since aa-s are live</P> <P>with right aa-s and gear on a guardian, you can outdamage a lot of "high tier" considered dps people for various reasons, player skill, aa setup, gear whatever</P> <P>aa-s have made it possible to extend the limitations of classes, leading to possibilities like a 1k dps guardian or a raid tanking rogue, so people should really start thinking out of the box now and realize its all about the player, its gear and skill upgrades, and now the aa-s, the dps tiers should be long forgotten now, yet some still keep quoting them</P> <P>and for control nerfs, just remember back, before dof, when all of our stuns worked just as interupts, even on solo mobs because any damage would brave them, if you could play them, you can play even better with real stuns, or direction roots and stifles, whatever you want, not to mention chanters epic stunning if its really gonna go live (will be removed shortly after if it does anyway)</P></DIV>

[ag]

<blockquote><hr>Kodros wrote:That info is kinda incorrect though.<hr></blockquote>I exempted that ability because it is not a <b>stun</b>. A stun is not a root-face, and I'll never consider it as such. Call me a lying cheating scoundrel if you must, but please don't call my information inaccurate. Here's a clearer statement, so there's no misunderstaning: Our <i>pure</i> stun duration has been lowered 45%, plain and simple. Go examine the combat arts yourself on the test server if you don't believe me, but that's the bad news.

[Kegofbud]

 I think you mistook my statement Gyilok. I didn't mean on the infamous list. I meant on a parse. I guess also by "everyone" I meant the people who play the class in well set raids every day, seeing the parses. To hell with the "list." You are preaching to the choir. I am agreeing with you. <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by Kegofbud on <span class=date_text>05-16-2006</span> <span class=time_text>12:11 PM</span>

[Crimson Dragon]

<div><blockquote><hr>Kodros wrote:<div><blockquote><hr>Crimson Dragon wrote:<div>there are over 20 times as many non-enchanters as there are enchanters (4.7% of the world population is enchanters). it is statistically impossible for every group to have an enchanter.... to say that the changes are "for enchanters" isn't sensible. why would a well-known giant of the mmorpg world make changes to appeal to such a small percent of its players? i don't see this as attracting new players.... new players wouldn't know the difference. the only thing it might do is shift more players into the enchanter classes. but would that really accomplish anything?side note: there are less brigands according to those numbers (25903 brigand vs 25971 coercer)</div><hr></blockquote>Enchanters should be the "Masters" of stun.  There are so many stuns being tossed out these days that if your group was coordinated, you could basically keep mobs stunned 95% of the fight.  A fight usually lasts ~45seconds and a single brig can bring 16seconds of stun to a group.  You see nothing wrong with that?  This change makes for more challenging encounters while making enchanters more viable for groups.  </div><hr></blockquote>enchanters are the masters of stun in eq2. no one can argue against it (and i'm not trying to). i'm a rogue, i should be able to exploit my opponents' weak points to incapacitate them - stuns being a part of that.anyway...... because a group is capable of chain-stunning doesn't mean that the group always coordinates it or does. and if you read all of what i posted, there aren't enough enchanters to go around: about 1 enchanter for ever 20 players (if my math was correct).if the idea (as i remember) was to make enchanters more useful in groups and raids.... and if there aren't enough....?</div>

[ag]

hehehe. This change is not going to make people play enchanters more. That's the truly sad part.Change for the sake of change; I can accept with a modicum of honesty.But change with a hidden agenda with no honesty; Nope! I ain't swallowing that, no sir, not this Gnome.You don't think there's a hidden agenda? If this change was JUST for control effects, why are there changes to damage numbers as well? Why hasn't it been made clear that non-control-effect portions of spells and CA's would be affected as well?Are they afraid to tell us? I've met most of them, and that seems unlikely. So, why the lack of clear information? Hidden agenda is the only answer I can give, because with so little hard information as to the real motiviation (given the publicly given goals defy logic) we're left to speculate.How do they defy logic? Enchanters are in a race for last place with Brigands as the least played class. It seems unlikely, given the mob mentality and path of least resistance with respect to emergent tactics that prevails in MMOs, that fewer players means more uber.So if they're not powerful, why are they being reduced in power? They really are. Go look at Lockeyes original post. On the last page (or near it) is a line by line comparison where it shows which enchanter spells are being modified. All to the negative. Ok, so.. how is this going to make more people play Enchanters? Because... they're.... harder to play? They have less utility? They have less DPS? Which one of these things doesn't belong?/rant_onLogic Begone! The change goes Live! Get back to the oars, you scallywags!/rant_off

[Carna]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Gyilok wrote:<BR> <DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kegofbud wrote:<BR> <P>1st of all, everyone knows where we stand on the DPS list.</P> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>incorrect, everyone knows where HE/SHE is on the dps list, you can forget about the infamous dps tier list, especially since aa-s are live</P> <P>with right aa-s and gear on a guardian, you can outdamage a lot of "high tier" considered dps people for various reasons, player skill, aa setup, gear whatever</P> <P>aa-s have made it possible to extend the limitations of classes, leading to possibilities like a 1k dps guardian or a raid tanking rogue, so people should really start thinking out of the box now and realize its all about the player, its gear and skill upgrades, and now the aa-s, the dps tiers should be long forgotten now, yet some still keep quoting them<BR></P> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>There quite an amusing post on the Rangers forum a wee while back where a Ranger realised what a suitably specced Guardian could sustain with the right bow... there were a couple of miffed Rangers <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Crimson Dragon]

<div><blockquote><hr>agra wrote:hehehe. This change is not going to make people play enchanters more. That's the truly sad part.Change for the sake of change; I can accept with a modicum of honesty.But change with a hidden agenda with no honesty; Nope! I ain't swallowing that, no sir, not this Gnome.You don't think there's a hidden agenda? If this change was JUST for control effects, why are there changes to damage numbers as well? Why hasn't it been made clear that non-control-effect portions of spells and CA's would be affected as well?Are they afraid to tell us? I've met most of them, and that seems unlikely. So, why the lack of clear information? Hidden agenda is the only answer I can give, because with so little hard information as to the real motiviation (given the publicly given goals defy logic) we're left to speculate.How do they defy logic? Enchanters are in a race for last place with Brigands as the least played class. It seems unlikely, given the mob mentality and path of least resistance with respect to emergent tactics that prevails in MMOs, that fewer players means more uber.So if they're not powerful, why are they being reduced in power? They really are. Go look at Lockeyes original post. <font color="#ff9900">On the last page (or near it) is a line by line comparison where it shows which enchanter spells are being modified. All to the negative.</font> Ok, so.. how is this going to make more people play Enchanters? Because... they're.... harder to play? They have less utility? They have less DPS? Which one of these things doesn't belong?/rant_onLogic Begone! The change goes Live! Get back to the oars, you scallywags!/rant_off<hr></blockquote>i noticed that.... and was wondering the same thing myself.....</div>

[Steven9]

<BR>I hope soe rethinks these nerfs why would we brigs want a root if we have only one ranged attack and thats getting nerfed 2.  All we need is a good stun so we ccan get behind mobs to use most of our spells.  I dont understand how a root wil help us at all.  I play on the pvp server and our spells are already reduced in dmg for that this nerf just makes it worst :/  lol was just about to ding 54 on my brig and get master 2 subdue im have to wait to see if its worth it now.  I made a brig because soe keep nerfing my main a summoner now my brig too :smileysad: when will the nerfs stop?

[Crimson Dragon]

the "root" effect also stops oppoents from turning. (assuming the mechanics are working correctly)<div></div>

[NemaLVey]

<FONT color=#cc99ff>Agra.... does the duration of the root last the entire duration?  Meaning, have you seen the root break early?</FONT>

[Aral]

<P>And is double up using current-tier arts?  </P> <P> </P>

[ag]

Unfortunately, as I said in my response to Lockeye, all my characters on test are corrupt. I can't even delete them. So those with higher level accounts will have to test and let us all know. <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Sorry, but I can't level up to 70 from 1 between now and LU24. hehehe.