gourdon
04-20-2012, 10:34 PM
<p>Adding two levels and then just adding the X1 and X2 level spells and combat arts can and will cause problems. I think doing it this way was a big mistake since the cut-off is arbitrary. I seriously doubt that all classes are getting anything near a fair shake with this system.</p><p>When I compare my Assassin to my Shadowknight, the comparison is quite embarrassing for the Assassin. The Assassin gets mostly his ranged combat arts(which do nothing compared to my ranged autoattack), a really low powered AoE stealth combat art(which no one ever uses except during predator's final trick) and his offensive stance. The Shadowknight gets a good number of his recourse(tap/drain) combat arts, including one of his AoEs, and his defensive stance. I am personally happier with what the Shadowknight gets. It seems that adding this randomness is just going to make classes even more unbalanced.</p><p>What I would consider to be the bigger problem is that only one stance is available at tier 10. This disadvantages those that are invested in and use the other since they can't upgrade. Either, all stances should be available for the current tier, or none. The way it is currently is wrong. There should be no advantage for one stance over the other.</p><p>Unless there is a plan to go beyond level 100, the notion that a tier has to be 10 levels isn't sustainable. This partial tier advance with the spells and combat arts falling as they may is going to cause problems. The question is whether the developers care.</p>