recklessness potency making threat gains on abilities very very high

[baguetteovenfresh]

<p>Posting this here because the other thread has devolved into a "yeah huh!" "nuh uh!" debate.</p><p>I am not sure the recklessness 50% potency and +50 potency should be applying to taunts. What is the point of having a -hate modifier if i get all my threat bonuses from abilities boosted by a tremendous amount? I dont see how on earth a tank in tankity stance is going to out taunt a reckless stanced tank with that boost.</p><p>suggested solutions: have the potency gain not apply to hate modifiers.</p>

[Tekadeo]

<p>Gotta agree here 100%.</p><p>Tbh I think it should only apply its potency to combat arts and not spells.  Timewarp is going to makereckless ccrusaders go gorillas, and it doesn't apply to all classes equally.  Sorry if that makes me sound like a jealous non-crusader lol.  But crusaders already get more bonuses from playing with Troubs and Illies while warriors and brawlers don't get much from them</p>

[baguetteovenfresh]

<p><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Gotta agree here 100%.</p><p>Tbh I think it should only apply its potency to combat arts and not spells.  Timewarp is going to makereckless ccrusaders go gorillas, and it doesn't apply to all classes equally.  Sorry if that makes me sound like a jealous non-crusader lol.  But crusaders already get more bonuses from playing with Troubs and Illies while warriors and brawlers don't get much from them</p></blockquote><p>i didnt start this thread to debate further the point or usefulness or appropriateness of the stance. i am just reporting the probably unintended significant boost to threat generation in a dps, non-tanking stance.</p>

[Lempo]

<p>Potency affects taunts, if you wanted that removed compeltely to compensate for the 'unintended' side effects here then so be it, that is not what you want, you want a special case made for this, don't use taunts when in reckless stance, not rocket science here. It would be the same for me asking for my nukes to not generate any hate unless I have a good group for hate transfer/reduction.</p>

[Tekadeo]

<p><cite>baguetteovenfresh wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Gotta agree here 100%.</p><p>Tbh I think it should only apply its potency to combat arts and not spells.  Timewarp is going to makereckless ccrusaders go gorillas, and it doesn't apply to all classes equally.  Sorry if that makes me sound like a jealous non-crusader lol.  But crusaders already get more bonuses from playing with Troubs and Illies while warriors and brawlers don't get much from them</p></blockquote><p>i didnt start this thread to debate further the point or usefulness or appropriateness of the stance. i am just reporting the probably unintended significant boost to threat generation in a dps, non-tanking stance.</p></blockquote><p>You're right, sorry I wasn't attempting to derail the thread.  Probably a bad idea anyway <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Tekadeo]

<p><cite>Lempo@Everfrost wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Potency affects taunts, if you wanted that removed compeltely to compensate for the 'unintended' side effects here then so be it, that is not what you want, you want a special case made for this, don't use taunts when in reckless stance, not rocket science here. It would be the same for me asking for my nukes to not generate any hate unless I have a good group for hate transfer/reduction.</p></blockquote><p>Of course we don't want to use taunts in reckless, but if you used that lil brain of yours you would know that quite a few fighter attacks and buffs have additional hate attached to them.  Take Insolence; now sure I can cancel my myth buff to take away the positional hate, but that bad boy still has a metric effton of hate attached to it.  </p><p>And for SK they have very valuable debuffs attached to their taunts, are they just not supposed to use them?  </p><p>I would indeed call this an I intended consequence, but not a bug.  Either way, I think it shouldn't work this way.</p>

[Beko]

<p>It shouldn't be a stance, this way all classes that have bonuses to stances benefit equally, but the penaltys are raised so you can use Dstance or Ostance with Recklessness.</p><div>Recklessness:</div><div></div><div> </div><div></div><div>Things you lose:</div><div></div><div>- Decreases the caster's effectiveness of worn armor vs all physical damage by 44%</div><div></div><div>- Decreases block chance of caster by 50%.</div><div></div><div>- Reduces Parry/Defense/Deflection by 3 for every level. (276 at level 92.)</div><div></div><div>- Every second your health is decreased by 1%.</div><div></div><div></div><div> </div><div></div><div>Things you Gain.</div><div></div><div>- Your Hate Gain is Converted to Hate Reduction. (Example: Buffs that increase hate gain, decrease hate for you, ect.)</div><div></div><div>- <span style="color: #ff0000;">Abilitys that increase threat, instead decrease threat.</span></div><div></div><div>- Taunts/Combat Arts/Spells no raise hate positions, but lower them.</div><div></div><div>- Increases Autoattack Modifier of Caster by 0.25. </div><div></div><div>- Increases Potency of Caster by 50%.</div><div></div><div></div><div> </div><div></div><div>When you cancel the buff:</div><div></div><div>Applies "Battle Fatigue" on Termination, lasts 15 seconds.</div><div></div><div>- Increases Damage Recieved by 50%. (Uncurable.)</div><div></div><div>- Stuns Caster. (15 Second Uncurable Stun.)</div><div></div><div>- Every second your health is decreased by 2%.</div><div></div><div>(The Caster looks like hes wobbley and dazing around.)</div>

[Tekadeo]

<p><cite>Beko@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>It shouldn't be a stance, this way all classes that have bonuses to stances benefit equally, but the penaltys are raised so you can use Dstance or Ostance with Recklessness.</p><div>Recklessness:</div><div></div><div> </div><div></div><div>Things you lose:</div><div></div><div>- Decreases the caster's effectiveness of worn armor vs all physical damage by 44%</div><div></div><div>- Decreases block chance of caster by 50%.</div><div></div><div>- Reduces Parry/Defense/Deflection by 3 for every level. (276 at level 92.)</div><div></div><div>- Every second your health is decreased by 1%.</div><div></div><div></div><div> </div><div></div><div>Things you Gain.</div><div></div><div>- Your Hate Gain is Converted to Hate Reduction. (Example: Buffs that increase hate gain, decrease hate for you, ect.)</div><div></div><div>- <span style="color: #ff0000;">Abilitys that increase threat, instead decrease threat.</span></div><div></div><div>- Taunts/Combat Arts/Spells no raise hate positions, but lower them.</div><div></div><div>- Increases Autoattack Modifier of Caster by 0.25. </div><div></div><div>- Increases Potency of Caster by 50%.</div><div></div><div></div><div> </div><div></div><div>When you cancel the buff:</div><div></div><div>Applies "Battle Fatigue" on Termination, lasts 15 seconds.</div><div></div><div>- Increases Damage Recieved by 50%. (Uncurable.)</div><div></div><div>- Stuns Caster. (15 Second Uncurable Stun.)</div><div></div><div>- Every second your health is decreased by 2%.</div><div></div><div>(The Caster looks like hes wobbley and dazing around.)</div></blockquote><p>I agree it shouldn't be a stance, but you shouldn't be able to use it with defensive stance.  </p><p>You and I both know that the 1% health loss is a waste of spell text.</p><p>Making us simply carefree about our dps is ridiculously OP, although I agree positionals should be taken away when using reckless.  But not turned to dehates.</p><p>The battle fatigue idea is one of the worst I've ever heard though.  I think it's fine the way it is on test as far as that goes.  Or even more, make it not cancel-able in combat period.  If you make the decision to go reckless you should be stuck in it</p>

[Lempo]

<p><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>Making us simply carefree about our dps is ridiculously OP, although I agree positionals should be taken away when using reckless.  But not turned to dehates.</blockquote><p>Ok I admit it does appear that you are not being entirely ridiculous with this like some.</p>

[Xelgad]

<p>Taunt values being modified by Recklessness is a bug - we've got a fix coming. No ETA on when it will reach the Test Server as of yet.</p>

[Onorem]

<p>Meh. Turning tank classes into dps should require them to be careful which buttons they push. If you don't want potency increased taunts, don't use them.</p>

[Yimway]

<p><cite>Onorem wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Meh. Turning tank classes into dps should require them to be careful which buttons they push. If you don't want potency increased taunts, don't use them.</p></blockquote><p>I sort of agree with this, the issue comes down to passive taunts, proc gear, and ca's that are also taunts.</p>

[baguetteovenfresh]

<p><cite>Onorem wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Meh. Turning tank classes into dps should require them to be careful which buttons they push. If you don't want potency increased taunts, don't use them.</p></blockquote><p>problem is many of the tanks attacks have innate taunt built in, as well as their epic effects. remember, the whole point of this change is ostensibly to allow tanks to group together and have a point in the group by giving them an optional dps role. if they cant dps because all they can do is push kick every 8 seconds, then you have defeated the entire alleged purpose *cough not testing for eqnext cough* of the change.</p>

[Onorem]

<p><cite>baguetteovenfresh wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Onorem wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Meh. Turning tank classes into dps should require them to be careful which buttons they push. If you don't want potency increased taunts, don't use them.</p></blockquote><p>problem is many of the tanks attacks have innate taunt built in, as well as their epic effects. remember, the whole point of this change is ostensibly to allow tanks to group together and have a point in the group by giving them an optional dps role. if they cant dps because all they can do is push kick every 8 seconds, then you have defeated the entire alleged purpose *cough not testing for eqnext cough* of the change.</p></blockquote><p>I understood what you meant the 'problem' was. I just don't agree that it is one.</p><p>(I can't speak to how this would change things for tanks in the new 'content' but did have 3 tanks at 90/280+ when it launched. This new stuff is just so horrible that I've only bothered to level one of my healers to raid once a week...)</p>

[Tekadeo]

<p><cite>Onorem wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>baguetteovenfresh wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Onorem wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Meh. Turning tank classes into dps should require them to be careful which buttons they push. If you don't want potency increased taunts, don't use them.</p></blockquote><p>problem is many of the tanks attacks have innate taunt built in, as well as their epic effects. remember, the whole point of this change is ostensibly to allow tanks to group together and have a point in the group by giving them an optional dps role. if they cant dps because all they can do is push kick every 8 seconds, then you have defeated the entire alleged purpose *cough not testing for eqnext cough* of the change.</p></blockquote><p>I understood what you meant the 'problem' was. <span style="color: #ff0000;">I just don't agree that it is one.</span></p><p>(I can't speak to how this would change things for tanks in the new 'content' but did have 3 tanks at 90/280+ when it launched. This new stuff is just so horrible that I've only bothered to level one of my healers to raid once a week...)</p></blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc99ff;">How can you not agree it is one?  Do any other DPS classes have innate taunts?  Any innate taunts that hit for 50k?  I mean itd be cool to hit my Experienced Insight buff while DPSing without it hitting for 50k /shrug</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc99ff;">Stop being childish.</span></p>

[Beko]

<p>My Experienced Insight is hitting for 97000 threat.</p>

[Onorem]

<p><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc99ff;">How can you not agree it is one?  Do any other DPS classes have innate taunts? ... </span></p></blockquote><p>Other DPS classes are actually DPS classes and not tanks looking for a second role.</p>

[Ingerimm]

<p><span style="color: #00ff00;">I am still of the opinion that it is the simplest and most sensible in "Reckless Stance" taunts the convert in detaunts.</span></p><p>This fixes exactly three serious problems.</p><p>First, there is neither passive nor active taunts then more of a problem, so the tanks can continue to use their full potential as it is intended. (Include as many of the high dps abilities of the tanks taunt Components, sometimes even with positive hatred positions)</p><p>Secondly, this stance is a pure DPS stance in which no tanking should be possible. Many of the tank classes, for example Guardian and Brawler have enough skills but as stone skins, which they could use to do it yet. The Crusaders have you even taken the ridiculous improvement of their wards in this stance for tanking anyway what one would have availed nothing, but to protect against other AEs, whether 12k or 25k every 30-60 seconds, which was pointless when tanking.</p><p>But as I said should not be tanking and it would not be possible if the taunts were turned into deaggros. For if the tanks will then use their full potential to make dps they should also use the combined capabilities for which they would preceed the aggro down. Thus, a tanking would not be possible in this stance!</p><p>The third would be clear for the last player who always insist in every stance must be tanking. So it is not intended and it will not work.</p><p>Of the other have, as other major classes are already complaining that they do not DPS stance I would also like to note briefly that the tanks are the only main class, which are often used to 3-4, but only in some situations. And thus running around in Rule 2, which are used only in situations or as ballast.</p><p><span style="color: #00ff00;">Therefore, this stance is basically a very good idea.</span></p><p>SOE must only ensure that this stance can improve the transfer is not abused and that they have already done the most part. The only thing that would really improve my eyes still, that would change the taunts to detaunts in this stance.</p>

[Yimway]

<p><cite>Ingerimm@Valor wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><span style="color: #00ff00;">I am still of the opinion that it is the simplest and most sensible in "Reckless Stance" taunts the convert in detaunts.</span></p></blockquote><p>That idea is way, WAY too powerful.  It basically makes it so the dpsing tank has to NEVER worry about getting aggro.  Something no DPS class is really afforded.</p><p>Also, even in reckless stance, it is my intention to be in the top 5 on the hate list so I can swap stances and take the mob when needed.</p>

[kalaria]

<p><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc99ff;">How can you not agree it is one?  Do any other DPS classes have innate taunts? </span></p></blockquote><p>Actually both Rogues have taunts, both single target and encounter taunts.  Not threat attached to damage, but vanilla taunts.</p>

[Yimway]

<p><cite>kalaria wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tekadeo wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc99ff;">How can you not agree it is one?  Do any other DPS classes have innate taunts? </span></p></blockquote><p>Actually both Rogues have taunts, both single target and encounter taunts.  Not threat attached to damage, but vanilla taunts.</p></blockquote><p>He meant passive, not innate.</p><p>Rogues do not generate threat by hitting anything other than the hitting their specific taunt abilities.</p><p>Most fighters however generate threat left and right without hitting an active ability.</p>