Log in

View Full Version : Achievements: Upcoming KoS Class Tree Review in GU36


Lockeye
06-11-2007, 03:15 PM
GU36 contains a significant update to many Class Tree achievements, aimed at removing most of the equipment restrictions on achievement abilities, improving their usability with pets, and balancing out desireability between the different branches of the Class Trees. Weapon specific requirements were originally meant to diversify the kinds of weapons that players would want to use and identify a character with a particular achievement branch. Popular achievement branches reinforced certain weapon types, for example, it greatly lowered the desirability of axes versus swords for a particular class if the swords branch was more powerful. This introduced new problems with desirability of loot and quest rewards. We’ve removed most of those requirements, reserving them only for the few branches that require shields and ranged weapons. Pet Achievements were tedious to use; their buffs almost always required recasting them every time the pet zoned. The EoF achievements added new functionality for achievement buffs to be applied permanently on the pet that was not available in KoS. This has now been added to all KoS Class achievements that permanently buff a pet type. We’ve analyzed the achievement spending patterns of each class to determine which branches are the most popular and which ones are greatly underutilized. A large part of this update to class achievements has been to increase the power of the least desired achievements. The few cases where an achievement received a reduction were made to balance out a penalizing equipment requirement that was removed as part of the update. The test release notes will contain a list of all the changes made to class achievements. Feedback is welcome.

Groma
06-11-2007, 03:24 PM
Any guestimate on when these notes will make their way to the forums?  All this sounds great, but would be nice to see it spelled out exactly how it is planned.

Kaiser Sigma
06-11-2007, 03:30 PM
Sounds interesting, especially considering how Predators only have two a-must AA branches atm. Could be fun to see an improved Sta branch...but doubtful~.

Ponos
06-11-2007, 03:31 PM
<p>This is a much needed change, and I very much agree.  I've become a sword-wielding madman, missing out on a lot of fine looking axes in hammers.</p><p>However, I'm disappointed to hear that there might still be a shield restriction.  </p><p>I understand that to allow players to equip a tower shield over a buckler and still take advantage of a Shield Tree Line would cause some unwanted balancing issues, but perhaps there is a happy medium somewhere.</p><p>Simply stated, I'm tired of wearing a buckler.  They seem to be the most graphically limited of all the shield types, and I've made it a habit now to conceal it beneath my cloak, even if my cloak clashes with the armor I'm currently wearing.</p><p>Hell, I don't even want to wear a tower shield per se.  I like kite shields.  Always have, ever since Diablo.</p><p>But again, looking forward to this change.</p>

Mirander_1
06-11-2007, 03:49 PM
Ponos@Antonia Bayle wrote: <blockquote><p>However, I'm dissapointed to hear that there might still be a shield restriction.  </p><p>I understand that to allow players to equip a tower shield over a buckler and still take advantage of a Shield Tree Line would cause some unwanted balancing issues, but perhaps there is a happy medium somewhere.</p><p>Simply stated, I'm tired of wearing a buckler.  They seem to be the most graphically limited of all the shield types, and I've made it a habit now to conceal it beneath my cloak, even if my cloak clashes with the armor I'm currently wearing.</p><p>Hell, I don't even want to wear a tower shield per se.  I like kite shields.  Always have, ever since Diablo.</p></blockquote>I could be wrong, but I think he means that, say, the warrior buckler line will still require are shield of some sort, but not necessarily a buckler.  Some AAs simply wouldn't logically work without a basic equipment requirement. To give an example of what I'm talking about; the Sorceror's sta line has an AA that lets the Sorc use a symbol as a shield.  This one will probably keep a symbol requirement, because the skill can't really logically work without a specific type of equipment.

the flu
06-11-2007, 03:50 PM
I'm curious as to how this will affect the rogue wisdom line, which requires an empty off hand. Will this still (hopefully) be the case?

Kirstie
06-11-2007, 03:51 PM
<cite>Gromann wrote:</cite><blockquote>Any guestimate on when these notes will make their way to the forums?  All this sounds great, but would be nice to see it spelled out exactly how it is planned. </blockquote><p> Hi Gromann,</p><p> Our goal right now is to get Test updated with these and other GU36 changes early this week.  When that happens the full update notes will be posted to the forums and the Test LaunchPad.</p><p>- Kirstie</p>

Groma
06-11-2007, 03:53 PM
appreciate it

Wrapye
06-11-2007, 04:10 PM
I foresee a reduction to the enchanter Agi line if the 'empty secondary slot' requirement goes away.  However, it will be interesting to see what is done with the enchanter Str line, as I can't think of anyone who has that line for very long.

vladsamier
06-11-2007, 04:29 PM
<p>So how bad is the current popular lines going to get nerfed in order to make the less commonly used Achievement paths seem okay? We all know that nothing ever gets beefed up in quality, only everything around it nerfed to make it appear beefed up. </p><p>Hopefully you aren't going for this approach and attempt to actually make the other lines better... Who knows, there might be some divine intervention and SOE sets down the nerf bat!</p>

Eriol
06-11-2007, 04:33 PM
Slamdar@Kithicor wrote: <blockquote><p>So how bad is the current popular lines going to get nerfed in order to make the less commonly used Achievement paths seem okay? We all know that nothing ever gets beefed up in quality, only everything around it nerfed to make it appear beefed up. </p><p>Hopefully you aren't going for this approach and attempt to actually make the other lines better... Who knows, there might be some divine intervention and SOE sets down the nerf bat!</p></blockquote>This is exactly what I worry about every time they say that they want to make less-utilized things more used.  Not all the time, but often, the "better" ones are made much worse, and the worse ones are made marginally better, so that everybody's "equal".  Worse off overall, but equal.

Mgunner
06-11-2007, 04:56 PM
<p>Please remove what I believe is the worst requirement, the trample line for paladins which require them to be on horseback.</p>

Snarks
06-11-2007, 04:59 PM
Regarding the Rogue KoS tree: Most rogues use STR/WIS or AGI/WIS and this is the resounding answer when people question which AA line they should choose. If I were to balance the tree I would greatly reduce the number of double attack you get from WIS and allow you to use both a shield and double attack with this line, to make this line a compliment to the STR/AGI and STA Lines. Int line is completely worthless at the moment. The reality is, not even the highest DPS rogues require much deaggro. To make it more useful, perhaps consider changing a deagrro AA to one that significantly improves the "Swarthy" hate transfer line. This way, not only does the rogue lose hate, but (more importantly in a group) the main tank gains hate. This should be near the top of the tree. The feign death AA needs to be looked at as well, it is largely useless. Consider adding more unique abilities to this line, like one that increases the duration of debuffs, or poison proc rate. Deaggro is not needed, but a good utility line could make some rogues reconsider the INT line.

Cornbread Muffin
06-11-2007, 05:15 PM
I am excited to see what sort of change the brawler strength line will undergo. I am assuming it isn't staying at 96% double attack, but I hope it is higher than the warrior-line double attack to help us pull ahead in DPS to where we ought to be.

Qanil
06-11-2007, 05:17 PM
<p>I just want to know if they will finally pull their you know what's out of you know where, and give warriors/crusaders a 2hand spec that make sense.</p><p>No Warrior/Crusader in his/her right mind would use a 2 handed weapon, and they drop everywhere.  You just get so much more by putting a shield in your hand... not to mention bash that it makes almost NO sense to use anything else.</p><p>I'm talking DPS people, tweak the tree to give a level of double attack with a 2 hander, or crits and we'll all be the happier.  Right now I see 99.99% of the community with a buckler in his/her hand because that's where the dps is at.</p><p>Run the statistics please, and see how many people fight with a 2 hander.  kkthx.</p><p>peace.</p>

NosajMa
06-11-2007, 05:25 PM
Suggestions: Remove horseback requirement of AGI line for Crusaders. Allow use of a buckler (cough FTH buckler cough) with the Rogue STA line. For the other Rogue aa's such as Traumatic Swipe that require a <i>type</i> of weapon, I can see that easily changing.  However, are there plans to change the freehand requirement with the WIS line?  I'd seriously consider switching back to the STA line <i>if</i> I could get the benefits of the WIS while using a shield <i>and</i> if I could use a buckler rather than a round shield.

Oakum
06-11-2007, 06:04 PM
<p>Hopefully they will not just change the AA's but also change the equipment some. Wardens need to be able to use 2 handed swords to go with STR line. Shaman can use two handed spears so why can't wardens use two handed swords. Even the nuking fury can use one two handed sword.</p><p>No, I don't want to use a two handed cleric hammer either although I am forced to use a two handed club right now.  I have come to embrace the Warden EoF AA line as a good way for class flavor. Fury's nuke, and wardens melee to get roughly the same DPS is what it should be for class  flavor reasons. If a warden wants to nuke or a fury melee they can, just give us wardens who don't want to be fury's a two handed sword use and str/wis on druid gear. </p><p>I would accept even adding wis to brawler gear since it wont buff a brawler resistance up to an unbalanced state while giving melee druids some alternative to int/wis gear.</p>

Skua
06-11-2007, 06:05 PM
ppl will flame me , but i hate the rogue wis line , 1 hand? yeah is "pirate" , but i love DW =/ , and soe forced me to 1h (For max dps) ..... hope that GU change that.....i want to DW and still keep dmg with a Wis rogue..... <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Predator AAs ...... =( Conjuror AAs are ok , but some are stupid oh and EOF mystic AAs ? lol 1 full line only for Rezs? , other for dispels ?  LOL look at mystic AA (melee line is ok) , and look at Defiler AA ....is just sad <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> let mystic upgrade debuffs wards ect /cheer SoE

Kegofbud
06-11-2007, 06:14 PM
I'm just thinking that I've passed on a lot of gear I could've really used now that this is changing. If it were at next expansion, this gear would be replaced anyway, then I wouldn't care so much. I don't know...this concerns me, because I have zero trust for these changes.

Aristigon
06-11-2007, 06:20 PM
<b>If</b> warriors are given a 2hander line give them some kind of avoidance buff (cough*parry*cough)  in addition to dps improvements to make up for the loss of defense from shield or just give 2hander some crazy dps and no extra avoidance.

Meatmonster
06-11-2007, 06:24 PM
<cite>NosajMaxX wrote:</cite><blockquote>Suggestions: Remove horseback requirement of AGI line for Crusaders. Allow use of a buckler (cough FTH buckler cough) with the Rogue STA line. For the other Rogue aa's such as Traumatic Swipe that require a <i>type</i> of weapon, I can see that easily changing.  However, are there plans to change the freehand requirement with the WIS line?  I'd seriously consider switching back to the STA line <i>if</i> I could get the benefits of the WIS while using a shield <i>and</i> if I could use a buckler rather than a round shield. </blockquote>   Rogues Freehand requirement is almost certainly not going to change, as it falls into a category of balance rather than just encouraging people to use certain kinds of weapons. The WIS line is balanced right now to the point where it is viable, and arguably superior to dual wield. Allowing people to run around with something in their offhand, be it a shield or dual wield would be wildly overpowered.

juz
06-11-2007, 06:50 PM
Ohh, why do I smell a nerf for bards. Surely the 'bard balancing team' tm feels they made us too powerful now. lol

mr23sgte
06-11-2007, 07:13 PM
<p>READ: Brawlers .................working as intended and lets just nerf their crit line a lil more and make crane twirl/flock do less damage, but keep the STR double proc less than a warriors</p><p>Yes I'm bitter!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>

Zarafein
06-11-2007, 09:11 PM
<p>Please don't touch the empty weapon slot requirement on rogue wisdom line, i would even prefer a nerf.</p>

Deson
06-11-2007, 09:13 PM
Sounds good. Only request I have before it hits test is to remove the requirement to be level 10 before you can even look at AP. AP can play so integral a role to character development that AP lines can be a make or break for class selection.

Zarafein
06-11-2007, 09:30 PM
<cite>SkuaII wrote:</cite><blockquote>ppl will flame me , but i hate the rogue wis line , 1 hand? yeah is "pirate" , but i love DW =/ , and soe forced me to 1h (For max dps) ..... hope that GU change that.....i want to DW and still keep dmg with a Wis rogue..... <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Predator AAs ...... =( Conjuror AAs are ok , but some are stupid oh and EOF mystic AAs ? lol 1 full line only for Rezs? , other for dispels ?  LOL look at mystic AA (melee line is ok) , and look at Defiler AA ....is just sad <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> let mystic upgrade debuffs wards ect /cheer SoE </blockquote> If you just want the damage, better hope that the other lines get an upgrade rather than taking style away from the wisdom line.. both would be happy this way.

Tames
06-11-2007, 10:30 PM
<p>Many fighter weapon options affect DPS by making it higher, if this is reduced because weapon requirement is removed then it will make fighters harder to solo and even less needed on raids as EOF raiding requires very high DPS output.</p><p>Once you have the weapons you need you can hotkey 'weapon equip' with the special abilities so you can just hit the buttons as if you werent even changing weapons, so theres no need to nerf anything as nothing will change much except that people will have greater chance of choosing the weapon they most like to equip all the time.</p><p>In the case of Paladins many have had to spec for DPS in raid guilds (assuming they are alowed on raids in many cases as many raiding Guilds regard them as useless) because their group buffs arent regarded as equivalent to DPS in usefullness. The end abilities in each line arent used in this case as you typically go 448 or 484 to max DPS. Trample line horse requirement could be replaced by a 2H AA allowing sweeping blows on many opponents, if you have a branced KoS line like EoF then you could choose 2HBlunt for concussive/stun/interrupt/stifle effects or 2HS/P for straight damage?</p><p>Currently Plate Tanks arent even needed for nearly all instances as Scouts (or even Mages) can tank them with a good healer. Perhaps you should make instance 'named' harder to tank?</p><p>If you really want people to use a greater spread of AA then give us more flexibility in where to put AA points ie either KoS or EoF and give us another 20 AA to gain before the next expansion (6 months away) as many of us are running out of incentive to play, having maxxed out.</p>

Gungo
06-11-2007, 10:53 PM
What makes you think that. These changes are coming as a direct result of class specific epics. If for instance sorcerers get a 2 hand epic thier freehand mastery would be useless. So i do foresee empty hand requirements removed. Which means rogue wis lien will likely be removed. which means you could dual wield with that aa line. Which means you probably should expect a nerf to double atk, becuase your dps will liekly be incredibly to high dual wielding. The same for brawlers str aa line, and possibly warriors. Really i am expecting MOST requirements will be removed as the post said. With a few minor exceptions and MANY adjustments to the power (or lack of) of these abilities.

Zarafein
06-11-2007, 11:19 PM
<p>Rogues can't use 2 handed weapons, they could still use dual wield with the offhand requirement. How about removing the freehand requirement on the large double attack bonus(8points=52%) but not on the small one(20%)?</p><p>Serious the possible to be a fencer with only 1 onehanded weapon was the main reason i stared a Swashbuckler, i played before kos but i always wanted something like this and was more than happy when the wis line made this possible.. removing this possibility is nearly(but not as much) as bad as removing teräs käsi in star wars galaxies imo,whats the point of the line if they remove freehand? </p><p>Imo for rogues its like this: str=debuffs,crits and defense, agility=backattacks and quickness, stamina=tanking, Intelligence=deaggro/stealth all of them aren't special because they use a certain weapon exept the wisdom line.</p><p>another point: if they don't remove lines with shield requirement(rogue stamina line for example) there is no reason to remove freehand requirement because those with shield lines have the same weapon limitations(no 2haned and dual wield would be a penality) as rogues with wisdom line. </p>

NosajMa
06-12-2007, 12:34 AM
Forgot to add this earlier: <i>please please please</i>, while you're changing the KoS AA's, make sure to fix existing AA's that are broken, such as the Shadowknight Siphon Might AA--this has been broken since EoF came out, I've /bug'd it in-game and reported it here on the forums, and it still doesn't work as described.

Unwise
06-12-2007, 02:12 AM
<p>The usage stats will show SOE that the bard lines have the two worst final AAs in existence.</p><p>One simply switches the HO, it is ment to progress it but does not. Does anyone use HOs anymore? Does any scout have trouble progressing them? Is this worthy of a final AA ability?</p><p>The other prevents you being knocked down. How often are you get knocked down? Not stunned, knocked down. Also, if you are tanking, it will cancel on you randomly.</p><p>From what I see on the forums, there are about 2 of us in existence that have even bothered to try to make these useful, and failed.</p>

Deson
06-12-2007, 03:39 AM
Actually thinking about it, any shot at having AP advancement be linear so we can more easily calculate what maxing a skill does? Or a tool tip that lays it out? The current live scheme makes it difficult to full plan out if you don't have the info on hand somewhere or aren't willing to do a lot of respeccing. Also, given that the equipment choices and overall line potency are major factors in determining what AP a player focuses on and in what order, are going to focus on in what order, are we going to get a full AP reset? That is, are they all going to be set to unassigned as opposed to just a tree reset? This is a pretty massive change to just stick with the current reset scheme.

SinIsLaw
06-12-2007, 06:16 AM
I don't know, this could be a great change, if just the weapon Type restrictions for the primary hand are gonna be changed! However if it touches the secondary slot as well, then I fear we may be in for a large downscaling of some abilities (Nerf). <u>Weapon restrictions removed for Rank2 abilites</u> For example, STR lines Crusader - 2nd Rank SwiftAxe - a temporary selfhast triggerd, needs an Axe <i> </i>Bard - 2nd Rank Turnstrike - Bards can trigger a short AE immunity if they have a Sword type weapon in their primary weapon slot Rogue - 2nd Rank Torporous strike - decrease casting & recating timers, needs a Sword All these 3 abilities, require a specific weapon, however a lot of people are used to have such specific weapon keyed to their hotbars and swap it in and out to trigger wanted effect, if they have a better weapon instead. It's just a bit annoyance for the palyer to swapp needed items in and out, and removing these restrictions would just make it easier - less hassle - looking at it most of the Rank 2 abilities would not overpower class by removing the primary weapon requirements ... Even the Rank2 abilities focusing on the 2nd Rank could possible be remove - some classes may benefit more then other from that however! So if this would be change Thumbs Up!!!!!!! <u> AA Lines focusing on a permanent condition x"</u> Most Classes have at least one AA line where they need to give something up to gain an advantage in somthing else, to gain a 'permanent' gain - like the rouge wis AA line, the rogue must have the secondary slot empty at ALL time to gain Rank 3 & 4 abilities, Rank 4 beeing double attack ... to balance out the missing DW ... Now if one would remove the condition (empty 2nd hand) and would allow Rogues to DW with that line it would make it a) overpowerd and b) all rogues would go back to DW and drop the one handers! This would be another disaster, people spend DKP to get Top end one handers to benefit from the WIS line, leaving the few DWs there are in EoF for Bards & Predators! So not only would they now need to re equip them self, but there would be a even bigger fight over the few DWs! Also chaning this line that a one hander is must, but a shield can  be equipped, lowering the % of double attack, would kill the one handed Rogue as well, as it stands right now, imho one needs to have a good one hander already to be on par with the DW configuration, the Qeynos Kilji is already considered by many to weak for the 1h AA line ... The same applies to the Wizard and/or Warrior Wisdom lines, and some others ... The big point imho, classes give up something to gain something else, removing the "give up" (restriction) and nerf the gain - would surely kill some classes in the way they have been equipping themself! Looking at it the rogues would take the biggest blow. so pls don't throw the whole game around again, and don't break what is not broken and fix the problems we have in the game right now - like someone said just as an example the SK EoF AA Enhance Siphon Strenght has been broken since EoF BETA and was bugged ever since ... Really imho the KoS AA lines still own most of the EoF AA lines, which are really the AA lines which SoE should look at ... Sks have one decent line the rest is rather crap, Assassins had their EoF AA lines rendered to be useless ... So well I'm actually more suspicous and worried about this change, then looking forward to it

Skua
06-12-2007, 07:42 AM
Lhangion@Innovation wrote: <blockquote><p>Rogues can't use 2 handed weapons, they could still use dual wield with the offhand requirement. How about removing the freehand requirement on the large double attack bonus(8points=52%) but not on the small one(20%)?</p><p>Serious the possible to be a fencer with only 1 onehanded weapon was the main reason i stared a Swashbuckler, i played before kos but i always wanted something like this and was more than happy when the wis line made this possible.. removing this possibility is nearly(but not as much) as bad as removing teräs käsi in star wars galaxies imo,whats the point of the line if they remove freehand? </p><p>Imo for rogues its like this: str=debuffs,crits and defense, agility=backattacks and quickness, stamina=tanking, Intelligence=deaggro/stealth all of them aren't special because they use a certain weapon exept the wisdom line.</p><p>another point: if they don't remove lines with shield requirement(rogue stamina line for example) there is no reason to remove freehand requirement because those with shield lines have the same weapon limitations(no 2haned and dual wield would be a penality) as rogues with wisdom line. </p></blockquote> i am sorry but i love my swashy , i love DW , how u balance that? , when AAs came , i was dissapointed , to get a raid spot i was "forced" to spec Wis line , and byebye DW ...... <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> a lot of rogues are happy with wis line , but the other 50% arent ......how SoE will fix that? if soe force Rogues to 1 hand weapon...i will just ask for class change , i rolled swashy 1 because i love the mix of debuffs attacks , fast attacks , no wait for timers to come up , utility (debuffs) , and boom , sorry but 60 lvls going DW now u MUST be 1h to be util......ehm? 1 u need to get a really GOOD 1h to make wis line shine.... 2 u need to spec that way .....i did and wasnt happy ....i feel empty =/ SoE need to make happy all ppl , rogues that like DW , 1h only  , and 1h + buckler....but all lines must be "equal".....or at least is what SoE is trying ..... As conjuror i was wondering why my EOF [Removed for Content] just cut casting time while necros get cut recast + dmg % ??? , lifeburn vs unabate (and i love unabate but when u are LFG and groups are just asking for wizards and necros to mana/life burns nameds <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) My retired Warlock , gez Manaburn vs Afthershock <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />   Now i am rolling a Mystic , and EOF mystic AAs vs Defilers aas.....=/ I am happy that SoE decide to give another try to AAs , imo some classes needed badly =/    

Wingrider01
06-12-2007, 08:34 AM
Wozamil@Permafrost wrote: <blockquote><p>Please remove what I believe is the worst requirement, the trample line for paladins which require them to be on horseback.</p></blockquote> That one is logical, somehow I cannot see a gnome/fae paladin attempting to trample a troll sized enemy without being on a horse, unless you are just talking about them doing damage to the enemies big toe, or maybe climb up on a rock and jump up and down on their head<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

SinIsLaw
06-12-2007, 08:47 AM
<cite>SkuaII wrote:</cite><blockquote>Lhangion@Innovation wrote: <blockquote><p>Rogues can't use 2 handed weapons, they could still use dual wield with the offhand requirement. How about removing the freehand requirement on the large double attack bonus(8points=52%) but not on the small one(20%)?</p><p>Serious the possible to be a fencer with only 1 onehanded weapon was the main reason i stared a Swashbuckler, i played before kos but i always wanted something like this and was more than happy when the wis line made this possible.. removing this possibility is nearly(but not as much) as bad as removing teräs käsi in star wars galaxies imo,whats the point of the line if they remove freehand? </p><p>Imo for rogues its like this: str=debuffs,crits and defense, agility=backattacks and quickness, stamina=tanking, Intelligence=deaggro/stealth all of them aren't special because they use a certain weapon exept the wisdom line.</p><p>another point: if they don't remove lines with shield requirement(rogue stamina line for example) there is no reason to remove freehand requirement because those with shield lines have the same weapon limitations(no 2haned and dual wield would be a penality) as rogues with wisdom line. </p></blockquote> i am sorry but i love my swashy , i love DW , how u balance that? , when AAs came , i was dissapointed , to get a raid spot i was "forced" to spec Wis line , and byebye DW ...... <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> a lot of rogues are happy with wis line , but the other 50% arent ......how SoE will fix that? if soe force Rogues to 1 hand weapon...i will just ask for class change , i rolled swashy 1 because i love the mix of debuffs attacks , fast attacks , no wait for timers to come up , utility (debuffs) , and boom , sorry but 60 lvls going DW now u MUST be 1h to be util......ehm? 1 u need to get a really GOOD 1h to make wis line shine.... 2 u need to spec that way .....i did and wasnt happy ....i feel empty =/ SoE need to make happy all ppl , rogues that like DW , 1h only  , and 1h + buckler....but all lines must be "equal".....or at least is what SoE is trying ..... As conjuror i was wondering why my EOF [I cannot control my vocabulary] just cut casting time while necros get cut recast + dmg % ??? , lifeburn vs unabate (and i love unabate but when u are LFG and groups are just asking for wizards and necros to mana/life burns nameds <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) My retired Warlock , gez Manaburn vs Afthershock <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />   Now i am rolling a Mystic , and EOF mystic AAs vs Defilers aas.....=/ I am happy that SoE decide to give another try to AAs , imo some classes needed badly =/     </blockquote>forcing you to use the wis over agi seems a bit  harsh, unless they gave u an uber 1h! <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  TBH i have a hard time to see how SoE is trying to make this work, without a massive nerf ... there are endabilites, which are kinda 'must have' DKTM and Bladdance for the bards - kinda a must have, leaving the bards with not really anything else to go for. Rouges, most of them are forced to go the STR line for TS! The only way to put more flavor to other AA lines the would need to kill endabilities or give something even better ... hmm what could beat bladedance ... Well and the way Lockeye put it only KoS AAs are touched, EoF AAs are Subclass trees, no word of them beeing looked at, and tbh the EoF once are the once which are mostly useless Lockeye wrote: <blockquote> GU36 contains a significant update to many Class Tree achievements, aimed at removing most of the equipment restrictions on achievement abilities, improving their usability with pets, and balancing out desireability between the different branches of the Class Trees. </blockquote>

Aker
06-12-2007, 09:12 AM
<span style="color: #ffffff">I agree with <b>SinIsLaw </span></b><span style="color: #ffffff">looking at all this I'm scared of even more problems than the ones we have now. I like AA, I think it was great idea implementing them in a game, but to be honest they made a lot of problems too (unbalancing classes even more then before and things like that). My point is, I see mostly people here scared of being nerfed or wanting to be overpowered. Question that bothers me would be, is there any chance if there will be AA changes to follow up what class is supposed to do in a game. Change AA for that class according to what it's supposed to do  and allow us to have more different play styles again before we all turn in few classes or leave game because it will become boring. Or even more imbalance will be created with new AA changes (if there is any balance left in game) with this new changes after a week later we will have GU37 or few days later silent nerf for some things someone (who I more and more think don't even play there game at all) screwed to do right at start as usual and make even worst with fixes. How about people who design AA for certain classes to start playing that class (no overpowered GM toons) for a while and than try to do job little better. For example I play in raid guild my main is assassin (I have inquisitor, bruiser, coercer, necromancer and warlock too) more and more I struggle  to keep  my place in raids, my guild is nice to me and if I work really hard I still manage to stay in top 3 DPS zone wide most of the time (but that is becoming harder and harder) and point is if I don't show up they will miss me only on friendly way not as "need to have" in raid. Since my class don't offer anything else but DPS which now lot other classes can offer with buffs and other things too on the way, what assassin who still look for guild or starting now could hope. I know someone will mention my hate transfer as great utility but I didn't have spot in mt group for long time now that is swashbucklers place now and to be honest with DPS as mine (or very close), much better AE and debuffs even with 1% less hate transfer they should be there more than me. Point of this is not screaming to nerf anyone it is just desperate  hope that someone will at least try to make all of classes useful and wanted in the game </span><span style="color: #ffffff">(what AA changes could really do) </span><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #ffffff">because this is multiplayer game and if your class is not wanted for raiding you can just change to class you don't like or leave the game.</span> </span>

Skua
06-12-2007, 09:15 AM
yeah but STR is a AWESOME line , Torporous strike (decrease casting speed + recovery speed), Melee crit ,Traumatic swipe (decrease reuse speed 50%&nbsp<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  hint example: Traumatic swipe is a must AA , but nerfing it wont make the other aa lines better >.>

rvbarton
06-12-2007, 09:18 AM
Let's not forget Healers having some crappy AA's.  I'd enjoy seeing Mystics/Templars getting a bit of love in the defense department...  even if only via AA's.  Some way to last more than 10 seconds in a PVP fight would be nice.  Maybe a defense against Stuns?  How about once a mob is stunned, then it cannot be stunned again for "x" amount of time?  I'd like to see the healers get love...  especially Mystics, but only because I play one primarily.  I also have a level 40 Templar that I don't play anymore because of the lack of defense.

redde
06-12-2007, 09:22 AM
Some people are being rather brainless here - for example the rogue line that requires an empty offhand (wis): The only reason you get such uber double attack etc is because your offhand is empty, reducing your damage that you could have had from adding a DW weapon. Imagine if you were wielding 2 weapons with such a high double attack%, would anyone NOT choose that line then? The point is to attempt to make each one equally desirable, to add diversity among a class. We don't want to see every rogue with an empty offhand, we want the other trees to be just as good. To those crying "this is gonna be another nerf" - the Dev already stated that the only reductions on abilities are to balance out the fact that the required weapon type has been removed, so you can now use those restricted abilities with ANY weapon (that one that you've got sitting in your bag with a higher damage rating). At a guess I would say the empty offhand abilities (agi enchanter, wis rogue, whatever the wiz one is) will remain empty offhand as they don't really reduce the desiarbility of any weapon (just the 2 handers). Just a guess though.

Beldin_
06-12-2007, 10:25 AM
<p>There already exist some AAs that works different regarding to the weapon you use, for example the primary skill for druids. </p><p>So why not do something similiar with the wis-line for rogues like 60% double-attack if secondary is empty and 25% if not or whatever.</p>

redde
06-12-2007, 10:30 AM
That may be the case. We shall see.

Crib92
06-12-2007, 10:53 AM
<p>I hope Divine Aura is on your list of fixes.</p>

Strums
06-12-2007, 11:05 AM
<p>Hopefuly they will let us re pick our claymore reward too...since most of us picked one simply because of the AA line we went down, instead of the one we really wanted...</p><p>heh...wishful thinking</p>

Zarafein
06-12-2007, 11:11 AM
<cite>SkuaII wrote:</cite><blockquote>Lhangion@Innovation wrote: <blockquote><p>Rogues can't use 2 handed weapons, they could still use dual wield with the offhand requirement. How about removing the freehand requirement on the large double attack bonus(8points=52%) but not on the small one(20%)?</p><p>Serious the possible to be a fencer with only 1 onehanded weapon was the main reason i stared a Swashbuckler, i played before kos but i always wanted something like this and was more than happy when the wis line made this possible.. removing this possibility is nearly(but not as much) as bad as removing teräs käsi in star wars galaxies imo,whats the point of the line if they remove freehand? </p><p>Imo for rogues its like this: str=debuffs,crits and defense, agility=backattacks and quickness, stamina=tanking, Intelligence=deaggro/stealth all of them aren't special because they use a certain weapon exept the wisdom line.</p><p>another point: if they don't remove lines with shield requirement(rogue stamina line for example) there is no reason to remove freehand requirement because those with shield lines have the same weapon limitations(no 2haned and dual wield would be a penality) as rogues with wisdom line. </p></blockquote> i am sorry but i love my swashy , i love DW , how u balance that? , when AAs came , i was dissapointed , to get a raid spot i was "forced" to spec Wis line , and byebye DW ...... <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> a lot of rogues are happy with wis line , but the other 50% arent ......how SoE will fix that? if soe force Rogues to 1 hand weapon...i will just ask for class change , i rolled swashy 1 because i love the mix of debuffs attacks , fast attacks , no wait for timers to come up , utility (debuffs) , and boom , sorry but 60 lvls going DW now u MUST be 1h to be util......ehm? 1 u need to get a really GOOD 1h to make wis line shine.... 2 u need to spec that way .....i did and wasnt happy ....i feel empty =/ SoE need to make happy all ppl , rogues that like DW , 1h only  , and 1h + buckler....but all lines must be "equal".....or at least is what SoE is trying ..... As conjuror i was wondering why my EOF [I cannot control my vocabulary] just cut casting time while necros get cut recast + dmg % ??? , lifeburn vs unabate (and i love unabate but when u are LFG and groups are just asking for wizards and necros to mana/life burns nameds <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ) My retired Warlock , gez Manaburn vs Afthershock <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />   Now i am rolling a Mystic , and EOF mystic AAs vs Defilers aas.....=/ I am happy that SoE decide to give another try to AAs , imo some classes needed badly =/     </blockquote> As i said before, you just use wis line because it (maybe) makes you stronger than using dual wield, you don't like whats special about the line.. so just hope that after these changes it will be as usefull to use.. for example str and agi line so you wouldn't be forced to use a 1hander because its as good as the wis(+agi or str) line. But i am really curious which epic weapon roges(especialy swashbucklers) get when they don't remove the shield requirement.. only solution which wouldn't hurt any rogue spec would be a weapon which is useable as 1hander and dual wield.

SinIsLaw
06-12-2007, 11:12 AM
Shalla@Valor wrote: <blockquote><p>There already exist some AAs that works different regarding to the weapon you use, for example the primary skill for druids. </p><p>So why not do something similiar with the wis-line for rogues like 60% double-attack if secondary is empty and 25% if not or whatever.</p></blockquote> As a Rogue who is going down the 1h AA line it requires a very good 1h to be on par with a DW! Now if u leave the 1h AA % on double attack, but add also 25% to double attck if you DW, then there is barely a need anymore to stay 1h, as DW will be far superior ... It would be awesome if SoE could push out some more details ASAP, since these news sure make a lot of Rogues think, "do i start spending DKP on DW" or " Do I still pay the insane dkp if the clearcutter drops" ...  Really depending on what SoE is gonna  do it may Kill the 1h rogues. =

Kaiser Sigma
06-12-2007, 11:19 AM
Given the amount of actual *good* dws ingame, killing the 1h line for rogues would make it a war for assasssins and bards to get weapons if they have to compete with rogues~.

Bladewind
06-12-2007, 11:30 AM
<p>I always thought being able to be a viable fencer was one of the coolest things  implemented with KoS AAs.  If the empty hand requirement is removed from the rogue wisdom line, perhaps a conditional bonus could be retained for using a 1 hander - the same way that horse trample works for crusaders.  Using the current setup, box 3 would give 10% base double attack but another 10% if your offhand is empty, and box 4 would give half of it's original bonus in any setting and double if the offhand is empty for each rank.  This would give a sizable bonus two dual wielders and sta-specced rogues (~37% double attack) while allowing those of us who want to use a 1 hander without a clumsy shield to still be able to.  The numbers for either situation could, of course, be tweaked.</p><p>The moral of the story is: Please do not kill fencing <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

Aker
06-12-2007, 11:37 AM
It looks like this thread should be moved in some rogues section. All that coming posted now is scare of nerfing theres overpowered DPS.

Zarafein
06-12-2007, 11:46 AM
<p>It's about fencing, "i" don't care if wis line gets nerfed to balance i just want be able to use 1hander with free hand with a bonus over using it without any special aa points(for example better than a assassin using 1 hander and freehand since they don't have a onehander line).</p><p>Fencing is(for some rogues) as important as the special monk animations for some monks, not because its the strongest line.</p>

Couching
06-12-2007, 11:50 AM
I have several suggestions: 1. The balance of KoS Class tree revamp has to be taken care in <b>RAID</b> rather than in solo as before. Class balance in raid is a very serious problem for EQ2 that has to be taken care of. Currently, a lot of classes are broken in raid with raid buffs. Some classes are too powerful and some classes are totally gimped. For example, any well geared monk has 100%~110% self haste comparing to other plate tank with 20%-30% self haste. If the base line of class balance is based on solo, the only way to balance is to make brawler tree totally crap. That's why brawler tree is totally gimped comparing to other fighter trees with current design. However, in raid, any plate tank in a melee buff stack group can get haste over 100% easily. Their dps got boost nicely in raid except monk since the haste cap is only 125%. That's how they can out damage monk in raid but not in solo. See the problem here? 2. Every fighter should has different lines for tanking and damages. Currently, brawler has <b>ZERO</b> line for tanking and totally crapped lines for dps. We didn't have any line which helps us tanking nor damages comparing to others. We can't get anything to help tanking except avoidance (comparing to other fighters, they have boost to <b>mitigation, aggro control, avoidance and tsunami like CA</b> from aa line). Though, with avoidance diminishing return and our high avoidance class setting, it's pointless to get any extra avoidance.Give brawler some tools so that we can tank better if we are specialized for tanking. For dps, currently, we have ZERO passive double attack with weapons. Also, our only aoe is 8% 300-500 damage proc. It's totally screwed nowadays since<b> proc rate is no longer based on how many hit you have</b>. <b>It's normalized to 3 sec delay weapon</b>.  In other word, the proc rate of our aoe is only <b>1.6 times per minute</b>. Come on, 8 points for merely 15-30 dps upgrade is really sad comparing to war tree. They have 24% frontal aoe from main hand weapon. Not to say they have 3 times better chances of proc, the damage of proc is also scaled with your weapon! All they need to do is to move a step and face mobs so that their frontal aoe can hit them. Our another single target proc is another joke. It's 24% single target 120-200 damage proc. Come on, another 8 points for 15-20 dps upgrade is really ridiculous comparing to other fighter tree. The most flaw design is that <b>we have only 18% critical hit comparing to 22% critical hit in War tree</b>. Why? Brawler is meant to out damage plate tank but we have less critical hit aa? Comparing to war tree, if you want to focus on damage, you have choices from getting 76% double attack, extra 20 haste, 22% critical hit and 24% frontal aoe from main hand. See how gimped brawler tree is? 3. Remove diminishing return of haste and dps effects. These effects should be linear or it screwed any class with self haste/dps buff. It is too easy for classes without self haste/dps to hit 100% haste/dps in raid. It causes a lot of problems of unbalance in raid. A player X with 200 haste should get benefit twice as player Y with 100 haste. You can keep the haste cap as 125% but without the effect of diminishing return. For example, a player X with 200 haste has 125% haste and a player Y with 100 haste has 62.5% haste in real. 4. Make a role for 2h weapon or just remove it from the game. There should be different advantages to use 1h with shield, DW weapon and 2h weapon for fighters. With current design, no body is going to use 2h weapon. No body gets any advantage to use a 2h weapon. I would suggest making 1h with shield for tanking, DW for best single target dps and 2h for best aoe dps for all fighters.

Penstar
06-12-2007, 12:02 PM
<p>There is something just wrong about running around with an axe in one hand, and nothing in the other.</p><p>I feel naked without a weapon in each hand.</p><p>I respect those who want to fence, but for us stabbity types, it seems a shame to be forced out of using DW for the best DPS.  There should at least be some sort of parity here between the dual weilding and the one handed styles.  Then it truly would become a matter of style and differentiation, rather than a formula for the best DPS build.</p>

Necodem
06-12-2007, 12:31 PM
<cite>Lockeye wrote:</cite><blockquote> Weapon specific requirements were originally meant to diversify the kinds of weapons that players would want to use and identify a character with a particular achievement branch. Popular achievement branches reinforced certain weapon types, for example, it greatly lowered the desirability of axes versus swords for a particular class if the swords branch was more powerful. This introduced new problems with desirability of loot and quest rewards. We’ve removed most of those requirements, reserving them only for the few branches that require shields and ranged weapons. </blockquote>I hope that the 2H/dual wield for Warriors will also be reconsidered with the AA revamp. Or will those type of wielding still be useless ( compared to buckler way STA line )?

Kaiser Sigma
06-12-2007, 12:35 PM
<cite>Penstar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I respect those who want to fence, but for us stabbity types, it seems a shame to be forced out of using DW for the best DPS.  There should at least be some sort of parity here between the dual weilding and the one handed styles.  Then it truly would become a matter of style and differentiation, rather than a formula for the best DPS build.</p></blockquote> Then you'd have to give predators a branch for 1 handers given otherwise rogues would be getting way too much diversity. Remember, this whole "review" isn't about rogues and tanks on horses. Healers, mages, predators and bards also exist~.

Captain Apple Darkberry
06-12-2007, 12:38 PM
<p><span style="color: #ff3300">I would only ask that since you are working on the abilities, you fix it so that the abilities that have been ~broken~ (aka: not working) in PvP be ~fixed~ (aka: have at least some effect added to them for PvP).</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">Examples:  Rogue STA line group taunt and proc taunt and INT line deaggros...   ...neither have any effect for PvP.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">Please add at least some effect to them, even if it is a tiny one so as to avoid imbalance.  Having them do absolutely ~nothing~ is not right...</span></p>

sensie
06-12-2007, 12:40 PM
<p>Well spoken couching.  I know there is a problem when I raid and a guardian out dps's me.  I would like to see some improvements for the brawler class, so as many said we are viable for a raid or even in some cases groups, I can't tell you how many times I have gotten the response I would prefer to have a plate tank when going to unrest or nizaria.  Why is that because 2 reasons avoidnace is not working and brawlers do not have good mutiple target taunts.  Now I worry about the nerf bat with this upcoming AA  tree revamp.  Brawlers are supposed to be the dps class or the fighters, but thats not how its working out and we are suppose to be tanks.</p><p>I would SOE to look at making the brawler class inot either viable tanks or a DPS, this inbetween stuff is not working.  As far as AA's go no one that I know of using theier end line abilities in the brawler trees, and I can see if they just remove the weapon requirement from AA's to it still being the same, so instead of going 4 4 8 sta/wis/int, we might go 4 4 8 sta/str/int or wis/int/str there is not point in using our end line abilities.  We don't even use the 4th ability in each line because most are either defense parry or defection adds, adn why we a brawler spend points into something that is not going to be used, because we never tank and because avoidance does not work at raid level.</p><p>I guess what this boils down to is lets look a bit deeper then weapon requirements and address some serious issues.  I know each class has thier issues and I am only speaking from a brawlers/monks perspective.</p><p>Sensie Hwarang </p>

Zarafein
06-12-2007, 12:45 PM
<p>I don't use the rogue int line, but imo this one will/should get a huge boost not only in pvp.</p>

Bladewind
06-12-2007, 01:19 PM
Lhangion@Innovation wrote: <blockquote><p>It's about fencing, "i" don't care if wis line gets nerfed to balance i just want be able to use 1hander with free hand with a bonus over using it without any special aa points(for example better than a assassin using 1 hander and freehand since they don't have a onehander line).</p><p>Fencing is(for some rogues) as important as the special monk animations for some monks, not because its the strongest line.</p></blockquote><p> Precisely.</p><p>I went with the wisdom on my rogue because I thought fencing was cool as hell.  I don't need to have any dps edge over dw types, I just want to not be gimped as a fencer.  That's why I suggested partial double attack bonuses for any weapon style then an additional conditional bonus for keeping the free hand empty.  This bonus is not for a dps advantage, but rather to keep fencing on par with dual wielding. I think that was the original intent of the double atatck bonus in the line anyway, but things got a bit carried away with high end one handers.</p>

Raveller
06-12-2007, 01:33 PM
<p>The end result of this will be the nerfing of the useful AA lines for each class, rather than an improvement to the useless ones.</p>

Bladewind
06-12-2007, 01:35 PM
<p>Brawler:</p><p>Needs a massive adjustment.  Currently, both the dps and tanking bonuses from KoS AAs are very weak.  We had our crits lowered while all other fighters had their auto-attack values raised to match the brawler table...   It would be nice to see a line of AAs that allowed us to focus on mitigation (or even one box in our KoS tree that gave mit bonuses), one that allowed us to focus on avoidance, etc..  The str line would be very attractive without the empty hand restriction.  Perhaps it could still grant extra bonuses for thsoe who choose to go empty handed similar to what I suggested for fencing?</p><p>Shaman:</p><p>It would be nice to have a little more independence from dogdog.</p><p>Crusader:</p><p>I like the extra flavor that horse trample adds.  It does suck to have the functionality halved indoors if you happen to die, though.  Perhaps changing it to 27% base at 8 ranks (to match the warrior multiattack) and +9% if mounted would be a good way to go instead of +18% base and +18% if mounted?</p><p>Bard:</p><p>Bards need all sorts of help <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  Relating specifically to KoS AAs, they just seem weak and underpowered across the board relative those I get from other classes I play.</p>

Wikod
06-12-2007, 02:12 PM
<cite>Raveller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>The end result of this will be the nerfing of the useful AA lines for each class, rather than an improvement to the useless ones.</p></blockquote> IHTA

vyr
06-12-2007, 02:13 PM
<p>hopefully this will remove the need to be on horseback for crusader AAs - half the fun when you are in a dungeon</p><p>2h AAs added ? too many great 2h weapons there for warriors and crusaders and you can only use them when you are not tanking =( </p><p>and please get rid of the pally healing tree - if we wanted to heal we would have played templars instead, we are tanks lol! </p><p>my 2c</p>

Think11
06-12-2007, 02:14 PM
Warrior Needs 2hander double attack. Now, there are no choices of equipping warrior with 2Hander. <img src="/smilies/136dd33cba83140c7ce38db096d05aed.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Obadiah
06-12-2007, 02:49 PM
<p>This thread sucks. </p><p>We begin with a vague indication of what some of the changes will be . . . . but no specifics until the patch notes . . . . which could come as I type this, or could be days away yet. So . . . we have 5 pages of speculation and wishlists when the changes they are implementing have already been devised, just not divulged. </p><p>What a tremendous tease. </p><p>As owner of a Defiler and Necro, I sure like the sound of what's being proposed for pet enhancements. After reviving, the Defiler has an entire bar full of buffs and summons and pet buffs to cast, and that's with some of them combined into a macro. Taking 2-3 out will be nice. </p><p>As the owner of a Berserker, I just hope I will no longer be pressured into the buckler tree, which I despise only because it's so widely espoused as the only build worth a hoot.</p><p>Having read the original post very shortly after it was posted, I eagerly await the actual notes. Then the REAL discussion begins. . . <img src="/smilies/385970365b8ed7503b4294502a458efa.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

Zarafein
06-12-2007, 03:05 PM
Imo its important to make some things clear as soon as possible, as we know that(in the past) this is capable to prevent some parts of changes or enhance a change(sometimes this was good, sometimes bad). and feedback is welcome.

InsertNeko
06-12-2007, 03:58 PM
Lhangion@Innovation wrote: <blockquote>Imo its important to make some things clear as soon as possible, as we know that(in the past) this is capable to prevent some parts of changes or enhance a change(sometimes this was good, sometimes bad). and feedback is welcome.</blockquote> it looks like some of the casting speed aa's will now be permanent like the enhance ones from the eof tree, from what I'm seeing. but as many know <b>there's only two lines any raiding conj will ever use in the Kos tree</b>. (This is an over generalization, don't panic, ok?) The Int line (4.6.4.4.8 ) and the Crit line on the left (4.4.4,8 ). From what I'm guessing, you're making the "undesirable"  lines better or simply nerfing the popular lines to make us look at the other ones? I'm hoping a little more clarity when the time comes will be in order. historically,  as mentioned it's easier for SOE to just nerf the popular/powerful ones and then the others look better in comparison. I'd ratehr you just move my pet buffs (Empower Servant, Speed casting, etc) into the pet itself similar to the EOF tree's enhance (as i mentioned), if I mistime an ae and pet dies, I've got 6 buffs to cast if I want him back to 100% again. plus, the free Respec will be nice too <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Cusashorn
06-12-2007, 04:29 PM
<cite>sensie wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Well spoken couching.  I know there is a problem when I raid and a guardian out dps's me.  I would like to see some improvements for the brawler class, so as many said we are viable for a raid or even in some cases groups, I can't tell you how many times I have gotten the response I would prefer to have a plate tank when going to unrest or nizaria.  Why is that because 2 reasons avoidnace is not working and brawlers do not have good mutiple target taunts.  Now I worry about the nerf bat with this upcoming AA  tree revamp.  Brawlers are supposed to be the dps class or the fighters, but thats not how its working out and we are suppose to be tanks.</p><p>I would SOE to look at making the brawler class inot either viable tanks or a DPS, this inbetween stuff is not working.  As far as AA's go no one that I know of using theier end line abilities in the brawler trees, and I can see if they just remove the weapon requirement from AA's to it still being the same, so instead of going 4 4 8 sta/wis/int, we might go 4 4 8 sta/str/int or wis/int/str there is not point in using our end line abilities.  We don't even use the 4th ability in each line because most are either defense parry or defection adds, adn why we a brawler spend points into something that is not going to be used, because we never tank and because avoidance does not work at raid level.</p><p>I guess what this boils down to is lets look a bit deeper then weapon requirements and address some serious issues.  I know each class has thier issues and I am only speaking from a brawlers/monks perspective.</p><p>Sensie Hwarang </p></blockquote><p> Yes, despite the grammar issues making it hard to read, I agree with everything Crouching said.</p><p>However, in your suggestion to make us either full tank or full DPS, I'd rather not be forced to lose my DPS just to tank. We're suppose to do more damage than all the other tank classes, and we're suppose to be third tier DPS classes compaired to everyone in general.</p><p>The only way I can think of making brawlers actual tanks is to increase all brawlers at level 70 to have a BASE AVOIDANCE of 80% regardless of buffs. I find it rather sad that a warrior can have as much as and even MORE avoidance through buffs than a brawler can get. Warriors are plate wearers. They should have no more than 30% avoidance self-buffed, and 45% through raid buffing.</p><p>But this thread isn't here to talk about class balance. It's here to talk about class balance through achievement lines. I agree. We need a major damage upgrade. The end line buffs in the KOS tree are absolutely worthless for monks. I mean come on. A skill that costs some 15-20 points that only does about 300 points of damage, but has a tedious requirement of using 0.1 seconds after you pull off a Punch-Jab-Kick combo? Putting in the need to pull it off so freakin fast alone makes it worthless.</p>

Captain Apple Darkberry
06-12-2007, 04:39 PM
<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="color: #0099cc">But this thread isn't here to talk about class balance. It's here to talk about class balance through achievement lines. </span>I agree. We need a major damage upgrade. The end line buffs in the KOS tree are absolutely worthless for monks. I mean come on. A skill that costs some 15-20 points that only does about 300 points of damage, but has a tedious requirement of using 0.1 seconds after you pull off a Punch-Jab-Kick combo? Putting in the need to pull it off so freakin fast alone makes it worthless.</p></blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff3300">In no way, ever, should AA trees be used to ~balance~ classes.  </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">Balance the classes, then build AA trees that allow non-game breaking yet useful  and desired customizations for peoples characters.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">If I have to use an AA tree to be ~balanced~, something is wrong as it means that I have to follow a certain AA build or I am gimped.</span></p>

Skua
06-12-2007, 04:48 PM
Captain Apple Darkberry wrote: <blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="color: #0099cc">But this thread isn't here to talk about class balance. It's here to talk about class balance through achievement lines. </span>I agree. We need a major damage upgrade. The end line buffs in the KOS tree are absolutely worthless for monks. I mean come on. A skill that costs some 15-20 points that only does about 300 points of damage, but has a tedious requirement of using 0.1 seconds after you pull off a Punch-Jab-Kick combo? Putting in the need to pull it off so freakin fast alone makes it worthless.</p></blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff3300">In no way, ever, should AA trees be used to ~balance~ classes.  </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">Balance the classes, then build AA trees that allow non-game breaking yet useful  and desired customizations for peoples characters.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">If I have to use an AA tree to be ~balanced~, something is wrong as it means that I have to follow a certain AA build or I am gimped.</span></p></blockquote> yeah thas my main problem with AAs like i said i want to DW with my rogue but i MUST take Wis or be a gimped rogue.... As conjuror i need to take STR and INT (str for crits ) int buff mage pet , STA line is for soloing (buff earth pet) , Agi line buff Scout pet (in raids or groups Mage > Scout , dpg and ranged dmg ) , Wis line is pffffffffffffffff  As Ranger , lol AGI line is the MUST HAVE , since give a ranged knockback + ranged crit ect..... Bards? lol bards need love badly Brawlers , uhmmm dont have 1 myself but looks like have huge problems too =/ imo crusaders and warriors need to have a 2h line .... ect ect....

Cusashorn
06-12-2007, 04:50 PM
Captain Apple Darkberry wrote: <blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="color: #0099cc">But this thread isn't here to talk about class balance. It's here to talk about class balance through achievement lines. </span>I agree. We need a major damage upgrade. The end line buffs in the KOS tree are absolutely worthless for monks. I mean come on. A skill that costs some 15-20 points that only does about 300 points of damage, but has a tedious requirement of using 0.1 seconds after you pull off a Punch-Jab-Kick combo? Putting in the need to pull it off so freakin fast alone makes it worthless.</p></blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff3300">In no way, ever, should AA trees be used to ~balance~ classes.  </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">Balance the classes, then build AA trees that allow non-game breaking yet useful  and desired customizations for peoples characters.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">If I have to use an AA tree to be ~balanced~, something is wrong as it means that I have to follow a certain AA build or I am gimped.</span></p></blockquote><p>...... Good point.</p><p>At any rate, they said they're going to look into the underused lines for all the classes. Agility is without a doubt the least used among brawlers. I've never seen anyone else on the Kithicor server with "Monkey Guru" as a prefix title, indicating that they went with agility. I think I may be the only one. </p>

Themaginator
06-12-2007, 04:57 PM
making one thing more useful doesnt mean nerfing another thing chill people...paranoid little fellows arent you

lilmohi
06-12-2007, 05:11 PM
<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Captain Apple Darkberry wrote: <blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="color: #0099cc">But this thread isn't here to talk about class balance. It's here to talk about class balance through achievement lines. </span>I agree. We need a major damage upgrade. The end line buffs in the KOS tree are absolutely worthless for monks. I mean come on. A skill that costs some 15-20 points that only does about 300 points of damage, but has a tedious requirement of using 0.1 seconds after you pull off a Punch-Jab-Kick combo? Putting in the need to pull it off so freakin fast alone makes it worthless.</p></blockquote><p><span style="color: #ff3300">In no way, ever, should AA trees be used to ~balance~ classes.  </span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">Balance the classes, then build AA trees that allow non-game breaking yet useful  and desired customizations for peoples characters.</span></p><p><span style="color: #ff3300">If I have to use an AA tree to be ~balanced~, something is wrong as it means that I have to follow a certain AA build or I am gimped.</span></p></blockquote><p>...... Good point.</p><p>At any rate, they said they're going to look into the underused lines for all the classes. Agility is without a doubt the least used among brawlers. I've never seen anyone else on the Kithicor server with "Monkey Guru" as a prefix title, indicating that they went with agility. I think I may be the only one. </p></blockquote>I love the monky guru line, even the final ability, I just can't bring myself to display that title. <img src="/smilies/0320a00cb4bb5629ab9fc2bc1fcc4e9e.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> 

Cusashorn
06-12-2007, 05:16 PM
I'm proud to show it off. Its humorous and cute, but it gives me a strong sense of individuality. I agree with Altruism though. All the other monks in the game decided to be selfish and only improve thier DPS with the 8-8-8 str/wis/int lines. I can't tell you how many times I've saved my raid force by putting Altruism on the main tank.

Solar_Fla
06-12-2007, 05:21 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>making one thing more useful doesnt mean nerfing another thing chill people...paranoid little fellows arent you </blockquote>People have had rough experiences in the past so being skeptical of their class being nerfed or having to completly redo their AA's and get used to a whole new set has some people antsy. I really hope they have learned from the past and plan to create a superior product to what they had. But people do have a reason to be wary for these changes. AA's are the only thing that gives us a sense of uniqueness in the game atm and even if some of them are broken people don't want to have to relearn them all over again. Humans as a species just don't like change very much even if what they are comfortable with is broken hehe.

Hellswrath
06-12-2007, 06:58 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>making one thing more useful doesnt mean nerfing another thing chill people...paranoid little fellows arent you </blockquote> I can only pray that you are right.

Supp
06-12-2007, 07:19 PM
Choatley@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>I'm just thinking that I've passed on a lot of gear I could've really used now that this is changing. If it were at next expansion, this gear would be replaced anyway, then I wouldn't care so much. I don't know...this concerns me, because I have zero trust for these changes.</blockquote> Amen brutha, <b><span style="font-size: large">AMEN</span></b>

Supp
06-12-2007, 07:25 PM
<p>You know, when these changes were first discussed, they said they would be removing many of the weapon specific requirements of the KoS lines. That's all they said. And so we rejoiced and patted the Devs on their backs.</p><p>Now I read this and wonder if it wasnt a Trojan Horse, give us a few goodies but nerf the really good stuff, the heavily overutilized stuff that has apparently drawn their attention. I fear to list off which ones I believe are awesome, for obvious reasons.</p><p>I realize I may be negative about it, but just the thought of being left with mediocre KoS AAs after Ive worked so hard to acquire them feels like an early burn. Of course, there's nothing I can do about it, but PRAY. </p><p><u>EDIT: HERE IS HOW THE KOS AA REVAMP WAS ORIGINALLY WORDED...</u></p><p> "The Achievement Trees introduced with the Kingdom of Sky expansion have been revisited to <b>increase the number of options available</b> to each character, and to <b>improve their desirability</b>. Weapon specific requirements for the class trees have been dropped with the exception of trees that require shields and ranged weapons. Pet Achievements have been revisited to take advantage of new functionality introduced to the game with the Echoes of Faydwer expansion. <b>Finally, branches that were less than desirable have been revisited to improve their viability and provide more options to everyone</b>."</p><p><i><span style="color: #0066ff">This is the hooray we all awarded the devs. There was nothing in here that even hinted at nerf.</span></i></p><p><u>NOW HERE'S HOW IT'S CURRENTLY WORDED:</u></p><p>GU36 contains a significant update to many Class Tree achievements, aimed at removing most of the equipment restrictions on achievement abilities, improving their usability with pets, <b>and balancing out desireability between the different branches of the Class Trees</b>.</p><p><i><span style="color: #0066ff">Balancing out desirability between branches? So the most currently utilized branches are now under srutiny. That sounds off-ish, but ok. </span></i> Weapon specific requirements were originally meant to diversify the kinds of weapons that players would want to use and identify a character with a particular achievement branch. Popular achievement branches reinforced certain weapon types, for example, it greatly lowered the desirability of axes versus swords for a particular class if the swords branch was more powerful. This introduced new problems with desirability of loot and quest rewards. We've removed most of those requirements, reserving them only for the few branches that require shields and ranged weapons. Pet Achievements were tedious to use; their buffs almost always required recasting them every time the pet zoned. The EoF achievements added new functionality for achievement buffs to be applied permanently on the pet that was not available in KoS. This has now been added to all KoS Class achievements that permanently buff a pet type. <b>We've analyzed the achievement spending patterns of each class to determine which branches are the most popular</b> and which ones are greatly underutilized. <b>A large part of this update to class achievements has been to increase the power of the least desired achievements</b>. <b>The few cases where an achievement received a reduction were made to balance out a penalizing equipment requirement that was removed as part of the update</b>. <i><span style="color: #0066ff">So the most popular branches are indeed under scrutiny. </span></i></p><p><i><span style="color: #0066ff">Umm, the large part has been to increase the junk achievements? Meaning, there is a smaller part being snuck in as well? That was not mentioned in the earlier publication where we dished out our praise. </span></i></p><p><i><span style="color: #0066ff">The last sentence is the one that worries me the most. To me, a "penalizing equipment requirement" is the STR line for brawlers and the WIS line for sorcerers. These are lines where you have to take off one or both of your weapons to get the benefit of the line. You were penalized to achieve a greater overall ability. So somehow these lines will recieve an achievement reduction. That's an obvious nerf. It could be a mininerf to balance out the benefits of having the extra equipment equipped, or it could be a massive nerf stripping the line. We have no way to know now that a blank check has been written for that door. Now that youve all had a direct chance to see the differences in the two publications, tell me this isnt a Trojan Horse.</span></i> </p>

Xandis
06-12-2007, 08:24 PM
<p>"Now if one would remove the condition (empty 2nd hand) and would allow Rogues to DW with that line it would make it a) overpowerd and b) all rogues would go back to DW and drop the one handers! This would be another disaster, people spend DKP to get Top end one handers to benefit from the WIS line, leaving the few DWs there are in EoF for Bards & Predators! So not only would they now need to re equip them self, but there would be a even bigger fight over the few DWs!"</p><p> - I'm not even a Rogue, but I see the problem here of losing the WIS line as it is. I hope they don't alter it.</p><p>Besides, I enjoy the 'diversity' of not every scouts dual-Wielding. Keeps it interesting. </p>

lavasoul
06-12-2007, 08:29 PM
Crusader Wis line needs major help cause its not used by many. Ask all the high end paladin and prettty sure all will say that you're a noob if you went with that line. Been a lot of threads about it on paladin forum which end up in a lot of name calling and put down.

Dimgl
06-12-2007, 08:49 PM
<span style="color: #00cc99">I almost wonder if the example of axes vs swords is based on the "4 1 INT movement" I championed that shows that 75 DR swords beat out mid 80 DR axes. Goodness knows I've caused them enough trouble in the past with things like the "Tanking Nizara Naked" fiasco and whatnot. But it's because of things like that and this that let me trust them. Though, I will say... I'm glad the devs are doing this. Speaking as a guy who wrote a thorough guide on game mechanics regarding the warrior class, and wrote an FAQ on the matter, and as a contributor and a good friend of the guy who wrote the Rogue FAQ and Critical Hit guide (two of the classes most oft-contested achievement wise,) I must say that one of the big reasons I love EQ2 is because it is like a beautiful piece of complex machinery. EQ2's mechanics are sophisticated, powerful, and clever. It's because the devs who built the machine put a lot of love and dedication into it. They've never set out with intent to destroy fun or introduce faulty mechanics. I don't think they'd start now. EoF introduced a lot of changes to the system; while at the same time the devs tried to limit the changes to as many other systems as possible. As a result, as far as achievements go, things were much better balanced under KoS's system, as they never updated the achievements when the combat system was revamped in EoF. Gameplay changes when combined with adornments and new itemization, resulted in a lot of achievement lines receiving dramatic reductions in usefulness and others shooting ahead tremenedously. The same is true of many class skill lines (warrior temp mitigation buffs are -still- way too weak comparatively) sadly. Hopefully we get class skill lines re-examined for EoF combat changes some day too. The problem is really simple: With diminishing returns in place, the best spec is the one that allows you to get boosts that are otherwise difficult to achieve. The hardest things to get aren't haste, dps, or anything like that anymore. Those things are common on gear. They're critical hits, double-attack, and the like. Similarly, defense and parry skill aren't so great compared to uncontested riposte/circular parry. Lines shouldn't add +parry, or +defense. Lines shouldn't even add +disruption. They should add a % chance to parry or % chance to dodge. For casters, a %reduction in resist rates. % chances perform the exact same in every situation, from solo to raid play, and would make it a lot easier for them to balance gameplay in the future, it also removes them from diminishing returns, and flatlines their reward, making balance possible. Scaling achievements based on skills as a function of level is nonintuitive and also does not necessarily result in the same effect in the same level range. Really, the #1 thing I hope they do with the KoS achievements is remove the stat filler. Seriously. All it does is represent a sunk cost that hurts players who happen to have their favorite line fall into a strange stat, or punish players who choose to spec in 3+ lines. This is especially exacerbated by the fact that these stat bonuses don't scale with level, meaning eventually we'll be level 120, but still get 16 of some stat for 4 achievement points. Oh well. If only I could sit down sometime and talk to a dev, right? </span><img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Lakespookie
06-12-2007, 10:11 PM
<blockquote><cite>Raveller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>The end result of this will be the nerfing of the useful AA lines for each class, rather than an improvement to the useless ones.</p></blockquote></blockquote><p> and what do you know according to test wizards are getting the nerf bat with these changes</p><p> wiz line is having brainstorm cut in half  and looks like FH is getting cut by about 1/3 if the progression stays the same.</p><p>I love how they say there going to improvve the jumk AA's and then nerf us a PVE raiding wizard has one goal MAximum DPS thats it thats why we dont use any of the other lines.</p><p> but like always lets fix whats not broken and not fix whats broken </p><p> Some things never change</p>

Deson
06-12-2007, 10:16 PM
Figure this feedback is better here. Overall I like what I read. Two complaints about the AP changes right now though- Why isn't summoner int 5 an auto pet buff now and shouldn't Shaman intel 3 be a spell crit chance to bring it in line with pretty much every other class? With the amount of proc gear available, all with it's own chance to crit, it seems like crit chance is the better option over damage if only for play feel consistency.

BossCre
06-12-2007, 10:17 PM
<p>Not that it really matters, but I'm not very happy to see the new shaman line changes...at least in what vague form I saw them in the test update notes.  I was perfectly happy in how I had them spec'ed on my defiler and mystic, but now it seems like SOE does it again with their "let's make stuff worse in one spot to get people to appreciate our new changes in this other one" bit.  Trust me...even if you improved lines and didn't tax any others, that still wouldn't make your game too easy...even if this was done for all classes across the board.</p><p>Of course, this will be lost in the deluge of posts to follow, and even if it was seen, nothing would be done to solve for it.  Just look at the combat changes and many other things that impacted the community negatively in the past.  Sure, some of it improved a little bit, but really...some of these changes and things done for "balance" are kind of petty when one sees the numbers presented by the rest of the game.  *sigh*</p>

Wrapye
06-12-2007, 10:46 PM
Reading the Test notes, the changes to the Enchanter str line will not convince anyone to use it.  That line needs to be revamped to be something else entirely before anyone will use it.  How many coercers get into melee?

selch
06-12-2007, 10:51 PM
<p>So you have given Warriors, a better version of a class definining ancient spell of Monks ? "Tsunami" with better defense + uncontested block + their mit ?</p><p>What are you thinking guys? Seriously, we are all settled with idea that you have long forgetten Monks and no hope with the class but this was the limit of that ignorance.... Why don't you give FD to them too?</p><p>Seems joke threads turning into reality...</p>

Proudfoot
06-12-2007, 10:59 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>making one thing more useful doesnt mean nerfing another thing chill people...paranoid little fellows arent you </blockquote>Well, go read the patch notes; Several items for some classes were 'reduced', and it was in the popular lines. nerf: Warrior Stam line; Reduced double attack talent buff: Warrior Int line; Buff the haste/reuse Yes, they are doing some changes to shoo people out of a line and using carrots to get them into others. I'd be fine with buffing other lines, but not nerfing the current 'best' lines in the process. Shaman Agi line; Reduced crit % talent This one pains me, I worked hard for those 8 points and 100% crit. buy level 35 <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Zarafein
06-12-2007, 11:02 PM
<p>Can't test those changes <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> "login rejected:The client's version does not macht the server's. Please re-run the patcher" but starting again and full scan did nothing.</p><p>Screw this, now i'am able to test this and cheer <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> fencing will still be alive"secondery slot hast to be empty"</p>

Mordacion
06-13-2007, 12:51 AM
If they really want to fix KoS AAs its incredibly simple: remove the first stat-boosting line in each tree entirely since they're a complete waste of AA points and I imagine 90% of the player base would rejoice to see them removed. With them gone leave the number of points needed to get the final abilities in each tree the same, requiring people to simply invest more points into actual useful skills and not offload them into a few stat points nobody really needs or cares about. It would keep the spirit of the KoS AA lines being based around a direct line of progression and simultaneously allow players to reap more benefits from going deep into a given line and finishing a line would have a greater impact on your character's abilities.

Moonlance
06-13-2007, 01:05 AM
Ponos@Antonia Bayle wrote: <blockquote><p>This is a much needed change, and I very much agree.  I've become a sword-wielding madman, missing out on a lot of fine looking axes in hammers.</p><p>However, I'm disappointed to hear that there might still be a shield restriction.  </p><p>I understand that to allow players to equip a tower shield over a buckler and still take advantage of a Shield Tree Line would cause some unwanted balancing issues, but perhaps there is a happy medium somewhere.</p><p>Simply stated, I'm tired of wearing a buckler.  They seem to be the most graphically limited of all the shield types, and I've made it a habit now to conceal it beneath my cloak, even if my cloak clashes with the armor I'm currently wearing.</p><p>Hell, I don't even want to wear a tower shield per se.  I like kite shields.  Always have, ever since Diablo.</p><p>But again, looking forward to this change.</p></blockquote>It seems to me that round shields are underutilized, I think that zerkers should be able to use round shields with this aa...perhaps.

Skua
06-13-2007, 01:34 AM
<cite>Mordacion wrote:</cite><blockquote>If they really want to fix KoS AAs its incredibly simple: remove the first stat-boosting line in each tree entirely since they're a complete waste of AA points and I imagine 90% of the player base would rejoice to see them removed. With them gone leave the number of points needed to get the final abilities in each tree the same, requiring people to simply invest more points into actual useful skills and not offload them into a few stat points nobody really needs or cares about. It would keep the spirit of the KoS AA lines being based around a direct line of progression and simultaneously allow players to reap more benefits from going deep into a given line and finishing a line would have a greater impact on your character's abilities. </blockquote> good idea, 4 points wasted just to advance >.>  put then in 1 line so if i want to have extra str agi or int  will invest points there....but no forced me to take them to advance....

Druisagoldengod
06-13-2007, 01:38 AM
So now AA skills are on a  shared timer?  Thats kinda lame on my SK seeing as I now have to choose between Swiftaxe and Legionnaire's Smite.  Not to mention reducing the casting speed on it.  Never mind, I'm going to just go reroll a brig.

graxnip
06-13-2007, 01:44 AM
<b>"The few cases where an achievement received a reduction were made to balance out a penalizing equipment requirement that was removed as part of the update. "</b> ok inquisitor class - we didnt have anything like freehand sorcery or the brawler bare fists with str [Removed for Content] knocking away our 100% melee crit to 80%? also - agi line 40dps is now 32% double attack - anybody know the numbers on how that will effect us before any criticism is passed? regardless how attractive you make the other lines - they still cant beat the benefits of sinking a large amount of points into either the STA line or the INT line. cmon - the inquisitor community have been patiently waiting for <b>any kind* </b>of feedback on enhanced fanaticism since the EOF launch, and now you guys go and retool kos aa that was working perfectly *any kind = meaning - a) "oh what are you talking about - it is working as intended" or b) "oops our bad we will add all those other additional adverse effects to the description" or c) "oops our bad it is bad enough heals are halved and mana costs are doubled - lets fix the penalties with chilling inquest and mana gaining procs" any kind of response would be fantastic

Deson
06-13-2007, 01:47 AM
Speaking as a summoner,none of our changes hurt. I like the scout changes but, a few other game mechanics would have to change to make the more useful than the mage pet. I was really hoping a few more pet restrictions would be removed since they are the equivalent of weapons restrictions. I just can't see how any of the pet abilities applied across other pets would be an unbalancing shift in power. Actually though as I think about it, I'd like the damage absorption abilities to remain casts. Controlling the damage spread between pet and master is part of being a summoner and I don't want that choice removed.

Snorm
06-13-2007, 02:06 AM
<p>Let me make this as clear as possible:</p><p>STOP MESSING AROUND WITH THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKEN. I DON'T PAY YOU TO TINKER AROUND WITH WHATEVER YOU FIND AMUSING. ONCE IT'S RELEASED, DON'T TOUCH IT UNLESS IT'S GAME BREAKING. EQ2 ISN'T YOUR PERSONAL TOY, IT'S A PRODUCT *I'M* PAYING *YOU* TO CREATE.</p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p>

Ravaan
06-13-2007, 02:40 AM
<p>so overlooking other classes as well as my own ... this was not a revamp this was a nerf the [I cannot control my vocabulary] out of the popular lines to force people to pick other lines.</p><p>do you really want to get rid of the other 10 level 70 inquisitors that play across all the servers?</p>

nookin
06-13-2007, 03:14 AM
You don't really expect any Assassin to spec away from STR/INT after those changes? They're still useless. Why would I want aoe autoattack when I am single target dps!? And WIS line... we want damage damnit! I have no time for deaggro'ing when the swashy next to me is outparsing me...

Cornbread Muffin
06-13-2007, 03:14 AM
<ul><li><b>Strength 3 - Relentless Punches: Renamed to Eye of the Tiger: No longer requires unarmed. Increases all combat art damage by 0.75% per rank.</b></li></ul><p>If I do 1500dps, of which 50% is CA damage - which happens to be what I parse (the rest being autoattack and stuns) - that means if I spend 8 points here my total DPS goes up by 45. That is a 3% boost, or about the equivalent of spending 8 AA points to receive a permanent +5 DPS buff. I can spend 5 plat on an adornment and gain a larger increase than this. Unless you somehow accidentally forgot to mention that this ability still does double attack as well this is horribly underpowered.</p>

JohnDoe058
06-13-2007, 04:23 AM
<p>Okay, I see the reason behind a lot of these changes.  For example, swashies need a nerf.  They should never, ever beat a sorc or predator, under any circumstances.</p><p>But WHY are you nerfing sorcerers, an already underpowered *supposed* T1 dps class?  Do any developers raid as a sorc?  Going with INT or STA line as a raiding sorc...you won't be able to do enough damage to grab aggro anyway.</p><p>And WHY do you want to FIGHT with your player base?  Why do you think you've lost so very many subscribers over the short time that is EQ2's life?  Why does every change involve a nerf for some undeserving class?  Why do you have classes that are simply inferior, with no warning before someone troubles themselves to invest hundreds of hours into a character?   Why do you have inferior classes, at all!?!?</p>

Arethu
06-13-2007, 04:41 AM
<cite>graxnip wrote:</cite><blockquote><b>"The few cases where an achievement received a reduction were made to balance out a penalizing equipment requirement that was removed as part of the update. "</b> ok inquisitor class - we didnt have anything like freehand sorcery or the brawler bare fists with str [Removed for Content] knocking away our 100% melee crit to 80%? also - agi line 40dps is now 32% double attack - anybody know the numbers on how that will effect us before any criticism is passed? regardless how attractive you make the other lines - they still cant beat the benefits of sinking a large amount of points into either the STA line or the INT line. cmon - the inquisitor community have been patiently waiting for <b>any kind* </b>of feedback on enhanced fanaticism since the EOF launch, and now you guys go and retool kos aa that was working perfectly *any kind = meaning - a) "oh what are you talking about - it is working as intended" or b) "oops our bad we will add all those other additional adverse effects to the description" or c) "oops our bad it is bad enough heals are halved and mana costs are doubled - lets fix the penalties with chilling inquest and mana gaining procs" any kind of response would be fantastic </blockquote> DO NOT NERF CLERICS GOOD STUFF. Dont do that, Im having fun being able to solo, why do you have to mess around with US. Cant you guys make the game better WITHOUT making good stuff worse. IF THAT IS THE CASE LET THE AA TREE THE WAY IT WAS.

Dakkon_10
06-13-2007, 04:43 AM
I discontinued my subscription recently but I'm still frequenting these boards in case something might change my mind. After seeing those patch notes I'm pretty content with my decision. Nerfing the lines everyone likes and boosting the lines everyone dislikes. That's just s-m-r-t... I love what they did with the rogue intelligence line. Swashbucklers don't need deaggro, so instead of changing it to be something useful, they just nerf our deaggro abilities. Genius! I think the nerf to the rogue wisdom line is totally uncalled for... especially since they are changing all dual wields into 1handers and have gotten rid of double-attack procs. Shouldn't they be boosting the line instead of nerfing it? Nerfing... no, more like killing. There were 4.1 reasons to go wisdom: 1.Style, 2.Hurricane damage, 3.Inspiration procs, 4. Auto-attack dps increase, and 0.1. a Small avoidance increase. Well, reason 1 isn't enough since there are plenty of other styles that you don't need to sacrifice anything for, reason 2 will be eliminated by changing dual-wields to 1handers, reason 3 is taken care of by this update, and I only added reason 0.1 so nobody would flame me about it, but in all honesty I can say nobody would take this line for the avoidance, especially since avoidance is as messed up as it is. So that just leaves an auto-attack damage increase, which is being nerfed as well. But for that auto-attack increase, we needed to sacrifice our offhand which is more than just another weapon, it's stats, a proc, attack rating, and another adornment. In the end, it's no longer worth the achievement points unless, like me, you're a die hard fencer. It would be better to go with str/agi and become another boring dual wield scout. Way to ruin a good thing. If this is what they have in store for RoK you won't see me coming back. <span style="font-size: xx-small">(And no, you can't have my stuff. A pirate takes his loot to the grave.) <span style="font-size: x-small">Edda-ted fur tay-poes.</span> </span>

Themaginator
06-13-2007, 04:45 AM
<cite>Snorm wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Let me make this as clear as possible:</p><p>STOP MESSING AROUND WITH THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKEN. I DON'T PAY YOU TO TINKER AROUND WITH WHATEVER YOU FIND AMUSING. ONCE IT'S RELEASED, DON'T TOUCH IT UNLESS IT'S GAME BREAKING. EQ2 ISN'T YOUR PERSONAL TOY, IT'S A PRODUCT *I'M* PAYING *YOU* TO CREATE.  I DONT WANT YOU TO MAKE THINGS DIFFERENT IN THIS GAME, ONCE YOU IMPLEMENT SOMETHING YOU SHOULD NEVER FIX IT I LIKE BROKEN CONTENT I WANT YOU TO CREATE THE GAME THE WAY I WANT IT I DONT CARE ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF OTHER PLAYERS </p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p></blockquote> LOL you shouldn't play MMOs, and any way they didnt even nerf you. OH also...post fixed

Snorm
06-13-2007, 05:03 AM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote><cite>Snorm wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Let me make this as clear as possible:</p><p>STOP MESSING AROUND WITH THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKEN. I DON'T PAY YOU TO TINKER AROUND WITH WHATEVER YOU FIND AMUSING. ONCE IT'S RELEASED, DON'T TOUCH IT UNLESS IT'S GAME BREAKING. EQ2 ISN'T YOUR PERSONAL TOY, IT'S A PRODUCT *I'M* PAYING *YOU* TO CREATE.  I DONT WANT YOU TO MAKE THINGS DIFFERENT IN THIS GAME, ONCE YOU IMPLEMENT SOMETHING YOU SHOULD NEVER FIX IT I LIKE BROKEN CONTENT I WANT YOU TO CREATE THE GAME THE WAY I WANT IT I DONT CARE ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF OTHER PLAYERS </p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p></blockquote> LOL you shouldn't play MMOs, and any way they didnt even nerf you. OH also...post fixed </blockquote><p>lol. possibly overstated or oversimplified. I'm not sure we (guards) were not nerfed... we will have to see how things actually come out on live, and how the riposte changes stack up with block.</p><p>I'm really more annoyed as a raid leader, particularly with the changes to aggro in a number of places. Making the sta line possibly less viable, changing the transfered hate amounts from swash and/or assassin, changing how coercers affect hate... I've spent a lot of time in a lot of different raids with a lot of different raid setups so that I have a fairly good feel for how any particular MT group will perform. Now, I'm going to have to relearn most of that it seems. All the scouts in my raids are going to have to deal with reduced aggro recuction abilities. The socerers are going to be playing with different AA builds. I suspect raid wide DPS will drop and/or we will have more hate issues. And why is this? How is that fun? Why am I paying for this service? What was the glaring, game breaking issues that make that a reasonable thing to do right this second?</p><p>If they had simply done what was initially stated, remove the weapon requirements, possibly even tone down some of the restrictions and moderately retune to keep things in line.. that would have had little impact on actual play. People would have been able to pick AA's with less concern about what exact weapons they had available, and drops would have been evaluated more on the merits of the partiular item instead of in light of AA concerns. No biggie.</p><p>I don't tune the mechanics of this game for a living. There very well may be horrific, game breaking, utterly imbalanced problems that need addressing ASAP. But then.... nothing has changed for a very long time, no expansions or other major overhauls to the combat system. It's a fact that people respond more negatively to a steady stream of small changes than a single very large change. Continuous small changes are harder to keep track of and result in a state of fear and paranoia about what's in store next. A single, large change is much easier to deal with. Even if you don't like it, you know it's done. Now, you have to wonder what's around the corner.. Hm, what will they decide to change week after next? Should I bid on that or let it go? I don't really need it right now, but what if they change.... It's just destabalizing and demoralizing to know that you passed on things that you now want, and got things you no longer need.</p><p>Obviouslly they are trying to address some imbalances and unintended side effects of the EoF changes to the combat system to the KoS AA's in preparation for the upcoming RoK release. I'm sure that the AA changes will have impact on RoK itemization, and they want to let things settle out as early as possible so that they have time to properly itemize the next expansion. Or at least, that's why I would pull something like this.</p><p>It's still disruptive, and, honestly a lot of this they should have thought about before radically overhauling the combat sytem with EoF.</p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p>

Armawk
06-13-2007, 05:57 AM
<p>Re: Clerics strength line...</p><p>Notes say: </p><p>Strength 5 - Steadfast: While remaining still, grants interrupt immunity, with a chance at stifle immunity.</p><p>Which sounds good. If I dont move it stays up?</p><p>Game says:</p><p>Last 2.0 seconds. (previous duration 24.0 seconds)</p><p>2? seconds? I.E. it doesnt in fact exist at all in any meaningful sense, given that ALL of the clerics abilities take longer than 2 seconds to cast so not even one cast would be safe from interrupt? Or am I missing something?</p>

Armawk
06-13-2007, 06:41 AM
<p>Ah wait, belay that I think I understand.. they converted this casting ability to a passive ability which means that the cleric is always immune to interrupt while standing still.. but this seems to only work while not using auto attack, ie using your weapon counts as moving. I think.</p><p>interesting</p>

Timaarit
06-13-2007, 07:07 AM
You know, for a moment I got my hopes up with the weapon requirement removal. That would have made my monk even to a viable raider. But the total removal of the DA from the AA's just made me feel sick. I mean c'mon, what is the purpose you intend for brawlers in raids? As it is, there is none. It is painfully obvious that brawlers will only tank stuff that is on farm status and even then only if there are no plate tanks available. And still brawlers are not given even the DPS of majority of the plate tanks. So change the Relentless Punches back to the 12% double attack on the brawler line. That wont break the game but it would be a good start in fixing the brawlers.

Necodem
06-13-2007, 08:01 AM
With the new DW system, brawler will DPS more.

Khrunk
06-13-2007, 09:26 AM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote><cite>Snorm wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Let me make this as clear as possible:</p><p>STOP MESSING AROUND WITH THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKEN. I DON'T PAY YOU TO TINKER AROUND WITH WHATEVER YOU FIND AMUSING. ONCE IT'S RELEASED, DON'T TOUCH IT UNLESS IT'S GAME BREAKING. EQ2 ISN'T YOUR PERSONAL TOY, IT'S A PRODUCT *I'M* PAYING *YOU* TO CREATE.  I DONT WANT YOU TO MAKE THINGS DIFFERENT IN THIS GAME, ONCE YOU IMPLEMENT SOMETHING YOU SHOULD NEVER FIX IT I LIKE BROKEN CONTENT I WANT YOU TO CREATE THE GAME THE WAY I WANT IT I DONT CARE ABOUT THE THOUSANDS OF OTHER PLAYERS </p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p></blockquote> LOL you shouldn't play MMOs, and any way they didnt even nerf you. OH also...post fixed </blockquote>uh yeah we did get nerfed its fine learn2read.

Kendricke
06-13-2007, 09:48 AM
<cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Re: Clerics strength line...</p><p>Notes say: </p><p>Strength 5 - Steadfast: While remaining still, grants interrupt immunity, with a chance at stifle immunity.</p><p>Which sounds good. If I dont move it stays up?</p><p>Game says:</p><p>Last 2.0 seconds. (previous duration 24.0 seconds)</p><p>2? seconds? I.E. it doesnt in fact exist at all in any meaningful sense, given that ALL of the clerics abilities take longer than 2 seconds to cast so not even one cast would be safe from interrupt? Or am I missing something?</p></blockquote><p><strike>I haven't tested it...yet, but I'm hoping that this means you have to stay still for at least 2 seconds to kick in the ability.</strike></p><p>And of course you figured that out on your own in the next post.  *sigh*</p>

Timaarit
06-13-2007, 10:16 AM
Darkhain@Venekor wrote: <blockquote>With the new DW system, brawler will DPS more.</blockquote>We will? How exactly? Note that at best the new DW system will come one month after this crap. Also they did state that the off hand weapon will have longer delay so that the overall DPS will stay close to the same. Whatever is on test is most likely the result of a miscalculation since it would give 16% more autoattack DPS (which converts to about 8% in reality). Considering that brawlers need at least 50% more dps for raiding credibility, this really is a slap in the face. So mere 8% more DPS is really an insult at this point and yes, I do think that is also unintended and a result of a miscalculation, they just forgot to reduce the offhand weapons damage enough to compensate.

Windowlicker
06-13-2007, 10:24 AM
<p>I can't say at first glance I'm very happy with some of these changes.  So far it just looks like 80% Nerf, 20% Love.</p><p>The Warlock AA changes look like they were well intended, but a 4% decrease to base damage?  </p><p>Can't you just turn all the Warlocks into Scouts or something and put us out of our misery?</p>

Sandain666
06-13-2007, 10:56 AM
Please Leave the Mystic AA skill ANCESTRAL AUTHORITY alone. you people already castrated our SOW AA ability to the point of uselessness Now you want to ruin the one of the few AA's that is useful and dare I say it fun. Good lord man do you people actually play this game? Sandain

Emerix
06-13-2007, 11:57 AM
<p>the rogue AA's were sine as they have been . the new changes seem to make the whole wis line much less desirable instead of making the others better . You will make all rogues worse.</p><p>What for ? Why change for the sake of changing ? Please rethink the whole affair .</p>

Aristigon
06-13-2007, 12:12 PM
<span style="color: #33cccc"><b><span style="font-size: medium">Based on the overwhelming volume of negative feedback to the prospective AA changes, I hope that SoE rethinks their methodology and instead of reducing effectiveness of popular AA's, make the under-utilized ones more desirable by actually improving them in usefulness. It seems like madness to infuriate a large percentage of your paying customers without a logical <u><i>explanation</i></u> being provided.</span></b></span>

Polywogus
06-13-2007, 12:15 PM
 < Unhappy Rogue ]=(

Slackerx
06-13-2007, 12:18 PM
<p>im here to represent the Enchanters and give feedback on the aa changes</p><p>STR-Line this line is intended to give chanters melee dps... the attempt to make this line usefull/desireable is a total failure. in order to take this line you would have to give up one of the other dps lines (int/agi) and if you take this line insted of agi/int it will not even come close to the dps done with agi/int so i consider these changes nonexistint at best. they will never be used...</p><p>STA-line  (deagro line) i actual like these changes they look real good for the chanter that wants to be all out utility instead of utility/dps. but personaly i would never use this line i like my 2k+ dps way to much to switch to this line</p><p>AGI-Line the only thing they did here was nerf the casting speed buff of the first ability by 50% !!!!!!!!! i hate this change the only reason i see for this change is to make other lines more desireable by nerfing agi...and still with this nerf i see no reason for a good raiding chanter to switch out of it to on of the other lines..</p><p> all in all the only thing i see impacting chanters is the agi nerf witch sucks but from what ive seen this is a small nerf compaired to what other classes are geting slamed up there [I cannot control my vocabulary].. and with some tinkering with play style and gear i should be able to still hit 2k+ dps...it still pisses me off that they nerf one nonborken line to make other desireable instead of just retooling the other lines and makeing them worth while.  o-well all we can do is roll with the punches and hope they dont break our classes.. </p><p>Dulamar</p><p>70 illusionst</p><p>Lucan</p>

rumblepants
06-13-2007, 12:52 PM
Coming from a Mystic, I'm not really sure I understand why there is a need to nerf our AGI line. The amount of damage we do isn't earth shattering by any means. Is this an attempt to make a desirable tree less desirable? There is a better method to handle this and that is improve/fix lines that need the attention and leave the ones that are clearly not an issue alone. I also don't like the fact that all of the buffs from our pet are now permanent. Specifically, we still have issues where Aura of Warding causes aggro issues for us.

einar4
06-13-2007, 12:56 PM
<p>  There is something I do not understand and would ask a development representative to address.  If the weapon requirment for the Warrior STA aa line has not been changed/removed, then why were the benefits for this aa line reduced? </p>

rumblepants
06-13-2007, 01:08 PM
<cite>einar438 wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>  There is something I do not understand and would ask a development representative to address.  If the weapon requirment for the Warrior STA aa line has not been changed/removed, then why were the benefits for this aa line reduced? </p></blockquote> Their method to move players off the line and onto another line. This peeves me to no end.

Foretold
06-13-2007, 01:08 PM
<p>My 2cp...</p><p>Why was the Brawler str 3 changed from double attack to a *minor* bump in CA damage?  Most of our damage comes from autoattack, not from CAs...</p><p>Several other classes have double attack.  It makes sense to me that a monk and bruiser, the most agile of fighters, should easily be able to pull off a double attack.</p><p>WHY change double attack to CA damage??  This makes no sense.  Please rethink.</p>

OBK2
06-13-2007, 01:59 PM
Please devs, rethink this! Show that you have learned something from the debacle of SWG NGE!!! Please show us that you actually play the game and listen to the community.

TheDragon
06-13-2007, 02:11 PM
<cite>Slackerx wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>im here to represent the Enchanters and give feedback on the aa changes</p><p>STR-Line this line is intended to give chanters melee dps... the attempt to make this line usefull/desireable is a total failure. in order to take this line you would have to give up one of the other dps lines (int/agi) and if you take this line insted of agi/int it will not even come close to the dps done with agi/int so i consider these changes nonexistint at best. they will never be used...</p><p>STA-line  (deagro line) i actual like these changes they look real good for the chanter that wants to be all out utility instead of utility/dps. but personaly i would never use this line i like my 2k+ dps way to much to switch to this line</p><p>AGI-Line the only thing they did here was nerf the casting speed buff of the first ability by 50% !!!!!!!!! i hate this change the only reason i see for this change is to make other lines more desireable by nerfing agi...and still with this nerf i see no reason for a good raiding chanter to switch out of it to on of the other lines..</p><p> all in all the only thing i see impacting chanters is the agi nerf witch sucks but from what ive seen this is a small nerf compaired to what other classes are geting slamed up there [I cannot control my vocabulary].. and with some tinkering with play style and gear i should be able to still hit 2k+ dps...it still pisses me off that they nerf one nonborken line to make other desireable instead of just retooling the other lines and makeing them worth while.  o-well all we can do is roll with the punches and hope they dont break our classes.. </p><p>Dulamar</p><p>70 illusionst</p><p>Lucan</p></blockquote><p>I couldn't have said it better and completely agree with everything you have said here.  A second enchanter chiming in on this issue.</p>

Roriondesexiest
06-13-2007, 02:17 PM
<p>Hehe wrong topic...</p><p>but on AA's if you change the way coercer hate transfer works you will just force people into AGI/INT line for the increased dps so they will be able to transfer more hate.</p><p>Do you guys even play this game?</p>

re1master
06-13-2007, 02:17 PM
<cite>OBK2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please devs, rethink this! Show that you have learned something from the debacle of SWG NGE!!! Please show us that you actually play the game and listen to the community.</blockquote>While relating this to NGE is a bit of a joke (and NGE wasn't exactly SOE's idea IIRC) -- this patch does seem a bit under developed.  First of all, I think in most cases removing the weapon type requirement for AA's would pretty much cover the balancing... Second of all, why nerf the STA line for warriors so hard?  Now I'll have to go like 21 AA's into Slaughtering (for the +10% double attack) in the guardian line to even come close to what I was at pre-nerf.  And even at that I'll still be double attacking 6% less.

Cornbread Muffin
06-13-2007, 02:24 PM
Alexander@Guk wrote: <blockquote><cite>OBK2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please devs, rethink this! Show that you have learned something from the debacle of SWG NGE!!! Please show us that you actually play the game and listen to the community.</blockquote>While relating this to NGE is a bit of a joke (and NGE wasn't exactly SOE's idea IIRC) -- this patch does seem a bit under developed.  First of all, I think in most cases removing the weapon type requirement for AA's would pretty much cover the balancing... Second of all, why nerf the STA line for warriors so hard?  Now I'll have to go like 21 AA's into Slaughtering (for the +10% double attack) in the guardian line to even come close to what I was at pre-nerf.  And even at that I'll still be double attacking 6% less.</blockquote> Be happy, in  just 16 AA points your newly nerfed double attack gives you 266% more DPS improvement than 48 points in Brawler AAs give them.

Skua
06-13-2007, 02:27 PM
Alexander@Guk wrote: <blockquote><cite>OBK2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please devs, rethink this! Show that you have learned something from the debacle of SWG NGE!!! Please show us that you actually play the game and listen to the community.</blockquote>While relating this to NGE is a bit of a joke (and NGE wasn't exactly SOE's idea IIRC) -- this patch does seem a bit under developed.  First of all, I think in most cases removing the weapon type requirement for AA's would pretty much cover the balancing... Second of all, why nerf the STA line for warriors so hard?  <span style="color: #cc0033"><b><u>Now I'll have to go like 21 AA's into Slaughtering (for the +10% double attack) in the guardian line to even come close to what I was at pre-nerf.  And even at that I'll still be double attacking 6% less.</u></b></span></blockquote>that remind me when soe implemented AAs.....

Supp
06-13-2007, 02:43 PM
<p><span style="font-size: xx-large">Is there anyone out there that is happy <u>overall</u>, any one at all? </span>(looks around the <b>WORLD</b>)</p><div align="center">You WoW and VG folks dont get to answer. STHU</div>

Belfrain
06-13-2007, 02:48 PM
Well I think I can come up with the reasoning behind their complete rogue nerfs, but you have to really slip your mind into the [Removed for Content] state that SOE developers trance themselves into to understand it. Every other class but rogues (and ESPECIALLY Swash) got at least something coming in this that can rate as a positive somewhere. So far rogues get to look forward to 1) Redcued hit rate thanks to Coule nerf 2) reduced agro transfer 3) reduced de-agro 4) reduced double attack rate 5) increased re-use timer of lunge reversal by roughly 30% 6) removed double attack dmg from 100% effects like Inspiration and CoB Oh....but THANKS FOR THE PICKPOCKET! WOOOOOOO. That 30 silver per mob really will add up you [Removed for Content] clowns. Now what did we get? Oh thanks so much for the de-agro line boost. You know sooo many rogues in raid guilds rely on that so much! Now with SOE dev thinking, they realize no one uses that piece of crap line so they WANT people to think it is worth taking. So they drop our agro control down and beef up the INT line thinking....hey that should entice them. Well....wrong. That won't entice a DPS class....sooooooolets DROP their DPS to a point they don't even think they are a DPS class...THEN they can take it! Good job again Sony you [Removed for Content]. Now afk to re-roll an assassin. Kilmoll Guk

Foretold
06-13-2007, 02:58 PM
Alexander@Guk wrote: <blockquote><cite>OBK2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please devs, rethink this! Show that you have learned something from the debacle of SWG NGE!!! Please show us that you actually play the game and listen to the community.</blockquote>While relating this to NGE is a bit of a joke (and NGE wasn't exactly SOE's idea IIRC) -- this patch does seem a bit under developed.  First of all, I think in most cases removing the weapon type requirement for AA's would pretty much cover the balancing... Second of all, why nerf the STA line for warriors so hard?  Now I'll have to go like 21 AA's into Slaughtering (for the +10% double attack) in the guardian line to even come close to what I was at pre-nerf.  And even at that I'll still be double attacking 6% less.</blockquote><p>Monks and Bruisers completely LOST their double attack...  at least you still have SOME.</p><p>This whole AA change needs rethinking. </p>

Supp
06-13-2007, 03:11 PM
<p>Yeah, but the rogue's double attack required a 1hander with a free offhand. Since they can DW, and DW'ers will be 1handers, why would they even want a double attack at all? I get the impression that the double attack aa will still require a free offhand.</p><p>/ponder</p>

Wrapye
06-13-2007, 03:20 PM
<cite>TheDragon wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Slackerx wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>im here to represent the Enchanters and give feedback on the aa changes</p><p>STR-Line this line is intended to give chanters melee dps... the attempt to make this line usefull/desireable is a total failure. in order to take this line you would have to give up one of the other dps lines (int/agi) and if you take this line insted of agi/int it will not even come close to the dps done with agi/int so i consider these changes nonexistint at best. they will never be used...</p><p>STA-line  (deagro line) i actual like these changes they look real good for the chanter that wants to be all out utility instead of utility/dps. but personaly i would never use this line i like my 2k+ dps way to much to switch to this line</p><p>AGI-Line the only thing they did here was nerf the casting speed buff of the first ability by 50% !!!!!!!!! i hate this change the only reason i see for this change is to make other lines more desireable by nerfing agi...and still with this nerf i see no reason for a good raiding chanter to switch out of it to on of the other lines..</p><p> all in all the only thing i see impacting chanters is the agi nerf witch sucks but from what ive seen this is a small nerf compaired to what other classes are geting slamed up there [I cannot control my vocabulary].. and with some tinkering with play style and gear i should be able to still hit 2k+ dps...it still pisses me off that they nerf one nonborken line to make other desireable instead of just retooling the other lines and makeing them worth while.  o-well all we can do is roll with the punches and hope they dont break our classes.. </p><p>Dulamar</p><p>70 illusionst</p><p>Lucan</p></blockquote><p>I couldn't have said it better and completely agree with everything you have said here.  A second enchanter chiming in on this issue.</p><p>Mazrim</p><p>70 illusionist</p><p>Unrest </p></blockquote>Perhaps 'Illusionist' would have been better than 'Enchanter', as Illusionists are now pretty much dps-oriented, while coercers can be utility oriented.  I couldn't really care less about the AGI line, as I don't have it. The change to the STA line, in conjunction with the lower hate transfer/deaggro that scouts have, will allow those coercers who have it to put the tank on top of the hate list again. I do agree, as I posted earlier, that the STR line will remain unused.  Nothing short of a total revamp of the line - not just adjusting abilities but developing new ones in their stead - will get enchanters to use that line.  I'm sure there are casters out there that for RP reasons like to get into melee.  It just isn't going to be an effective method of attack regardless of how you slice it, though.  If you like the idea of casting nukes and being able to get up close and personal, play a shadowknight (which I do as well).

Arbreth
06-13-2007, 03:28 PM
<p>Y'all are scaring me and I was one that truly hoped that they had actually fixed the Shaman KoS tree to reflect the fact that we are supposed to be healers...  I hated the old tree, and am now only filling it up becuase I need to do something with those points.</p><p> Why nerf anything?  Removing the weapon requirements to me seemed good (though it did teach me how to use the new macro system to swap weapons/ cast and put my favored toy back).  If the idea was to make the other lines more desirable, why did they just not do that?</p><p> I am looking forward to not needing to cast, cast, cast, cast for Puppy's sake everytime he saves my life, but even as I do not raid, I can understand the concern of a permanant aggro magnet tied to his tail.</p><p> However, the idea here is to provide feedback to the Developers on what is, and is not working, preferably AFTER you have actually gotten in game to see those changes and have played with them.  Eight pages of blasting just in response to the proposed changes is a bit much, remember, things can change, and often do.  (Remember the War of the Wargs?)  </p><p>Please stop with the cursing the developers, do not thank them if you are unhappy, but they do not deserve the bashing I have seen either.  Go to Test, test the tree, respond with constructive suggestions, otherwise you all just sound like whiney brats.</p><p>That said, I will put aside my Mommy-ness and take a gander myself to see if I should really be worried or not.</p>

Snorm
06-13-2007, 03:33 PM
<p>Sure thing. I'll have my entire raid force copy their toons out to test tonight, and we'll give the new AA's a go. I believe my exact words will be, 'Suck it up, slackers! A night of loot is a small price for more throughly tested combat changes we all have to live with.' </p><p>Oh, wait. You can't actually get toons on to test... <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p>

Microphage
06-13-2007, 03:39 PM
<cite>Supple wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: xx-large"><span style="font-size: small">Is there anyone out there that is happy <u>overall</u>, any one at all?</span> </span>(looks around the <b>WORLD</b>)</p><div align="center">You WoW and VG folks dont get to answer. STHU</div></blockquote><p>Heh heh, very few people are 'happy' with change, <b>any</b> change.  If it was all buffs we would have a stream of rants about how class A was buffed more than class B.  Frankly, <b>I don't know if I'm happy or not because I haven't actually <u>tested</u> anything</b>.  </p><p>I will say that the changes to the brawler lines look intriguing.  Yes we lose barehanded double attacks, but all in all it appears to be a net buff.  The reality could be very different, and even then the final result after testing may be different.</p>

Obadiah
06-13-2007, 03:40 PM
<cite>Supple wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: xx-large">Is there anyone out there that is happy <u>overall</u>, any one at all? </span>(looks around the <b>WORLD</b>)</p><div align="center">You WoW and VG folks dont get to answer. STHU</div></blockquote><p>Overall, yes. Very much so with respect to the classes I play. I didn't care for VG, and although I tried WoW, I didn't inhale.</p><p>1. My eldest character is a Berserker. I hate how there's not even debate anymore (before this). The Stamina/Buckler line rules to roost. So I'm glad to see it weakened a bit. I think it's wholly appropriate. Now the debate can begin anew. And juicing up the Agi line . . . wow. . . might even have to throw THAT one into the debate now as well. I'd like more improvements to the Wisdom line myself, but overall, yeah, I'm happy. </p><p>2. 2nd most often used character is a Defiler. I can't wait to get home and kick my dog (though not as hard as THEY did <img src="/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />&nbsp<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />. I have 7 or 8 points in Ancestral Authoritah, but I don't mind the crit hit reduction. I'm a healer. Who cares if I only crit 80%? So what . . . my farming gets slowed down slightly? Might actually consider the Wisdom line now too. Would have liked to have seen more improvements to Sta though, like apply Herbal Expertise to group cures too. Still about the only thing I like about that line is having the Witchdoctor title. (Thank you, David Seville)</p><p>3. Among my favorite toons is my Necro. So obviously turning pet enhancements into permanent buffs a la the EoF lines is beautiful, I don't think anyone would disagree. Love that. BUT, I also am the ONE person that went down the Agility line . . . and the changes to that ROCK. Instant Resummon, WOO! Stamina line changes would be fantastic for a solo Necro too.</p><p>4. Bard changes. Is there (or was there) a worse end-line ability than Coin Toss? 50% increase to HOs may still not be all that and a harem of lamias, but between that and the improvements to the Int 3 & 4 abilities, that line looks ... interesting, at least, as does the revamped Stamina line. </p><p>I'm level 67, but I only have about 27 AAs with my Swashbuckler. He's a POS. (um, that's Pirate Ogre Swash, but whatever else you were thinking probably applies to this particullar Swash) So I won't comment on those. My young Warlock appreciates some of the Sorceror changes though too. </p><p>Somehow I knew a change this substantial would bring out the cries of SWG.</p>

Emerix
06-13-2007, 03:50 PM
<p>I see it like a guildy of mine who happens to be a rogue .</p><p>They make us all suck since the game is too easy and so they can make us suck less in the new add on . </p>

Themaginator
06-13-2007, 03:54 PM
<cite>Supple wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: xx-large">Is there anyone out there that is happy <u>overall</u>, any one at all? </span>(looks around the <b>WORLD</b>)</p><div align="center">You WoW and VG folks dont get to answer. STHU</div></blockquote>im fine ...i wasnt nerfed at all nor were the other 3 classes i play, ofcourse you guys can never be happy with anything so yeah, just shut up...i dont think anyone on these forums has posted anything positive even when theres something positive to post about.

Janto
06-13-2007, 03:57 PM
<p>I think that the changes to the brawler line are a bit extreme....the double attack line was a great choice for those of us leveling a brawler but not really a choice for those raiding. I feel that should keep this as a double attack skill and simply lower the % to around 8-10%.... I dont see a brawler class not being able to double attack....</p><p> Plus the idea was to make lines more appealing not force people into other lines but nerfing the already good ones to being worthless...Instead of nerfing good achievement choices go back and buff up the weak ones...add some of those new skills you have suggestion in place of poor ones in other lines. Dont take away good skills like double attack for poor combat arts damage %</p>

Supp
06-13-2007, 03:58 PM
Ubriaco@Everfrost wrote: <blockquote>3. Among my favorite toons is my Necro. So obviously turning pet enhancements into permanent buffs a la the EoF lines is beautiful, I don't think anyone would disagree. Love that. BUT, I also am the ONE person that went down the Agility line . . . and the changes to that ROCK. Instant Resummon, WOO! Stamina line changes would be fantastic for a solo Necro too.</blockquote><p>Im holding out tentatively on that one. I'm not convinced that 20% scout pet double attack is equal to 13.6% crit chance. You arent the only one that went down the AGI line. I have it too. I must say I love the pet teleport end line ability, though I will appreciate this instant resummon ability, in part because it will free up the 5 AAs I spent in the EoF tree for summoning time. If the double attack is on par with the crit chance, Im happy with that change. </p><p>What Im not happy with is this business of necro's being included in the group of DPS'ers that are having the biggest overall general DPS nerf. I am a DPS class with a side order of utility, yet the predators, sorcerers and most notably conjuror's have a significantly higher potential for numbers than a necro. Conjuror's have significantly more dps than a necro, though they are intended to be a high T2 dps class, just like necro's are now, but they are currently a high T1, second only to the assassin. </p><p>I understand that that's not right because of what teir they are supposed to be in, but I dont begrudge them that. I love the necro motif and all the cool pets, whereas the conjuror equivalent is bland and boring. That is the primary tradeoff that keeps making me a happy necro even though I dont compare to conjuror DPS. But if they're gonna nerf the big boys, dont include the necros. Dont just lump us all together as summoner's because we dont DPS the same. </p>

Supp
06-13-2007, 04:04 PM
<p>Im pretty sure I know what will happen anyway. A couple months after this change goes into effect, we will all have respecd to our liking, raided with those respecs, compared ourselves to our comrades, and then will have accepted this as the new norm. We will forget our prior greatness, and take solice in our then-current greatness. I suppose it's an inevitability. Those who cant accept it will quit. Those who were tentative may add it to the growing list of mental notations they are taking in relation to their desire to continue playing. Those were not affected will not care. But, it will pass. And they know that.</p><p>I dont think this change compares to the SWG revamp that cause so much damage. Ive never heard anyone say anything positive about that SWG change, and it's been at least what, a year? And still, the people I know consider it a dead game. That was a truly destructive blow that is very rare, so I dont agree that that's this. For what it's worth though, Im pretty sure that if the SWG Devs knew this would happen, they wouldnt have done it. Seriously, it's such a blot on their record that it would have been better if the game had never existed. lol</p>

ChrisRay
06-13-2007, 04:08 PM
I dont know if this has been answered. And I am sorry if it has. I assume we'll get a free achievement reset when these changes go live?     

Themaginator
06-13-2007, 04:20 PM
<cite>Janto wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I think that the changes to the brawler line are a bit extreme....the double attack line was a great choice for those of us leveling a brawler but not really a choice for those raiding. I feel that should keep this as a double attack skill and simply lower the % to around 8-10%.... I dont see a brawler class not being able to double attack....</p><p> Plus the idea was to make lines more appealing not force people into other lines but nerfing the already good ones to being worthless...Instead of nerfing good achievement choices go back and buff up the weak ones...add some of those new skills you have suggestion in place of poor ones in other lines. Dont take away good skills like double attack for poor combat arts damage %</p></blockquote> my brawler friend loved the changes.

Haciv
06-13-2007, 04:31 PM
<cite>ChrisRay wrote:</cite><blockquote>I dont know if this has been answered. And I am sorry if it has. I assume we'll get a free achievement reset when these changes go live?      </blockquote> Was wondering the same thing.  I'd assume so since the changes are so drastic.

Thoral
06-13-2007, 04:46 PM
<p>I must be misunderstanding something.  Did SOE just effectively remove unarmed combat from the game?  From day 1, I rolled a bruiser so that I could trash bozos with my bare hands.  What's the point of a brawler now?</p>

Kaleyen
06-13-2007, 04:49 PM
<cite>Thoral wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>What's the point of a brawler now?</p></blockquote>To sit back with the Rangers and chuck your throwing stars at the mobs and compete with the Ranger beside you for DPS?

Ravaan
06-13-2007, 04:49 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>im fine ...i wasnt nerfed at all nor were the other 3 classes i play, ofcourse you guys can never be happy with anything so yeah, just shut up...i dont think anyone on these forums has posted anything positive even when theres something positive to post about. </blockquote><p> well of course you're fine, they could take away every skill and just make us all use auto attack and you will put a positive spin on it "well combat was too complicated this is a good change"</p><p>It's called you're a fanboy, everything SOE does is great!.</p>

Foretold
06-13-2007, 04:57 PM
<cite>Thoral wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I must be misunderstanding something.  Did SOE just effectively remove unarmed combat from the game?  From day 1, I rolled a bruiser so that I could trash bozos with my bare hands.  What's the point of a brawler now?</p></blockquote><p> That seems to be the case, yes.  And they completely removed double attack from the brawler AA tree.  Completely.  Removed.  It.  Didn't just reduce it to compensate for weapons in hand.  Removed.</p><p>Completely.</p><p>Seems a brawler should be able to double attack.  And barefisted fighting seems to me to be a pretty class-defining method of attack, I'd think.</p>

blazerpuppies79
06-13-2007, 05:05 PM
Oephelia@Najena wrote: <blockquote><cite>Thoral wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I must be misunderstanding something.  Did SOE just effectively remove unarmed combat from the game?  From day 1, I rolled a bruiser so that I could trash bozos with my bare hands.  What's the point of a brawler now?</p></blockquote><p> That seems to be the case, yes.  And they completely removed double attack from the brawler AA tree.  Completely.  Removed.  It.  Didn't just reduce it to compensate for weapons in hand.  Removed.</p><p>Completely.</p><p>Seems a brawler should be able to double attack.  And barefisted fighting seems to me to be a pretty class-defining method of attack, I'd think.</p></blockquote>While fighting unarmed you're not even dual-wielding(boggle<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />.  Why can't they just buff the other trees while leaving the good ones alone?

Couching
06-13-2007, 05:33 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote><cite>Janto wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I think that the changes to the brawler line are a bit extreme....the double attack line was a great choice for those of us leveling a brawler but not really a choice for those raiding. I feel that should keep this as a double attack skill and simply lower the % to around 8-10%.... I dont see a brawler class not being able to double attack....</p><p> Plus the idea was to make lines more appealing not force people into other lines but nerfing the already good ones to being worthless...Instead of nerfing good achievement choices go back and buff up the weak ones...add some of those new skills you have suggestion in place of poor ones in other lines. Dont take away good skills like double attack for poor combat arts damage %</p></blockquote> my brawler friend loved the changes. </blockquote>I am really disappointed in this change. Brawlers have two serious problems that have to be fixed in high end raid. First is dps and second is aggro control. For dps, we get almost zero boost for consistence dps. We still have only 18% critical hit comparing to war 22% critical hit. Why? Care to give any reason? Also, we still have ZERO passive double attack. Moreover, you boost all plate tanks aoe to 40% and give us 16% with less damages. The replaced skill for double attack is 6% CA damage. Do you know how much damage is a full master monk in raid? Let me tell you, it's around 500 dps. The 6% CA is about 30 dps. It's too ridiculous comparing to war or crusader tree. For aggro control, all plate tanks have passive taunt, 2 encounter taunts and different kind of aoe rescue or heavy aoe CAs to hold multiple mobs in raids. Now you even give them 40% frontal aoe to help them in dps and aggro control. Where is passive taunt and 2nd encounter taunt for brawler? or at least give us 40% frontal aoe so that we can have a chance to hold multiple mobs in raids. With new KOS tree, berserker will still out damage brawler in high end raid and guardian will be even. Though, don't forget, they can still tank way better than brawlers. <b>Overall, if you don't want brawler to out damage your favorite class such as berserker, at least give us a boost on aggro control. How about replacing 6% CA to a pure aoe hate skill so that we can have a chance to tank add mobs in raids</b>?

Niffoni
06-13-2007, 05:54 PM
As entertaining as girly message board slap-fights are to watch, I think folks would be better served to discuss the proposed changes rather than resort to childish theatrics.  That's what this forum is theoretically for.

JohnDoe058
06-13-2007, 06:04 PM
<cite>Niffoni wrote:</cite><blockquote>As entertaining as girly message board slap-fights are to watch, I think folks would be better served to discuss the proposed changes rather than resort to childish theatrics.  That's what this forum is theoretically for. </blockquote>So we're childish because we disagree with you, or what the dev's are doing here?  Or we're childish because you don't happen to like what we're saying?  You are the only person here who has NOT posted something helpful, relevant to the topic, so STHU.

OBK2
06-13-2007, 06:17 PM
Oephelia@Najena wrote: <blockquote>Alexander@Guk wrote: <blockquote><cite>OBK2 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Please devs, rethink this! Show that you have learned something from the debacle of SWG NGE!!! Please show us that you actually play the game and listen to the community.</blockquote>While relating this to NGE is a bit of a joke (and NGE wasn't exactly SOE's idea IIRC) -- this patch does seem a bit under developed.  First of all, I think in most cases removing the weapon type requirement for AA's would pretty much cover the balancing... Second of all, why nerf the STA line for warriors so hard?  Now I'll have to go like 21 AA's into Slaughtering (for the +10% double attack) in the guardian line to even come close to what I was at pre-nerf.  And even at that I'll still be double attacking 6% less.</blockquote><p>Monks and Bruisers completely LOST their double attack...  at least you still have SOME.</p><p>This whole AA change needs rethinking. </p></blockquote><p>While I agree that NGE was someting huge and much bigger than this it is still pretty much the same thing. It seems like the devs are not listening to the community or even playing the game(?). I have been praising EQ2 all over the place the last couple of months for how good it has become and then they just slap the whole community in the face. Maybe not as bad as with NGE but hardly good for business, and you should not underestimate the power of an unhappy community.</p><p>Personally I play a coercer as my main and I have to say for us the changes are quite small even if the changes made seems to be somewhat weird (hate transfer changes that makes no sense) but I really hope the devs read in on the feedback posted here on the forums and rethink what they are about to do. </p>

Niffoni
06-13-2007, 06:24 PM
<cite>JohnDoe058 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Niffoni wrote:</cite><blockquote>As entertaining as girly message board slap-fights are to watch, I think folks would be better served to discuss the proposed changes rather than resort to childish theatrics.  That's what this forum is theoretically for. </blockquote>So we're childish because we disagree with you, or what the dev's are doing here?  Or we're childish because you don't happen to like what we're saying?  You are the only person here who has NOT posted something helpful, relevant to the topic, so STHU. </blockquote> Thanks for the demonstration <img src="/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> In an attempt to re-rail this, it certainly seems at though a major target of the changes has been aggro management.  I seem to recall folks calling for more skill when managing aggro, and that the AAs were becoming a crutch here, and this could well indicate that the devs are hoping for that sort of change.  I only hope that ample time is granted to test the balancing on this as it is spread across many classes, and that's usually asking for trouble.

JohnDoe058
06-13-2007, 06:30 PM
<cite>Niffoni wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>JohnDoe058 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Niffoni wrote:</cite><blockquote>As entertaining as girly message board slap-fights are to watch, I think folks would be better served to discuss the proposed changes rather than resort to childish theatrics.  That's what this forum is theoretically for. </blockquote>So we're childish because we disagree with you, or what the dev's are doing here?  Or we're childish because you don't happen to like what we're saying?  You are the only person here who has NOT posted something helpful, relevant to the topic, so STHU. </blockquote> Thanks for the demonstration <img src="/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></blockquote><p>Yeah, no [Removed for Content] we're a bit upset about these changes, and your trolling here isn't even remotely productive.  Should we tone it down, to please your stupid, worthless butt?  Don't tell us to be quiet, just because you don't like what we're saying. </p>

Agaxiq
06-13-2007, 06:37 PM
<cite>blazerpuppies79 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oephelia@Najena wrote: <blockquote><cite>Thoral wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I must be misunderstanding something.  Did SOE just effectively remove unarmed combat from the game?  From day 1, I rolled a bruiser so that I could trash bozos with my bare hands.  What's the point of a brawler now?</p></blockquote><p> That seems to be the case, yes.  And they completely removed double attack from the brawler AA tree.  Completely.  Removed.  It.  Didn't just reduce it to compensate for weapons in hand.  Removed.</p><p>Completely.</p><p>Seems a brawler should be able to double attack.  And barefisted fighting seems to me to be a pretty class-defining method of attack, I'd think.</p></blockquote>While fighting unarmed you're not even dual-wielding(boggle<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />.  Why can't they just buff the other trees while leaving the good ones alone? </blockquote> Yes, it will be pointless to go unarmed now.  At least in the past, before AA's, our offensive stance had a VERY LARGE proc while fighting unarmed.  However, adding that back might not be enough.  That proc was severely nerfed anyways. All this does is give us less variety - each tree now adds some DPS with the any weapon layout - this ruining the whole point of the AA trees -  Before I could do a bare-fist setup, a 2H tree, or a dual-wield setup, now it won't matter. I'll check it out, assuming we get a free respec, but I'm not holding my hopes up. agressiv

Supp
06-13-2007, 06:47 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>im fine ...i wasnt nerfed at all nor were the other 3 classes i play, ofcourse you guys can never be happy with anything so yeah, just shut up...i dont think anyone on these forums has posted anything positive even when theres something positive to post about. </blockquote><p>You see this part fanboy? </p><p><span style="color: #cc3300">General</span></p><ul><li><span style="color: #cc3300">Damage was reduced at the higher levels based on class. Rogues, predators, sorcerers and summoners had the greatest reduction. </span></li></ul><p>You're nerfed bro. You're nerfed. </p><p>As a matter of fact, I wouldnt be surpised if of the classes on that list, your conjuror was hit the hardest, since conjurors are supposed to be a high T2 but are currently a high T1 DPS class.</p>

Foretold
06-13-2007, 06:50 PM
<cite>Supple wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>im fine ...i wasnt nerfed at all nor were the other 3 classes i play, ofcourse you guys can never be happy with anything so yeah, just shut up...i dont think anyone on these forums has posted anything positive even when theres something positive to post about. </blockquote><p>You see this part fanboy? </p><p><span style="color: #cc3300">General</span></p><ul><li><span style="color: #cc3300">Damage was reduced at the higher levels based on class. Rogues, predators, sorcerers and summoners had the greatest reduction. </span></li></ul><p>You're nerfed bro. You're nerfed. </p><p>As a matter of fact, I wouldnt be surpised if of the classes on that list, your conjuror was hit the hardest, since conjurors are supposed to be a high T2 but are currently a high T1 DPS class.</p></blockquote>That's PvP only... and Shashtan lives on Mistmoore server, judging by his username.  Doesn't make him any less of a fanboy <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Zarafein
06-13-2007, 07:24 PM
<p>My main is a swashbuckler(pve) and i'am happy for the slight wisdom nerf(yes you don't need to post before after comparison to show i'am wrong or something thanks!) so those swashbucklers which took the line just because its best may switch to dual wield and those which liked fencing can still do it without beeing useless.</p><p>To brawlers.. imo eye of the tiger has to be significantly better to be usefull.</p>

Shackleton1
06-13-2007, 08:11 PM
<p>As a swashy, I'm not *too* bothered about a generic drop in dps.</p><p>I'm also not *that* worried about the agro changes. I think it's risky, and if it isn't properly balanced then it has the potential to be game breaking until it's balanced properly, and I think it's unwise to make such sweeping changes all in one go, I think they'd be better off doing it a bit at a time... but that's their call and if they don't do it right I'll scream at them when the time comes.</p><p>What I *am* worried about is this idea of choice in the AA lines. I like being a fencer. However, I forsee two possibilities, and at present I don't know whether or not these will be the case (and won't unless we get some more numeric details).</p><p>Possibility A: AGI becomes superior (not equal to) WIS. Need to take STR line for debuffs, need to take AGI line for dps. Result: WIS line no longer viable.</p><p>Possibility B: Agro management requires INT line. Need to take STR line for debuffs, need to take INT line to stay alive. Result: WIS line no longer viable.</p><p>This is supposed to be about opening up choice. Have to be very careful that it really does open up choice, as opposed to just forcing us into a different set of default necessary lines. Especially the case with the INT line. Either you have enough de-agro or you don't. Either INT line is useless or it's essential. There really isn't much grey area.</p><p>Really hope the devs know what they're doing because this does have the potential to strike a hammer blow to my enjoyment of the game, and would be such a shame considering the hitherto exceptionally development that's been ongoing.</p>

Samulbrar
06-13-2007, 08:31 PM
<cite>JohnDoe058 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Niffoni wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>JohnDoe058 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Niffoni wrote:</cite><blockquote>As entertaining as girly message board slap-fights are to watch, I think folks would be better served to discuss the proposed changes rather than resort to childish theatrics.  That's what this forum is theoretically for. </blockquote>So we're childish because we disagree with you, or what the dev's are doing here?  Or we're childish because you don't happen to like what we're saying?  You are the only person here who has NOT posted something helpful, relevant to the topic, so STHU. </blockquote> Thanks for the demonstration <img src="/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></blockquote><p>Yeah, no [I cannot control my vocabulary] we're a bit upset about these changes, and your trolling here isn't even remotely productive.  Should we tone it down, to please your stupid, worthless butt?  Don't tell us to be quiet, just because you don't like what we're saying. </p></blockquote>Let's not go down this path.

Hanokh
06-14-2007, 01:46 AM
SWG-Tunso wrote: <blockquote><p>Thanks everybody for your impassioned input on this proposed change. Based upon that, we've decided to shelve it for now and will explore different alternatives in upcoming publishes ...</p></blockquote><p>The SWG dev team listened last month to the player base regarding a huge nerf to healing and it never made it to the live game.  Let's hope that the EQ II team has the guts to "shelve" this proposed travesty.</p><p>Why the need to break what is working and refuse to work on what is broken?  If some AA lines are unpopular, revamp those and leave the rest alone.  How hard is that to understand?  Provide 5 attractive alternatives and diversity will flourish.  Provide 5 useless, nerfed alternatives and the choices become meaningless.</p><p>   </p>

Cocytus
06-14-2007, 03:27 AM
<p>Very, very well said Hanokh. </p><p>The Sony devs have been met by a massive joining of players in general who do not want these changes to go through.</p><p>Yet despite this, I sadly think they will ignore us.</p><p>People are comfortable with the way things are now. The only people that have been complaining are on PVP servers and unskilled players. Therefore, changes (such as the double attack not procing 100% procs) need to be confined to PVP servers ONLY. Also, There is no reason whatsoever to close the gap between skilled players and unskilled players. Skilled players should shine, not be punished.</p><p>The way it's going now..there's no point in playing the game for competition really. It's just becoming communism. There'll be no reason to be better. There'll be no reason to be good. There'll no way to stand out as a skilled player, because people who aren't as good will always complain about people doing better than them and screaming for nerfs.</p><p>And I have a dreadful feeling that the devs will forever cater to bumbling idiots.</p>

Armawk
06-14-2007, 03:44 AM
<p>IN TESTING FEEDBACK</p><p>Nothing bad looking from my perspective yet. Only had a few brief sessions, but the AA changes to my character seem sensible.</p>

Timaarit
06-14-2007, 03:49 AM
Are you a raider?

Verios-EQ2
06-14-2007, 04:05 AM
<cite>Timaarit wrote:</cite><blockquote>Are you a raider? </blockquote> Lets not start that argument again shall we?

Arethu
06-14-2007, 04:25 AM
<cite>Verios-EQ2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Timaarit wrote:</cite><blockquote>Are you a raider? </blockquote> Lets not start that argument again shall we? </blockquote>Why not? How many times I had died in EOF raids zones how many was the time expended, Im not talking about plat for mender yet. So Now the devs came here to nerf aa trees? C'mon they should nerf the epics mobs instead and make our life easier and fun.  As a Templar my crit meele is 102% crit with my gear. It doesnt make me a dps class but helps when Im soloing, I was having fun playing but now it is nerfed to 80% for what reason? Because they want drive me to out of the game to WOW maybe? Who Knows. Mixing nice but not much important updates such a dressing room with a nerf to make less our pain does not work. Done forget that we are nerd geeks and wanna be of... Reconsider the nerf, please. Why in the hell you devs  gave us something good to take it alway later. Why you guys are so cruel. Nor fair, NOT FAIR.

Timaarit
06-14-2007, 04:33 AM
<cite>Verios-EQ2 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Timaarit wrote:</cite><blockquote>Are you a raider? </blockquote> Lets not start that argument again shall we? </blockquote>Why not? After all vast majority of the population will end up raiding at least once and most of them will want more. But I can rephrase. Are you a person who likes raiding?

Armawk
06-14-2007, 04:41 AM
Excuse me, you think TEMPLARS got nerfed?? my soloing templar looks good through this, I think I like the new steadfast version especially.

Ordate
06-14-2007, 04:49 AM
<p>First, I would like to say thank you for acknowledging that some of the lines just were not worth anything.  Please in the future start listening to the players during beta.  Some of the classes knew certain paths would never be used during the beta of the respective expansions.  But they were not changed then.  I also request that some of the class specific trees (eof) get looked at very soon.  There are tons of skills that will never see a point spent in them.</p><p>Second, I know that the notes that just hit for the test server are just that test, but let me point out some highlights from the mystic perspective.</p><p>(str) 1.  Dogdog not required for skills in other trees besides str.  A great fix.  Shaman have stated from day one that with dogdog being so frail you had to go to the end line in str to even use him as the smallest ae's kills him, even from group mobs.  I still hold that a better solution would be to make the dog himself ae immune and allow the end skill in str to remain how it is for the rest of it.</p><p>2.  For those that will continue with the dog, not having to cast those pet buffs over and over will be nice.  One favor though.  Can you look into reducing his cast time as well?  We arent going to kick him out over and over to have him tank for us even if you cut his cast time in half.</p><p>a.  Brought up on the mystic forums, some people will miss not having rit aggression that was under the wisdom tree.  (I think a minority, but ones still actually liked that skill.)</p><p>b.  Also brought up on the mystic boards.  Pet ward has some concern as you would no longer be able to not have it up.  This is sometimes desireable as you have a tank that is less then attentive/not so good.</p><p>(sta) 3.  Will crippling bash retain its debuff portion?  One of the main reasons to pick up that skill before.</p><p>4.  Herbal expertise.  A pretty good skill.  Increasing the casting cost reduction on the skill makes it a slightly more viable choice.  I think the mystic tree (eof) tree was built with this skill in mind.  However, the problem is the bonuses that you get in that tree are pretty much nil.  More on this below.</p><p>5.  Coagulate.  If this is cross raid might be ok for mystic, else pretty much a defiler only skill (and they dont have cures in their class tree) so likely still wont be used.  The highlight of that line (4th skill) is cures.  Cures are marginally important in groups but important to raiders.  As such please do your research on who will and wont pick up this skill.  The ones that have a chance at it if coagulate is group only are raid guild mystics that dont have a defiler.</p><p>Still an overall weak line.  There isn't anything that will cause me to pound down the door to pick this up.  If the mystic cure tree was much stronger, perhaps then.  Otherwise I think most will not elect this tree.  Block harm is a big question mark.  Is it self only?  Other players?  Cross raid?  If it is castable on others might be worth getting this line for that skill.  Otherwise this line remains dead.</p><p>(wis) 6. Whole wisdom line.  Are these self only?  Group?  Could be good, could be great, could be meh.  Some very promising skills from the descriptions.  If it is done right this could be a feasable alternative to the normal str/agi build.</p><p>(int) 7.  Intelligence line.  Could be an amusing alternative.  Better for defilers then mystics.  The two end skills could be amazing.  Immunities could be a winner enough to draw mystics to this line as well.  Again unknown based on numbers.  I think you will see some defiler builds with this line and a very few mystics unless immunties is overpowered.</p><p>(agi - the big one, with only one change) 8.  Or perhaps I should call this 8 + however many skills are in the EoF Mystic AA tree that arent buff related.  I say this because of the complete wreck of a tree that mystic's got in EoF.</p><p>The Buff branch is a good tree.  Not over powered, has some nice skills to pick up in it.</p><p>The rez tree is an absolute joke.  Yes death happens but it makes more sense to spend points to stop death from happening or even dps then it does to go "I Failed, I better get good at helping others because I suck!"  IF this was EQ1 and everyone got crap skills that the very last of their aa points would be put into, this would be ours.  Its trash.  Eating less as in EQ1 would be worth more then this branch.  Stated by a multitude mystics and defilers (the defilers felt sorry for us) since EoF beta.</p><p>Cures.  The advantage you get from putting points into these skills is spotty at best.  The trauma one is ok as well as ancient balm if you didnt have to spend a lot of points to get to it.  But otherwise it is a lot of points with little to no end help to us doing our job.  The change outlined above might make these skills a very fraction small more viable but they will still remain relatively useless.  The last skill also needs to prevent charm as stated in the skill description and still needs some help to be useful.  Overall this branch rates "do I have to put points into this?"  Which is slightly better then the rez tree but still rubish.  If this branch was better you might see mystics make builds using the sta line and this set.</p><p>Combat arts and the change to the agility line.  The despairing mystic having invested his points into his buff tree and dings that aa where he has to look elsewhere.  He examines the tree and cringes.  Every skill by itself is horrid.  But wait!  I get a skill in the KoS tree that makes my combat art tree viable!  So the mystic respecs off intelligence and goes to agility.  (Yes I was a str/int and not a str/agi mystic prior to eof)  </p><p>This is where I am worried.  By itself the combat art tree is not so good.  If it is looked at as a stand alone tree it is only marginally better then cures.  There are 2 main advantages to this branch.  One is that the casting time for dps'ing is reduced.  The other is that with maxed out crits it made each spell a slight damage increase.  It also opens up what weapons we can use some as we look for long delay weapons otherwise.  I had been using some shorter delay as I could still ca between swings and only would loose swings on heals/debuffs.  While the dps with the perfect weapon could get a little high under very strict circumstances (you need a certain 2hander from a certain contested)  and the right group, for the most part it was an "ok" damage increase for the cost of 42aa.  Thats a significant investment.  More so for a healer.  Granted, we gained dps from two sources, swinging more often, and just a small raw damage nudge to our damage "spells".  But at a heavy cost.</p><p>What all this means is that while you might achieve to bring down our dps some you also make the one branch that pretty much all mystics go to in our eof tree (by force not choice) worse.  For a class that has probably one of the worst eof trees this is another hard blow.  And the really sad part is, while you may get some mystics to get off the str line in the KoS tree many of us will still stay with agility as otherwise 25ish points in our EOF tree is wasted.  You will have only partially accomplished your goal of giving us a true choice between skills.  Aka we can finally go off the strength line.  But we are still pigeon-holed into agility by EoF.  So I beg please look at the mystic EoF tree as well.  Drop the rez tree and replace it, make the cure tree viable or replace it, and make the combat art tree viable stand alone or replace it if you truely wish to give us choice between trees and not just nerf us since we started dps'ing as we had no other choice.</p>

Zabjade
06-14-2007, 04:51 AM
<span style="color: #00cc00">As Timaarit stated in another thread, the reason you don't have much Brawler feedback (Good or bad) from High end raiding guild is because there are <b>FEW to NO</b> <b>brawlers in said guilds</b> other then as nonraiding alts. </span>

Danthalas
06-14-2007, 05:48 AM
<p>I am not particularly happy with those changes from a raiding monk point of view (and for a general brawler as well to be honest).</p><p><u>Double Attack</u>:</p><p>As many brawlers, I took the weapons restrictions change like  possible good news, one that would at least help us a bit...giving us the possibilily to double attack with our weapons. Of course, 90+% would have probably be unbalancing, but about 30% would have been great.</p><p>The removal of the double attack AA will hurt a lot the young brawlers and most of the higher ones who might not have the opportunity to get some T7 fabled weapons which make us "decent". As for the raiding point of view, we'll still be lacking in DPS and as a consequence in aggro.</p><p><u>Upgrading CA Damages</u>:</p><p> The idea to improve CA damages in itself isn't bad. But as a few brawlers allready reported, CA damages are only about a half of our DPS, a 6% increase is quite too low. Either pump it up or/and if you still want to get us rid of our double attack, put back the DPS buff mod at least.</p><p><u>Crane Twirl</u>:</p><p>Improving the amount of the proc rate is decent, but why decrease the damages...We are allready lacking in AE attack potential and AE aggro so it isn't really welcome. Either put back the damages were they went or, maybe, add a hate proc to the skill. This would help us slighty.</p><p><u>Mitigation Boost</u>:</p><p>Putting back some mitigation boost AA is a good thing, but barely 300 mitigation at rank 8 is a bit watered. I'd really like to see it pumped up a bit or "gasp" put something like a chance to generate aggro when it or avoiding.</p><p><u>Chi</u>:</p><p>Altho it might sound nice on the paper, a 15 mins recast (if i am correct) is meh.</p><p><u>Crane Flock</u>:</p><p>Good change.</p><p>To summarize, brawlers are supposed to be in the top of the fighter branch DPS and on the lower side for tanking. We are pretty low at tanking on the raiding scene (tho we might be ok at usual heroic stuff), and we are also low with DPS. With the AA revamp you have a chance to help a kinda broken class so think about the changes which you have made...they aren't quite adequate in my view.</p><p>Regards,</p><p>Ambre</p><p>Monk and Officer of Unity, Splitpaw.</p>

Themaginator
06-14-2007, 06:01 AM
Ambre@Splitpaw wrote: <blockquote><p>I am not particularly happy with those changes from a raiding monk point of view (and for a general brawler as well to be honest).</p><p><u>Double Attack</u>:</p><p>As many brawlers, I took the weapons restrictions change like  possible good news, one that would at least help us a bit...giving us the possibilily to double attack with our weapons. Of course, 90+% would have probably be unbalancing, but about 30% would have been great.</p><p>The removal of the double attack AA will hurt a lot the young brawlers and most of the higher ones who might not have the opportunity to get some T7 fabled weapons which make us "decent". As for the raiding point of view, we'll still be lacking in DPS and as a consequence in aggro.</p><p><u>Upgrading CA Damages</u>:</p><p> The idea to improve CA damages in itself isn't bad. But as a few brawlers allready reported, CA damages are only about a half of our DPS, a 6% increase is quite too low. Either pump it up or/and if you still want to get us rid of our double attack, put back the DPS buff mod at least.</p><p><u>Crane Twirl</u>:</p><p>Improving the amount of the proc rate is decent, but why decrease the damages...We are allready lacking in AE attack potential and AE aggro so it isn't really welcome. Either put back the damages were they went or, maybe, add a hate proc to the skill. This would help us slighty.</p><p><u>Mitigation Boost</u>:</p><p>Putting back some mitigation boost AA is a good thing, but barely 300 mitigation at rank 8 is a bit watered. I'd really like to see it pumped up a bit or "gasp" put something like a chance to generate aggro when it or avoiding.</p><p><u>Chi</u>:</p><p>Altho it might sound nice on the paper, a 15 mins recast (if i am correct) is meh.</p><p><u>Crane Flock</u>:</p><p>Good change.</p><p>To summarize, brawlers are supposed to be in the top of the fighter branch DPS and on the lower side for tanking. We are pretty low at tanking on the raiding scene (tho we might be ok at usual heroic stuff), and we are also low with DPS. With the AA revamp you have a chance to help a kinda broken class so think about the changes which you have made...they aren't quite adequate in my view.</p><p>Regards,</p><p>Ambre</p><p>Monk and Officer of Unity, Splitpaw.</p></blockquote>just for future reference, this is how to complain, and not look like a total jerk lol calm and cool and not yelling at SOE or calling the doom of the game.  On the 15 minute recast thing on the Chi i kind of disagree though, they made the spell godly now and 15 minutes really isnt that long. On my Conjuror  Plane Shift is a fifteen minute recast and i use it ALL the time it is one of my most useful spells.

YummiOger
06-14-2007, 09:54 AM
<p>On a Personal Level: Warrior Nerf to Buckler line was needed a long time ago. It is Expected and Exepted. -16% to double attack and the removal of Block form Buck4 in favor of Reposte, nothing MAJOR but prolly more balanceing. Prolly a 10-15% reduction in Buckler DPS.</p><p>on a more General Level:</p><p>Removal of weapon restrictions on teir2 abilities is a good theing, BUT on the Same Timer is no good. Restricts the ability to use multiple abilities thru macros. example is Executioners Wrath --> Bezerker Assualt.</p><p>the Nerfs on Hate xfers and multipliers is a BAD MOVE SOE. in high DPS guilds, the Tanks are already on the edge of aggro control. This is going to Force reduction in DPS output and therefore increaseing the length of the fights. .. great now the Colossuses in MiSS are goting to take 15 mins each. </p><p>Changes to Dual Weild are confusing and the reason its called for is not understood by me. Every1 was fine where they were at?.. Fix whats NOT broke?.. o well, anyways. All i know is the off hand weapon will have to have one heck of a <b>-Haste%</b> to balance it properly. If not parses will look like 1-8Scouts 9,10 mages. and Tanks will not be able to hold aggro at all.</p><p>To all the peeps saying they are taking a base auto-attack DPS nerf. you are INCORRECT. DEV posted Directly that base DPS Nerf will effect PVP ONLY.</p><p>What i would have Liked to See:</p><p>Slight adjustment in the Deminishing returns Curve for Stats/Mit/Aviod and a 2 hander AP tree for Warriors/Crusaders.</p>

Next-History
06-14-2007, 02:47 PM
<p>***Critcal Hit Rate***</p><p>How about distributing Critcal Hit on each line? </p><p>STR Blackguard's Strength --> STR+8 Crit+3.0% (Rank2) AGI Pirate's Agility --> AGI+10 Crit+3.0% (Rank2) STA Mercenary's Stamina --> STA+12 Crit+3.0% (Rank2) WIS Fencer's Wisdom --> WIS+16 Crit+3.0% (Rank2) INT Thief's Intelligence --> INT+14 Crit+3.0% (Rank2)</p><p>(Even if it raises to rank3 from rank2, critcal hit rate does not go up.)<span style="font-family: 'MS ゴシック'"><span style="font-family: 'MS ゴシック'"><span style="font-family: 'MS ゴシック'"><span style="font-family: 'MS ゴシック'"></span></span></span></span></p>

Next-History
06-14-2007, 03:07 PM
<p>I do not think that the present INT LINE is not much useful, either. </p><p>exp... (ROG KoS AA) </p><p>*** INT LINE ***         *Boot Dagger (Renewal of automatic buff)         *When cheap shot(Lv.4) is used DURING A JUMP,additional attack with dagger is delivered.                 Rank 1 --- 1 dagger                 Rank 2 --- 3 daggers + 10sec Snear                 Rank 3 --- 5 daggers + 20sec Snear + Proc 15% DD                 Rank 4 --- 1 poison coating micro dagger (Mez not break)                 Rank 5 --- 3 poison coating micro daggers + 15sec Snear                 Rank 6 --- 5 poison coating micro daggers + 30sec Snear                 Rank 7 --- 10 poison coating micro daggers                 Rank 8 --- 10 poison coating micro daggers + 30sec Snear</p><p>-----------------------</p><p>        *Thief's Prowess (buff)         *The following effect will be added if an attack hits the mark continuously.                 *It needs to be OFFENSE STANCE.                 *Each effect inherits Rank1-8.                 *Only a right hand is counted.                 *Encounter DD + interrupt is surely added to the attack of the 5-12th shot.                         Rank 1 --- The 5th hit. snear 70%                         Rank 2 --- The 6th hit. slow 25point                         Rank 3 --- The 7th hit. DPS down 25point                         Rank 4 --- The 8th hit. stun 1.5sec                         Rank 5 --- The 9th hit. stun 1.5sec                         Rank 6 --- The 10th hit. stun 1.5sec                         Rank 7 --- The 11th hit. Mob does NOT AGGRO for 8sec (buff)                         Rank 8 --- The 12th hit. Mob is flown 5-10m. + The next attack is critcal hit.</p><p>-----------------------</p><p>        *Evasiveness                 Rank 1 --- 5% of the HATE reduced 30 seconds ago can be turned to HEAL.                 Rank 2 --- 10% of the HATE reduced 30 seconds ago can be turned to HEAL.                 Rank 3 --- 15% of the HATE reduced 30 seconds ago can be turned to HEAL.                 Rank 4 --- 20% of the HATE reduced 30 seconds ago can be turned to HEAL.                  Elude(Hate-1,000) --> Evasiveness Rank4 --> HP+200                 Rank 5 --- 4% of the HATE acquired 10 seconds ago can be turned to DD.                 Rank 6 --- 6% of the HATE acquired 10 seconds ago can be turned to DD.                 Rank 7 --- 8% of the HATE acquired 10 seconds ago can be turned to DD.                 Rank 8 --- 10% of the HATE acquired 10 seconds ago can be turned to DD. 5,000dmg(Hate+5,000) --> Evasiveness Rank8 --> DD 500dmg on target.</p><p>-----------------------</p><p>        *Feign                 Rank 2 --- Rogue's decoy is generated.(Equipment is copied.)                 Rank 4 --- A decoy counterattacks by fixed probability.                 Rank 6 --- Strong snear is hung on all the objects that attacked the decoy.                 Rank 8 --- If an effect disappears, a decoy will self-blast(PBAoE). </p><p>-----------------------</p><p>The individuality of a character will not come out in revising the existing spell downward to improving KoS AA. Since INT LINE is unpopular, is it said that BUFF is revised downward???</p>

Foretold
06-14-2007, 03:16 PM
Ambre@Splitpaw wrote: <blockquote><p>I am not particularly happy with those changes from a raiding monk point of view (and for a general brawler as well to be honest).</p><p><u>Double Attack</u>:</p><p>As many brawlers, I took the weapons restrictions change like  possible good news, one that would at least help us a bit...giving us the possibilily to double attack with our weapons. Of course, 90+% would have probably be unbalancing, but about 30% would have been great.</p><p>The removal of the double attack AA will hurt a lot the young brawlers and most of the higher ones who might not have the opportunity to get some T7 fabled weapons which make us "decent". As for the raiding point of view, we'll still be lacking in DPS and as a consequence in aggro.</p><p><u>Upgrading CA Damages</u>:</p><p> The idea to improve CA damages in itself isn't bad. But as a few brawlers allready reported, CA damages are only about a half of our DPS, a 6% increase is quite too low. Either pump it up or/and if you still want to get us rid of our double attack, put back the DPS buff mod at least.</p><p><u>Crane Twirl</u>:</p><p>Improving the amount of the proc rate is decent, but why decrease the damages...We are allready lacking in AE attack potential and AE aggro so it isn't really welcome. Either put back the damages were they went or, maybe, add a hate proc to the skill. This would help us slighty.</p><p><u>Mitigation Boost</u>:</p><p>Putting back some mitigation boost AA is a good thing, but barely 300 mitigation at rank 8 is a bit watered. I'd really like to see it pumped up a bit or "gasp" put something like a chance to generate aggro when it or avoiding.</p><p><u>Chi</u>:</p><p>Altho it might sound nice on the paper, a 15 mins recast (if i am correct) is meh.</p><p><u>Crane Flock</u>:</p><p>Good change.</p><p>To summarize, brawlers are supposed to be in the top of the fighter branch DPS and on the lower side for tanking. We are pretty low at tanking on the raiding scene (tho we might be ok at usual heroic stuff), and we are also low with DPS. With the AA revamp you have a chance to help a kinda broken class so think about the changes which you have made...they aren't quite adequate in my view.</p><p>Regards,</p><p>Ambre</p><p>Monk and Officer of Unity, Splitpaw.</p></blockquote><p>/agreed</p><p>According to my parses on raids, CA's only actually account for about 30% of my total DPS.  I have a great guild leader who strives to make sure there is always a dirge in my group because she understands how valuable that extra haste is.  So taking away a double hit, which would have helped my DPS tremendously and therefore my use in raiding, and replacing it with a CA boost that will do very little to my DPS, does not help me at all.</p><p>Yes there are very few raiding brawlers even in casual raiding guilds like mine.  The elite raiding guilds will have NOTHING to do with us.  Check their rosters.  If they have one raiding Bruiser, that's amazing.  They have NO monks.  </p><p>This issue of no raid utility needs to be resolved.  And taking away our double hit ISN'T the solution, its just another [Removed for Content]. </p>

Ba
06-14-2007, 03:36 PM
<cite>Supple wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: xx-large">Is there anyone out there that is happy <u>overall</u>, any one at all? </span>(looks around the <b>WORLD</b>)</p><div align="center">You WoW and VG folks dont get to answer. STHU</div></blockquote> Druid here. Not at all unhappy with any of the changes so far. But then, we always did have a "meh" KoS AA tree. Good to see it improved on.

Astrlidia
06-14-2007, 06:14 PM
<p>I have one question. Will I be able to solo like before, or will I be forced  find a group, just to level, like some of the other SOE games I will not mention.</p><p>I'm not in a guild, and have no wish to join one with my characters. I do not want to go to raids or dungeons, because of the ninja looting, and other crap. I have no interest in these places, but I do enjoy my abilty to play solo, while in a MMORPG. Will this be takened away?</p><p>What changes are be tested for AAs doesn't interest me, because I use mine to be able to solo effectively, not in mind of group, or raid, or PvP, and guild wars. How will this effect my characters? I have characters on test, but not really interested in logging them on, becuase it's huge strain trying to do anything in there.</p>

Mirander_1
06-14-2007, 06:29 PM
All classes could solo before AAs were introduced, although some classes do get some noticable help from the AAs.  Maybe if you gave your class, people would be able to tell you if your solo ability has been noticably nerfed.

Frigid2000
06-14-2007, 06:31 PM
Not unhappy with the changes at all.  But then again, I play a bard, and we were borked to begin with, so these changes are great for me.

ReturnOfMadness
06-14-2007, 06:32 PM
<cite>Astrlidia wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I have one question. Will I be able to solo like before, or will I be forced  find a group, just to level, like some of the other SOE games I will not mention.</p><p>I'm not in a guild, and have no wish to join one with my characters. I do not want to go to raids or dungeons, because of the ninja looting, and other crap. I have no interest in these places, but I do enjoy my abilty to play solo, while in a MMORPG. Will this be takened away?</p><p>What changes are be tested for AAs doesn't interest me, because I use mine to be able to solo effectively, not in mind of group, or raid, or PvP, and guild wars. How will this effect my characters? I have characters on test, but not really interested in logging them on, becuase it's huge strain trying to do anything in there.</p></blockquote>yes you should be able to solo like ya always did, but depending your class ya might have to change tactics, so no biggie just adept and move on to have fun <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> as for the ninjalooting, sounds to me like ya had a bad experience dont be discouraged to group cause of that >_>

Valer
06-14-2007, 07:44 PM
They really need to scrap this whole concept of "nerf aggro control, and they'll be <b>forced</b> to take those less attractive lines".   Instead beef up those seldom used lines, add more to them than just aggro management.  Modify them so that people don't have to lose a considerable amount of dps by going down the other path.  Currently all GU36 will do is make raiding/grouping more tedious, and the whole idea is that we pay to be entertained and have fun.  Once that fun begins to be replaced with tedium, thats when people start to leave

Next-History
06-14-2007, 07:46 PM
<p>If the diversity of weapons is required(GU36 KoS AA update), please attach the feature to weapons more. Please also increase a effect. </p><p>*** Example ***</p><p>               *** Effect charge opportunity ***               ・The effect in which re-charge is impossible is added to DROP ITEMS.               ・Preparing many effects Various strategies could develop (even in case of high-end contents).</p><p>                            ・Torn Ligament Longbow (aITEM -669897630 -1979562757:Torn Ligament Longbow/a)                             ・LEGENDARY ITEM                             ・DMG RATE 164-384  ----->  164(154-174) - 384(364-404)                             ・STR+28  ----->  STR+ 0-40                             ・INT+28  ----->  INT+ 0-40                             ・HP+60  ----->  HP+ 0-150                             ・POWER+50  ----->  POWER+ 0-150                             ・Hidden Shot  ----->  A permanent effect</p><p>                             <NEW EFFECT>                             "Magic armor-piercing bullet" (charge 25/25)  ----->  Re-charge is impossible.                                           ・The highest DMG RATE is guaranteed at the time of use.(60sec buff)</p><p>A legendary item... can it be called "LEGENDARY" truly? Although it gets ahead... Lowering the rate of drops, pleasure is only lost. </p><p>Please play 365 times in the same place and aim at the place where 365 times of joy, anger, humor and pathos occurs.</p>

Rhuarc222
06-15-2007, 01:46 PM
<p>Just want to add my voice to the chorus here and ask that the devs please buff up useless aa lines and leave the popular ones alone.  The massive amounts of nerfs in this update are just making people mad and discontent with the game in general. when they could be excited about all the new content you are putting in instead you point at nice new things while you are peeing on our shoes. </p><p>I would think after all the years since EQ1 hit that you would have learned by now that massive nerfing isn't good for business. How about keeping people happy by making their classes better, not taking away everyones favorite toys and giving us 3 new mediocre options to replace them. I really don't understand who thought this would be a good idea or good for the community that is trying to look past all the nasty stuff you do to us in order to play what i think is, despite your best efforts, the best MMoG available today.  But if you think it was a good idea and not just a nasty joke, then IMHO, you are plain stupid.</p><p>I know its not nice to say bad things about the poor developers, but i'm just being honest because personally i'm offended by the disregard for your players feelings and the time they have invested in their charactors. </p>

Snorm
06-15-2007, 01:54 PM
<p>The wording on the sta block to parry change needs some either seme clarification outside of game or rewording. </p><p>Check the guard/zerker forums. There is no clear understand of the change. Testing to dertmine how it actually works is a fairly tricky process.</p><p>Actually the whole riposte/parry addorn AA issue could use some clarification as well. That seems to be the major area that no one has ever really understood all that well.</p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p>

Giland
06-15-2007, 02:24 PM
This sounds just like the great mitigation balancing of 06. Probably the same reasons too. There is really only two ways to balance classes. 1) Give certain classes bigger nukes or more utility 2) Reduce another classes effectiveness The problem with doing option 1 is they have to rebalance all the mobs if they hand out bigger and better nukes, CAs, and/or more utility to everyone. The problem with option 2 is everyone crying and screaming about being nerfed. (side note, I find it...interesting that people complain when a change is made that is viewed as making the game easier as the dumbing down of all that is holy, then complain when a change is made that is viewed as making the game harder, IE, a nerf). Seems they have decided to limit how much agro a tank can get from other classes, or how much agro a nontank player can dump. In effect, creating a limit on how much dps a raid can generate. Perhaps the intent is to bring the ultra hardcore raiders a little closer down to the casuals, to allow more people to experience the content by allowing that content to be structured in such a way as to not require specific gear from a previous zone or expansion. This isn't a knock against those that are hardcore raiders, or trying to prop up casual players, but from a development standpoint, designing content that would require players to progress through 2 previous expansions before even getting a glimpse of just doesn't make sense to me. The closer they can keep the pool of players, the easier it becomes to design content, and the more content can be designed that will be experienced by a greater number of players. Just to make up some numbers, if a casual raider in legendary with some fabled using all masters generated 1000 dps, and a hardcore raider can generate 1500 dps, then content can be designed so that it feels challanging to the hardcore player, while not being completely out of reach for the casual raider. By creating a glass ceiling, raids can be more diverse in the classes they take.

Snorm
06-15-2007, 02:36 PM
Giland@Guk wrote: <blockquote><p>This sounds just like the great mitigation balancing of 06. Probably the same reasons too. There is really only two ways to balance classes. 1) Give certain classes bigger nukes or more utility 2) Reduce another classes effectiveness The problem with doing option 1 is they have to rebalance all the mobs if they hand out bigger and better nukes, CAs, and/or more utility to everyone.</p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">When did they ever say they were rebalancing anything? They said that they were improving playabiilty by getting rid of certain restrictions that had unintended consiqunces.</span> The problem with option 2 is everyone crying and screaming about being nerfed. (side note, I find it...interesting that people complain when a change is made that is viewed as making the game easier as the dumbing down of all that is holy, then complain when a change is made that is viewed as making the game harder, IE, a nerf).</p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">People will complain about any kind of change that is poorly defended or done for little reason. When they nerfed certain classes becaues of unreasonably high DPS and say as much, sure some people complain, but, if the developers are right, and they have generally been, the playerbase gets over it and moves on. The issue here is largely that the actual impact and the stated agenda seem very out of line with each other.</span> Seems they have decided to limit how much agro a tank can get from other classes, or how much agro a nontank player can dump. In effect, creating a limit on how much dps a raid can generate. Perhaps the intent is to bring the ultra hardcore raiders a little closer down to the casuals, to allow more people to experience the content by allowing that content to be structured in such a way as to not require specific gear from a previous zone or expansion. This isn't a knock against those that are hardcore raiders, or trying to prop up casual players, but from a development standpoint, designing content that would require players to progress through 2 previous expansions before even getting a glimpse of just doesn't make sense to me. The closer they can keep the pool of players, the easier it becomes to design content, and the more content can be designed that will be experienced by a greater number of players. Just to make up some numbers, if a casual raider in legendary with some fabled using all masters generated 1000 dps, and a hardcore raider can generate 1500 dps, then content can be designed so that it feels challanging to the hardcore player, while not being completely out of reach for the casual raider. By creating a glass ceiling, raids can be more diverse in the classes they take. </p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">There is a balance here as well. The more 'open' the content, the faster people chew through it, and the faster they are hungry for more. If you set the curve too shallow, people run through content once or twice, and move on or get bored and leave the game. Too steep, and people get frustrated over not being able to see higher teir content, get bored of farming the same crap over and over again, and move on. Honestly, they have generally done a good job of handling progression, IMO. Since KoS came out, the only people that have totally farmed out the content prior to the next expansion are the super super hardcore, and they have managed to keep the curve shallow enough that the more casual players can feel like they have made reasonable progress, and experienced most if not all of the content.</span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">And again.. If they decided that raid wide DPS approaching the 30k mark was just stupid and not intended, they they should have said as much, and said that they were addressing that issue ALONG with the other reasons given. And if that is the intent, why now? Why in the middle of an expansion? Why not back when the Woushy was first getting killed and raids were first getting up into those levels of DPS instead of after months of that?</span></p></blockquote>Snorm -- 70 Guard

Snorm
06-15-2007, 02:39 PM
Giland@Guk wrote: <blockquote>Just to make up some numbers, if a casual raider in legendary with some fabled using all masters generated 1000 dps, and a hardcore raider can generate 1500 dps, then content can be designed so that it feels challanging to the hardcore player, while not being completely out of reach for the casual raider. By creating a glass ceiling, raids can be more diverse in the classes they take. </blockquote><p> Oh, one other thing, if you set the aggro limit at a very low number, you limit the effectivness of the DPS classes and make that a less viable class choice. As an extreme, if you made it where any DPS over 300 would pull aggro off of the tank, then no one would ever play a pure DPS class, at least not outside of soloing. Why would you when you could do just as much damage with any other class in the game, and bring a lot more to the table?</p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p>

Giland
06-15-2007, 03:17 PM
why now? because there is a new expansion right around the corner. Because someone is looking at numbers and saying "holy cow, x class can hit 6k dps, you want me to balance based on that?? " I am not claiming conspiracy theory here. But much more was touched than just AAs. Heck, DW weapons are being completely removed in the GU after. Was this a spur of the moment decision? Something has to cause this to happen, and I am going to go with the expansion.

Themaginator
06-15-2007, 03:25 PM
<cite>Snorm wrote:</cite><blockquote>Giland@Guk wrote: <blockquote><p>This sounds just like the great mitigation balancing of 06. Probably the same reasons too. There is really only two ways to balance classes. 1) Give certain classes bigger nukes or more utility 2) Reduce another classes effectiveness The problem with doing option 1 is they have to rebalance all the mobs if they hand out bigger and better nukes, CAs, and/or more utility to everyone.</p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">When did they ever say they were rebalancing anything? They said that they were improving playabiilty by getting rid of certain restrictions that had unintended consiqunces.</span> The problem with option 2 is everyone crying and screaming about being nerfed. (side note, I find it...interesting that people complain when a change is made that is viewed as making the game easier as the dumbing down of all that is holy, then complain when a change is made that is viewed as making the game harder, IE, a nerf).</p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">People will complain about any kind of change that is poorly defended or done for little reason. When they nerfed certain classes becaues of unreasonably high DPS and say as much, sure some people complain, but, if the developers are right, and they have generally been, the playerbase gets over it and moves on. The issue here is largely that the actual impact and the stated agenda seem very out of line with each other.</span> Seems they have decided to limit how much agro a tank can get from other classes, or how much agro a nontank player can dump. In effect, creating a limit on how much dps a raid can generate. Perhaps the intent is to bring the ultra hardcore raiders a little closer down to the casuals, to allow more people to experience the content by allowing that content to be structured in such a way as to not require specific gear from a previous zone or expansion. This isn't a knock against those that are hardcore raiders, or trying to prop up casual players, but from a development standpoint, designing content that would require players to progress through 2 previous expansions before even getting a glimpse of just doesn't make sense to me. The closer they can keep the pool of players, the easier it becomes to design content, and the more content can be designed that will be experienced by a greater number of players. Just to make up some numbers, if a casual raider in legendary with some fabled using all masters generated 1000 dps, and a hardcore raider can generate 1500 dps, then content can be designed so that it feels challanging to the hardcore player, while not being completely out of reach for the casual raider. By creating a glass ceiling, raids can be more diverse in the classes they take. </p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">There is a balance here as well. The more 'open' the content, the faster people chew through it, and the faster they are hungry for more. If you set the curve too shallow, people run through content once or twice, and move on or get bored and leave the game. Too steep, and people get frustrated over not being able to see higher teir content, get bored of farming the same crap over and over again, and move on. Honestly, they have generally done a good job of handling progression, IMO. Since KoS came out, the only people that have totally farmed out the content prior to the next expansion are the super super hardcore, and they have managed to keep the curve shallow enough that the more casual players can feel like they have made reasonable progress, and experienced most if not all of the content.</span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff">And again.. If they decided that raid wide DPS approaching the 30k mark was just stupid and not intended, they they should have said as much, and said that they were addressing that issue ALONG with the other reasons given. And if that is the intent, why now? Why in the middle of an expansion? Why not back when the Woushy was first getting killed and raids were first getting up into those levels of DPS instead of after months of that?</span></p></blockquote>Snorm -- 70 Guard </blockquote>you will find that in a month you'll totally forget this happened and you'll be used to your new AAs. It always happens and it will happen again.  You will notice that what they changed wasn't really that big of a change, and you'll go on with your EQ2 life.

JohnDoe058
06-15-2007, 03:33 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>you will find that in a month you'll totally forget this happened and you'll be used to your new AAs. It always happens and it will happen again.  You will notice that what they changed wasn't really that big of a change, and you'll go on with your EQ2 life. </blockquote><p>Dude, what are you smokin?  Cuz u should share that stuff, rather than hoarding it.</p><p>I'm still feeling the effects of the EoF combat revamp (GU29?).  My bruiser just can't come close to soloing what she could before.  Period.  Haven't forgotten it, and won't. </p>

Snorm
06-15-2007, 03:37 PM
Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>you will find that in a month you'll totally forget this happened and you'll be used to your new AAs. It always happens and it will happen again.  You will notice that what they changed wasn't really that big of a change, and you'll go on with your EQ2 life. </blockquote><p> And then they will announce the next round of changes and balancing to what they just got done changing.... <img src="/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>I'm only being somewhat glib <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p>

Themaginator
06-15-2007, 03:53 PM
<cite>Snorm wrote:</cite><blockquote>Sashtan@Mistmoore wrote: <blockquote>you will find that in a month you'll totally forget this happened and you'll be used to your new AAs. It always happens and it will happen again.  You will notice that what they changed wasn't really that big of a change, and you'll go on with your EQ2 life. </blockquote><p> And then they will announce the next round of changes and balancing to what they just got done changing.... <img src="/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>I'm only being somewhat glib <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p></blockquote> lol then you'll forget about those eh its a cruel cycle

Grimwell
06-15-2007, 04:01 PM
A few things to remember.... This content is on Test. It is slated to go for GU36 and we put the preview and the content out here early because we want the community as a whole to see it on Test and to be able to try it all out before it goes live. That way you can provide constructive feedback about how it's working for you (if you play on one of the Test servers) and talk about how it could affect you based on the data provided from people on Test. That's right, we want your feedback! Constructive feedback, which can include criticism. That can help the team collect your data and impressions, compare that to what we have internally, and the design intent of the changes, and evaluate the content as it has landed on Test. The basic point of that is to say that the cement isn't dry yet, and we do want your feedback. That said, name calling (each other, or the devs), overly negative comments ("They hate us and never listen!&quot<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />, wild speculation based on the last three posts, and any other off focus posts really won't help. The information about what has been changed on Test is out there. People who are playing on Test are strongly encouraged to feed back based on what they are actually seeing (and remember that you can respec AA for free, try different builds!). People who aren't on Test are strongly encouraged to look at that hard data and personal experiences that the Test community can provide, and then feed back based on their peers experience. The dev team is actively looking for productive feedback about these changes, and collecting data as it is being used by a wider pool of people now that it's on the Test servers. In effect, they are actually using the Test servers to actually test the ideas. Let's focus on quality feedback. You may not see sixty red names posting answers to every question, concern, fear, and outrageous assumption on the message boards - but don't think for a moment that we aren't reading, and using the productive feedback to valuate these changes. BTW, if you are a PvPer, and you have not done '/testcopy add' for your characters and you have concerns about how you are affected by this... you are missing a chance at a preview. That's not an option for PvE players due to the nature of the two Test servers, but the PvP folks should be on PvP Test seeing it for themselves where possible

Rastaah
06-15-2007, 04:25 PM
<p>Do I get on the pvp test simply by copying? I did do the copy thing but when I went on test today only characters that came up were my old test server characters (PVE)</p><p>Is there a special way to access pvp test server?</p><p>Thanks. </p>

Grimwell
06-15-2007, 04:33 PM
'/testcopy add' with the character you want moved to PvP copy should work (provided it's a PvP character on a PvP server to begin with). It may take a day, or a little longer, but when all the data is copied and sorted you are suddenly there (unless you are at the Test cap too).

Ghartan
06-15-2007, 04:47 PM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>A few things to remember.... This content is on Test. It is slated to go for GU36 and we put the preview and the content out here early because we want the community as a whole to see it on Test and to be able to try it all out before it goes live. That way you can provide constructive feedback about how it's working for you (if you play on one of the Test servers) and talk about how it could affect you based on the data provided from people on Test. That's right, we want your feedback! Constructive feedback, which can include criticism. That can help the team collect your data and impressions, compare that to what we have internally, and the design intent of the changes, and evaluate the content as it has landed on Test. *cut* </blockquote><p> The problem Grimwell is that most of the complaints are coming from those that ARE NOT being tested on the Test Server. And by that I mean the raiders (and I am not talking Lab runs here).</p><p>As has been mentioned many times, top tier raiders DO NOT exist on Test ... sorry that is a fact. So what are we suppose to do in the interim till this comes live ... ??</p>

mr23sgte
06-15-2007, 04:48 PM
<p>I think the Monk/Brawler community has posted more than enough ideas pre-AA change anouncement in our forums. What we want is either better raid tanking mainly for off tanking adds OR</p><p>Raid utility and  to be compensated with better DPS than a warrior if we can't tank as well (which we cant atm) </p><p>There is nothing like being outparsed by my mt guard when I'm fully fabled and DPS specced. </p><p>I have not seen any of our ideas utilized or even a response until everyone screamed about the AA changes, most of them were really thought out and not over powering imo...............if the changes for AA are approved for the LIVE servers - it will make it even worse to play a brawlers class.  </p><p>Is it possible tio have my 70 Monk copied to test if he is on PVE? I'm pretty much done with crying and will play another class if this is whats going to happen. Its like every expansion since DOF as a Brawler you hope something will improve, but it really never does.........time to go cry in my beer.</p>

Ozgood
06-15-2007, 04:52 PM
<p>Well, as I stated in another board, as I understand it, this game was originally slated to be 100 levels.  In the fall, the cap will increase to 80.  Now whether or not they give us new AA's or not, if everything is at 100% at level 70, then there is no incentive to get to 80, 90 or 100 if it comes.  What I am trying to say, irregardless of Grimwell or anyone else being here, is to balance each class, by tier, determine maximum usefulness in Raids, soloability and PvP, is [Removed for Content] near impossible.</p><p>In other words, if you are a melee priest, you will now have 10% per rank, leaving additional future ranks to get you to 100%.  Same goes with other abilities.  This is NOT the end.  But it happened to everyone, so what really have you lost?  Parses?  Bragging rights?  Soloability as a Healer?</p><p>As it is right now and if you don't believe me, go to the 8 bazillion threads about it, that certain classes had no roles (subjectively) and others could do things (scouts tanking) that they maybe weren't designed to do.  People always talk about T1, T2 DPS classes as a gospel, but where did the Devs say this?  As it was, the class balance was BAD.  People were playing a few classes and that was about it.  PvP wasn't friendly to new players, and ended quickly and unfairly.  Some classes felt like buff bots and brought little to a group that they weren't AFK for.</p><p>Broaden your horizons-</p><p>Defilers, Coercers, Troubs and Pallies were at the bottom of the barrel.  Go to their boards, THEY are not complaining.  Bards got a much needed buff, Coercers can be more active in raids rather than spamming power, Troubs can do more DPS and can go ANY group now with their Double attack buffs and Pallies now have a variety of options (AGI) to do DPS.</p><p>Those that are complaining do have a right to do so, but I guarantee (with the exception of Furies) that you were a more popular and needed class.  They basically spread the abilities of the few to the many.  They are promoting more grouping and balancing classes.</p><p>But test it out and post hard data.  It's funny because the people whining the most, go to test, and actually grudgingly don't disagree with the changes.</p><p>This is a game and a business.  New subscribers, more playable classes, friendlier PvP = more $$$$.</p>

Belfrain
06-15-2007, 04:55 PM
If you really cared about testing things like this out, you would be allowing PVE characters to copy over to Test to see. For that matter, you should find a willing guild to run the same raid content on the live server and then with the exact same gear and people run it on test to see exactly how your changes affect them. It isn't rocket science. It is the most basic testing with control and test groups. You guys get paid to make sure things work right.....all we want is for this to be FAIRLO looked at and parsed thoroughly. It seems like WE all know that things on test do not translate to the live server....btu whether you refuse to believe that or willingly choose to ignore it is debatable.

Ghartan
06-15-2007, 05:01 PM
<cite>Belfrain wrote:</cite><blockquote>If you really cared about testing things like this out, you would be allowing PVE characters to copy over to Test to see. For that matter, you should find a willing guild to run the same raid content on the live server and then with the exact same gear and people run it on test to see exactly how your changes affect them. It isn't rocket science. It is the most basic testing with control and test groups. You guys get paid to make sure things work right.....all we want is for this to be FAIRLO looked at and parsed thoroughly. It seems like WE all know that things on test do not translate to the live server....btu whether you refuse to believe that or willingly choose to ignore it is debatable.</blockquote><p> Aye ... those moved over could EASILY be flagged as "temp" so that when GU36 goes live they could be deleted from the Test Server. </p><p>So the disruption to the test community is nothing more than a red herring to distract us from what is really possible.</p>

Obadiah
06-15-2007, 05:02 PM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>'/testcopy add' with the character you want moved to PvP copy should work (provided it's a PvP character on a PvP server to begin with). It may take a day, or a little longer, but when all the data is copied and sorted you are suddenly there (unless you are at the Test cap too).</blockquote><p> Given the magnitude of the changes affecting the KoS lines (not to mention weapons in the GU37 part) for ALL players, doesn't it seem like a good idea to perform /testcopies for PvE characters as well? Wasn't this done on a temporary basis prior to previous expansions? </p><p>Just doesn't seem to me that there would be a broad enough player base to give these a thorough run through.</p><p>Not to mention all my Test characters are under level 10. <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

mr23sgte
06-15-2007, 05:03 PM
<p>Quoted from the Monk Forums:</p><p>Placing my AA post there too so we can discuss some...</p><p>"I am not particularly happy with those changes from a raiding monk point of view (and for a general brawler as well to be honest).</p><p><u>Double Attack</u>:</p><p>As many brawlers, I took the weapons restrictions change like  possible good news, one that would at least help us a bit...giving us the possibilily to double attack with our weapons. Of course, 90+% would have probably be unbalancing, but about 30% would have been great.</p><p>The removal of the double attack AA will hurt a lot the young brawlers and most of the higher ones who might not have the opportunity to get some T7 fabled weapons which make us "decent". As for the raiding point of view, we'll still be lacking in DPS and as a consequence in aggro.</p><p><u>Upgrading CA Damages</u>:</p><p> The idea to improve CA damages in itself isn't bad. But as a few brawlers allready reported, CA damages are only about a half of our DPS, a 6% increase is quite too low. Either pump it up or/and if you still want to get us rid of our double attack, put back the DPS buff mod at least.</p><p><u>Crane Twirl</u>:</p><p>Improving the amount of the proc rate is decent, but why decrease the damages...We are allready lacking in AE attack potential and AE aggro so it isn't really welcome. Either put back the damages were they went or, maybe, add a hate proc to the skill. This would help us slighty.</p><p><u>Mitigation Boost</u>:</p><p>Putting back some mitigation boost AA is a good thing, but barely 300 mitigation at rank 8 is a bit watered. I'd really like to see it pumped up a bit or "gasp" put something like a chance to generate aggro when it or avoiding.</p><p><u>Chi</u>:</p><p>Altho it might sound nice on the paper, a 15 mins recast (if i am correct) is meh.</p><p><u>Crane Flock</u>:</p><p>Good change.</p><p>To summarize, brawlers are supposed to be in the top of the fighter branch DPS and on the lower side for tanking. We are pretty low at tanking on the raiding scene (tho we might be ok at usual heroic stuff), and we are also low with DPS. With the AA revamp you have a chance to help a kinda broken class so think about the changes which you have made...they aren't quite adequate in my view.</p><p>Regards,</p><p>Ambre</p><p>Monk and Officer of Unity, Splitpaw."</p>

Foretold
06-15-2007, 05:07 PM
<cite>Ghartan wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Belfrain wrote:</cite><blockquote>If you really cared about testing things like this out, you would be allowing PVE characters to copy over to Test to see. For that matter, you should find a willing guild to run the same raid content on the live server and then with the exact same gear and people run it on test to see exactly how your changes affect them. It isn't rocket science. It is the most basic testing with control and test groups. You guys get paid to make sure things work right.....all we want is for this to be FAIRLO looked at and parsed thoroughly. It seems like WE all know that things on test do not translate to the live server....btu whether you refuse to believe that or willingly choose to ignore it is debatable.</blockquote><p> Aye ... those moved over could EASILY be flagged as "temp" so that when GU36 goes live they could be deleted from the Test Server. </p><p>So the disruption to the test community is nothing more than a red herring to distract us from what is really possible.</p></blockquote>I would be all over a temporary-flagged test copy.  A very good idea, especially considering the controversial nature of this GU...

Tandy
06-15-2007, 05:11 PM
Much as I hate to suggest anything like WoW...they have a test server they ONLY bring up for big updates and allow copies...why not the same thing here if your afraid of upsetting the reg test server...open up a temp server, allow all the copies people want. Would get a nice amount of solo group and raid feedback then.

Siclone
06-15-2007, 05:12 PM
<p>yea what Grimwell said,,,,</p><p>lets here from the people on the test server, everyone else go complain and whine in your class forum</p>

Bewts
06-15-2007, 05:15 PM
<p>The topic of this reply regards to MONKS.</p><p>In order to get into a raid you have to do one of a few things:  Tank epics, heal, have a superior buff (we'll call that utility), or do good DPS.</p><p>Monks are not designed to tank epics, at least not with how avoidance works.  For the investment of the 23 other people at a raid, a monk is a bad choice compared to most plate tanks.  We'll leave that be for now.</p><p>Monks are not healers, but we have a heal ability.  I haven't seen a raid looking for healer that seriously considered a monk filling that spot, so we can let that one be too.</p><p>Monks don't have a superior buff.  Altruism isn't going to get you into a raid so that a wizard or necro can manaburn/lifeburn with impunity.  The raid would rather add another high DPS class and let the wizard/necro die if they shoot their skills too early.  Group FD was made useless the day repair kits were invented.  No reason to worry about dying anymore.</p><p>Monks are not DPS, we haven't been a high DPS class for a long time, and even when we had respectable DPS it was too much because it was unintended due to a flaw in the system.  Monks wear the lightest armor.  We don't even double attack anymore on Test.</p><p>Of the suggested improvements, I see things lacking and my suggestions include the following to make Monks... 'better' without  making us 'better'</p><p>One, adjust the mitigation bonus on our AA line to be a percent of total mitigation to include applied buffs (unlike the Brell Diety buffs).  This would in no way increase our mitigation while soloing to unbalancing values, but it would help rebalance the ability of us to tank depending on who was in our group, and what buffs we had.  I don't think a 4-5% increase per rank in mitigation is all that bad of a thing.  For a 4k mitigation, that puts us around 4800 to 5k mit before anything short term.  I think thats pretty viable to make a monk 'tank' worthy.</p><p>Double attack is gone.  The majority of other classes gained double attack with weapons.  Thats a tough pill to swallow.  Monks were already lacking on DPS compared to the Zerkers in specific AA setups.  I won't compare monks to zerkers beyond that because that is a different arguement.  I will say that as a brawler, you should have a natural double attack to begin with.  I think it should be enchanced to a great degree if you use HtH weapons, to a slightly lesser degree if you use crushing batons/hammers/etc, and then 2hb bo's and staves should see a quad attack (two ends, 4 total attacks).  Granted the quad attack would occur less often than HtH and other onehanded crushing weapons, but it should have the same DPS effect as using HtH with its double attack value, or crushing weapons with their slightly lesser double attack values.</p><p>The majority of brawler DPS comes from our auto attacks, not our combat arts.  The more combat arts we use, the less overall damage we do because of our casting times affect our DPS drastically unless we use increasingly slower delay weapons.  Lowering the reuse of our combat arts will do nothing to help our DPS, it will just hurt the amateur players who don't know that, burn up our mana faster, and overall decrease our DPS.  Making our combat arts go off instantly would be an interesting concept though.  I do think our combat arts are underpowered compared to other dps classes.  We really don't know if monks are supposed to be more DPS or more Tank so its hard to ask for bigger combat arts, but I do think the AA line should allow for brawlers to increase their combat arts significantly (25% or more) but have the drawback of losing avoidance, mitigation or some other tanking skill, or shoot if we choose that line we generate 25% more damage, but 25% more hate.  If adjusting combat arts is a big project, then perhaps a simple increase of our auto attack damage would be beneficial (although degrades our ability to maintain aggro on orange con mobs)</p><p>Hate generation is an issue for monks, always has been.  We have difficulty holding a single multi mob encounter.  People know this.  Throwing multiple encounters together and you have either one dead warlock or one very LOM healer and a warlock who needs to change their robe.  With that said, brawlers should see a skill much like the guardian (their polar opposite) in regards to hate generation.  The Guardians generate hate each time they get hit because the mob is mad it isn't doing as much damage as it should.  Brawlers need the same thing - almost - each time the mob misses, it gets enraged more that it keeps missing - hence generating more hate for the brawler.  This in no way increases the skill of a brawler to solo or kill anything, it just helps them keep their groups alive - and *gasp* possibly be able to tank an epic encounter of their tier.  Change Mongoose Stance to this and brawlers would be very content.  We don't need de-aggro, we need more aggro.  Worry about de-aggro when we actually have the DPS (burst or maintained) to steal it first - unless you give us the utility to group de-aggro, either a spell on a timer or a group maintained buff that lowers hate gain of all group members by X amount.</p><p>Group/Raid utility.  Brawlers bring almost nothing to a raid that some other class can do better.  In a pinch, or if someone failed to show we get a slot to raid in and never join the parse channels (or at least I don't).  That being said, a few things would make a brawler more... desirable on a raid.  Adjust both brawler buffs to add a double attack value to their haste/dps group buffs.  10%-20% double attack.  You can increase the concentration to 2 slots if you want.  Adjust the Self STR/WIS buff on the monk to make it targetable on anyone in your group.  Calm Tranquility = 2 conc, stance = 1 conc, STR/WIS = 1 conc which leaves you with the option of putting Tranquil Vision (with AA on it for hate generation/loss) OR Hate proc OR a second STR/WIS buff out there for your 5th concentration slot.  That way, if a monk is not going to be tanking, they bring something valuable to a DPS group and don't get tossed into the fury/int caster/ranger groups with no buffs to help them out.</p><p>The final Brawler Intelligence AA... Brawlers health when tanking is very spikey.  Play a level 70 monk with one healer in OOB and you'll see what I mean - and thats a far reach from a high end instance.  30% health to see the mitigation modifier go up means you have seconds before you die.  I think an adjustment to anything under 50% health is more reasonable.  We don't have to have a 4k mit buff on that either.  1500-2k mit while under 50% health is definitely more reliable and feasible than the 4k when under 30%.  If this is instituted along with the mitigation % buff mentioned earlier, we will see similar numbers to guardians in regards to tankability - AA is an option, not a requirement and monks should definitely be able to choose to be on par with plate tanks or on par with mid tier DPS.  Giving brawlers the option to choose which way to go is more important - the difficulty is balancing that.  I still think the fairest tradeoff would be giving up the chances to critical hit for the increase to 50%.  You can keep the criticals if you want, but keep it under 30% health.  Perhaps thats a viable fix?</p><p>I think having an AA setup that can be either A: A bit of tanking, a bit of DPS; B: All out tanking, or C: all out DPS is better than giving us a little of each.  Allowing two monks to show up at a raid, one be an off tank, the other is a DPS and the raid not suffering is better than having 2 monks that bring sketchy utility, below average DPS, and no defining skills.</p><p>Most of all, Monks, if we are to be a hybrid, want to have the ability to do that, and do that well.  We already can do a little of each - and we expect the AA trees to enchance those chosen paths.  Give us the option to tank well if we follow one route, DPS well if we follow another, or a mix of both if we prefer to be more casual.  There is nothing wrong with those options, and the AA trees should reflect that.  Not the foolishness that I see proposed on Test now.</p><p>Regards from Afghanistan,</p><p>Sanctum, 70 Monk</p>

Bre
06-15-2007, 06:18 PM
<p>In regards to aggro issues, for a ranger, the sudden decrease in our passive deaggro is not as big a deal as I originally thought it might be. It does take more work now, but it can be overcome. The only true problems I see are for those few rangers that are in top lvl gear. And I mean top lvl. Scale bow, kilij & 628, TW arrows, ect... They will have some problems in my estimation, but I really do believe it is not a game breaker. It is one that can be adapted to and overcome. </p><p>The bigger problem as I see it is the change to arrows. Which is still being tweaked so no need to panic just yet. The aa changes presented as of right now do little to nothing that would impact a ranger or cause them to think more than briefly on switching to them. Assassins maybe, rangers? nope. We are trying very hard to get a balance in the KoS tree. My strong hope is to get an aa listing full of viable choices for both classes. Not the current clear choices that we are shown now.</p><p>Overall, rangers are still a viable t1 dps class, the competition just got closer and we have to work harder. But I have little doubt my peers on the live servers will continue to pincusion anything in thier path. Pecking order may be up in the air for a bit, but I for one enjoy a fight more than a slaughter. Till a swash steps up in my way then yeah I get a little peevish. :p</p><p>Brega - 70 Ranger, Test Server</p>

Grimwell
06-15-2007, 06:20 PM
I know it's frustrating for PvE people not to be able to copy over to PvE Test, but that server has a history and a strong community that deserves some respect with any ideas like that. Not saying it's off limits, but I am saying that there are more things to factor in there. They have a closed economy to consider for instance. With Test PvP it's been deliberately launced as a hotbed of change and no protections. One thing to remember for people concerned about raid testing. PvP players on a raid have the exact same experience as PvE players, unless someone else shows up and picks a fight. So any PvP raid capable guild is very welcome to copy over en masse and take on one of the raid zones. That is one way for raid players to check it out. Yes, those PvP characters have special rules on their PvP, but not on their PvE - so they should be able to speak to the AA changes in that world. (and also run through the Felwithe Throne if they are up to it!!!) Just an idea!

Valer
06-16-2007, 07:03 AM
Currently there are no guilds on test that are capable of clearing EH or MMIS, and its one of the main reason EoF raids were released with so much bugs, exploits and lag.  This new raid zone is supposed to be comparable in difficulty to the 3rd floor of EH, and with no guilds on test clearing through EH, it leaves a chunk of content unable to be thoroughly tested.  PVE test copies should be implemented, so a vast amount of characters from all types of play styles can be quickly introduced and test <b>all</b> types of content thoroughly.  Test server's main concern should be trying to get in as many people as possible, to sift through as much content as possible. Not trying to form a tight knit "community", since that limits testing, and should be reserved for the live servers.  The way test runs now, we'd be better served picking a random live server , apply the changes there, and have them test it out.  At least that way we would have more accurate data.

NiteWolfe
06-16-2007, 08:45 AM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>I know it's frustrating for PvE people not to be able to copy over to PvE Test, but that server has a history and a strong community that deserves some respect with any ideas like that. Not saying it's off limits, but I am saying that there are more things to factor in there. They have a closed economy to consider for instance. With Test PvP it's been deliberately launced as a hotbed of change and no protections. One thing to remember for people concerned about raid testing. PvP players on a raid have the exact same experience as PvE players, unless someone else shows up and picks a fight. So any PvP raid capable guild is very welcome to copy over en masse and take on one of the raid zones. That is one way for raid players to check it out. Yes, those PvP characters have special rules on their PvP, but not on their PvE - so they should be able to speak to the AA changes in that world. (and also run through the Felwithe Throne if they are up to it!!!) Just an idea! </blockquote> First of this so called community is so small if it was a live server they would had be merged already. Frankly on there closed economy.. they DO NOT have any economy to really speak of. Iam sure they do there best to test new stuff but the simple fact is that they do not have the manpower to test somethingf this large and wide reaching.  SOE has allowed what should be a place for everyone to test new stuff to become a closed tightly guarded live server.

MrWolfie
06-16-2007, 10:30 AM
<cite>NiteWolfe wrote:</cite><blockquote> First of this so called community is so small if it was a live server they would had be merged already. Frankly on there closed economy.. they DO NOT have any economy to really speak of. Iam sure they do there best to test new stuff but the simple fact is that they do not have the manpower to test somethingf this large and wide reaching.  SOE has allowed what should be a place for everyone to test new stuff to become a closed tightly guarded live server. </blockquote><p> Levelling on one server is enough for me. None of my characters on test are of sufficient level or AA experience to test these changes.</p><p>One thing that does concern me, is that these changes have been put on test en masse. Instead of introducing the changes for one class at a time and dealing with all the reports for that. </p><p>I have the feeling they will go live en masse too. And that would be a BAD thing.</p>

Ba
06-16-2007, 11:03 AM
<p>So your basically testing with a small community of players, most of whom are in the lower level ranges.</p><p>Think how many more testers you might get if you allow a brief period of /testcopy to the PvE test server.</p><p>I understand many people on TEST may get upset at a lot of new L60-L70's arriving but you may see more accurate testing of raid-playstyle affecting changes that way.</p>

Belfrain
06-16-2007, 02:49 PM
And lets not forget that the test ALSO has the DW changes which are most likely going to disguise any DPS loss from this update.

Noaani
06-16-2007, 04:17 PM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing to remember for people concerned about raid testing. PvP players on a raid have the exact same experience as PvE players, unless someone else shows up and picks a fight. So any PvP raid capable guild is very welcome to copy over en masse and take on one of the raid zones. That is one way for raid players to check it out. Yes, those PvP characters have special rules on their PvP, but not on their PvE - so they should be able to speak to the AA changes in that world. (and also run through the Felwithe Throne if they are up to it!!!) Just an idea! </blockquote><p>So why are NPU and Second Dawn on PvP test atm?</p><p>Also, if the community on the test server is so precious, why not start up a second test server that does not have these limits, is modeled off the PvP test server, but is for all non PvP players that want to test stuff out, but do not have the time/desire to level a toon up in the anti-social structure that has found its way on to the current test server?</p><p>This fulfills the requirements of many groups. It keeps the test server community is tact (this community is nothing like communities on live servers, and this is a major reason a lot of bugs hit live that shouldn't... the test server players are playing the game in a different manner to the rest of us). It allows those of us who dispise the community on test, yet would like to contribute to testing this game, a means to do so. It also provides specific groups of players to have the opportunity to test changes that specifically affect them, raiders and crafters being the most obvious examples to me.</p>

kenm
06-16-2007, 04:24 PM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>I know it's frustrating for PvE people not to be able to copy over to PvE Test, but that server has a history and a strong community that deserves some respect with any ideas like that. Not saying it's off limits, but I am saying that there are more things to factor in there. They have a closed economy to consider for instance. With Test PvP it's been deliberately launced as a hotbed of change and no protections. One thing to remember for people concerned about raid testing. PvP players on a raid have the exact same experience as PvE players, unless someone else shows up and picks a fight. So any PvP raid capable guild is very welcome to copy over en masse and take on one of the raid zones. That is one way for raid players to check it out. Yes, those PvP characters have special rules on their PvP, but not on their PvE - so they should be able to speak to the AA changes in that world. (and also run through the Felwithe Throne if they are up to it!!!) Just an idea! </blockquote>So basically, SOE openly shows favoritism toward PvP players.  Awesome. If PvE Test wants to be a small community that doesn't want outsiders being able to test changes for the good of the game, why not just make it into a normal fast exp server for casuals?  I mean, that's all it is anyway.  Then open up the beta server year-round with copies and all, easy testing.

Snorm
06-16-2007, 04:32 PM
<p>To be upfront, I don't play much on test, and probably never will. Just a minor rant....</p><p>If you have never done serious QA, don't critique the players on test. Even if you have, remember that test players are voluntiers doing a job that normally is paid for. The server has been around for a very long time. Why do people assume there are only a few level 70 toons over there? People complain that there are no serious raiding guilds over there to test the upper level raid content, and then turn around and complain that a couple raiding guilds were copied over just to test the high level raid content...</p><p>Remember that the test server is just the last line of testing before something goes live. Setting up a proper testing inhouse for a lot of things in a game like this are both time consuming and expensive (lots of people involved), meaning it's difficult for SOE to test a lot of things inhouse. Don't assume that because you don't like something that goes live that no one on the test server ever mentioned it; ultimately it's the devs that are responsible for the quality of this game, not the testers. The testers just provide feedback and bug reports. </p><p>And finally, if you think the test players are doing a sloppy job, try to do a better one yourself. If you're not willing to invest the time to do that, you don't have a lot of room to review those that do.</p><p>This isn't a thread about the test server itself, or the testing methodology that SOE has decided to implement with EQ2. If you want to discuss either of those, the appropriate thing to do is start another thread on the topic.</p><p>And I'll throw one more vote for the idea of a disposable test server where copies are always allowed and toons are deleted after a short period of inactivity,  in addition to the current one. It would be nice for those of us that do not want to play extensively on the test server, but would like the option of reviewing major combat changes like this before they go live.</p><p>Snorm -- 70 Guard</p>

gnarkill
06-17-2007, 07:13 AM
Hey Lockeye...speaking of AA changes, Any chance of making Shadowknight Siphon Hate AA have a pvp check? Like everytime someone in my group is hit, there is a 3% chance to have hostile target forced on to me?

Rijacki
06-17-2007, 11:04 AM
<cite>MrWolfie wrote:</cite><blockquote>One thing that does concern me, is that these changes have been put on test en masse. Instead of introducing the changes for one class at a time and dealing with all the reports for that. <p>I have the feeling they will go live en masse too. And that would be a BAD thing.</p></blockquote> If they'd only done one class at a time, it would have taken 2 years, at one month per, to get the changes out.  If they'd only done a few classes now, a few later, etc, those in the classes they did would be screaming about how they were changed when no one else was and those not changed at the same time would scream about how they weren't changed when others were.  If they did it piecemeal, one class at a time, a few at a time, etc, it would be a VERY BAD thing. Think back to the class hats... For those who played SWG, think back to the 1st year with the Creature Handlers..

HippyKnight
06-17-2007, 12:40 PM
<span style="font-size: x-small; color: #ccffff; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-small"><span style="color: #ccffff"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Everyone at the moment picks wisdom, so the freehand/brainstorm changes reduce all sorcerors dps by about 5%, far more than any secondary slot item would provide. That 5% more than undoes every upgrade I've managed to get for my character this year, and I don't see how anyone can say the one trick wonders called sorcerors are currently doing 5% more than they should. A 2k fight will now be 1900, a 2.5k fight will now be 2375..</span></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small"> <p><span style="font-size: x-small"><span style="color: #ccffff"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif">But now I can respec away from the +dps lines to the improved sta/int lines and get myself less survivability, less +skill, and less dehate than a ranger has innately. And the dps of .. a fury..</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small"><span style="color: #ccffff"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif">My feedback/suggestions? </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small"><span style="color: #ccffff"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Reduce brainstorm by 2%, increase +crit from str by 4% and cast/recast from agi by 3%. Then str/agi/wis are about the same and sorcerors arent getting nerfed.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small"><span style="color: #ccffff"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Bring sorcerors up to ranger level by changing concussive to a 27% passive deaggro and +45 skills buff.</span></span></span></p><p>Scrap the deaggro int line and change it to a proc line with +pwr and +dmg hostile spell procs so that it is comparable/ a viable alternative to str/agi/wis. </p></span></span>

Sunrayn
06-18-2007, 12:02 AM
<cite>Valeros wrote:</cite><blockquote>Currently there are no guilds on test that are capable of clearing EH or MMIS, and its one of the main reason EoF raids were released with so much bugs, exploits and lag. </blockquote><p> Im sorry, your theory doesnt hold water.  You see, the TEST server didnt *even get* EoF *until* it went live.  You can blame the BETA testers, who were, incindentally *copied live server characters and raid guilds*,  for the EoF raid zone bugs, better yet, dont blame any playtesters.  We dont fix a. single. thing.  Thats not our job.</p><p>Oh, and dont bring up Unrest either, raid guilds from live were copied over for that too.</p>

kenm
06-18-2007, 12:12 AM
<cite>Sunrayn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Valeros wrote:</cite><blockquote>Currently there are no guilds on test that are capable of clearing EH or MMIS, and its one of the main reason EoF raids were released with so much bugs, exploits and lag. </blockquote><p> Im sorry, your theory doesnt hold water.  You see, the TEST server didnt *even get* EoF *until* it went live.  You can blame the BETA testers, who were, incindentally *copied live server characters and raid guilds*,  for the EoF raid zone bugs, better yet, dont blame any playtesters.  We dont fix a. single. thing.  Thats not our job.</p><p>Oh, and dont bring up Unrest either, raid guilds from live were copied over for that too.</p></blockquote>SOE, not any testers, is seriously the reason to blame for that crap.  MMIS was completely blocked off in beta, when guilds did get ported in the first door didn't even work so they could only kill one named.  Mobs across the board were completely missing abilities and people were clearing FTH and killing stuff in EH with pickup raids.  PHH was totally bugged out and impossible as well. There was seriously almost nothing to test raid-wise in EoF beta. On the other hand, this new raid zone should be tested so it doesn't get thrown live horribly broken like EoF did.  When you're unable to copy, and no guilds on test are capable of clearing EH (The zone difficulty is SUPPOSED to be EH 3rd floor), it means flat out nobody on PvE test is even <b>capable</b> of doing proper testing on it regardless.  How is that a good thing?  Oh, it's not. Anyway, who was actually copied for for Unrest?  I've never heard of that, but raid guilds...  for a group zone?  Sheesh, Unrest is a total joke, you'd think SOE would've beefed it up a ton then.

Zarafein
06-18-2007, 01:15 AM
Imo the devs got a lot of feedback the last days, hope we see some new update notes soon before it hits live.

Pogopuschel
06-18-2007, 04:17 AM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>I know it's frustrating for PvE people not to be able to copy over to PvE Test, but that server has a history and a strong community that deserves some respect with any ideas like that. Not saying it's off limits, but I am saying that there are more things to factor in there. They have a closed economy to consider for instance. </blockquote> Screw PvE test. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> If people started playing on the test server, they should know that the characters and everything there is of a rather volatile nature. In my opinion, it's is in everybody's interest that things that go live work from the beginning and are as balanced as possible. It saves the developers, the GMs and the players many headaches. Maybe a less radical approach, albeit I'm not sure if the database structure is built to support this... How about allowing to copy chars to PvE test, with the following restrictions to preserve their economy: - Everything you have except your coin transfers over - All items you bring get the "no-value" and "no trade" flags. - Copied characters get deleted after 24h (?)

NiteWolfe
06-18-2007, 06:00 AM
Uyaem@Runnyeye wrote: <blockquote><cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>I know it's frustrating for PvE people not to be able to copy over to PvE Test, but that server has a history and a strong community that deserves some respect with any ideas like that. Not saying it's off limits, but I am saying that there are more things to factor in there. They have a closed economy to consider for instance. </blockquote> Screw PvE test. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> If people started playing on the test server, they should know that the characters and everything there is of a rather volatile nature. In my opinion, it's is in everybody's interest that things that go live work from the beginning and are as balanced as possible. It saves the developers, the GMs and the players many headaches. Maybe a less radical approach, albeit I'm not sure if the database structure is built to support this... How about allowing to copy chars to PvE test, with the following restrictions to preserve their economy: - Everything you have except your coin transfers over - All items you bring get the "no-value" and "no trade" flags. - Copied characters get deleted after 24h (?) </blockquote> the oh so important economy that keeps getting brought up does not exist. I been there the market is as much a joke as the rest of it. Only thing i ca nfigure is they are afraid that players that copy over may actualy put some value on the items and  then they have to face paying for stuff instead of giveing it all away.  nothing is profitable over there and they want to keep it that way.

Legiax
06-18-2007, 06:29 AM
<p>From a <b><u>PvP</u></b> Point of view regarding Sorcerer AA changes:</p><p>Well done Devs, honestly. The STA tree forever has been there to help us survive longer, and unfortunately in PvP, it did very little towards its end goal. Manashield was simply a great way to burn your power out and die with the lack of any ability to fight back. With the upcoming changes, making it a 2:1 dmg vs power consumed, the ability will now become more viable at higher levels, which is superb. Scouts will moan because they can no longer 2 shot us, but if we spend AA points to prevent being 2 shotted, then [Removed for Content]... I want exactly what I am speccing for tbh. Well done, good changes.</p><p>The Subjugation bonus being added is also great, ordination... /shrug. The one thing I am not sure about is the Mitigation increase you are adding in, I am trying to be totally un bias here. Giving us more mitigation on top of an AA line which already scales rather nicely, might be a bit too severe, could you perhaps tell us how big the increase will be?</p><p>Finally, the INT line de-agro abilities, do not work in PvP at the moment. This line will still be hugely unpopular if you don't fix its PvP functionality.</p><p>Overall, from a <b><u>PvP</u></b> perspective, the STA line looks amazing and i'm more than happy. Good Job Devs!</p>

Terrifier
06-18-2007, 10:40 AM
<cite>Bayl wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>So your basically testing with a small community of players, most of whom are in the lower level ranges.</p><p>Think how many more testers you might get if you allow a brief period of /testcopy to the PvE test server.</p><p>I understand many people on TEST may get upset at a lot of new L60-L70's arriving but you may see more accurate testing of raid-playstyle affecting changes that way.</p></blockquote> Nice guess but really way off the mark. There are several high end raid guilds on test. If you are interested in helping please make a character and there are a lot of us that will be willing to help you get up and running. Would you be willing to move over from live and not get to go back ? I doubt you would and thats why copying over your character just doesn't work. Make a commitment and make a difference.  People assuming they understand what test is about without playing and leveling there are very misinformed. We are not paid to play and have jobs and family just like everyone else. We all have our own reasons for being on test. Some like the community feel and others like the total lack of plat spam. The bottom line is we all made our characters and made a commitment to the server just like others commit to live servers.  Anyone that wants a hand getting started is always welcome.

liveja
06-18-2007, 11:45 AM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote>That way you can provide constructive feedback about how it's working for you (if you play on one of the Test servers) and talk about how it could affect you based on the data provided from people on Test.</blockquote><p>Good deal! Too bad I don't have a level 70 Swashy on the Test server, so I could test the changes.</p><p>Of course, I could go to the PvP test server, but why would I do that? I have no interest in PvP, & want only to know how these changes are going to affect my PvP experience.</p><p>I've read the "reasons" for no test-copy to the non-PvP Test Server, & they all ring very hollow to me. I'm not the least bit interested in leveling up again on another server; otherwise, I would be playing on Test. Allowing us to test-copy to the normal Test server would eliminate all of these issues. Please re-consider it.</p>

Cheydak
06-18-2007, 12:24 PM
<cite>Grimwell wrote:</cite><blockquote> BTW, if you are a PvPer, and you have not done '/testcopy add' for your characters and you have concerns about how you are affected by this... you are missing a chance at a preview. That's not an option for PvE players due to the nature of the two Test servers, but the PvP folks should be on PvP Test seeing it for themselves where possible </blockquote> <p>That's all well and good but I would assume the class and character make up of a raiding PvP guild differs greatly from those on PvE.  That being the case, it's really not a very good indicator of how these changes will impact the rest of us.  My apologies if I'm wrong in my assumptions.</p><p>I have no desire to denigrate the good work that's being done by players on the test server.  There's no doubt that hundreds of bugs & glitches have been caught before they hit Live because of their vigilance.  That being said, the whole concept of a separate server that requires players to have to level up new characters in order to test certain aspects of the game is really not serving the best interests of the player base at large.  The PVE servers comprise the majority of the population in EQ2, yet have the least amount of representation when it comes to character altering changes like the ones being presented now.  If the developers <b><i>truly</i></b> want feedback on how things impact the status quo, then they need to have a better system in place, encompassing a much larger sampling than what's currently on the test server.</p>

Sir Longsword
06-18-2007, 02:12 PM
<p>Test server economy? I made a toon on test once and the broker had 17, that's right 17, pages of items on the broker.  That was not a focused search for fresh giant toes either, that was wide open.  Is that the economy we are afraid to taint?</p><p>edit: grammer</p>

ZeyGnome
06-18-2007, 08:19 PM
<p>Maybe you need to re-edit again.  Not once has there been less than 500 pages on the broker.  Try not using a filter next time or come up with a more creative untruth.</p>