Next round of troubador nerfs on test?

AzureDa · 02-10-2005, 02:37 PM

so.... strength being made less effective.

(sigh)

One of the key abilities of Troubadors is to buffs stats, obviously any decrease in the efficacy of stats weakens the class. To put it another way... rather than personally doing damage, troubadors do damage indirectly. They increase the damage the party does, and this (buffed damage + personal damage) is the damage contribution a troubador brings to a group.

We are the class most likely to have high strength - on our own, by virtue of our buffs. The whole analysis was based on an incorrect assumption that fighters alone have high strength: they don't. Its buffs that get fighters that strength and so the strength change is something that primarily weakens the buffing classes.

Relatively speaking... this change will make fighters more attractive in groups relative to troubadors; their contribution to damage is being reduced much less than a troubadors. Not only that.... fighters are getting tougher relative to troubadors as well.

AzureDa · 02-10-2005, 02:50 PM

... Currently in the live game, a strength of 400 (achievable at the higher levels with buffs and gear) results in a 200% damage bonus. This results in fighters being the premier melee damage dealers, since they typically have the highest STR values...

- Moorgard

OK... just to point out where the real falacy is here in the post.

The damage increase due to the buffs is something that needs to be attributed to the buffer - not to the person being buffed. Thats the damage pickup you get when you add the buffer to the group... thats what they bring to the table. Troubadors can raise the strength of everyone in the group by 100.... thats an accross the board 25% damage increase on base melee... that comes from adding the troubadour.

Just because the fighter is the one swinging doesn't mean all the damage they do should be attributed to them for balancing purposes. Their contribution is their unbuffed number... everything else needs to be attributed to the person providing the buff. Lowing the total impact of strength, you disproportionately make buffers less attractive to groups.

To restate it again.... if a player has a base of 150 strength.... and a buffer can add +100 str to everyone in the group (for a total of +600 strength); the nerf hits the buffer four times as hard as the guy being buffed.

Alis · 02-10-2005, 03:26 PM

I think we all knew fighters being top of the damage tree at high lvls was going to change, I hope it affects them enough, unbuffed they are in the 100-200 str range? so maybe 15% reduction in damage at best which will also affect scouts. Mages needed an increase in dps which they have and to keep the group dynamic right they reduced fighters and scouts.

For the buffers of this world it sure has been a bad month.

AzureDa · 02-10-2005, 04:24 PM

I think getting the group dynamic right is an admirable goal... and I am certainly willing to accept that changes need to be made. Reading the changes message really worried me though; the explanations given didn't match up with what they were actually doing. That gives me no confidence that they did their 'balancing' calculations correctly.

It -has- been a bad month for the buffers of the world. What I really want to see is a patch message that says something like "we think buffers were doing to much to enhance the group, so we have treduced their effectiveness in favor of classes that do direct damage, do direct heals."

That would at least indicate that they understand what is going on here, give us a feeling that some vision of balance will actually be achieved. Right now, their change to reduce the effectiveness of warriors... reduces the effetiveness of the buffers far more than it does the warriors. If that is their -intent-, thats one thing. If they are flailing about randomly trying to fix a problem by doing things before thinking about what they are doing... thats something different. They'll just keep whipsawing back and forth if thats the case.

Alis · 02-10-2005, 05:40 PM

Well the fact that the extremes are penalized more certainly isnt nice. I am assuming that all the uber groups at the top that had troubs/dirges as requirements has caused some of the problem. Going from totally necessary in a top group is one thing as long as we offer enough to be wanted at all, leave the spot empty he isnt adding much is not something I want to ever hear of any class.

Sadly group has got harder since the last patch this one sure isnt going to help.

34 Dirge by the way.

Nevari · 02-10-2005, 07:31 PM

Moorgard wrote:
While this change will have some impact on scouts, it should be minimal enough (due to the fact that they typically don't have STR at the same degree as fighters) that scouts will now have higher damage output than fighters. This helps scouts fill the role they were intended to fill as damage dealers through the use of their powerful arts.

I use lots of power in a fight. I use even more using HO. For sure my CA will improve my DPS. Now we forget the impact of haste like the ring, FBSS, haste song.Let me siphon power or use constantly debuffs. Let me juggle buffs as needed and I'm OOP and my DPS go down big time.This isn't thought through. It's aimed on the scout class and not taking into account the troubador subclass nor the dirge.The assumption of which attribute is highest due to equipment is exact that, a assumption. Some might look for more strength to do more DPS, who knows?Troubador needs ASAP a very careful look to balance our usefullness out again. We thrown into the scout pot once again and will be hit hardest of all subclasses. I remember beta there was said, bard DPS will be adjusted due to the reason we don't use poison. Never happened in a measureable amount afraid.Adjusting STR, I agree it's good for the overall game, needs to take into account a benefit given to troub in exchange then.

Alis · 02-10-2005, 08:47 PM

Of course increasing the buff lenghts will change brias for the better, but I have to say this is impressive stuff for enchanters.

SingleTra · 02-10-2005, 09:44 PM

I do agree that troubs and dirges need to be looked at more closely. Sony needs to stop lumping us in a general group called scout, because we are FAR from what the other scouts are. The apparent desire to pummle the troubs and dirges into the dirt, is working. I pulled the patch message off the test server, so lets take a close look here.

- The damage bonus given by extremely high amounts of strength has been reduced. For example, having a strength of 400 previously gave a 200% damage bonus; after this change, the damage bonus is 155%. There is no change to the damage bonus at a STR of 100, and only a slight reduction at 200 STR.

Alright. Now we once again have a character wide nerf. We knew this one was coming when the warriors were attributing to 40% or more damage towards the encounter. What does this do to other classes? I seriously question the justification the dev gave to nerf the entire player base.

- Heavy armor now mitigates 11% more damage. Light armor now mitigates 35% more damage.

What? It is apparent medium armor was completely looked over on this one. Where is the mitigation for medium armor?

- Having stamina greater than 200 will now increase the character's maximum health pool.

Something I like to see. That is something the group will actually benefit from, to an extent. Thought this was in place already though? Was I mistaken? I may be of some use yet, to a group anyhow.

- Maximum power will increase when the stats used to determine it (strength, agility, intelligence, or wisdom) go above 200.

Once again, hasn't this always been the case? Was it capped at 200?

- Melee combat arts will decrease in effectiveness when equipping a weapon that is green to the character. They will decrease even further if a grey weapon is equipped.

If you are still using your citizenship weapon at level 40, you should be punished. I only fear that this will be implemented to armor and other equipment slots.

- If an epic opponent can only be hit by a certain quality of weapon, that weapon's level must be within 75% or 5 levels of the target's level.

Dont see an issue here. Can the weapon be of higher level? Will that epic mob that is grey to me be immune to my super fancy weapon because the weapon is 5 levels too good for it?

I understand that these changes are only on test right now, but track record confirms, they all will be live soon. I am currently trying to make the best hypothesis on all of these changes while trying to keep a level head about the next round of Troubadour and Dirge nerfs. Although it seems they are not directed at the 2 subclasses, they do impact us the hardest. I am not keeping my hopes up in light of the proposed changes. I am however, looking forward to the day that there is a message that states that the bard class will be in-line with all other classes in the game, and not lumped in as a scout.

Caa · 02-11-2005, 12:13 AM

I was in group yesterday where sadly an SK did more DPS than me. The DPS was pretty constant in this order:

Assassin (without poison) > Shadowknight > Necromancer >> Troubador (me) > Inquisitor

With the Strength Damage Bonus adjustment and increasing casters (even though not necessarily Necros, that it seems will come later) things should fall into place. On even con mobs the Assassin was about doubling my DPS. That seems a little of out of whack. I bring a lot of utility to my group so I'm not worried too much, but a boost in DPS is warranted I think. There is an easy solution that Sony implemented for wizards and warlocks. Maybe a 30-35% increase to our CA and song damage OR somehow link haste with CA timers (which would be ideal imo), the added utlity there would make up for our lack of DPS.

Iliad 32 Troubador

Tox

Message Edited by Caali on 02-10-2005 11:15 AM

aeio · 02-11-2005, 12:51 AM

I don't even think we can succesfully lobby for ways to improve us, until they actually tell us what the group defining archetype role is for scouts. It is not damage, it is not tanking, it is not healing.Until they tell us what they intend for the entire archetype, we can't even begin to suggest ways for us to better fill or roles given our specific class in that archetype.

AzureDa · 02-11-2005, 02:07 PM

Assassin (without poison) > Shadowknight > Necromancer >> Troubador (me) > Inquisitor

With the Strength Damage Bonus adjustment and increasing casters (even though not necessarily Necros, that it seems will come later) things should fall into place.

No, they won't... which is the problem. The important issue is that your contribution to DPS ( personal + 10% bonus from buffs on you 10% of shadowknights + 10% of assassin + etc.) is going to drop significantly more than the SK's contribution drops (i.e. his unbuffed DPS).

If the SK has 100 strength... and you buff everyone in the party by 100 strength... then he might lose 5% of his DPS, you lose 5% of the DPS the SK is no longer doing from your buff, 5% that you are no longer doing, 5% the assassin is no longer doing ... 5% the necromancer is no longer doing....

The impact of the change is to dramatically decrease the DPS contribution from a troubador.... moderately drop the DPS from a fighter. Let me repeat that: the most dramatic impact of the strength change will be to reduce the effectiveness of the buffing classes.

Message Edited by AzureDawn on 02-11-2005 01:53 AM

Ep · 02-11-2005, 07:23 PM

SingleTrack wrote:

I do agree that troubs and dirges need to be looked at more closely. Sony needs to stop lumping us in a general group called scout, because we are FAR from what the other scouts are. The apparent desire to pummle the troubs and dirges into the dirt, is working. I pulled the patch message off the test server, so lets take a close look here.

- The damage bonus given by extremely high amounts of strength has been reduced. For example, having a strength of 400 previously gave a 200% damage bonus; after this change, the damage bonus is 155%. There is no change to the damage bonus at a STR of 100, and only a slight reduction at 200 STR.

Alright. Now we once again have a character wide nerf. We knew this one was coming when the warriors were attributing to 40% or more damage towards the encounter. What does this do to other classes? I seriously question the justification the dev gave to nerf the entire player base.

- Heavy armor now mitigates 11% more damage. Light armor now mitigates 35% more damage.

What? It is apparent medium armor was completely looked over on this one. Where is the mitigation for medium armor?

- Having stamina greater than 200 will now increase the character's maximum health pool.

Something I like to see. That is something the group will actually benefit from, to an extent. Thought this was in place already though? Was I mistaken? I may be of some use yet, to a group anyhow.

- Maximum power will increase when the stats used to determine it (strength, agility, intelligence, or wisdom) go above 200.

Once again, hasn't this always been the case? Was it capped at 200?

- Melee combat arts will decrease in effectiveness when equipping a weapon that is green to the character. They will decrease even further if a grey weapon is equipped.

If you are still using your citizenship weapon at level 40, you should be punished. I only fear that this will be implemented to armor and other equipment slots.

- If an epic opponent can only be hit by a certain quality of weapon, that weapon's level must be within 75% or 5 levels of the target's level.

Dont see an issue here. Can the weapon be of higher level? Will that epic mob that is grey to me be immune to my super fancy weapon because the weapon is 5 levels too good for it?

I understand that these changes are only on test right now, but track record confirms, they all will be live soon. I am currently trying to make the best hypothesis on all of these changes while trying to keep a level head about the next round of Troubadour and Dirge nerfs. Although it seems they are not directed at the 2 subclasses, they do impact us the hardest. I am not keeping my hopes up in light of the proposed changes. I am however, looking forward to the day that there is a message that states that the bard class will be in-line with all other classes in the game, and not lumped in as a scout.

The reason why they upgraded heavy and light armor skills is b/c those are the fighter armors, warrior/crusader for heavy and monk for light. We as scouts don't need armor upgrades b/c we don't tank.

Jethro · 02-11-2005, 08:08 PM

Don't tank? I tank everytime I solo. They might as well call medium very very light armor if this line of reasoning is applied SMILEY

.

AzureDa · 02-11-2005, 08:48 PM

We as scouts don't need armor upgrades b/c we don't tank.

oh, for some reason I was operatign under the mistaken impression that troubadors were a utility class able to do a variety of things... like stepping up or a short time if the tank goes down, offtank, and solo. A jack of all trades able to fill a variety of holes in a group. Glad you cleared that up!

Nevari · 02-11-2005, 09:01 PM

Let me quote another thread from the boards. The post is just class imo :smileyvery-happy:

Archmago wrote:
lvl 40 Troub at Oasis server - always interested in game mechanics and diverse gameplay.

Once upon a time there was a country - we call it Nurrath. Nurrath had a lot adventurers. They were divided into:

damage dealers
healers
tanks

Now the Gods decided there would be another class. They said:

This class wont deal much damage, will not be able to heal and cannot tank. However, they will be able to help all the other classes out.

After a while the tanks found out that this class could also tank a little bit so they started crying and complaining to the Gods.

And the healers found out that this class could heal a little bit and they started crying and complaining to the Gods.

And the damage dealers found out that this class can deal nearly as much damage as they could do so they started crying and complaining to the Gods.

And the Gods heard all these people crying and complaining and they created a new class:

This class should not be able to tank - not even a little bit.
This class should not be able to heal - not even a little bit.
This class should be able to do a little bit of damage still. (must be a mistake here)

And they named the class: Troubadour.

P.S. I really think these songs are annoying. We should take away their instruments, too.

Alis · 02-11-2005, 09:28 PM

Are you still wanted in groups? I

Alis · 02-11-2005, 09:31 PM

Are you still wanted in groups? I was disappointed to be out dps by assasin by a factor of 2 to 1, even if I am helping him, with three assasins and one Dirge lfg would I be worth a pick? Class balance especially on the balance of utility is so hard, from the early reports (never got that high) raids required bards, I would love to compare groups with say an assasin instead of a bard and see which is more efficient. Sadly to many variables but it would be nice if neither was the obvious choice.

Jzi · 02-11-2005, 11:10 PM

The changes to the armours aren't a nerf to scouts at all, so I don;t know why people are focusing on that. What the person is saying about us not tanking is its not our primary role, and medium armour isn't a worn armour for a character whose primary role is to tank. hence they did heavy armour and then light armour for brawlers.

Medium armour didn't take a nerf, its still the same, and still better that light armour, however if anything as the gap between medium and light armour has closed a bit, it makes using light armour a more viable armour chioce if thats what we wanted to do.

So as far as thats concerned, its not a nerf to bards or scouts at all its a benefit.

The agility changes went in last patch, the latest round on test nerfs strength. Well yes this effects bards as they buff str, although dirges due to their supposedly more offensive role tended to have buffs with str attached extra, where as troubs have agility, so in that respect it prolly hits dirges more (which i play), and we also debuff str too, so again effects us.

However, it was brought in to curb some of the high level fighters having such high level dps, most scout dps seems to come from CA and then weapons attacks + poisions, so scouts are effected less by that change, bringing the dps of scouts and fighters at high levels more in line.. troubs are still a scout so its swings and round abouts on that change... however yeah the benefit of this balance is seen more by the other scouts than bards as some of our dps contribution comes from the fighter classes via buffs.

what you can hope for in this is that they alter the str stat, and if they then still see fighters kicking out the damage, they'll take a closer look at how CA, regular melee, weapon delay & haste all figure into the dps equation and realise things are perhaps not working as they "might" be intending.

Message Edited by Jziad on 02-11-2005 10:16 AM

Tharn · 02-14-2005, 08:07 AM

Someone post if it actually becomes worthwhile to log in again... Thanks!

AzureDa · 02-14-2005, 02:25 PM

Medium armour didn't take a nerf, its still the same, and still better that light armour, however if anything as the gap between medium and light armour has closed a bit, it makes using light armour a more viable armour chioce if thats what we wanted to do.

well, if you raise the damage and accuracy of mobs, and raise the armor values of armor other than medium, this has the same impact as nerfing medium armor. and that's what we have seen over the last couple weeks. The goal has clearly been to insure that fighter classes can tank, and scout classes can't. Not a bad goal, but perhaps has gone too far in terms of removing a major piece of utility from scouts. This isn't the same problem that the stat changes are.... or even really a problem, IMHO. They have a clear goal about making fighters essential to groups to tank; which is fine.

(It does raise the question about why 'scouts' shouldn't also be essential to a group, but that's digressing.)

---

The stat changes are a real problem.

The changes to stats will hit dirges as well; my impression that dirges focused more on debuffs (making opponents weaker) and trobs more on buffs (making the party stronger.) It will hit some of the healing classes with a buffing focus. The important thing is that the impact of the nerf is that buffing classes become much less effective.

If the goal is to make buffing classes weaker, in favor of classes that don't, then this change would make sense. The issue is one of not attributing the additional damage from buffs to the guy doing the buffing. There may (or may not) be a balance issue where strength buffs are contributing too much damage to the group. This is fundamentally a different balance issue than whether or not fighters are outdamaging scouts.

Their explanation of the rationale for the change doesn't match with what they are changing.

Message Edited by AzureDawn on 02-14-2005 03:52 AM

Lyones · 02-15-2005, 09:49 PM

medium armor is getting boosted too... look through the dev tracker posts and you'll find where they clarifiedIt is incredibly difficult to quantify the dps attributable to a bard vs. that of a most other classes... If I haste for x and increase weapon skill by x and add x amount of mana and x amount of procs and x amount of strength how much of that is attributable to me and how much to the others... There was a desire to nerf STR because it was shifting towards ideal group of monk,zerker,pally,sk,troub,templar or something similar because STR was so good to buff... this is in part an attempt to rebalance the group makeup dynamic and bring mages back into the fold... it does hit you hard in this one aspect but I would suggest to you that even without the STR adjustment you would be hit hard just from this rebalance... if the primary group starts replacing those 3 tanks with a ranger and 2 mages then you lose almost all your STR buff gain anywaysHere are some numbers from my lvl 32 pallyFight number one: Lvl 34 Sand Snapper, hit percentage 55.56%, 397 damage from crushing, 1726 from specialsFight number two: Lvl 34 Sand Snapper, hit percentage 87.50%, 455 damage from crushing, 1586 from specialsFight number three: Lvl 34 Sand Snapper, hit percentage 64.29%, 282 damage from crushing, 1844 from specialsThat's only 3 fights but you can see the miniscule portion that is attributable to my regular attacks... Those numbers might be pushing 1/3 if i had 2hs and was buffed with divine intervention (which i left out of this small test)...

AzureDa · 02-16-2005, 03:22 PM

There was a desire to nerf STR because it was shifting towards ideal group of monk,zerker,pally,sk,troub,templar or something similar because STR was so good to buff... this is in part an attempt to rebalance the group makeup dynamic and bring mages back into the fold...

Generally though... adding stength to a scout will result in an absolute pickup in damage similar to buffing a fighter. and as you have shown... doesn't impact any individual person all that much. Where people lose out is when you have your DPS from buffs spread accross 6 people... then the effect is much larger for the buffer.

Its fine to bring mage-types 'back into the fold' by nerfing buffing classes... which is what is happening... but at that point they need to be recognizing that this is primarily a nerf to buffers... and has nothing to do with fighters doing way to much damage relative to scouts. The end result is it weakens chanters-coercers-troubadors-dirges-druids-furies ... and increases the relative value of guardians-berserkers-paladins-SKs-templars-inquisitors-wizards-warlocks.

Caa · 02-16-2005, 07:16 PM

Again I was parsing damage last night in a low 30s group and the monk and assassin (no poison) were both consistently scoring the same ~2700. That was with the monk tanking. So there definitely is need for readjustment there. Which I might add is being proposed for the next patch: increase in light armor defense and decrease damage output.

The way to fix this nerf for troubador is to give a buff that increases DD (and or DOT) damage by a certain percentage and have haste affect both melee and combat ability/spell recast times. I'd like to see that % increase tacked onto the Aria line which I consider almost 100% useless atm.

Averil · 02-16-2005, 10:32 PM

I agree with the comments re Aria. I've been trying this for a while and haven't noticed any difference in damage output.

Has anyone ever parsed to see if this spell makes a difference? As far as I can tell, it never procs.

Bister · 02-17-2005, 03:48 PM

SingleTrack wrote:- Melee combat arts will decrease in effectiveness when equipping a weapon that is green to the character. They will decrease even further if a grey weapon is equipped.
If you are still using your citizenship weapon at level 40, you should be punished. I only fear that this will be implemented to armor and other equipment slots.

actually this change is intended for 1 specific weapon i would bet, the PGT, even though it cons grey it is the weapon of choice for insanely long raid mob fights due to the massive number of comabt arts it adds to the fight via power boost procs. They might just have found it to be as silly as i did that we would call for a substandard weapon to be equipped for any ^^^ fight.that said, i'm gonna miss the lil fella, he's merchant fodder now SMILEY

02-10-2005, 02:37 PM	#1
AzureDa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 39	so.... strength being made less effective. (sigh) One of the key abilities of Troubadors is to buffs stats, obviously any decrease in the efficacy of stats weakens the class. To put it another way... rather than personally doing damage, troubadors do damage indirectly. They increase the damage the party does, and this (buffed damage + personal damage) is the damage contribution a troubador brings to a group. We are the class most likely to have high strength - on our own, by virtue of our buffs. The whole analysis was based on an incorrect assumption that fighters alone have high strength: they don't. Its buffs that get fighters that strength and so the strength change is something that primarily weakens the buffing classes. Relatively speaking... this change will make fighters more attractive in groups relative to troubadors; their contribution to damage is being reduced much less than a troubadors. Not only that.... fighters are getting tougher relative to troubadors as well. __________________ - Fineus, the Cheesethief of Steamfont

02-10-2005, 02:50 PM	#2
AzureDa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 39	... Currently in the live game, a strength of 400 (achievable at the higher levels with buffs and gear) results in a 200% damage bonus. This results in fighters being the premier melee damage dealers, since they typically have the highest STR values... - Moorgard OK... just to point out where the real falacy is here in the post. The damage increase due to the buffs is something that needs to be attributed to the buffer - not to the person being buffed. Thats the damage pickup you get when you add the buffer to the group... thats what they bring to the table. Troubadors can raise the strength of everyone in the group by 100.... thats an accross the board 25% damage increase on base melee... that comes from adding the troubadour. Just because the fighter is the one swinging doesn't mean all the damage they do should be attributed to them for balancing purposes. Their contribution is their unbuffed number... everything else needs to be attributed to the person providing the buff. Lowing the total impact of strength, you disproportionately make buffers less attractive to groups. To restate it again.... if a player has a base of 150 strength.... and a buffer can add +100 str to everyone in the group (for a total of +600 strength); the nerf hits the buffer four times as hard as the guy being buffed. __________________ - Fineus, the Cheesethief of Steamfont

02-10-2005, 04:24 PM	#4
AzureDa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 39	I think getting the group dynamic right is an admirable goal... and I am certainly willing to accept that changes need to be made. Reading the changes message really worried me though; the explanations given didn't match up with what they were actually doing. That gives me no confidence that they did their 'balancing' calculations correctly. It -has- been a bad month for the buffers of the world. What I really want to see is a patch message that says something like "we think buffers were doing to much to enhance the group, so we have treduced their effectiveness in favor of classes that do direct damage, do direct heals." That would at least indicate that they understand what is going on here, give us a feeling that some vision of balance will actually be achieved. Right now, their change to reduce the effectiveness of warriors... reduces the effetiveness of the buffers far more than it does the warriors. If that is their -intent-, thats one thing. If they are flailing about randomly trying to fix a problem by doing things before thinking about what they are doing... thats something different. They'll just keep whipsawing back and forth if thats the case. __________________ - Fineus, the Cheesethief of Steamfont

02-10-2005, 07:31 PM	#6
Nevari Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 92	Moorgard wrote: While this change will have some impact on scouts, it should be minimal enough (due to the fact that they typically don't have STR at the same degree as fighters) that scouts will now have higher damage output than fighters. This helps scouts fill the role they were intended to fill as damage dealers through the use of their powerful arts. I use lots of power in a fight. I use even more using HO. For sure my CA will improve my DPS. Now we forget the impact of haste like the ring, FBSS, haste song.Let me siphon power or use constantly debuffs. Let me juggle buffs as needed and I'm OOP and my DPS go down big time.This isn't thought through. It's aimed on the scout class and not taking into account the troubador subclass nor the dirge.The assumption of which attribute is highest due to equipment is exact that, a assumption. Some might look for more strength to do more DPS, who knows?Troubador needs ASAP a very careful look to balance our usefullness out again. We thrown into the scout pot once again and will be hit hardest of all subclasses. I remember beta there was said, bard DPS will be adjusted due to the reason we don't use poison. Never happened in a measureable amount afraid.Adjusting STR, I agree it's good for the overall game, needs to take into account a benefit given to troub in exchange then. __________________

02-10-2005, 09:44 PM	#8
SingleTra Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 12	I do agree that troubs and dirges need to be looked at more closely. Sony needs to stop lumping us in a general group called scout, because we are FAR from what the other scouts are. The apparent desire to pummle the troubs and dirges into the dirt, is working. I pulled the patch message off the test server, so lets take a close look here. - The damage bonus given by extremely high amounts of strength has been reduced. For example, having a strength of 400 previously gave a 200% damage bonus; after this change, the damage bonus is 155%. There is no change to the damage bonus at a STR of 100, and only a slight reduction at 200 STR. Alright. Now we once again have a character wide nerf. We knew this one was coming when the warriors were attributing to 40% or more damage towards the encounter. What does this do to other classes? I seriously question the justification the dev gave to nerf the entire player base. - Heavy armor now mitigates 11% more damage. Light armor now mitigates 35% more damage. What? It is apparent medium armor was completely looked over on this one. Where is the mitigation for medium armor? - Having stamina greater than 200 will now increase the character's maximum health pool. Something I like to see. That is something the group will actually benefit from, to an extent. Thought this was in place already though? Was I mistaken? I may be of some use yet, to a group anyhow. - Maximum power will increase when the stats used to determine it (strength, agility, intelligence, or wisdom) go above 200. Once again, hasn't this always been the case? Was it capped at 200? - Melee combat arts will decrease in effectiveness when equipping a weapon that is green to the character. They will decrease even further if a grey weapon is equipped. If you are still using your citizenship weapon at level 40, you should be punished. I only fear that this will be implemented to armor and other equipment slots. - If an epic opponent can only be hit by a certain quality of weapon, that weapon's level must be within 75% or 5 levels of the target's level. Dont see an issue here. Can the weapon be of higher level? Will that epic mob that is grey to me be immune to my super fancy weapon because the weapon is 5 levels too good for it? I understand that these changes are only on test right now, but track record confirms, they all will be live soon. I am currently trying to make the best hypothesis on all of these changes while trying to keep a level head about the next round of Troubadour and Dirge nerfs. Although it seems they are not directed at the 2 subclasses, they do impact us the hardest. I am not keeping my hopes up in light of the proposed changes. I am however, looking forward to the day that there is a message that states that the bard class will be in-line with all other classes in the game, and not lumped in as a scout. __________________

02-10-2005, 03:26 PM	#3
Alis Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 44	I think we all knew fighters being top of the damage tree at high lvls was going to change, I hope it affects them enough, unbuffed they are in the 100-200 str range? so maybe 15% reduction in damage at best which will also affect scouts. Mages needed an increase in dps which they have and to keep the group dynamic right they reduced fighters and scouts. For the buffers of this world it sure has been a bad month.

02-10-2005, 05:40 PM	#5
Alis Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 44	Well the fact that the extremes are penalized more certainly isnt nice. I am assuming that all the uber groups at the top that had troubs/dirges as requirements has caused some of the problem. Going from totally necessary in a top group is one thing as long as we offer enough to be wanted at all, leave the spot empty he isnt adding much is not something I want to ever hear of any class. Sadly group has got harder since the last patch this one sure isnt going to help. 34 Dirge by the way.

02-10-2005, 08:47 PM	#7
Alis Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 44	Of course increasing the buff lenghts will change brias for the better, but I have to say this is impressive stuff for enchanters.

02-11-2005, 12:13 AM	#9
Caa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 54	I was in group yesterday where sadly an SK did more DPS than me. The DPS was pretty constant in this order: Assassin (without poison) > Shadowknight > Necromancer >> Troubador (me) > Inquisitor With the Strength Damage Bonus adjustment and increasing casters (even though not necessarily Necros, that it seems will come later) things should fall into place. On even con mobs the Assassin was about doubling my DPS. That seems a little of out of whack. I bring a lot of utility to my group so I'm not worried too much, but a boost in DPS is warranted I think. There is an easy solution that Sony implemented for wizards and warlocks. Maybe a 30-35% increase to our CA and song damage OR somehow link haste with CA timers (which would be ideal imo), the added utlity there would make up for our lack of DPS. Iliad 32 Troubador Tox Message Edited by Caali on 02-10-2005 11:15 AM __________________ Iliad 36 Troubadour / 33 Alchemist Odys 33 Defiler / 37 Armorer Freeport, Toxxulia

02-11-2005, 12:51 AM	#10
aeio Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 267	I don't even think we can succesfully lobby for ways to improve us, until they actually tell us what the group defining archetype role is for scouts. It is not damage, it is not tanking, it is not healing.Until they tell us what they intend for the entire archetype, we can't even begin to suggest ways for us to better fill or roles given our specific class in that archetype.

02-11-2005, 02:07 PM	#11
AzureDa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 39	Assassin (without poison) > Shadowknight > Necromancer >> Troubador (me) > Inquisitor With the Strength Damage Bonus adjustment and increasing casters (even though not necessarily Necros, that it seems will come later) things should fall into place. No, they won't... which is the problem. The important issue is that your contribution to DPS ( personal + 10% bonus from buffs on you 10% of shadowknights + 10% of assassin + etc.) is going to drop significantly more than the SK's contribution drops (i.e. his unbuffed DPS). If the SK has 100 strength... and you buff everyone in the party by 100 strength... then he might lose 5% of his DPS, you lose 5% of the DPS the SK is no longer doing from your buff, 5% that you are no longer doing, 5% the assassin is no longer doing ... 5% the necromancer is no longer doing.... The impact of the change is to dramatically decrease the DPS contribution from a troubador.... moderately drop the DPS from a fighter. Let me repeat that: the most dramatic impact of the strength change will be to reduce the effectiveness of the buffing classes. Message Edited by AzureDawn on 02-11-2005 01:53 AM __________________ - Fineus, the Cheesethief of Steamfont

02-11-2005, 07:23 PM	#12
Ep General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 435	SingleTrack wrote: I do agree that troubs and dirges need to be looked at more closely. Sony needs to stop lumping us in a general group called scout, because we are FAR from what the other scouts are. The apparent desire to pummle the troubs and dirges into the dirt, is working. I pulled the patch message off the test server, so lets take a close look here. - The damage bonus given by extremely high amounts of strength has been reduced. For example, having a strength of 400 previously gave a 200% damage bonus; after this change, the damage bonus is 155%. There is no change to the damage bonus at a STR of 100, and only a slight reduction at 200 STR. Alright. Now we once again have a character wide nerf. We knew this one was coming when the warriors were attributing to 40% or more damage towards the encounter. What does this do to other classes? I seriously question the justification the dev gave to nerf the entire player base. - Heavy armor now mitigates 11% more damage. Light armor now mitigates 35% more damage. What? It is apparent medium armor was completely looked over on this one. Where is the mitigation for medium armor? - Having stamina greater than 200 will now increase the character's maximum health pool. Something I like to see. That is something the group will actually benefit from, to an extent. Thought this was in place already though? Was I mistaken? I may be of some use yet, to a group anyhow. - Maximum power will increase when the stats used to determine it (strength, agility, intelligence, or wisdom) go above 200. Once again, hasn't this always been the case? Was it capped at 200? - Melee combat arts will decrease in effectiveness when equipping a weapon that is green to the character. They will decrease even further if a grey weapon is equipped. If you are still using your citizenship weapon at level 40, you should be punished. I only fear that this will be implemented to armor and other equipment slots. - If an epic opponent can only be hit by a certain quality of weapon, that weapon's level must be within 75% or 5 levels of the target's level. Dont see an issue here. Can the weapon be of higher level? Will that epic mob that is grey to me be immune to my super fancy weapon because the weapon is 5 levels too good for it? I understand that these changes are only on test right now, but track record confirms, they all will be live soon. I am currently trying to make the best hypothesis on all of these changes while trying to keep a level head about the next round of Troubadour and Dirge nerfs. Although it seems they are not directed at the 2 subclasses, they do impact us the hardest. I am not keeping my hopes up in light of the proposed changes. I am however, looking forward to the day that there is a message that states that the bard class will be in-line with all other classes in the game, and not lumped in as a scout. The reason why they upgraded heavy and light armor skills is b/c those are the fighter armors, warrior/crusader for heavy and monk for light. We as scouts don't need armor upgrades b/c we don't tank. __________________ --- Sir Auron

02-11-2005, 08:08 PM	#13
Jethro Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 24	Don't tank? I tank everytime I solo. They might as well call medium very very light armor if this line of reasoning is applied .

02-11-2005, 08:48 PM	#14
AzureDa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 39	We as scouts don't need armor upgrades b/c we don't tank. oh, for some reason I was operatign under the mistaken impression that troubadors were a utility class able to do a variety of things... like stepping up or a short time if the tank goes down, offtank, and solo. A jack of all trades able to fill a variety of holes in a group. Glad you cleared that up! __________________ - Fineus, the Cheesethief of Steamfont

02-11-2005, 09:01 PM	#15
Nevari Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 92	Let me quote another thread from the boards. The post is just class imo :smileyvery-happy: Archmago wrote: lvl 40 Troub at Oasis server - always interested in game mechanics and diverse gameplay. Once upon a time there was a country - we call it Nurrath. Nurrath had a lot adventurers. They were divided into: damage dealers healers tanks Now the Gods decided there would be another class. They said: This class wont deal much damage, will not be able to heal and cannot tank. However, they will be able to help all the other classes out. After a while the tanks found out that this class could also tank a little bit so they started crying and complaining to the Gods. And the healers found out that this class could heal a little bit and they started crying and complaining to the Gods. And the damage dealers found out that this class can deal nearly as much damage as they could do so they started crying and complaining to the Gods. And the Gods heard all these people crying and complaining and they created a new class: This class should not be able to tank - not even a little bit. This class should not be able to heal - not even a little bit. This class should be able to do a little bit of damage still. (must be a mistake here) And they named the class: Troubadour. P.S. I really think these songs are annoying. We should take away their instruments, too. __________________

02-11-2005, 09:28 PM	#16
Alis Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 44	Are you still wanted in groups? I

02-11-2005, 09:31 PM	#17
Alis Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 44	Are you still wanted in groups? I was disappointed to be out dps by assasin by a factor of 2 to 1, even if I am helping him, with three assasins and one Dirge lfg would I be worth a pick? Class balance especially on the balance of utility is so hard, from the early reports (never got that high) raids required bards, I would love to compare groups with say an assasin instead of a bard and see which is more efficient. Sadly to many variables but it would be nice if neither was the obvious choice.

02-11-2005, 11:10 PM	#18
Jzi Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 94	The changes to the armours aren't a nerf to scouts at all, so I don;t know why people are focusing on that. What the person is saying about us not tanking is its not our primary role, and medium armour isn't a worn armour for a character whose primary role is to tank. hence they did heavy armour and then light armour for brawlers. Medium armour didn't take a nerf, its still the same, and still better that light armour, however if anything as the gap between medium and light armour has closed a bit, it makes using light armour a more viable armour chioce if thats what we wanted to do. So as far as thats concerned, its not a nerf to bards or scouts at all its a benefit. The agility changes went in last patch, the latest round on test nerfs strength. Well yes this effects bards as they buff str, although dirges due to their supposedly more offensive role tended to have buffs with str attached extra, where as troubs have agility, so in that respect it prolly hits dirges more (which i play), and we also debuff str too, so again effects us. However, it was brought in to curb some of the high level fighters having such high level dps, most scout dps seems to come from CA and then weapons attacks + poisions, so scouts are effected less by that change, bringing the dps of scouts and fighters at high levels more in line.. troubs are still a scout so its swings and round abouts on that change... however yeah the benefit of this balance is seen more by the other scouts than bards as some of our dps contribution comes from the fighter classes via buffs. what you can hope for in this is that they alter the str stat, and if they then still see fighters kicking out the damage, they'll take a closer look at how CA, regular melee, weapon delay & haste all figure into the dps equation and realise things are perhaps not working as they "might" be intending. Message Edited by Jziad on 02-11-2005 10:16 AM

02-14-2005, 08:07 AM	#19
Tharn Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 12	Someone post if it actually becomes worthwhile to log in again... Thanks!

02-14-2005, 02:25 PM	#20
AzureDa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 39	Medium armour didn't take a nerf, its still the same, and still better that light armour, however if anything as the gap between medium and light armour has closed a bit, it makes using light armour a more viable armour chioce if thats what we wanted to do. well, if you raise the damage and accuracy of mobs, and raise the armor values of armor other than medium, this has the same impact as nerfing medium armor. and that's what we have seen over the last couple weeks. The goal has clearly been to insure that fighter classes can tank, and scout classes can't. Not a bad goal, but perhaps has gone too far in terms of removing a major piece of utility from scouts. This isn't the same problem that the stat changes are.... or even really a problem, IMHO. They have a clear goal about making fighters essential to groups to tank; which is fine. (It does raise the question about why 'scouts' shouldn't also be essential to a group, but that's digressing.) --- The stat changes are a real problem. The changes to stats will hit dirges as well; my impression that dirges focused more on debuffs (making opponents weaker) and trobs more on buffs (making the party stronger.) It will hit some of the healing classes with a buffing focus. The important thing is that the impact of the nerf is that buffing classes become much less effective. If the goal is to make buffing classes weaker, in favor of classes that don't, then this change would make sense. The issue is one of not attributing the additional damage from buffs to the guy doing the buffing. There may (or may not) be a balance issue where strength buffs are contributing too much damage to the group. This is fundamentally a different balance issue than whether or not fighters are outdamaging scouts. Their explanation of the rationale for the change doesn't match with what they are changing. Message Edited by AzureDawn on 02-14-2005 03:52 AM __________________ - Fineus, the Cheesethief of Steamfont

02-15-2005, 09:49 PM	#21
Lyones Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 57	medium armor is getting boosted too... look through the dev tracker posts and you'll find where they clarifiedIt is incredibly difficult to quantify the dps attributable to a bard vs. that of a most other classes... If I haste for x and increase weapon skill by x and add x amount of mana and x amount of procs and x amount of strength how much of that is attributable to me and how much to the others... There was a desire to nerf STR because it was shifting towards ideal group of monk,zerker,pally,sk,troub,templar or something similar because STR was so good to buff... this is in part an attempt to rebalance the group makeup dynamic and bring mages back into the fold... it does hit you hard in this one aspect but I would suggest to you that even without the STR adjustment you would be hit hard just from this rebalance... if the primary group starts replacing those 3 tanks with a ranger and 2 mages then you lose almost all your STR buff gain anywaysHere are some numbers from my lvl 32 pallyFight number one: Lvl 34 Sand Snapper, hit percentage 55.56%, 397 damage from crushing, 1726 from specialsFight number two: Lvl 34 Sand Snapper, hit percentage 87.50%, 455 damage from crushing, 1586 from specialsFight number three: Lvl 34 Sand Snapper, hit percentage 64.29%, 282 damage from crushing, 1844 from specialsThat's only 3 fights but you can see the miniscule portion that is attributable to my regular attacks... Those numbers might be pushing 1/3 if i had 2hs and was buffed with divine intervention (which i left out of this small test)...

02-16-2005, 03:22 PM	#22
AzureDa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 39	There was a desire to nerf STR because it was shifting towards ideal group of monk,zerker,pally,sk,troub,templar or something similar because STR was so good to buff... this is in part an attempt to rebalance the group makeup dynamic and bring mages back into the fold... Generally though... adding stength to a scout will result in an absolute pickup in damage similar to buffing a fighter. and as you have shown... doesn't impact any individual person all that much. Where people lose out is when you have your DPS from buffs spread accross 6 people... then the effect is much larger for the buffer. Its fine to bring mage-types 'back into the fold' by nerfing buffing classes... which is what is happening... but at that point they need to be recognizing that this is primarily a nerf to buffers... and has nothing to do with fighters doing way to much damage relative to scouts. The end result is it weakens chanters-coercers-troubadors-dirges-druids-furies ... and increases the relative value of guardians-berserkers-paladins-SKs-templars-inquisitors-wizards-warlocks. __________________ - Fineus, the Cheesethief of Steamfont

02-16-2005, 07:16 PM	#23
Caa Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 54	Again I was parsing damage last night in a low 30s group and the monk and assassin (no poison) were both consistently scoring the same ~2700. That was with the monk tanking. So there definitely is need for readjustment there. Which I might add is being proposed for the next patch: increase in light armor defense and decrease damage output. The way to fix this nerf for troubador is to give a buff that increases DD (and or DOT) damage by a certain percentage and have haste affect both melee and combat ability/spell recast times. I'd like to see that % increase tacked onto the Aria line which I consider almost 100% useless atm. __________________ Iliad 36 Troubadour / 33 Alchemist Odys 33 Defiler / 37 Armorer Freeport, Toxxulia

02-16-2005, 10:32 PM	#24
Averil Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 15	I agree with the comments re Aria. I've been trying this for a while and haven't noticed any difference in damage output. Has anyone ever parsed to see if this spell makes a difference? As far as I can tell, it never procs.

02-17-2005, 03:48 PM	#25
Bister Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 8	SingleTrack wrote:- Melee combat arts will decrease in effectiveness when equipping a weapon that is green to the character. They will decrease even further if a grey weapon is equipped. If you are still using your citizenship weapon at level 40, you should be punished. I only fear that this will be implemented to armor and other equipment slots. actually this change is intended for 1 specific weapon i would bet, the PGT, even though it cons grey it is the weapon of choice for insanely long raid mob fights due to the massive number of comabt arts it adds to the fight via power boost procs. They might just have found it to be as silly as i did that we would call for a substandard weapon to be equipped for any ^^^ fight.that said, i'm gonna miss the lil fella, he's merchant fodder now