test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
GWF Frontline Surge buffed ?
vcek
Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 127 Arc User
i noticed on preview it hits upto 5 targets now instead of 3, is this a bug ? or wont work in pvp ? or just buff ?
Post edited by vcek on
0
Comments
Nopez, not really a buff. More like a attempt to balance it.
Damage got nerfed by 25%, target cap up to 5.
Which means, in few words, that on single targets or 2-3- targets you deal less damage. On 4-5 targets, you deal more damage.
You can read it as less damage in PvP, where you never hit 5 people at once, but potentially more damage in PvE if you consistently hit 4-5 targets at least.
Overall, i'd say in PvP it's less damage: most of the time you hit 1 or 2 enemies. So there, it's a flat 25% damage nerf.
In PvE, you now need to position yourself well, hit at least 4 mobs to deal the same damage as before, and 5 to deal more damage than before. So more difficult to pull out the damage, but you can be rewarded with more damage.
even with 25% damage nerf it will still do 2.5 times more damage then roar with only 3-4 sec longer cd
Roar is not prone, is root. And gives bonus AP per target hit. Damage is not its aim. It is a different kind of power.
Frontline is a ranged prone and is not supposed to boost your AP gain per traget hit, like roar.
They are 2 different powers with 2 different aims.
Don't get the point in comparing the 2 powers, if there's even one.
Frontline now hits for 25% less, with still 19 seconds cooldown, on single targets. This is the fact. The OP asked if it was nerfed, and explained him in details which changes have been made and how they will affect gameplay.
roar = determination gain, no ap.
yes... gwf have serious internal unbalance.
Yeah my bad. It's determination .Either way, the 2 powers have very different aim. It's like comparing not so fast and mighty leap just cause they are both AoE powers.
The OP asked specifically about frontline changes, not about balance issues.
No, they are equal in terms of usage. Before IV came to GWF they used Roar as ranged-interrupt-lockdown ability to be able to reach a target and land Takedown->IBS combo. Now they have Frontline which deals 2.5 times more damage with longer lockdown and only 3-4 sec more cd.
It is a nerf, tbh. Out of all the things that are nerf-worthy on a SENTINEL GWF, they take away 25% dmg of EVERY single spec tree... instead of just altering the sentinel tree. It destroys an entire skill, along with all of it's feats. for every spec not just the one spec that everybody's always complaining about. They made it seem like it's a buff... but for single target specs, it is a massive nerf to the spike dmg.
(while the real reason people are hitting "too" hard remains unchanged > Perfect Vorpal enchantments.)
Yes it never fails to surprise me that when a single spec is unbalanced, Cryptic somehow always decides to nerf the entire class rather than the unbalanced spec...
yeah this is the main problem atm frontline have 16 sec cd and 5.2k damage while roar have 10.5 and 1.7k damage with balance changes frontline will have some 15 sec cd while 4.2k damage so even with nerf will be 2.5 times better on damage then roar while doing prone and a lot more easy to target if they folow any logic and balance frontline should deal 50% more damage then roar not 150% even then would be far better option
even with this nerf it is still far to op on damage and its damage should be reduced even more
Sry, but you are comparing a utility skill to a direct damage/spike damage skill.
Comparing roar to frontline surge is like comparing enhanced mark to anvil of doom.
Roar is 14 seconds.
Which means it's 5 seconds difference, not 3-4.
Get facts straight.
Also, as said, one is a utility move, the other is a spike damage AoE move with prone.
Roar was used to get CWs and TRs, depending on the situation. Against other melees like GFs and GWFs it was sub optimal, since they could not avoid and you would lose lots of damage with roar.
Roar is in common to IV and swordmaster. The power you have to compare to is flourish. Whic is what is replaced by frontline, and what IVs lose to take frontline. Flourish could use a damage buff, but still, it has range (can follow the target), it has stun, it hits hard (could hit harder) and has lower cooldown than frontline. With this damage reduction, damage should be much closer, while the cooldown difference still remains.
Also: this is a topic about a guy asking about the changes to frontline. Could the nerf crowd please avoid coming to every, single topic, regardless from the matter of discussion, just to point out "GWFs are OP, nerf them" (which is not generic GWF but sentinel iV tank build, but whatever)?
I already explained all in the second reply, the topic was already over. Did you really have to drag that discussion in this topic too?
There are already tons of threads where you guys can say how GWFs are OP. Need to go OT in every thread and transform every thread in a discussion about balance issues?
Come on.
As far as I know , the older destroyer had two sources of damage . The unstoppable ( 25 % for all damage , but I did not take this stage) and slam . There are several feats that still carry the destroyer aspect of the encounter / daily centered (one feat literally transforms recovery in arp ) but let's look at the feet " Relentless battle fury " ( hehe ) .
This feat reduces the time the roar (Determination / old ap builder / aoe ) the battle fury ( buff ap gain / aoe damage ) and takedown ( have not had the courage to reduce ibs I think) .
No need to comment on how this feat was central in both compilations and have lost their reason to exist today ...
What remains today as a compilation of damage is critical builds ( the destroyer offers bleed but do not get critical chance ) . And in this sense comes fs . Large aoe control ( how the hell can find it a nerf ? ) And upper explosion damage . As damage to the destroyer is equal determination, and the fights themselves do not last long now ...
I know this post is not appropriate to analyze here , but I see so many people complaining randomly about the gwf I think it clear that the relevant class is deeply unbalanced internally ... and if we consider that the old gain ap + cancellation were " bugs " then the class was never officially viable .
The gwf need a DEEP internal review ... and I fear the result . So insist both " official threads " .
ps:is obvious that the situation is not so dramatic as well. but I LOVE analyze rpg ... hahha
The real problem is that between my GWF and my GF, with the same amount of power, my GWF deals twice as much damage with the same ability.
I think, quite simply, swordmaster and IV can, for the best, be developed as a "single target DPS" paragon (swordmaster) and AoE DPS paragon (IV).
As i said, the change is frontline for flourish. Right now, the 25% single target nerf to frontline brings it near flourish for single target damage. Flourish should be, however, higher in damage to single targets compared to frontline. So i'd buff it, make it more powerful. And increase range a bit, while decreasing threat rush range by half. Frontline is fine as it is now, with the 25% damage reduction on single targets. Flourish should deal, imho, much more damage, as a high DPS single target power.
GFs deal less damage cause the weapon base damage is lower. I think, looking at the changes the devs are doing on preview to GFs, that they want the "fighters" to be very similar, but with a "fighter with the shield", more tanky, on one hand, and a "fighter with a big weapon", less tanky but with more DPS, on the other hand. GFs should get better at tanking to be the "tank fighter", with a far higher tanking potential through the use of his shield. GWFs are fine as they are now for damage, and survivability in PvE, but should be less tanky in PvP. GFs should not be WAY tankier than GWFs though the use of shields, and become a true tank.
In PvE a big role can be played by dungoen design too. FH is good and requires GFs to tank. I think a good mix of strategies, hard hitting cc resistant mobs, ccable mobs exc... would help a lot.
not truth conq gf hits only 400 less damage with frontline then my insitigator gwf and u still have knights so even 2x more problem is skill it self it is op on gf and gwf if u compare it to our other encounters
for me the extra attack power this would indeed be an extra attack from which triggered the damage . If I cause 1000 damage , extra attack will cause 1000 damage . If I cause 10000 , the extra attack is 10000 . from this conception , you can take this critical power ( randomness of randomness ) . excluded critical about the critical ( and bleed on bleed ) remains only a power very good for pve , which is unique, and relatively unsatisfactory area of action for sm.
would be VERY good for both the gf and for the gwf , improving the ability to aoe / defend , pulling all enemies and stop this critical need . Sum that the steel defense and you have , by theory , a complete fighter ( which should be the proposal of the patch ) .
And as many passives, it influences your encounters, be them AoE or single target. Can't really label it as "AoE", even if it's for sure more useful in a dungeon run when you deal huge AoE damage.
People already complain about deep gash. If you make steel blitz a double hit, you know what will happen? In PvE, even more qq about how OP it is.
In PvP, even worse. You will double, for example, a 10k crit, hitting for 20k. Even if it happens only once in a Whole match, you will have loads of people complaining about being 2 shotted due to steel blitz. Bad idea. But a damage buff to steel blitz could be useful.
1 - I know blitz steel is not an encounter ... you defined the sword master by nature of one encounter . I defined by "set " . The potential " unrealized " the steel blitz to draw aggro might be comparable , mechanically , the split shot ( a very good definition that a given issue about the alleged threat ranger player , but this is another discussion) .
Sum that the steel defense and we can not deny that solve all problems gf and create an interesting option for gwf .
2 - pvp : The beauty of this power is that it behave better from a mass x of opponents . this can be adjusted . you can have a 0% chance to inflict extra damage on an opponent and cause 100% " one hit ko " on 6 enemies . It's a stupid example, obviously. I'm just saying that , in the case of aoe , there is nothing that does not straighten .
3 - the gwf sm only has 2 " powerful " atacks: ibs and reaping strike . Overall it would be an artificial, random cap increase and boost ( generous, I confess ) to avalanch / MAYBE spinning strike .
The most fantastic scenery that you would have an extra 16k time or another with a reaping strike . It is VERY strong... but it is also complicated. The cleave the gf would be better .
Happy gwf + Happy GF= barracks in peace. Other classes have their own internal problems that can be adjusted with creativity .
4 - I could stay until tomorrow saying what 's wrong with the iv , and how this path is unbalanced internally and externally in pve and pvp ( think of the bonus wms , at least with atwills , not trigger to bleed ) but I'm having the prudence to entertain an equivalence in pve .
The gf / gwf sword master would have fantastic tankiness/ aoe dps (pve) and iron with a blast of damage / aoe control / speed/ synergy with cw / internal buffs / better bleed ...
Summary : if I want a single dps I roll a tr .
PS:People complain today about iv, you know it. You understand the gwf well to recognize, amid so many misleading opinions, what's unbalanced today.
Playing as a TR isn't an option either, because i would like to play as a knight, not as a thief.