@wizardlvl80#5963 It is absolutely pointless to underline in every post your elitism and capabilities. Btw. how do you know that not 50% of the player in this threat do far better than you but are able to keep objectivity in a bigger sense?
> But if you simply press o type tomb and press return you geht gold how player run actually. It is not me, it is the hole community 24/7
>
> That is a community issue then and changing classes won't fix human nature. Whatever is the new bis, they will spam for 24/7.
>
> U dont mean a single type of human do u? I mean there are alot people with different idea when they play the game. Some are completionist, pefectionist and some are casual. Perfectionist will continue to spam for BIS while the casual will continue to play with whatever setup thrown at them. Balance is just numbers that can be controled by the developer. Player made build out of those number that is given by developer. If BIS and non BIS were a few number apart, speed are 80% affected by ilvl, 20% by others( party composition, BIS, skill etc..) and content is doable by both without huge difference, then i say the game is on the right track. Some people will still spam for BIS but alot more will spam for anything that could get the game going. Currently there is only one setup that can get their game going without much problem and that is why everyone is spamming it. But if any setup could get the game going without much problem, then u will see more poeple spaming on any setup they can find since its not much different and dungeon could be done by both BIS or non BIS alike.
What you say here is that you want to just swing the weapon and do damage. Based on IL you want the completion of dungeon to be sure for you, you don't want to accept that you can fail inside this dungeon. You want it for granted no matter how bad you play. Your balance idea is "everyone's whos entering tong will complete it and the only difference is timing".
Wow, just wow. This is amazing how lazy can people be. Instead of working on your toon, you come here and say "make me stronger, make them weaker, I want to press a mouse button and kill everything around". Wow.
This dungeon isn't for you. This class isn't for you. HR is about skill and you don't know anything about it. You want to compete in endgame? Be endgame.
1st, u dont understand what i m trying to say. What i m trying to do here is to bring other party composition to the level of 2dc meta. So are u trying to accuse people that run Tong with 2dc meta are lazy people? What i m trying to say there is speed run shouldnt be gauge by party composition but instead ilvl. Real balance mean any composition will do. But anyway u are starting to sound elitist so have it ur way.
It's funny you guys are blaming me of elitism when what I say you guys are lazy and don't want to be there for the team in terms of running tong.
I already stated - I'm happy to take to this dungeon anyone who is ready to try it and commit his effort for the overall success or failure. I ran this dungeon many times with friends who never actually were able to get inside, just to show them how it looks. Heck, we got our buts kicked at Orcus, but they were prepared for it. There was lots of fun in this failure. And you guys know what almost everyone of my friends said? I got to be better to get here. And this is what I respect about them. They didn't came here crying like both of you, they just said they need to get better and I'm pretty sure they will be very successful.
I'm running tong with so many class varieties: SW, TR, HR, CW but if I want to complete this dungeon smoothly or want to grind it, I complete party of people who know their class and who know what their role in party is. And that's basically endgame - you know what you do in party. If my party needs me to spam Longstrider shot, Commanding shot and to use Lantern in terms of buffing, debuffing - I will happily do this. If my party needs my GF to abandon Commander's Strike and put Knight's Valor on - I will do this. I will see and hear what are their needs and adapt. And every single class can do this. Every single class can fill a role there. But the problem is player, not the class. Belive me, I prefer to run this dungeon without 2x tanks, but with SW, CW MoF or HR trapper, because of how much utility they add to the party.
@thefabricant already posted a screenshot of 26mins tong run with party of 3x dps 1x DC 1x OP. And the party composition was no dps GF, no GWF, but HR and two TRs. Where are your argument guys? Where is elitism here? Cause these people were able to form a party of your dreams and complete this dungeon with fast pace.
You guys just don't wan't to admit you're not good enough and it's you who are to blame for your failures. I don't even want to drag things like your archery build @kangkeok which you stated on HR forums here. Cause it just shows how little you know about this class and how much you have to learn. You think item lvl shows how good you are? Well it doesn't. Do some reading, watch Sume's channel. You'll learn about this class and eventually master it. It's easy to get your gear now, it's easier than it ever was actually.
4
Options
jumpingmorksMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 876Arc User
Imo, i dont like nerfs. Theyre easy fixes and quick but they dont work too well if they push too much it makes them need to do more work later down the road. As for classes being excluded, they do need their respective buffs. Bloody death does favor burst damage as well and not procs so that might also be a factor in tong with the gwf and gf. It isnt so much that no one wants to run older content as its not as profitable or worthwhile, support characters will always get more runs than dps so more chances to have gotten their greater ostorian rings for example and little reason to run it now compared to the many dps when they have their rings already. Random ques were made so that they would have ques popping faster rather than just shores (i think) and etos, the lack of support characters are an issue and the lack of content (1 dung 1 skirmish per mod) makes it so that once u got wat u needed u just run it for fun (if u still like it), salvage, or to help others. The dungeon specific gear like jarls gaze and survivor wraps helped i think, i liked that change to the loot drops maybe impliment that occasionally. Also, i personally think there should be more incentive to running a support character to get ppl to try them at least ( lvling a dc used to be terrible so the dc changes helped alot), dailies go by faster with loadouts and was a good change. Also maybe in open world areas, support characters recieve a damage buff, chult might be a breeze for dps but as a dc myself, for batari its i get them or they get me... not exactly game breaking either, just really helps with campaigns and boons. 2 dc is great but isnt needed and only player mentality tbh, just ppl trying to squeeze out an extra 5 mins.
Imo, i dont like nerfs. Theyre easy fixes and quick but they dont work too well if they push too much it makes them need to do more work later down the road. As for classes being excluded, they do need their respective buffs. Bloody death does favor burst damage as well and not procs so that might also be a factor in tong with the gwf and gf. It isnt so much that no one wants to run older content as its not as profitable or worthwhile, support characters will always get more runs than dps so more chances to have gotten their greater ostorian rings for example and little reason to run it now compared to the many dps when they have their rings already. Random ques were made so that they would have ques popping faster rather than just shores (i think) and etos, the lack of support characters are an issue and the lack of content (1 dung 1 skirmish per mod) makes it so that once u got wat u needed u just run it for fun (if u still like it), salvage, or to help others. The dungeon specific gear like jarls gaze and survivor wraps helped i think, i liked that change to the loot drops maybe impliment that occasionally. Also, i personally think there should be more incentive to running a support character to get ppl to try them at least ( lvling a dc used to be terrible so the dc changes helped alot), dailies go by faster with loadouts and was a good change. Also maybe in open world areas, support characters recieve a damage buff, chult might be a breeze for dps but as a dc myself, for batari its i get them or they get me... not exactly game breaking either, just really helps with campaigns and boons. 2 dc is great but isnt needed and only player mentality tbh, just ppl trying to squeeze out an extra 5 mins.
Why is it whenever the devs make adjustments to the game it is called a nerf. When an encounter, at will, runtestone, etc... are performing outside of the devs design and the item is adjusted it is called a nerf. The reality is, it is not a nerf because the item is performing well above what the devs intended. The devs have to look at all angles when making fixes or adjustments and they usually try to do the lesser evil so that the player base does not take as much of a hit, but rarely does the lesser fix result in the type of change/adjustment the devs want. This is why the game is adjusted further until it is to the point where the devs can move onto other things.
The problem with the small minor adjustment method is it has long term ramifications that negatively effect the game and it hinders specific classes and hurts the overall game community. Right now not many GF are running TONG as tanks due to how weak a GF is compared to a OP as a tank in TONG. That was a bad design by the devs and due to this the devs will probably do minor adjustments to the OP or GF to make the GF class viable as a tank in TONG. This could possibly impact other aspect of the game and cause imbalance that will require further adjustment later on.
The minor tweaks we keep seeing is quite frankly annoying and need to stop. I rather see the devs stop it with the minor adjustment and take a small team to start working on full game revamp while the rest of the dev team works on development of new content. This is needed as the imbalances across this game is getting old.
0
Options
putzboy78Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,950Arc User
Why is it whenever the devs make adjustments to the game it is called a nerf. When an encounter, at will, runtestone, etc... are performing outside of the devs design and the item is adjusted it is called a nerf. The reality is, it is not a nerf because the item is performing well above what the devs intended. The devs have to look at all angles when making fixes or adjustments and they usually try to do the lesser evil so that the player base does not take as much of a hit, but rarely does the lesser fix result in the type of change/adjustment the devs want. This is why the game is adjusted further until it is to the point where the devs can move onto other things.
It's called a nerf because its a decrease in ability. However, you must acknowledge there are differences. Example
elol set bonus was not working as intended, everyone knew it. Yes they let it sit for a year before resolving it but when the fixed it, it was indeed a fix not a nerf.
When they lowered the amount of stats you get from bonding stones, that was indeed a nerf. Because the function worked as described in the tooltip and they adjusted the tooltip.
The different being the tooltip and the description. In both cases we saw a dramatic decrease in performance one was a fix and one was nerf. In the case of the nerf it was a balancing decision. Another argument in the nerf vs fix column is when things are released to production with bugs identified on test. Live isn't supposed to be a WIP, testers are supposed to identify problems before it impacts customers (game play), you use test scripts to ensure you don't have re-occurrence, you include in your development time a cushion to incorporate feedback from testing. That's one reason many people would call everything a nerf, because once it hits live you should be able to assume its WAI.
It's funny you guys are blaming me of elitism when what I say you guys are lazy and don't want to be there for the team in terms of running tong.
I already stated - I'm happy to take to this dungeon anyone who is ready to try it and commit his effort for the overall success or failure. I ran this dungeon many times with friends who never actually were able to get inside, just to show them how it looks. Heck, we got our buts kicked at Orcus, but they were prepared for it. There was lots of fun in this failure. And you guys know what almost everyone of my friends said? I got to be better to get here. And this is what I respect about them. They didn't came here crying like both of you, they just said they need to get better and I'm pretty sure they will be very successful.
I'm running tong with so many class varieties: SW, TR, HR, CW but if I want to complete this dungeon smoothly or want to grind it, I complete party of people who know their class and who know what their role in party is. And that's basically endgame - you know what you do in party. If my party needs me to spam Longstrider shot, Commanding shot and to use Lantern in terms of buffing, debuffing - I will happily do this. If my party needs my GF to abandon Commander's Strike and put Knight's Valor on - I will do this. I will see and hear what are their needs and adapt. And every single class can do this. Every single class can fill a role there. But the problem is player, not the class. Belive me, I prefer to run this dungeon without 2x tanks, but with SW, CW MoF or HR trapper, because of how much utility they add to the party.
@thefabricant already posted a screenshot of 26mins tong run with party of 3x dps 1x DC 1x OP. And the party composition was no dps GF, no GWF, but HR and two TRs. Where are your argument guys? Where is elitism here? Cause these people were able to form a party of your dreams and complete this dungeon with fast pace.
You guys just don't wan't to admit you're not good enough and it's you who are to blame for your failures. I don't even want to drag things like your archery build @kangkeok which you stated on HR forums here. Cause it just shows how little you know about this class and how much you have to learn. You think item lvl shows how good you are? Well it doesn't. Do some reading, watch Sume's channel. You'll learn about this class and eventually master it. It's easy to get your gear now, it's easier than it ever was actually.
Because u are acting like one, u keep calling people lazy when u dont even know how hard some people have tried to get into Tong. Just look back on ur post. Eveything u said are so judgemental and not discussing on the topic at hand about balances. U keep slaming people with lazy and not working toward getting skill level up to join Tong, then u agree archer is hard to get into Tong because they are not viable. Then without even pursueing on why they are not viable ( which is about the topic on balance), u start calling archer player does not have the knowledge on HR because they dont follow sume guide. U dont even know if they have a good skill or knowledge on archery as u, urself said u dont. That show u dont care about the person or recognize archer as a part of HR and deem any knowledge on archery is not HR's. All u are saying is everyone that dont follow sume guide and play trapper/combat like u, do not have HR knowledge. In short, u are saying anyone who dont play like u are dumb. Its like a doctor judging a technician that he is trash just because he is a blue collar when he himself dont even know how to repair a table lamp. Thats elitism.
I respect that @thefabricant proves his point with the sreenshot but it still doesnt show that the HR are using achery spec or the TR are using scoundrel or execution. Thats why i call for balance on those non viable path. Also I m glad he proves that it can be done with normal 1 tank 1 healer 3 dps setup and i appreciate his effort. But meta group doing at half the time are still a difference that may sway people from using the normal setup. If meta setup takes about 22-23min as compare to normal at 26min, i would say people might consider doing normal setup. Also, 26min for a group of friend that u know, pug might take more. If u are trying to say pug dont deserve endgame content, thats being elitist. Any thought of u deserve the content more than other are elitism. Pug are player too that is trying to learn just like u. U are lucky that the enviroment u are in able u to progress in the game. Some are not that lucky. If u are saying they deserve it because they are lazy to make their own group, think again about are making group with non viable class and everyone left the group at 1st fail. Then again u may call them stupid for not using a viable class but whos fault is that that their class is not viable. Everyone have the right to play what they want. U cant force a player to play the class they dont like. Thats is where class balance comes in so everyone has the equal advantage to play the content.
Off topic :
About my archer build i posted ( https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter#/discussion/1237096/a-short-guide-for-support-archer) , feel free to drag it in when u clearly didnt even read the intention of that post and u already start asking silly question like "why archery path? It's clearly not working well as it is now." Or "You should warn people that being too much in range will often result in being out of the buff range (like Into The Fray etc.)" which clearly show u didnt even read the gamplay section. The only good point u made out of all of them are on debuff companion which is good and gave me some idea and i should thank u for that but thats it. The question on seeker vengence over aspect of wolf pack also show u have no knowledge on this build either or on aspect of the wolf pack range or longstrider minimum buff range. If u do, u couldnt have known that they dont sync well. Like i said earlier, u dont judge people playing archer when u have not play them urself. Its just something that u and i are specialize on different path thats all. But i m glad archery are tested by pvp player like @jonkoca and has great result in pvp.
I played a scourge wedlock back in mod 6,7 when it was a beast , after it got nerfed I went haste cleric , when they nerfed haste I went AC/DC. Point being , those who are committed to being the best will elect the characters from the next meta w/e they turns out to be an the people crying will still be crying. Not to mention it's never been easier for an endgame player to make a new character you buy the boons ,you transfer an switch enchantments if needed , an at the end of all that we , will still not have trouble finding groups .(this whole class balance issue seems like a nonissue , not hard to switch classes if you think your class sucks !!!) Ps. fastest t9 ive run was with a sw , I don't blame the toons I blame the operators for them not getting in groups
when u dont even know how hard some people have tried to get into Tong.
Have they ever tried to start their own group? It's 100 times faster, belive me. I don't know why people are so affraid of "invite to que" button.
Oh, wait. They're lazy.
In short, u are saying anyone who dont play like u are dumb.
Please point a specific place where I stated this. All I say is you don't know the class you play and even you are 15-16k HR archer (or whatever your IL is), you don't know your class. That's all. Never called you dumb, just lazy.
2
Options
jumpingmorksMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 876Arc User
when u dont even know how hard some people have tried to get into Tong.
Have they ever tried to start their own group? It's 100 times faster, belive me. I don't know why people are so affraid of "invite to que" button.
Oh, wait. They're lazy.
In short, u are saying anyone who dont play like u are dumb.
Please point a specific place where I stated this. All I say is you don't know the class you play and even you are 15-16k HR archer (or whatever your IL is), you don't know your class. That's all. Never called you dumb, just lazy.
Folks will complain about the current meta but it would be interesting to find out how many of those actually recruit non meta groups to run TONG, the pessimist in me suggests they don't and just complain about it because they think it will increase their chances of getting TONG farms, it won't because I also suspect many of those need carrying because at the end of the day this is an end game dungeon.
Here's a tip, instead of diluting this thread with your incessant off-topic justifications on why your build matters, why don't you post it in the HR forum and get ACTUAL feedback on it. You might be able to improve your build, or you might even be able to shed light on an otherwise underused path for a popular class.
EDIT: I don't really care on a personal level whether they keep or change the current meta as long as the dungeon is doable and within a 1 hour time frame.
I'll support any action by the devs that they feel is necessary to improve the game and by improve I mean keeping it fun.
At the end of the day this is an RPG, if you've ever asked a channel, hey what's the best weapon enchantment to do the most damage, you are not as far away from groups looking to minimise their time in a dungeon as you like to think you are.
Min maxers have been in RPG's for as long as I remember, if the devs do not account for min maxing they will just bounce from nerf to nerf.
Bottom line, this is an end game dungeon, if you need to be carried, if you need to be squeezed in the group so you can get your 1% chance of getting a UE, you've got no place being there.
2
Options
jumpingmorksMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 876Arc User
If UE's are such an issue for people, remove them from TONG and put them in the Wondrous Bazzar for 1m AD each.
Players who just want to get carried claiming they have no other option to upgrade their enchantments when in actual fact just want to sell them on AH will vanish from these threads.
Players who farm TONG for UE's will be happier as they won't have to run TONG 20 times for a single UE and we can all go back to farming eToS for salvage
But it's all moot, for all we know in the next mod UE's might drop in TONG/FBI and MSP.
If you think DPS GF's have anywhere near the same level of protection a tank GF has you're smoking something.
Where was the tanking ability between the two compared?
It was explicitly stated that the current system allows for a tank to perform on par with or out perform a DPS class which is why the meta is comprised of a OP/***GF***/DC/DC. The GF produces massive DPS as a result and is in part why reducing the DPS benefit of the power stat was suggested for non-DPS classes, it would essentially remove the GF from that meta as well as the synergy between the OP/GF pair (which is currently a viable "backup" option that still ties up two tanks) and coupled with the future 2 DC changes would essentially disband that current meta and the looming backup meta (OP/GF).
Why would i run etos for a 4k salvage when i can run TONG to make a potential 800K from UESs (and more salvage).
Your desires, thoughts, etc. do not dictate what and why people run whatever content they choose to run or what they may want to run or not run in response to changes to the game.
Your comparison involves players being able to effectively farm ToNG and outside of the meta the time to complete can be longer, not only that so many players prefer the meta that they often enough refuse to run a group outside of it. In addition to those things RAD has a refining limit of 36k a day (per character) so even if ToNG granted more RAD per run anything beyond 36k a day would simply be the same as acquiring 36k any combination of other ways (personally would bank on EToS though which doesn't require a meta group to complete quickly). Also even if a player that frequently runs ToNG has excess of RAD piled up that more than likely won't deter then from future/consecutive runs because by your logic they will be seeking the UES's so the RAD argument you provided isn't suitable.
ToNG is not the only source of larger amounts of AD, not to mention queue content only offers a chance at high yielding drops, you can run a queue many times over and not get a high yielding drop which also makes that argument not suitable. Let's say a group can run ToNG in 20 minutes, times 30 runs that 10 hours and no UES's or very few get any? If any drop, those that didn't get one pretty much would only come away with salvage and seals and that 10 hours could have been spent doing things that would permit a much larger return that isn't as capped. On "average" about how many runs does it take to get a UES? A number of players simply buy UES's and or do other things to gain AD.
The problem is the meta choking the amount of available tanks/DC's and some players thinking that the majority of players only/primarily are concerned with later content. There are a number of players end game ready/capable that still enjoy non-top tier content with their friends/Guild/Alliance.
ALL Rights Reserved for any and all suggestions, ideas, etc. from this user.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY "No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
If you think DPS GF's have anywhere near the same level of protection a tank GF has you're smoking something.
Where was the tanking ability between the two compared?
It was explicitly stated that the current system allows for a tank to perform on par with or out perform a DPS class which is why the meta is comprised of a OP/***GF***/DC/DC. The GF produces massive DPS as a result and is in part why reducing the DPS benefit of the power stat was suggested for non-DPS classes, it would essentially remove the GF from that meta as well as the synergy between the OP/GF pair (which is currently a viable "backup" option that still ties up two tanks) and coupled with the future 2 DC changes would essentially disband that current meta and the looming backup meta (OP/GF).
Again, currently how the system works tanks can out DPS actual DPS classes with little to no penalty. Simply reducing the amount of DPS from power would balance two classes (OP/GF)(it wouldn't be as beneficial to bring a second tank vs an actual DPS class), everything else that power buffs would remain the same and the looming double DC nerf will bring up the other end of the scale
I highlighted the section that triggered my response. As someone who mains a 16k GF and a 15k OP and has done since mod 6 when Cryptic would not acknowledge the stacking Arp bug and I had to endure countless verbal abuse / kicks because of said bug, I think I can safely say I've earned my right to voice opinion on what a tank tank and a dps tank can and cannot do.
There is a massive disparity between tank GF's and dps GF's, there is no way a tank GF can do anything close to the damage of a DPS GF, hell, on my tank loadout am lucky to do more damage than a DC. Also, my dps GF loadout couldn't hope to do the damage he does (which I might like to point out is nothing compared to Anri/Bethel/Lillith) and survive what my tank GF loadout does.
So to clarify: If you think a DPS GF with similar or on par damage with a GWF (aka the DPS you're impying) can also tank an end game dungeon with little to no penalty as you so nicely put it, I'll reiterate, you've got to be smoking something.
And since your response is likely going to be based on a semantic argument based on grammar instead of facts, and instead of suggesting your post might have been poorly worded to the point that it gave a false impression that something exists which clearly does not, I'm not going to take the risk of responding and diluting this thread further and detracting from those who have made some excellent posts in this thread.
Your quotes and my post will stand for others to judge.
If you think a DPS GF with similar or on par damage with a GWF (aka the DPS you're impying) can also tank an end game dungeon with little to no penalty as you so nicely put it
Where was a DPS GF vs GWF and or a DPS GF tanking end game content implied? You assumed both of those and even quoted one:
Again, currently how the system works tanks can out DPS actual DPS classes with little to no penalty.
"actual DPS classes" simply meaning more than one DPS class and doesn't indicate which (you seemingly assumed it was the GWF solely even though the statement referred to multiple classes). An OP can increase their DPS and still tank effectively ("with little to no penalty"). A GF can increase their DPS although which reduces their tanking effectiveness, in content where mobs/bosses can be burned through the reduction in tanking effectiveness matters less ("with little to no penalty"). A DPS GF alongside a OP "can out DPS actual DPS classes with little to no penalty" depending on the content, group composition and buffs. The statement still hold true.
In a number of posts it was simply stated "DPS", not GWF (which you assumed) or anything specific. The GWF, SW, TR, HR and CW all do DPS and about 4 of those 5 a DPS GF can outperform depending on the content, group composition and buffs. When a GF is brought in alongside an OP for the most part they aren't there to "off-tank", they are there to DPS (especially in higher content) and again, the reason they are part of the meta (OP/***GF***/DC/DC) is because of their DPS output.
ALL Rights Reserved for any and all suggestions, ideas, etc. from this user.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY "No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
If u are saying they deserve it because they are lazy to make their own group, think again about are making group with non viable class and everyone left the group at 1st fail. Then again u may call them stupid for not using a viable class but whos fault is that that their class is not viable. Everyone have the right to play what they want. U cant force a player to play the class they dont like. Thats is where class balance comes in so everyone has the equal advantage to play the content.
In short, u are saying anyone who dont play like u are dumb.
Please point a specific place where I stated this. All I say is you don't know the class you play and even you are 15-16k HR archer (or whatever your IL is), you don't know your class. That's all. Never called you dumb, just lazy.
To cut the chase on throwing more pointless insult, lets clear up the situation. Do u remember why i mention archery in the 1st place? Look back from the start at page 6 where u claim All other classes are viable and able to play all the content. And so i point out there are some class ( or path to be specific) like archery are getting denied of content due to its viability and need balancing. But u responded by blaming me for picking archery and further insult me for lack of HR knowledge etc. I mean come on, if i do not know that archer isnt viable, why would i take it as an arguement over ur "All other classes are viable and able to play all the content" statement? I mean arent u contradicting on ur statement by claming archery isnt a viable path?
Well on a unrelated note (too late i guess), since ques can identify classes, maybe depending on the amount of support characters, the dungeon's hp and damage values will scale. This will help moderate the meta so that stacking too many "buffers" will not be as effective. This can be rebalanced when a new person joins the que as well so no one goes in as all dps then switch to support characters. No one likes rebalances unless theyre buffs, nerfs can break classes and that just means more work down the road for devs. Please reconsider changing 2 dc and implement a scaling system, i would rather have devs working on more content and broken mechanics rather than nerf this for now and rebalance it later.
1
Options
jumpingmorksMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 876Arc User
Well on a unrelated note (too late i guess), since ques can identify classes, maybe depending on the amount of support characters, the dungeon's hp and damage values will scale. This will help moderate the meta so that stacking too many "buffers" will not be as effective. This can be rebalanced when a new person joins the que as well so no one goes in as all dps then switch to support characters. No one likes rebalances unless theyre buffs, nerfs can break classes and that just means more work down the road for devs. Please reconsider changing 2 dc and implement a scaling system, i would rather have devs working on more content and broken mechanics rather than nerf this for now and rebalance it later.
I've no idea how this system would work, depends on implementation maybe? But on the flip side, Cryptic, although great in some cases, suck pretty hard at scaling encounters to groups, I assume this is probably more down to lack or resources and money being given to the devs from the bean counters at the top, because there is some absolute genius working in this company, you can see it smattered here and there.
Which is a real shame, because we got Minsc (to name but one) due solely down to the genius of Bioware and Baldur's Gate and those that worked on it, given the chance and the resources, games 10 years from now could be asking to use characters from Neverwinter and that would be the highest accolade any company can be given. No game is forever, no thing ever is, but it would prove without a shadow of a doubt that the game not only gave players a meaningful connection to the narratives in the game but that they added to the richness and diversity of the D&D IP.
Sorry, I kinda digressed off-topic xD If you want to see what I mean about scaling run Cloak Tower on a geared level 70
Think of it as gf, op, and dc all have base %, so when u add more than 2 to a group the damage and hp scale up based on the 3rd support % and increases if another support is added based of their class %.Can see wat u mean about scaling tho tbh, how much is too much and how much is too little... would need alot of testing on preview to be able to impliment it correctly tho but its a long term rework rather than a huge overall class balance of support characters (op and gf were probably next)
1
Options
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
If u are saying they deserve it because they are lazy to make their own group, think again about are making group with non viable class and everyone left the group at 1st fail. Then again u may call them stupid for not using a viable class but whos fault is that that their class is not viable. Everyone have the right to play what they want. U cant force a player to play the class they dont like. Thats is where class balance comes in so everyone has the equal advantage to play the content.
In short, u are saying anyone who dont play like u are dumb.
Please point a specific place where I stated this. All I say is you don't know the class you play and even you are 15-16k HR archer (or whatever your IL is), you don't know your class. That's all. Never called you dumb, just lazy.
To cut the chase on throwing more pointless insult, lets clear up the situation. Do u remember why i mention archery in the 1st place? Look back from the start at page 6 where u claim All other classes are viable and able to play all the content. And so i point out there are some class ( or path to be specific) like archery are getting denied of content due to its viability and need balancing. But u responded by blaming me for picking archery and further insult me for lack of HR knowledge etc. I mean come on, if i do not know that archer isnt viable, why would i take it as an arguement over ur "All other classes are viable and able to play all the content" statement? I mean arent u contradicting on ur statement by claming archery isnt a viable path?
First:
All classes and all paths are not the same. Non-viable archery doesn't contradict "all classes". What next? Someone will say all classes, and someone will argue with their random mashed feats?
Does archery need significant rework to be viable? Yes. And Archery is a fun path, that either should be seperated to a damn archer class or have crapton of rework.
Does archery has anything to do to the topic in the this thread? Nope, nada, nothing, same as it's viability in group content which is zero, nothing, nada, zilch (or very close to it) .
This is why there are loadouts. And firends. I have a guildie that speced archery, and I will gladly take them to any place (and we did tong). They enjoy the game play, and if they are having fun, I'm all for it. But that doesn't make Archery as a path any better...
Second:
Why, for the love of sanity, anyone will want to do tong as scoundrel ? If someone find it fun, great, I will never argue against someone having fun, at the end it's a game, but it's common knowledge that it's inferior to the other paths in terms of damage. So no, the TRs in that screenshot are not masochistic to that extent. What next? People will argue that we should havedone it with Bait and switch, shadowy disappearance, and deft strike? With some talisman of shadows and sneak attack as class features...
Arguing that classes that need balance, which they do, is one thing, arguing that classes are viable is another, which is also in general true, depends on the definition of viable, and how much gear and work it needs. But arguing that every path should be viable is not realistic, when the devs can't find the time to do minor changes to a class to bring it on par to the others, in terms of ROI.
Post edited by micky1p00 on
2
Options
putzboy78Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,950Arc User
Your desires, thoughts, etc. do not dictate what and why people run whatever content they choose to run or what they may want to run or not run in response to changes to the game.
Your comparison involves players being able to effectively farm ToNG and outside of the meta the time to complete can be longer, not only that so many players prefer the meta that they often enough refuse to run a group outside of it. In addition to those things RAD has a refining limit of 36k a day (per character) so even if ToNG granted more RAD per run anything beyond 36k a day would simply be the same as acquiring 36k any combination of other ways (personally would bank on EToS though which doesn't require a meta group to complete quickly). Also even if a player that frequently runs ToNG has excess of RAD piled up that more than likely won't deter then from future/consecutive runs because by your logic they will be seeking the UES's so the RAD argument you provided isn't suitable.
ToNG is not the only source of larger amounts of AD, not to mention queue content only offers a chance at high yielding drops, you can run a queue many times over and not get a high yielding drop which also makes that argument not suitable. Let's say a group can run ToNG in 20 minutes, times 30 runs that 10 hours and no UES's or very few get any? If any drop, those that didn't get one pretty much would only come away with salvage and seals and that 10 hours could have been spent doing things that would permit a much larger return that isn't as capped. On "average" about how many runs does it take to get a UES? A number of players simply buy UES's and or do other things to gain AD.
Bravo on taking what I said out of context. The reference in the reference is in relation to the idea that removing dcs from tong will free them up to help lower progression people through lower level dungeons.
You are not going to get 17k dcs running etos farms for salvage. So regardless of what happens to the meta, you aren't fixing the problem your defining of supports not running lower end content. If I'm faced with a top end prize of salvage from etos or committing my playing time to watching Ash vs Evil Dead then Ash wins. Your argument is fundementally flaud in that you assume the available playing time of all supports is fixed, its not. Supports can play other games, play other roles, or invest their time in something really crazy like reading a book.
So removing supports from the meta doesn't necessarily give you more available resources in the content your targeting. The only thing that can do that is balancing the rewards (which they already have started working on with the RAD role bonus.
The beauty of being a support is getting into dungeons. Compared to a dps class leveling, farming boons, etc is much more work. A 17K DC has spent loads more time in the game (assuming they are F2P) to get to 17K than a GWF. The reward for that effort is high demand for dungeons and advantages for farming dungeon loot.
The problem is the meta choking the amount of available tanks/DC's and some players thinking that the majority of players only/primarily are concerned with later content. There are a number of players end game ready/capable that still enjoy non-top tier content with their friends/Guild/Alliance.
The game is an MMO, people here for the social if we were looking for content we would play an RPG which will always be better than an MMO for content and balance. So if people like you they will play with you, if you can't get a tank or DC to play with you... maybe your should check out the self help section of the library on making friends.
Asking the devs to change the meta so that people are forced to play with you is like having your mom talk to my mom so my mom will make me play with you. Even if my mom makes me go to the same park as you, it doesn't mean I'll ever want to or enjoy playing with you. I'll just stop going to the park
Does archery has anything to do to the topic in the this thread? Nope, nada, nothing, same as it's viability in group content which is zero, nothing, nada, zilch (or very close to it) .
This threat was flooded by comments from two other threats, maybe you did not know. The moderator wanted it this way, so we talk crossover about several topics, maybe in short it will stop. @kreatyve said : "There were 3 large topics regarding this same topic. They have all been merged now, to make it easier to keep track of. Sorry for any inconvenience."
My topic was class balance - not exclusively double DC (I play one myself), since there are more classes than DC, but I go on arguing that direction. Threat was named "classbalance is a mess" or a fairy tale?
Actual Tong on PC mod 12b: 32 DC 14 OP 12 GWF 14 GF ------------------------------------- 2 SW (1xdps 1x buffer) 4 Hunter ( no clue about buff builds) 6 CW (4x supporter/2xDps) 0 TR
That´s 65 buffer vs 19 striker (1 person missing), 17 teams, 15 running double DC, two single DC, about 3,5 buffer/supporter in every group. I do not know where all those guys show up runnning outside actual meta with 3-1-1 rainbow setups, at least they are a small number or do not exist atm. Those numbers are the same every time I pop up that window, sadly.
I know posting this does not solve anything. I don´t know how devs will handle those bufferparties, I also don´t know if things will be better if, but I believe balance is needed, same as I do think former nerfs or fixes were needed to get classes back in line for good (to lazy to name them again).
Post edited by schietindebux on
1
Options
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
Does archery has anything to do to the topic in the this thread? Nope, nada, nothing, same as it's viability in group content which is zero, nothing, nada, zilch (or very close to it) .
This threat was flooded by comments from two other threats, maybe you did not know. The moderator wanted it this way, so we talk crossover about several topics, maybe in short it will stop. My topic was class balance, I guess, so I go on arguing or posting hard facts.
Actual Tong on PC mod 12b: 32 DC 14 OP 12 GWF 14 GF ------------------------------------- 2 SW (1xdps 1x buffer) 4 Hunter ( no clue about buff builds) 6 CW (4x supporter/2xDps) 0 TR
That´s 65 buffer vs 19 striker (1 person missing), 17 teams, 15 running double DC, two single DC, about 3,5 buffer/supporter in every group. I do not know where all those guys show up runnning outside actual meta with 3-1-1 rainbow setups, at least they are a small number or do not exist atm. Those numbers are the same every time I pop up that window, sadly.
I know this does not solve anything. I don´t know how devs will handle those bufferparties, I also don´t know if things will be better if, but I believe that balance is needed, same as I do think former nerfs or fixes were needed to get classes back in line for good (to lazy to name them again).
And how that compares in percentage? If there are only 10 PvE end-game TRs, and 1000 GWFs, having 1 TR in tomb is ten times more than 12 GWFs...
I'm not sure what the argument here is, is there a meta of 2 DC. ofc there is... and it's not for nothing, if 2 DC can buff to equal 5 dps then yes, if we take everything else equal (and optimal), gear, skill, etc... having 2 DC will be always faster than the other options.
Does it mean you can't do, 3dps + 1 + 1, no it doesn't. I have done it many times, and as hero accord, and honestly, just because it was faster then finding more DCs. There are groups that you need 2 DCs, and there are groups that you know that 5 minutes there or here, doesn't matter, and you can go in.
So again, in this circular argument about balance, what the bottom line?
Are classes viable? Depends on what is the definition of viable, if we consider completing it, with the same composition as other classes, 3/1/1 or 1/4 or other variants, then yes, all classes are viable. Do they have the same ROI or will it be a similar time? No. To play as effective as one class, another need more skill, or more gear, or more knowledge etc.. Or combination... Do those that mained SW enjoy it now, mostly no. What they need to shed tears, blood and sweat for comes almost easily to the rest. Next TR.. etc.. And shedding tears, blood and sweat to get the same results, is not what most want in their games, or hobbies or want in general.
If you think a DPS GF with similar or on par damage with a GWF (aka the DPS you're impying) can also tank an end game dungeon with little to no penalty as you so nicely put it, I'll reiterate, you've got to be smoking something.
You got a shield and you got teammates, you will be at DR cap all time. A tactitian GF is not much better in terms of tankyness, except he uses surging tide (if it works?). You also could run Feytouched. A dps GF spams Knights Challenge at Orcus Avatar without much penalties/prblems, he spams Knights challange at Withers without much penalties or problems, he has to shield up anyway to stack SWW. Only Ras Ni is a bit tricky, so KC (=lock in boss and get double incoming damage) might be your fate, but even tough some dps GF´s I met are doing so and survive. Lifestael + dps is the best defence at last boss anyway for a GF. I myself tanked that boss (unwillingly) until the end with my 14k+ dps setup (no KC by sure), since that OP died midway. Spam fighters recovery and avoid that IBS+DOT. Sure you will be more squishy at lower IL but there is not a "massive" difference to a tactitian in terms of tankyness, since he lacks in dps=lifesteal, only weakness is KC and timing when you spam GW. A dps GF that want´s to hold against a good GWF in dps, has not many choices beside using "Knight´s Challange". So a dps GF has to tank those boss N° 1 and 2 by sure, no matter if he wants or not and most of them have no issues with current group setup/meta running with an OP and 2x DC to do so from my pov. My lowie dps-GF does at 1 and 2 with not many issues using KC. Beside that I did not meet one dps GF that was capable to deal those crazy numbers, maybe a setup problem and the fate of pugging in a low buffer group to some degree.
If bufferparties was not the actual meta there was not much space for a dps-GF. Dps GF is a product of actual overbuffs and current meta imo, but actually those dps GF´s tank endcontent pretty regularly.
Post edited by schietindebux on
1
Options
jumpingmorksMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 876Arc User
Does archery has anything to do to the topic in the this thread? Nope, nada, nothing, same as it's viability in group content which is zero, nothing, nada, zilch (or very close to it) .
This threat was flooded by comments from two other threats, maybe you did not know. The moderator wanted it this way, so we talk crossover about several topics, maybe in short it will stop. @kreatyve said : "There were 3 large topics regarding this same topic. They have all been merged now, to make it easier to keep track of. Sorry for any inconvenience."
My topic was class balance, I guess, so I go on arguing or posting hard facts.
Actual Tong on PC mod 12b: 32 DC 14 OP 12 GWF 14 GF ------------------------------------- 2 SW (1xdps 1x buffer) 4 Hunter ( no clue about buff builds) 6 CW (4x supporter/2xDps) 0 TR
That´s 65 buffer vs 19 striker (1 person missing), 17 teams, 15 running double DC, two single DC, about 3,5 buffer/supporter in every group. I do not know where all those guys show up runnning outside actual meta with 3-1-1 rainbow setups, at least they are a small number or do not exist atm. Those numbers are the same every time I pop up that window, sadly.
I know this does not solve anything. I don´t know how devs will handle those bufferparties, I also don´t know if things will be better if, but I believe that balance is needed, same as I do think former nerfs or fixes were needed to get classes back in line for good (to lazy to name them again).
It's perfectly fine to argue from a subjective point of view and a factual point of view, personally I'd prefer not to mix the two and like to give written clues when I am arguing from a subjective viewpoint. Subjective is important because how everyone feels is important, and the better we feel playing the game the more fun we are having. Facts are great too, as long as they are done right, I don't have a lot of patience with researchng facts and my eyes glaze over when I see math so I usually argue via the subjective but I am acutely aware that if the numbers are saying something different to what I am perceiving then the devs have to pay more attention to the facts.
Valid feedback can be given with facts and subjective arguments, because at the end of the day, we're all here to have fun and maybe blow off some steam, it's up to us to be clear about what we are asking for, because if we ask for the wrong thing and get it, nobody wins.
EDIT: Something I am fond of repeating, happy customers spend more money!
1
Options
putzboy78Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,950Arc User
The beauty of being a support is getting into dungeons. Compared to a dps class leveling, farming boons, etc is much more work.
Maybe before classrework and loadouts, it really was a pain, was. Atm my DC same as my GF has no issue, even my boonless OP melts through content.
DC still doesn't compare to a GWF in damage. I'm not saying you can't level a DC, I'm saying it requires significantly more effort. DC is slow (not GF slow but slow) dps is based around DOTs and debuff stacking. There is a world of difference. DC could always complete solo content, it just needed more time. Needs less time now but still needs more time than a comparable DPS. If I do my daily epic HE in the stronghold solo the time requirement for my DC is not that much better than my CW that has 5k lower ilvl meanwhile a comparable GWF one shots everything. If you've level a DC and done the boons you've spent twice as much effort on it as a dps class the reward is being in demand for party play. This does not even account for game mechanics that rewards killing like QM, fey blessing, and hoard enchants. Faster trophy hunting in chult, more efficent voucher farming in the siege of neverwinter. Almost every aspect of the game benefits DPS play with the only exception being getting a party for end game content.
Does archery has anything to do to the topic in the this thread? Nope, nada, nothing, same as it's viability in group content which is zero, nothing, nada, zilch (or very close to it) .
This threat was flooded by comments from two other threats, maybe you did not know. The moderator wanted it this way, so we talk crossover about several topics, maybe in short it will stop. My topic was class balance, I guess, so I go on arguing or posting hard facts.
Actual Tong on PC mod 12b: 32 DC 14 OP 12 GWF 14 GF ------------------------------------- 2 SW (1xdps 1x buffer) 4 Hunter ( no clue about buff builds) 6 CW (4x supporter/2xDps) 0 TR
That´s 65 buffer vs 19 striker (1 person missing), 17 teams, 15 running double DC, two single DC, about 3,5 buffer/supporter in every group. I do not know where all those guys show up runnning outside actual meta with 3-1-1 rainbow setups, at least they are a small number or do not exist atm. Those numbers are the same every time I pop up that window, sadly.
I know this does not solve anything. I don´t know how devs will handle those bufferparties, I also don´t know if things will be better if, but I believe that balance is needed, same as I do think former nerfs or fixes were needed to get classes back in line for good (to lazy to name them again).
And how that compares in percentage? If there are only 10 PvE end-game TRs, and 1000 GWFs, having 1 TR in tomb is ten times more than 12 GWFs...
I'm not sure what the argument here is, is there a meta of 2 DC. ofc there is... and it's not for nothing, if 2 DC can buff to equal 5 dps then yes, if we take everything else equal (and optimal), gear, skill, etc... having 2 DC will be always faster than the other options.
Does it mean you can't do, 3dps + 1 + 1, no it doesn't. I have done it many times, and as hero accord, and honestly, just because it was faster then finding more DCs. There are groups that you need 2 DCs, and there are groups that you know that 5 minutes there or here, doesn't matter, and you can go in.
So again, in this circular argument about balance, what the bottom line?
Are classes viable? Depends on what is the definition of viable, if we consider completing it, with the same composition as other classes, 3/1/1 or 1/4 or other variants, then yes, all classes are viable. Do they have the same ROI or will it be a similar time? No. To play as effective as one class, another need more skill, or more gear, or more knowledge etc.. Or combination... Do those that mained SW enjoy it now, mostly no. What they need to shed tears, blood and sweat for comes almost easily to the rest. Next TR.. etc.. And shedding tears, blood and sweat to get the same results, is not what most want in their games, or hobbies or want in general.
Despite what everyone tells in this threat the facts show something different. The truth is , that in most threats the presence of some let´s say non-casual-player is overrepresented and does not show at all the average setup the community runs. If I recognize every day that parties are setup like that 100% of the day ,tank/leader vs controller/striker 3:1 more 4:1 this clearly show the state of this game It is not about GWF btw., that´s not the main aspect. One DO buffs a dps x4+ the other DC multiplies x3+. You get the result putting those things together and it is different from x4. If you watch those "perfect setups" the damage dealt by that "one dps" is above a factor x30. If you want to tell me that´s a healthy number I don´t know what to say. If every chat, every group and every player in this game calls for 3 classes exclusivley something has to be wrong, right? Honestly I can go on running buffer parties, but that´s not the way I want a game to be like. We got zero need for controller "Nope, nada, nothing" we got one request for a striker out of 5 spots. That´s pretty poor for an mmo. And this request is not only for Tong.
Arguing that classes that need balance, which they do, is one thing, arguing that classes are viable is another, which is also in general true, depends on the definition of viable, and how much gear and work it needs. But arguing that every path should be viable is not realistic, when the devs can't find the time to do minor changes to a class to bring it on par to the others, in terms of ROI.
Exactly my point. Its not the community fault when class (or path) balance is a mess right now. Its developer reckless changes that makes it a mess right now. I remember archery began to decline when mod 6 remove soft cap from crit and got neglected and more problem pops out along the way. Gwf offtank ( is it IV? ) become non existance. I mean alot of those path are crippled into non viable state by developer in an unthoughful way. If they had been more careful with implementing new stuff, making sure it doesnt mess something up, and if it did, correct them before implementation. That way, they wont be needing to waste extra resources in the future to make it right again and they will have more time on focusing new content for the game. Destroying a class/path viability is not class balance. Its creating liability for the future. Regardless, these problem are still there and if the developer decide to neglect it so be it. I m tired of playing content that are dictated by fotm.
1
Options
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
Does archery has anything to do to the topic in the this thread? Nope, nada, nothing, same as it's viability in group content which is zero, nothing, nada, zilch (or very close to it) .
This threat was flooded by comments from two other threats, maybe you did not know. The moderator wanted it this way, so we talk crossover about several topics, maybe in short it will stop. My topic was class balance, I guess, so I go on arguing or posting hard facts.
Actual Tong on PC mod 12b: 32 DC 14 OP 12 GWF 14 GF ------------------------------------- 2 SW (1xdps 1x buffer) 4 Hunter ( no clue about buff builds) 6 CW (4x supporter/2xDps) 0 TR
That´s 65 buffer vs 19 striker (1 person missing), 17 teams, 15 running double DC, two single DC, about 3,5 buffer/supporter in every group. I do not know where all those guys show up runnning outside actual meta with 3-1-1 rainbow setups, at least they are a small number or do not exist atm. Those numbers are the same every time I pop up that window, sadly.
I know this does not solve anything. I don´t know how devs will handle those bufferparties, I also don´t know if things will be better if, but I believe that balance is needed, same as I do think former nerfs or fixes were needed to get classes back in line for good (to lazy to name them again).
And how that compares in percentage? If there are only 10 PvE end-game TRs, and 1000 GWFs, having 1 TR in tomb is ten times more than 12 GWFs...
I'm not sure what the argument here is, is there a meta of 2 DC. ofc there is... and it's not for nothing, if 2 DC can buff to equal 5 dps then yes, if we take everything else equal (and optimal), gear, skill, etc... having 2 DC will be always faster than the other options.
Does it mean you can't do, 3dps + 1 + 1, no it doesn't. I have done it many times, and as hero accord, and honestly, just because it was faster then finding more DCs. There are groups that you need 2 DCs, and there are groups that you know that 5 minutes there or here, doesn't matter, and you can go in.
So again, in this circular argument about balance, what the bottom line?
Are classes viable? Depends on what is the definition of viable, if we consider completing it, with the same composition as other classes, 3/1/1 or 1/4 or other variants, then yes, all classes are viable. Do they have the same ROI or will it be a similar time? No. To play as effective as one class, another need more skill, or more gear, or more knowledge etc.. Or combination... Do those that mained SW enjoy it now, mostly no. What they need to shed tears, blood and sweat for comes almost easily to the rest. Next TR.. etc.. And shedding tears, blood and sweat to get the same results, is not what most want in their games, or hobbies or want in general.
Despite what everyone tells in this threat the facts show something different. The truth is , that in most threats the presence of some let´s say non-casual-player is overrepresented and does not show at all the average setup the community runs. If I recognize every day that parties are setup like that 100% of the day ,tank/leader vs controller/striker 3:1 more 4:1 this clearly show the state of this game It is not about GWF btw., that´s not the main aspect. One DO buffs a dps x4+ the other DC multiplies x3+. You get the result putting those things together and it is different from x4. If you watch those "perfect setups" the damage dealt by that "one dps" is above a factor x30. If you want to tell me that´s a healthy number I don´t know what to say. If every chat, every group and every player in this game calls for 3 classes exclusivley something has to be wrong, right? Honestly I can go on running buffer parties, but that´s not the way I want a game to be like. We got zero need for controller "Nope, nada, nothing" we got one request for a striker out of 5 spots. That´s pretty poor for an mmo. And this request is not only for Tong.
What everyone tells? And what facts? Again, what are you trying to prove here? (And what others trying to prove here?) Is there a 2 DC meta? Yes there is. No one is denying this. One DO doesn't buff x4 and the other isn't x3 and you don't get x30 just from that.
Again no one denying that there is a 2 DC meta. Is the class versatility is health? No, per meta you get one spot for dps, and comparing to the general population where you have more DPS than anything else, you get parties that opposite of what the common classes are. Is it still better than mod4 HAMSTER with CWs? Unfortunately/fortunately Yes. Here you get 1 DPS, and 3 classes, so at least that. Then you had CW or go play something else (again as general meta, private channels, guilds, friends ofc kept running with other people).
Is it healthy? Ofc not. Could it be worse? oh yes. Was it worse already? Most definitely. And more so the devs already stated that this has a target on its back. So probably a general external buff change (buffs that people get from other players) like Diminished Returns with cap. And most agree that the buffs need tuning, yet there are also other ways to create diversity, like indeed bringing a carrot, 10% buff per class aura (for example), non stacking, and you got incentive to make rainbow parties..
There are solutions, some easier, some harder, some better, some worse, but there are few things, that are certain, players, like all life, will gravitate to the easier way.
Post edited by micky1p00 on
0
Options
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
Arguing that classes that need balance, which they do, is one thing, arguing that classes are viable is another, which is also in general true, depends on the definition of viable, and how much gear and work it needs. But arguing that every path should be viable is not realistic, when the devs can't find the time to do minor changes to a class to bring it on par to the others, in terms of ROI.
Exactly my point. Its not the community fault when class (or path) balance is a mess right now. Its developer reckless changes that makes it a mess right now. I remember archery began to decline when mod 6 remove soft cap from crit and got neglected and more problem pops out along the way. Gwf offtank ( is it IV? ) become non existance. I mean alot of those path are crippled into non viable state by developer in an unthoughful way. If they had been more careful with implementing new stuff, making sure it doesnt mess something up, and if it did, correct them before implementation. That way, they wont be needing to waste extra resources in the future to make it right again and they will have more time on focusing new content for the game. Destroying a class/path viability is not class balance. Its creating liability for the future. Regardless, these problem are still there and if the developer decide to neglect it so be it. I m tired of playing content that are dictated by fotm.
Archery decline was not because of crit, it was due to balancing (needed balancing) to split shot. When HR best playstyle is to "split shot, split shot, split shot" repeat. And get more DPS than anything and everything just splitshoting, something is wrong.
Can you get 100% crit chance now? Yes you can, I have, and many others who play DPS at end-game 100% crit chance. There is no escape from this. Does it help archery? not at all, their issue is with distance from the buffers, and no simple change will fix that.
But lets be practical and look a bit at the big picture, what classes have good paths, and what classes lacking, HR has 2 other working well paths, and specs, yes, those that are not archery. So if we want prioritize, then HR is not on the top of the list, there are SW ahead, and a bit of TR. Meanwhile picking archery and having fun in guild is one thing, but picking archery and go to public channels with it, is another.
Comments
It is absolutely pointless to underline in every post your elitism and capabilities.
Btw. how do you know that not 50% of the player in this threat do far better than you but are able to keep objectivity in a bigger sense?
Edit for quote
It's funny you guys are blaming me of elitism when what I say you guys are lazy and don't want to be there for the team in terms of running tong.
I already stated - I'm happy to take to this dungeon anyone who is ready to try it and commit his effort for the overall success or failure. I ran this dungeon many times with friends who never actually were able to get inside, just to show them how it looks. Heck, we got our buts kicked at Orcus, but they were prepared for it. There was lots of fun in this failure. And you guys know what almost everyone of my friends said? I got to be better to get here. And this is what I respect about them. They didn't came here crying like both of you, they just said they need to get better and I'm pretty sure they will be very successful.
I'm running tong with so many class varieties: SW, TR, HR, CW but if I want to complete this dungeon smoothly or want to grind it, I complete party of people who know their class and who know what their role in party is. And that's basically endgame - you know what you do in party. If my party needs me to spam Longstrider shot, Commanding shot and to use Lantern in terms of buffing, debuffing - I will happily do this. If my party needs my GF to abandon Commander's Strike and put Knight's Valor on - I will do this. I will see and hear what are their needs and adapt. And every single class can do this. Every single class can fill a role there. But the problem is player, not the class. Belive me, I prefer to run this dungeon without 2x tanks, but with SW, CW MoF or HR trapper, because of how much utility they add to the party.
@thefabricant already posted a screenshot of 26mins tong run with party of 3x dps 1x DC 1x OP. And the party composition was no dps GF, no GWF, but HR and two TRs. Where are your argument guys? Where is elitism here? Cause these people were able to form a party of your dreams and complete this dungeon with fast pace.
You guys just don't wan't to admit you're not good enough and it's you who are to blame for your failures. I don't even want to drag things like your archery build @kangkeok which you stated on HR forums here. Cause it just shows how little you know about this class and how much you have to learn. You think item lvl shows how good you are? Well it doesn't. Do some reading, watch Sume's channel. You'll learn about this class and eventually master it. It's easy to get your gear now, it's easier than it ever was actually.
The problem with the small minor adjustment method is it has long term ramifications that negatively effect the game and it hinders specific classes and hurts the overall game community. Right now not many GF are running TONG as tanks due to how weak a GF is compared to a OP as a tank in TONG. That was a bad design by the devs and due to this the devs will probably do minor adjustments to the OP or GF to make the GF class viable as a tank in TONG. This could possibly impact other aspect of the game and cause imbalance that will require further adjustment later on.
The minor tweaks we keep seeing is quite frankly annoying and need to stop. I rather see the devs stop it with the minor adjustment and take a small team to start working on full game revamp while the rest of the dev team works on development of new content. This is needed as the imbalances across this game is getting old.
elol set bonus was not working as intended, everyone knew it. Yes they let it sit for a year before resolving it but when the fixed it, it was indeed a fix not a nerf.
When they lowered the amount of stats you get from bonding stones, that was indeed a nerf. Because the function worked as described in the tooltip and they adjusted the tooltip.
The different being the tooltip and the description. In both cases we saw a dramatic decrease in performance one was a fix and one was nerf. In the case of the nerf it was a balancing decision. Another argument in the nerf vs fix column is when things are released to production with bugs identified on test. Live isn't supposed to be a WIP, testers are supposed to identify problems before it impacts customers (game play), you use test scripts to ensure you don't have re-occurrence, you include in your development time a cushion to incorporate feedback from testing. That's one reason many people would call everything a nerf, because once it hits live you should be able to assume its WAI.
I respect that @thefabricant proves his point with the sreenshot but it still doesnt show that the HR are using achery spec or the TR are using scoundrel or execution. Thats why i call for balance on those non viable path. Also I m glad he proves that it can be done with normal 1 tank 1 healer 3 dps setup and i appreciate his effort. But meta group doing at half the time are still a difference that may sway people from using the normal setup. If meta setup takes about 22-23min as compare to normal at 26min, i would say people might consider doing normal setup. Also, 26min for a group of friend that u know, pug might take more. If u are trying to say pug dont deserve endgame content, thats being elitist. Any thought of u deserve the content more than other are elitism. Pug are player too that is trying to learn just like u. U are lucky that the enviroment u are in able u to progress in the game. Some are not that lucky. If u are saying they deserve it because they are lazy to make their own group, think again about are making group with non viable class and everyone left the group at 1st fail. Then again u may call them stupid for not using a viable class but whos fault is that that their class is not viable. Everyone have the right to play what they want. U cant force a player to play the class they dont like. Thats is where class balance comes in so everyone has the equal advantage to play the content.
Off topic :
About my archer build i posted ( https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter#/discussion/1237096/a-short-guide-for-support-archer) , feel free to drag it in when u clearly didnt even read the intention of that post and u already start asking silly question like "why archery path? It's clearly not working well as it is now." Or "You should warn people that being too much in range will often result in being out of the buff range (like Into The Fray etc.)" which clearly show u didnt even read the gamplay section. The only good point u made out of all of them are on debuff companion which is good and gave me some idea and i should thank u for that but thats it. The question on seeker vengence over aspect of wolf pack also show u have no knowledge on this build either or on aspect of the wolf pack range or longstrider minimum buff range. If u do, u couldnt have known that they dont sync well. Like i said earlier, u dont judge people playing archer when u have not play them urself. Its just something that u and i are specialize on different path thats all. But i m glad archery are tested by pvp player like @jonkoca and has great result in pvp.
Have they ever tried to start their own group? It's 100 times faster, belive me. I don't know why people are so affraid of "invite to que" button.
Oh, wait. They're lazy.
Please point a specific place where I stated this. All I say is you don't know the class you play and even you are 15-16k HR archer (or whatever your IL is), you don't know your class. That's all. Never called you dumb, just lazy.
@kangkeok
Here's a tip, instead of diluting this thread with your incessant off-topic justifications on why your build matters, why don't you post it in the HR forum and get ACTUAL feedback on it. You might be able to improve your build, or you might even be able to shed light on an otherwise underused path for a popular class.
EDIT:
I don't really care on a personal level whether they keep or change the current meta as long as the dungeon is doable and within a 1 hour time frame.
I'll support any action by the devs that they feel is necessary to improve the game and by improve I mean keeping it fun.
At the end of the day this is an RPG, if you've ever asked a channel, hey what's the best weapon enchantment to do the most damage, you are not as far away from groups looking to minimise their time in a dungeon as you like to think you are.
Min maxers have been in RPG's for as long as I remember, if the devs do not account for min maxing they will just bounce from nerf to nerf.
Bottom line, this is an end game dungeon, if you need to be carried, if you need to be squeezed in the group so you can get your 1% chance of getting a UE, you've got no place being there.
Players who just want to get carried claiming they have no other option to upgrade their enchantments when in actual fact just want to sell them on AH will vanish from these threads.
Players who farm TONG for UE's will be happier as they won't have to run TONG 20 times for a single UE and we can all go back to farming eToS for salvage
But it's all moot, for all we know in the next mod UE's might drop in TONG/FBI and MSP.
It was explicitly stated that the current system allows for a tank to perform on par with or out perform a DPS class which is why the meta is comprised of a OP/***GF***/DC/DC. The GF produces massive DPS as a result and is in part why reducing the DPS benefit of the power stat was suggested for non-DPS classes, it would essentially remove the GF from that meta as well as the synergy between the OP/GF pair (which is currently a viable "backup" option that still ties up two tanks) and coupled with the future 2 DC changes would essentially disband that current meta and the looming backup meta (OP/GF). Your desires, thoughts, etc. do not dictate what and why people run whatever content they choose to run or what they may want to run or not run in response to changes to the game.
Your comparison involves players being able to effectively farm ToNG and outside of the meta the time to complete can be longer, not only that so many players prefer the meta that they often enough refuse to run a group outside of it. In addition to those things RAD has a refining limit of 36k a day (per character) so even if ToNG granted more RAD per run anything beyond 36k a day would simply be the same as acquiring 36k any combination of other ways (personally would bank on EToS though which doesn't require a meta group to complete quickly). Also even if a player that frequently runs ToNG has excess of RAD piled up that more than likely won't deter then from future/consecutive runs because by your logic they will be seeking the UES's so the RAD argument you provided isn't suitable.
ToNG is not the only source of larger amounts of AD, not to mention queue content only offers a chance at high yielding drops, you can run a queue many times over and not get a high yielding drop which also makes that argument not suitable. Let's say a group can run ToNG in 20 minutes, times 30 runs that 10 hours and no UES's or very few get any? If any drop, those that didn't get one pretty much would only come away with salvage and seals and that 10 hours could have been spent doing things that would permit a much larger return that isn't as capped. On "average" about how many runs does it take to get a UES? A number of players simply buy UES's and or do other things to gain AD.
The problem is the meta choking the amount of available tanks/DC's and some players thinking that the majority of players only/primarily are concerned with later content. There are a number of players end game ready/capable that still enjoy non-top tier content with their friends/Guild/Alliance.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY
"No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
Ongoing Issue: Legitmate Players Banned for Botting (Console) and the Future for "Dedicated" Players
Suggestions: (Implemented) \/\/ Rearrange Character on character Select Screen
In a number of posts it was simply stated "DPS", not GWF (which you assumed) or anything specific. The GWF, SW, TR, HR and CW all do DPS and about 4 of those 5 a DPS GF can outperform depending on the content, group composition and buffs. When a GF is brought in alongside an OP for the most part they aren't there to "off-tank", they are there to DPS (especially in higher content) and again, the reason they are part of the meta (OP/***GF***/DC/DC) is because of their DPS output.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY
"No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
Ongoing Issue: Legitmate Players Banned for Botting (Console) and the Future for "Dedicated" Players
Suggestions: (Implemented) \/\/ Rearrange Character on character Select Screen
To cut the chase on throwing more pointless insult, lets clear up the situation. Do u remember why i mention archery in the 1st place? Look back from the start at page 6 where u claim All other classes are viable and able to play all the content. And so i point out there are some class ( or path to be specific) like archery are getting denied of content due to its viability and need balancing. But u responded by blaming me for picking archery and further insult me for lack of HR knowledge etc. I mean come on, if i do not know that archer isnt viable, why would i take it as an arguement over ur "All other classes are viable and able to play all the content" statement? I mean arent u contradicting on ur statement by claming archery isnt a viable path?
Which is a real shame, because we got Minsc (to name but one) due solely down to the genius of Bioware and Baldur's Gate and those that worked on it, given the chance and the resources, games 10 years from now could be asking to use characters from Neverwinter and that would be the highest accolade any company can be given. No game is forever, no thing ever is, but it would prove without a shadow of a doubt that the game not only gave players a meaningful connection to the narratives in the game but that they added to the richness and diversity of the D&D IP.
Sorry, I kinda digressed off-topic xD If you want to see what I mean about scaling run Cloak Tower on a geared level 70
All classes and all paths are not the same. Non-viable archery doesn't contradict "all classes". What next? Someone will say all classes, and someone will argue with their random mashed feats?
Does archery need significant rework to be viable? Yes. And Archery is a fun path, that either should be seperated to a damn archer class or have crapton of rework.
Does archery has anything to do to the topic in the this thread? Nope, nada, nothing, same as it's viability in group content which is zero, nothing, nada, zilch (or very close to it) .
This is why there are loadouts. And firends. I have a guildie that speced archery, and I will gladly take them to any place (and we did tong). They enjoy the game play, and if they are having fun, I'm all for it. But that doesn't make Archery as a path any better...
Second:
Why, for the love of sanity, anyone will want to do tong as scoundrel ? If someone find it fun, great, I will never argue against someone having fun, at the end it's a game, but it's common knowledge that it's inferior to the other paths in terms of damage.
So no, the TRs in that screenshot are not masochistic to that extent. What next? People will argue that we should havedone it with Bait and switch, shadowy disappearance, and deft strike? With some talisman of shadows and sneak attack as class features...
Arguing that classes that need balance, which they do, is one thing, arguing that classes are viable is another, which is also in general true, depends on the definition of viable, and how much gear and work it needs. But arguing that every path should be viable is not realistic, when the devs can't find the time to do minor changes to a class to bring it on par to the others, in terms of ROI.
You are not going to get 17k dcs running etos farms for salvage. So regardless of what happens to the meta, you aren't fixing the problem your defining of supports not running lower end content. If I'm faced with a top end prize of salvage from etos or committing my playing time to watching Ash vs Evil Dead then Ash wins. Your argument is fundementally flaud in that you assume the available playing time of all supports is fixed, its not. Supports can play other games, play other roles, or invest their time in something really crazy like reading a book.
So removing supports from the meta doesn't necessarily give you more available resources in the content your targeting. The only thing that can do that is balancing the rewards (which they already have started working on with the RAD role bonus.
The beauty of being a support is getting into dungeons. Compared to a dps class leveling, farming boons, etc is much more work. A 17K DC has spent loads more time in the game (assuming they are F2P) to get to 17K than a GWF. The reward for that effort is high demand for dungeons and advantages for farming dungeon loot. The game is an MMO, people here for the social if we were looking for content we would play an RPG which will always be better than an MMO for content and balance. So if people like you they will play with you, if you can't get a tank or DC to play with you... maybe your should check out the self help section of the library on making friends.
Asking the devs to change the meta so that people are forced to play with you is like having your mom talk to my mom so my mom will make me play with you. Even if my mom makes me go to the same park as you, it doesn't mean I'll ever want to or enjoy playing with you. I'll just stop going to the park
@kreatyve said : "There were 3 large topics regarding this same topic. They have all been merged now, to make it easier to keep track of. Sorry for any inconvenience."
My topic was class balance - not exclusively double DC (I play one myself), since there are more classes than DC, but I go on arguing that direction. Threat was named "classbalance is a mess" or a fairy tale?
Actual Tong on PC mod 12b:
32 DC
14 OP
12 GWF
14 GF
-------------------------------------
2 SW (1xdps 1x buffer)
4 Hunter ( no clue about buff builds)
6 CW (4x supporter/2xDps)
0 TR
That´s 65 buffer vs 19 striker (1 person missing), 17 teams, 15 running double DC, two single DC, about 3,5 buffer/supporter in every group.
I do not know where all those guys show up runnning outside actual meta with 3-1-1 rainbow setups, at least they are a small number or do not exist atm.
Those numbers are the same every time I pop up that window, sadly.
I know posting this does not solve anything. I don´t know how devs will handle those bufferparties, I also don´t know if things will be better if, but I believe balance is needed, same as I do think former nerfs or fixes were needed to get classes back in line for good (to lazy to name them again).
If there are only 10 PvE end-game TRs, and 1000 GWFs, having 1 TR in tomb is ten times more than 12 GWFs...
I'm not sure what the argument here is, is there a meta of 2 DC. ofc there is... and it's not for nothing, if 2 DC can buff to equal 5 dps then yes, if we take everything else equal (and optimal), gear, skill, etc... having 2 DC will be always faster than the other options.
Does it mean you can't do, 3dps + 1 + 1, no it doesn't. I have done it many times, and as hero accord, and honestly, just because it was faster then finding more DCs. There are groups that you need 2 DCs, and there are groups that you know that 5 minutes there or here, doesn't matter, and you can go in.
So again, in this circular argument about balance, what the bottom line?
Are classes viable? Depends on what is the definition of viable, if we consider completing it, with the same composition as other classes, 3/1/1 or 1/4 or other variants, then yes, all classes are viable.
Do they have the same ROI or will it be a similar time? No. To play as effective as one class, another need more skill, or more gear, or more knowledge etc.. Or combination...
Do those that mained SW enjoy it now, mostly no. What they need to shed tears, blood and sweat for comes almost easily to the rest. Next TR.. etc..
And shedding tears, blood and sweat to get the same results, is not what most want in their games, or hobbies or want in general.
Atm my DC same as my GF got no issue, even my boonless OP melts through content. You got a shield and you got teammates, you will be at DR cap all time. A tactitian GF is not much better in terms of tankyness, except he uses surging tide (if it works?). You also could run Feytouched.
A dps GF spams Knights Challenge at Orcus Avatar without much penalties/prblems, he spams Knights challange at Withers without much penalties or problems, he has to shield up anyway to stack SWW.
Only Ras Ni is a bit tricky, so KC (=lock in boss and get double incoming damage) might be your fate, but even tough some dps GF´s I met are doing so and survive. Lifestael + dps is the best defence at last boss anyway for a GF.
I myself tanked that boss (unwillingly) until the end with my 14k+ dps setup (no KC by sure), since that OP died midway. Spam fighters recovery and avoid that IBS+DOT. Sure you will be more squishy at lower IL but there is not a "massive" difference to a tactitian in terms of tankyness, since he lacks in dps=lifesteal, only weakness is KC and timing when you spam GW.
A dps GF that want´s to hold against a good GWF in dps, has not many choices beside using "Knight´s Challange".
So a dps GF has to tank those boss N° 1 and 2 by sure, no matter if he wants or not and most of them have no issues with current group setup/meta running with an OP and 2x DC to do so from my pov. My lowie dps-GF does at 1 and 2 with not many issues using KC.
Beside that I did not meet one dps GF that was capable to deal those crazy numbers, maybe a setup problem and the fate of pugging in a low buffer group to some degree.
If bufferparties was not the actual meta there was not much space for a dps-GF. Dps GF is a product of actual overbuffs and current meta imo, but actually those dps GF´s tank endcontent pretty regularly.
Valid feedback can be given with facts and subjective arguments, because at the end of the day, we're all here to have fun and maybe blow off some steam, it's up to us to be clear about what we are asking for, because if we ask for the wrong thing and get it, nobody wins.
EDIT:
Something I am fond of repeating, happy customers spend more money!
The truth is , that in most threats the presence of some let´s say non-casual-player is overrepresented and does not show at all the average setup the community runs.
If I recognize every day that parties are setup like that 100% of the day ,tank/leader vs controller/striker 3:1 more 4:1 this clearly show the state of this game
It is not about GWF btw., that´s not the main aspect.
One DO buffs a dps x4+ the other DC multiplies x3+.
You get the result putting those things together and it is different from x4.
If you watch those "perfect setups" the damage dealt by that "one dps" is above a factor x30.
If you want to tell me that´s a healthy number I don´t know what to say.
If every chat, every group and every player in this game calls for 3 classes exclusivley something has to be wrong, right?
Honestly I can go on running buffer parties, but that´s not the way I want a game to be like.
We got zero need for controller "Nope, nada, nothing" we got one request for a striker out of 5 spots. That´s pretty poor for an mmo.
And this request is not only for Tong.
Is there a 2 DC meta? Yes there is. No one is denying this.
One DO doesn't buff x4 and the other isn't x3 and you don't get x30 just from that.
Again no one denying that there is a 2 DC meta. Is the class versatility is health? No, per meta you get one spot for dps, and comparing to the general population where you have more DPS than anything else, you get parties that opposite of what the common classes are.
Is it still better than mod4 HAMSTER with CWs? Unfortunately/fortunately Yes. Here you get 1 DPS, and 3 classes, so at least that. Then you had CW or go play something else (again as general meta, private channels, guilds, friends ofc kept running with other people).
Is it healthy? Ofc not. Could it be worse? oh yes. Was it worse already? Most definitely. And more so the devs already stated that this has a target on its back. So probably a general external buff change (buffs that people get from other players) like Diminished Returns with cap. And most agree that the buffs need tuning, yet there are also other ways to create diversity, like indeed bringing a carrot, 10% buff per class aura (for example), non stacking, and you got incentive to make rainbow parties..
There are solutions, some easier, some harder, some better, some worse, but there are few things, that are certain, players, like all life, will gravitate to the easier way.
Can you get 100% crit chance now? Yes you can, I have, and many others who play DPS at end-game 100% crit chance. There is no escape from this. Does it help archery? not at all, their issue is with distance from the buffers, and no simple change will fix that.
But lets be practical and look a bit at the big picture, what classes have good paths, and what classes lacking, HR has 2 other working well paths, and specs, yes, those that are not archery. So if we want prioritize, then HR is not on the top of the list, there are SW ahead, and a bit of TR.
Meanwhile picking archery and having fun in guild is one thing, but picking archery and go to public channels with it, is another.