test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

My take on the "2DC nerf"

13

Comments

  • sangrinesangrine Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 575 Arc User
    I play both DC (AC and DO) and MoF renengade CW.
    From my experience, in numerous dungeons, such as FBI, SVA, and MSP and almost every else too,
    my success rate, and the "smoothness" of the run, is definitely higher on my MoF Renegade CW.
    I believe the reason is this:
    There are currently not enough DC's to satisfy the huge demand, but there are still a lot of good DC's.
    The same is not true about MoF CW's.
    There are a lot of MoF's but most are SS CW's who change loadout to MoF, just to be accepted in a party.
    They are good dps SS CW's, but bad support/buff/debuffer CW's.

    When I play my DC, it's almost never happens that, in my party, is a very good MoF buff/debuff CW.
    A well-built, well-played MoF support CW is very rare.
    But when I play my MoF renegade CW, it's common to see a DC in the party, and that DC ranges from mediocre to excellent.
    It's ironic that, dungeon runs with my CW are smoother, but it's much easier to get a party invite on my DC.

    I am looking forward to module 13. Rise of the MoF CW. LoL.
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User
    sangrine said:

    I play both DC (AC and DO) and MoF renengade CW.
    From my experience, in numerous dungeons, such as FBI, SVA, and MSP and almost every else too,
    my success rate, and the "smoothness" of the run, is definitely higher on my MoF Renegade CW.
    I believe the reason is this:
    There are currently not enough DC's to satisfy the huge demand, but there are still a lot of good DC's.
    The same is not true about MoF CW's.
    There are a lot of MoF's but most are SS CW's who change loadout to MoF, just to be accepted in a party.
    They are good dps SS CW's, but bad support/buff/debuffer CW's.

    When I play my DC, it's almost never happens that, in my party, is a very good MoF buff/debuff CW.
    A well-built, well-played MoF support CW is very rare.
    But when I play my MoF renegade CW, it's common to see a DC in the party, and that DC ranges from mediocre to excellent.
    It's ironic that, dungeon runs with my CW are smoother, but it's much easier to get a party invite on my DC.

    I am looking forward to module 13. Rise of the MoF CW. LoL.

    I keep hearing how 2 DC groups with an OP tank are the only way to play T9. Yet some of my smoother runs have been with a GF tank and a CW MoF instead of a 2nd DC. Plus we all got extra seals by running without a 2nd DC and only running 1 Tank class.

  • vorphiedvorphied Member Posts: 1,870 Arc User
    grrouper said:

    As when i play AC i linger a tad behind and watch the parties back giving buffs as the party makes there attacks.

    Kind of off-topic, but I'm trying to picture how this approach would work. I'd argue that it's even more important to be in the thick of it as AC because the buff radius of Anointed Army isn't that huge. Whether AC or DO, I find it useful to play DC as a front-line support to maximize damage and exposure to various buffs.

    As far as the 2x DC thing, I would really like to see opportunity for more group diversity, but Cryptic needs to make further changes if they really want to convince players that it's not optimal just to run with 2 DCs. Preferably without further nerfs to DC....

    Sacrilege - Warlock
    Contagion - Cleric
    Testament - Wizard
    Pestilence - Ranger
    Dominion - Paladin

    NIGHTSWATCH

  • putzboy78putzboy78 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,950 Arc User
    as long as you need AA's cc immunity for ras nsi, there will be no real diversity on the "healer" role
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User
    putzboy78 said:

    as long as you need AA's cc immunity for ras nsi, there will be no real diversity on the "healer" role

    Why do you need this? Honestly you don't if the group knows what they are doing.

    Last night we ran a MoF Hybrid, DO, OP Tank, HR and SW and we beat it just fine. In fact, due to all the damage buffs it was a fairly quick run for a 14K group. You don't need an AC/DC to beat anything. Just like you don't two DCs. The idea of needing an AC DC or two DC is a community mindset and for groups wanting 15 minute runs. Most groups will not hit that 15 minute mark due to no one properly communicating buff, debuffs, etc... Most runs are around 30 minutes or so.

    The group above we beat T9 in 36 minutes and we did not even have two full buffers, we did it with a DO DC and me as a hybrid MoF CW. The extra damage a hybrid MoF provides along with the 20% damage buff and defense debuff on bosses works wonderfully. Yeah it would have been a bit faster with a 2nd DC as I know from running with this group but what is 3 minutes more in a dungeon, nothing as my DC was capped on seals and my CW needed seals. So I ran on my CW.

    My main is a DC but IMO they are highly overrated. In fact, I ran with a group that did a none DC run.

    OP tank, GF DPS, GWF DPS, MoF Buffer and Templock. We beat it in 40 minutes with this group. You do not need a DC at all to beat T9, just preferred for its buffs.
  • putzboy78putzboy78 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,950 Arc User
    not everyone is as good a player as you. for the rest of us, paralysis is a nightmare
  • pitshadepitshade Member Posts: 5,590 Arc User
    My build is DO but even when running as sole DC, I go AC for that fight. Less buffs but that paralysis is terrible and with the latency/server timing issues, mostly unavoidable.
    "We have always been at war with Dread Vault" ~ Little Brother
  • vorphiedvorphied Member Posts: 1,870 Arc User
    "Need" is a semantics issue in this discussion.

    There are a lot of things that we don't strictly "need" to get the job done, but if we're being realistic, many players don't set out with the goal of potentially making 45 min-1 hr+ runs, which is a strong possibility when they dare to venture too far from the popular meta and with other players they don't know. Is it possible to veer off the beaten path and still finish in a somewhat reasonable time? Sure. Is doing so likely to result in reasonable completion times and to promote a fun experience for the average random group? Probably not.

    As for Ras Nsi, the Partial Paralysis isn't necessarily a deal-breaker, but it's sufficiently annoying that one can understand why many parties file party CC immunity into the "need" column when putting together their lineups.
    Sacrilege - Warlock
    Contagion - Cleric
    Testament - Wizard
    Pestilence - Ranger
    Dominion - Paladin

    NIGHTSWATCH

  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User
    vorphied said:

    "Need" is a semantics issue in this discussion.

    There are a lot of things that we don't strictly "need" to get the job done, but if we're being realistic, many players don't set out with the goal of potentially making 45 min-1 hr+ runs, which is a strong possibility when they dare to venture too far from the popular meta and with other players they don't know. Is it possible to veer off the beaten path and still finish in a somewhat reasonable time? Sure. Is doing so likely to result in reasonable completion times and to promote a fun experience for the average random group? Probably not.

    As for Ras Nsi, the Partial Paralysis isn't necessarily a deal-breaker, but it's sufficiently annoying that one can understand why many parties file party CC immunity into the "need" column when putting together their lineups.

    Its a want and not a need when you have a list. To beat any new content the needs are as followed. A good tank to hold thread and take a majority of the beating. A buffer/healer to buff damage/power and heal as needed. Good DPS that are strong enough to take out the enemies before it gets to tough. Those are the needs. The community than takes those needs and creates their wants.

    Want 2 DC yet you can do T9 with just a Templock and no other healer.
    OP Tank - again GF can do it as well
    GWF or HR as DPS - seen it done with no GWF or HR in groups.


    It is not need that players are asking for in LFG, it is what they want to run with. Big difference between need and want. I did a random Q on T9 and got a group of a GF, CW, TR, SW, and myself and we beat it at 36 minutes. Huh...not bad for 100% random Q. Though I did this for fun but normally would run with my normal group but no one was on and I did not want wait 20 minutes for another DC or a pally Tank to run a single t9.

    The most important thing for any player in this game is finding a group that knows the mechanics and know how to get the most out of their character. I ran with plenty of 17K GWF and my DC was doing about 75% of their damage, so knowledge plays a much bigger role than IL or simply forming the right meta in this game.
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User
    plavia said:

    the WOL nerf is strong, it will effect 2 DC runs

    the rest are just usuall nerfs (stacks of FF and exaltation???)
    if you play DC you should get used to it. at one point we wont be able to do the daily grind and than will get buff.
    till than, all nerfs

    LMAO....

    The buff from WoL on a DO is joke. A pure powersharing DO will not provide you anywhere near the same power that a Healadin would provide. The DO is there for TI, PoD, FF/BtS and HG. The AC is there for AA, DG, Ext, and BtS/FF. Even with all the changes the two DC meta will stay.

    A MoF and SW are viable options to replace a DO or a AC DC if you cannot find a 2nd DC for your group and I think that was the goal with the updates to the Templock build, giving us more options for group makeup that are not DC focused.

    AC DC should have a MoF and a DO should have a Templock with them if you want to run a group without a 2nd DC.

    I have done T9 on PS4 with only 1 DC and running with a Templock or a MoF and the runs were basically the same time as the runs with 2 DCs. The reason for the time almost matching up is all due to the damage output of the Temp and the MoF are typically higher than that of a DO DC.

    IMO, this really does not change anything other than we cannot stack WoL and BYS. I'm happy about this change and hopefully the devs continue down the path of removing things that stack that shouldn't.
  • vorphiedvorphied Member Posts: 1,870 Arc User
    The changes intended to discourage 2x DC are minimally impactful. Solo DC was viable even before, and having one each of AC and DO is still a strong setup.
    Sacrilege - Warlock
    Contagion - Cleric
    Testament - Wizard
    Pestilence - Ranger
    Dominion - Paladin

    NIGHTSWATCH

  • arcanjo86arcanjo86 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,093 Arc User
    the 2 dc meta is on private queue if they dont want it then lock 1 healer on private queue other wise 2 dc will stay forever, if they make this make sure they do the same for tank role aswell xD.
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User
    edited March 2018
    arcanjo86 said:

    the 2 dc meta is on private queue if they dont want it then lock 1 healer on private queue other wise 2 dc will stay forever, if they make this make sure they do the same for tank role aswell xD.

    The same can be said with the tank side as well. The meta is a OP Tank, GF, AC DC, DO DC and HR/GWF. This makeup is 2 tank and 2 healers with 1 DPS. That is not a balanced group and is why many DPS are upset and the devs are trying to fix this issue. The only way to do this is remove the private q system all together so that way you cannot stack the support classes.

    The call out would be this if the devs did adjust the Q system.

    Looking for OP Tank (good by GF), DC (AC or DO), Templock, MoF and HR/GWF/TR. That is what the community would start seeking for T9 or whatever the latest dungeon is if the devs remove the ability to stack more than one support role in a private Q.
  • pitshadepitshade Member Posts: 5,590 Arc User
    The 'fix' is to reduce the effectiveness of buffs, increase the effectiveness of DPS classes and design content that favors or even requires different roles and the ability for independent action. When DPS struggle to do their jobs without external buffs and the boss fights are all focused on single target damage in a tiny area, the current meta will reign. People play the way that they do in reaction to the content that Cryptic gives us. If they want the players to go wuth 3 DPS etc..., it is incumbent on them to design content that favors it.
    "We have always been at war with Dread Vault" ~ Little Brother
  • vorphiedvorphied Member Posts: 1,870 Arc User
    > @grrouper said:
    > the 2 dc meta is on private queue if they dont want it then lock 1 healer on private queue other wise 2 dc will stay forever, if they make this make sure they do the same for tank role aswell xD.
    >
    > Yes and lets add only 1 DPS to the Queue while we are at it . Tell me why should DPS get to take up 3 spots in the group now is that fair to support classes ? And how can one factor who is DPS or who is support when i have ran my DC as DO or AC many times only to out DPS a CW, HR, TR, SW, or GWF in the group. The issue is not 2 DCs the issue is players need to learn how to play there classes and make adjustments when needed. A good share of the players that complain about 2 DC in group or 4 support are the ones that have not spent the time to understand there class enough to actually perform well at being a damage dealer.

    I agree. While there have been and arguably still are balancing issues around DCs, the lack of DPS players performing the role to the desired degree of effectiveness is at least as much of a problem.

    Compounding buff balancing issues is the fact that it’s easier to find two DCs who can at least use an empowered buff and dailies to buff the living hamsters out of one good DPS than it is to find more than one really good DPS. Forcibly restricting the number of DCs in a party is certainly not the answer, or at least not the answer that best addresses the whole problem.
    Sacrilege - Warlock
    Contagion - Cleric
    Testament - Wizard
    Pestilence - Ranger
    Dominion - Paladin

    NIGHTSWATCH

  • mamalion1234mamalion1234 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,406 Arc User
    edited March 2018

    putzboy78 said:

    as long as you need AA's cc immunity for ras nsi, there will be no real diversity on the "healer" role

    Why do you need this? Honestly you don't if the group knows what they are doing.

    Last night we ran a MoF Hybrid, DO, OP Tank, HR and SW and we beat it just fine. In fact, due to all the damage buffs it was a fairly quick run for a 14K group. You don't need an AC/DC to beat anything. Just like you don't two DCs. The idea of needing an AC DC or two DC is a community mindset and for groups wanting 15 minute runs. Most groups will not hit that 15 minute mark due to no one properly communicating buff, debuffs, etc... Most runs are around 30 minutes or so.

    The group above we beat T9 in 36 minutes and we did not even have two full buffers, we did it with a DO DC and me as a hybrid MoF CW. The extra damage a hybrid MoF provides along with the 20% damage buff and defense debuff on bosses works wonderfully. Yeah it would have been a bit faster with a 2nd DC as I know from running with this group but what is 3 minutes more in a dungeon, nothing as my DC was capped on seals and my CW needed seals. So I ran on my CW.

    My main is a DC but IMO they are highly overrated. In fact, I ran with a group that did a none DC run.

    OP tank, GF DPS, GWF DPS, MoF Buffer and Templock. We beat it in 40 minutes with this group. You do not need a DC at all to beat T9, just preferred for its buffs.
    replace gf and gwf with a sw and a cw dps and then tell me what happened on sw and cw with paralysis:).
    gf-gwf are self immune easily to partial paralysis.
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User
    edited March 2018
    pitshade said:

    The 'fix' is to reduce the effectiveness of buffs, increase the effectiveness of DPS classes and design content that favors or even requires different roles and the ability for independent action. When DPS struggle to do their jobs without external buffs and the boss fights are all focused on single target damage in a tiny area, the current meta will reign. People play the way that they do in reaction to the content that Cryptic gives us. If they want the players to go wuth 3 DPS etc..., it is incumbent on them to design content that favors it.

    There are a few ways to solve this. I find that the harshest ways always tend to change behavior, even after many complain.

    Here is my harsh way of punishing groups when you stack roles.

    Adding a 2nd healer or tank to any run will result in the standard chest not being able to be opened.
    Adding a 2nd tank and a 2nd healer will result in the standard and dungeon specific key chest not being able to be opened.
    A run full of support roles results in no seals being award and no access to the end game chests.

    This would definitely alter behavior of groups.

    Another thoughts it increase enemies stats.

    Adding a 2nd healer or tank enemies IL is increased by 2 and stats are increase by 100%.
    Adding a 2nd healer and tank enemies IL is increased by 5 and stats are increase by 200%.

    The goal of both of these ideas is to curtail the thought that you need two of X role to beat content. In fact, adding a 2nd role would in fact hinder most groups. Not ideal but it would allow more players to play roles they want to play. I have been in group where a DC does like playing as a DC but does because that player could not get into content on their main as a DPS. Sad, but that is what is happening in this game and forcing our hands to not run the current meta is probably the only way to ensure more DPS are picked up for the latest content.

    Another thought is do this. If you run the standard group you get bonus chest that has a small probably of dropping a legendary mount. This is only for the heroic accord dungeon and is updated when a new dungeon is added to the game.
  • vorphiedvorphied Member Posts: 1,870 Arc User
    Outright punishment for role-stacking is a bit absurd. If Cryptic even thinks of taking it that far, they're better off with an outright ban on the role. Still inadvisable, but at least more honest than presenting a false choice.

    Cryptic created their own mess by making the stacking and interaction of various buffs such an easy and potent solution to end-game dungeons; restricting roles in private queue or punishing players for deviating from the rainbow party setup would be insulting as well as unnecessary.

    For better or worse, heavy support is the current meta and the only way that some lower ilvl parties can reasonably complete ToNG. I favor the path of encouraging Cryptic to continue working on ways to increase the appeal of different party compositions rather than putting the onus entirely on the players to conform to Cryptic's desired party composition.
    Sacrilege - Warlock
    Contagion - Cleric
    Testament - Wizard
    Pestilence - Ranger
    Dominion - Paladin

    NIGHTSWATCH

  • putzboy78putzboy78 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,950 Arc User
    yawn, same arguments over and over again

    2DC is not the problem, 4 supports 1 dps is the problem even if you create more diversity on the support side, it doesn't fix the problem that people want to dps and at least half of the supports out there are only playing support to get into a party and aren't really max/min'ing for the support role (i.e. they aren't great at it, just tolerable) and who knows how many people abandon the game because they can't even get into a party.

    The fix is not punishing non-traditional parties nor is it to remove private queue flexibility which alienates the player base because it hampers people's ability to play with their friends in game.

    The fix is to adjust Hero's Accord (not adding legendary mount to dungeon, that's just stupid and would kill lock-box viability) so people have an incentive to use traditional parties. Beyond that the fix is quit difficult which is to return the game back to a scenario where roles are more meaningful so that there is an advantage to taking a control, an aoe dpsr, a single target dpsrs, etc.
  • pitshadepitshade Member Posts: 5,590 Arc User
    > @mebengalsfan#9264 said:
    > There are a few ways to solve this. I find that the harshest ways always tend to change behavior, even after many complain.
    >
    >
    The problem is not player behavior. It is that content and classes are designed in such a way to encourage a meta that many find objectionable. It is Cryptic's design at fault and that is where the solution lies. All of your proposed solutions ignore where fault lies, the design of the content. Change the game to favor 3 dps groups and the players will adapt to that.
    "We have always been at war with Dread Vault" ~ Little Brother
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User
    pitshade said:

    > @mebengalsfan#9264 said:

    > There are a few ways to solve this. I find that the harshest ways always tend to change behavior, even after many complain.

    >

    >

    The problem is not player behavior. It is that content and classes are designed in such a way to encourage a meta that many find objectionable. It is Cryptic's design at fault and that is where the solution lies. All of your proposed solutions ignore where fault lies, the design of the content. Change the game to favor 3 dps groups and the players will adapt to that.

    No it is not. I went onto my GF as a tank with a MoF, a AC DC, a SW that was full DPS build and a HR and we beat T9 in 40 or so minutes. That same weekend, similar group but instead of a GF it was an OP tank and again, we beat it in 40 minutes.

    The want of having two DCs, a GF and a OP is for the quicker minute runs. That is a want and not what is needed to complete content and it is a community want not a design of the game. I used both alliance, LFG, guild and zone chat to form groups that do not run 2 DCs and almost all players leave that are not part of a core group that I typically rely on for my alts for T9.

    This is the first MMO where the norm of DPS heavy groups is not a thing. Most other games it is 1-1-3 or 1-4 because the support roles are not really needed. I like that this game is support heavy but the mindset is in the community and not the content design. Your own comment proves my point.

  • pitshadepitshade Member Posts: 5,590 Arc User
    I have run 3 dps groups as well. Your point is completely irrelevant.

    Cryptic designed the game so that stacking buffs is more effective than stacking DPS. This is a fact. Players go for what is most efficient so therefore, they stack buffs. Players in will always go for what is most efficient. It is up to the people designing the game to set the rules to favor the playstyle they want to see.

    It is Cryptic's fault for designing the game so that buffs are better that damage dealers. It is not the player's fault for noticing this. If the meta is objectionable it is because the content that it is based on is broken. Fix the content and the meta will shift.

    Trying to force people to play the game in a certain way without addressing the causes underlying their behavior is what has led to the fiasco of the Random Queues.
    "We have always been at war with Dread Vault" ~ Little Brother
  • c1k4ml3kc3c1k4ml3kc3 Member Posts: 1,257 Arc User
    edited March 2018
    People seem to forget one extremely important fact. It is not at all about DC only, it is about the way DC overgrew into a powerhouse which needed serious trimming down the line due to people who used the mechanic to gain unfair advantage in many cases, thus making other classes and a good portion of players completely unnecessary.

    Yes, you are completely correct to be mad at how things work in this game. Yes, there were numerous mistakes presented in both the business plan and the actions of certain developers. Those things happen, but you can't, in any way,form or thought, blame the game for investing a lot of money or whatever because you thought it would be best to optimize the character around one or two specific encounters/powers/options so that it's a total powerhouse to a point where there's no return.

    If the content was made to a point where each role would have a significant impact by their class definition and mechanics, then it wouldn't be a problem. But there is no content like that and there are no buffs/nerfs on a day-to-day basis which means that some classes will have extreme benefits while others will have no use at all for the dictatorship of meta, usually forcing players to build and grow another class because "they heard it somewhere it's going to rock" only to be slapped in the face some months afterwards when developers proceed with valid plans for trimming where it's overgrown.
    So, don't rush into building something which has a potential to be trimmed, especially not if you're a longtime player. The only thing you're going to do to yourself is become stressed out and trying to blame someone or something for things you did. You do not have to follow the meta in order to enjoy the game. Completely proven by Chult!

    As much as some of you wouldn't like to have a perma-one DC per team, this would seem like a valid method of teaching people to simply stop pursuing the 2XDC combo with the emphasis on "FOR SOME TIME", unless you want to face even more extreme nerfs down the line because I strongly believe that is what will happen when you do not listen to what developers are stating. Why is it so hard to accept the history of Neverwinter? It teaches everyone that if you overuse something, it's bound to change sooner or later. The rule above all is "Fair use", and if you use something to gain unfair advantage you're bound to find consequences. Unfortunately, most of the times, the consequences hit the entire class rather than some individual who did exploits. And that's a terrible case, but that's how things work in this game. Should it really become a surprise and should it really span a discussion on the forum for that long after it's already done and over with?

    Even if you do not acknowledge it, by choosing yet again the 2XDC combo, you, the players, inevitably lock-out other classes thus creating more and more problems down the line. By doing that, you, yourself are permalocking certain party compositions in order to gain an unfair advantage. This is a valid strategy, but if you use certain exploits and then think how developers intended it because "it's there" is usually not a very solid case, I'm afraid. If you make a class just for a particular dungeon and to go to that very dungeon, you're going to have a very bad time once the nerfhammer drops.

    When I came back to the game and saw how effective the lightning enchantment was on my CW I simply knew that a nerf is coming. I was hesitant to buy it or play with it, but I figured out that I could play with it for the time being before the nerf hits, even though I didn't have a single, solitary confirmation for it by any source given the Devs NDA policy. If you play long enough you simply know when something's an exploit or doesn't work as intended. So while other CWs were crying their brains out how CW got a nerf in MOD13, I was just laughing and preparing for MOD13 because I knew that the class-cpecific powers were going to be trimmed not to apply certain powers per tick more than usual. And I'm happy that my class is finally going towards the proper direction and can end up being one of the most, if not, the most balanced class in the game due to the viability of all three paragon paths/feats. The only thing missing is not at all connected to the CW's mechanic, but rather with the mechanic of the Elite mobs and bosses who are control-immune.

    And this CONTROL IMMUNITY is directly connected to the DAMAGE REDUCTION immunity of the elite mobs, which is the main reason why people venture to the dungeons with the support classes. There really is no other reason, the faulty elite mobs and the hardships of the dungeon are the main problem in the game. But will it change? What can we, as players, do about it to change? I recall that people were hating the control back some mods ago, but now you have a problem with people hating on the support classes? That's taxing.

    Before you judge what I say I think it is completely fine to take even 5 of the same classes in a dungeon, but not because they are the most efficient at doing stuff.

    The question is - will we ever see the content created to affect all classes? I sincerely doubt it. The classes fell to two roles only - DPS and Support and some classes do stuff that's supposed to be done by three separate classes, and they outperform by a long, long margin.

    This class is Paladin. Aura of Courage + Insane Healing + Tankyness + Content where going without Paladin is a lose - lose - lose - lose situation?

    DPS classes are making their builds so that Aura of Courage is used as many times and as much as possible. This is some heavy BS right there. This is the exploit stuff I talk about and permalocks paladin in each and every party composition by default, but I can't blame the players for using it, although I will laugh when it gets nerfed and people start dropping their pampers around because they only got themselves to blame for building and investing in a character around another class feature. If you want to do that, fine, but don't go crying because things like that have an expiatory date. Think of it as an investment that you have to use in a particular time scenario since in this game everything's an investment at one point or another. Saving all your refinement for that one-two day for 2 x refine event, polluting your mail with stuff? That's unfair use and it will be removed sooner or later. That's how this game works. You overuse it - you lose it.

    So, please, continue using the 2 x DC + OP + GF and see will it help the classes down the line or not.
    True Neutral
    Left the Game due to heavy Damage Control & Missing Spanish Language
  • vorphiedvorphied Member Posts: 1,870 Arc User
    If the player base at large is guilty of anything, it’s not recognizing that there are more reasonably viable comps than one involving 2x DC+OP+GF and that good DPS players really help open the meta a bit.

    However, players are not at fault for using the tools that Cryptic gave them. Shifting the blame to players for taking the path of least resistance while grinding for a rare drop distracts from the fact that Cryptic created this meta by making buffs so very powerful, largely stackable, and easy to use.
    Sacrilege - Warlock
    Contagion - Cleric
    Testament - Wizard
    Pestilence - Ranger
    Dominion - Paladin

    NIGHTSWATCH

  • c1k4ml3kc3c1k4ml3kc3 Member Posts: 1,257 Arc User
    I speak from the experience and history of Neverwinter.

    If something looks too good when you want to purchase it or build around it, it's probably going to get nerfed due to the overuse.
    If you build your character and invest around 40.000.000 AD in building the perfect character minmaxing the percentage for the sake of effectiveness in a specific dungeon, and you built this character so that you can best utilize someone else's power which usually comes from buffs and similar, you can't blame Cryptic and you can blame only yourself, especially if you are an oldtime player who's familiar with how things run on the Neverwinter. Investing a lot knowing that something's too good to be true at certain times is an enormous gamble.

    Heck, I'm still thinking that they'll nerf the Chultan Tiger because the Companion was that good when it emerged on the preview some time ago. It's just the experience talking.
    True Neutral
    Left the Game due to heavy Damage Control & Missing Spanish Language
  • vorphiedvorphied Member Posts: 1,870 Arc User
    GWF and GF have been extremely powerful and popular for years without significant nerfs, so I’m not sure I’m onboard with this line of thought.

    Also no way will they nerf the tiger; it’s essentially another flavor of Con Artist with a better (though limited uptime) active bonus, a slightly worse item slot distribution (no 3x ring), and strangely slow movement speed. It’s good, and I use one, but it’s hardly game-breaking,
    Sacrilege - Warlock
    Contagion - Cleric
    Testament - Wizard
    Pestilence - Ranger
    Dominion - Paladin

    NIGHTSWATCH

Sign In or Register to comment.