test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Lionheart set bonus additive with critsev and CA

2»

Comments

  • d3cepti0n#1453 d3cepti0n Member Posts: 73 Arc User

    tom#6998 said:

    > @sekosek#5740 said:

    > (Quote)

    > Its easiest only if you are Cw/Tr/Hr. How many dps Dc or Gf have you seen so far ? And look at the wizard counts. Even on channels people specifically only ask for Cw/Tr...



    What leads u to believe that those players would finish if there were cw/tr/hr? There are alot of endgame dps players of those classes and they still cant finish.

    As you said, to "finish it" you need to find a party first, if no one else is accepting your class because its broken, how can you even start running it?

    Also I've tried multiple classes damages with almost best in slot items, I can clearly say if players are decent, there are more than 30% damage difference between those classes just with the damage formula being broken. I am talking about numbers and I know who are the players in finished parties. Full of 4-5 wizards. Not even single dc/gf/gwf dps.

    Right now those people you say they can't finish are still learning and practising mechanics. After you learn mechanics and practice for few days its not that hard to finish it. After you learn the mechanics and get used to it, you just need to beat dps, healing and tanking checks.

    Not everyone tried out the trial for weeks like you guys. Just give them few weeks and more and more parties will achieve to finish it. I even saw a new party who finished it today who were practising for a week. But I am pretty sure it will still be full of Wizards and Rouges/Rangers.

    Congratulations on parties who finished the trial, I absolutely support their effort and hardwork, don't get me wrong. I am just saying, it is not fair for the characters that has broken damage formula because they have nothing to do about it. And now I am asking you if you claim all dpses are same, why did you guys make your party full of wizards?
    No one's not accepting you into the trial because your class is broken. They're not accepting you because you are refusing to use it properly.

    If I want to play Wizard using only Cold powers for thematic reasons, I'm not gonna complain that my class is broken, or that cold powers need to be buffed to be on-par with the current best build. There are perfectly viable setups for every class in the game for ToMM right now. During my time in NW, as far as I recall, this is a first. This is the healthiest meta I've personally experienced, and you're non-stop whining on the forums because "but I want to deeeeps, I dont wanna taaank".

    Either learn your class, adapt to the meta, and perform well, or make the decision to play an off-meta build, for your personal satisfaction, an expect it to perform as such.
    Piece by piece.
  • agilestoagilesto Member Posts: 516 Arc User


    and you're non-stop whining on the forums because "but I want to deeeeps, I dont wanna taaank".
    Either learn your class, adapt to the meta, and perform well, or make the decision to play an off-meta build, for your personal satisfaction, an expect it to perform as such.

    As as Barbarian, our position is a bit different than GF/DC since Mod 16. Like them, our class is underperforming because it's somewhat WAI compared to the other dps classes. The thing is prior to M16, GF could officially be only a tank, and DC only a support. There were some nice other builds, but the assigned role was always that because of the design. So in M16 when they see that dps mode is not viable enough, they can keep their tank/heal build and hope for a better future as a dps. But as a prior dps, Barbarians now see they're not viable enough, and actually need to change their role entierely, meaning changing all the mounts/pets/enchants and gear to get a tank build to be actually useful in TOMM.

    Yeah, blah blah, adapt to the meta, and other hamster. When 3 dps classes are overperforming there's no "adapt to the meta", there's "change your role entierely if you want to do something", and this is not correct. The devs gave us a dual-role build, we should be able to use them both.

    This is the healthiest meta I've personally experienced

    Hahahaha. NO.
  • d3cepti0n#1453 d3cepti0n Member Posts: 73 Arc User
    agilesto said:



    As as Barbarian, our position is a bit different than GF/DC since Mod 16. Like them, our class is underperforming because it's somewhat WAI compared to the other dps classes. The thing is prior to M16, GF could officially be only a tank, and DC only a support. There were some nice other builds, but the assigned role was always that because of the design. So in M16 when they see that dps mode is not viable enough, they can keep their tank/heal build and hope for a better future as a dps. But as a prior dps, Barbarians now see they're not viable enough, and actually need to change their role entierely, meaning changing all the mounts/pets/enchants and gear to get a tank build to be actually useful in TOMM.

    Even classes that kept their "Role" had to switch a major portion of their setup to be effective through the mods.
    Not to mention that the classes you set as an example, didn't even actually keep their roles. GFs went from practically being a melee DpS to Tank, and DCs ended up as Healers from either a power-hungry AC buffer or a buff/dps DO.

    Having a dual-role class is supposed to make your class more flexible, not to force the devs to balance around *both* your paragons.
    agilesto said:



    Hahahaha. NO.

    While it's amusing to watch you act childish, I'd rather you be more specific. So, please, tell me specifically, which meta did you personally find healthier for the game? The 4-buff 1-dps comps that required x2 DCs and almost always preffered a GWF? The TR SoD one where TRs 1-shot Avatar of Orcus? The meta where the "prior to M16 Tank" could 3-shot anything with 3 Griffons to the point where we used "Griffons per Second" over "Damage per Second" as a joke? Oh, I'm sure Warlocks loved all these metas.
    Piece by piece.
  • agilestoagilesto Member Posts: 516 Arc User
    edited September 2019


    Having a dual-role class is supposed to make your class more flexible, not to force the devs to balance around *both* your paragons.

    Kinda, yes. Because please tell me how can you be flexible if your parangons aren't balanced?


    agilesto said:



    Hahahaha. NO.

    While it's amusing to watch you act childish, I'd rather you be more specific. So, please, tell me specifically, which meta did you personally find healthier for the game? The 4-buff 1-dps comps that required x2 DCs and almost always preffered a GWF? The TR SoD one where TRs 1-shot Avatar of Orcus? The meta where the "prior to M16 Tank" could 3-shot anything with 3 Griffons to the point where we used "Griffons per Second" over "Damage per Second" as a joke? Oh, I'm sure Warlocks loved all these metas.
    Oh sure, M14-15 were a way way healthier meta than it is now, as I explained myself on another post. No class was left behind, except maybe SW (but that's the case for years now sadly), every dps class could do a good job, the GWF-only era was long gone. Oh yeah top meta groups could melt content, but that's a very small portion of the population. Average groups were doing average runs, underperforming groups struggled with content. CODG was still a challenge for most, as was CR. The balance was here, and with the random queues the 3 dps needed resolved most 4-1 composition problems.

    Ha, what a joke this meta is when nothing is balanced. The game was actually balanced in PVE prior M16 when they decided to have a look at it, and destroy everything. Do you see any balance in content now? When T1 dungeons and skirmishes are way harder than T3 ones, when CODG melts like butter in oven, and where 3 classes (well 4, but SW...) are officially doing more dmg because they're not coded in the same way, aka NO BALANCE?

    So sorry, NO this is not, by a lightyear, the healthiest meta this game has known.
  • d3cepti0n#1453 d3cepti0n Member Posts: 73 Arc User
    agilesto said:


    Having a dual-role class is supposed to make your class more flexible, not to force the devs to balance around *both* your paragons.

    Kinda, yes. Because please tell me how can you be flexible if your parangons aren't balanced?


    agilesto said:



    Hahahaha. NO.

    While it's amusing to watch you act childish, I'd rather you be more specific. So, please, tell me specifically, which meta did you personally find healthier for the game? The 4-buff 1-dps comps that required x2 DCs and almost always preffered a GWF? The TR SoD one where TRs 1-shot Avatar of Orcus? The meta where the "prior to M16 Tank" could 3-shot anything with 3 Griffons to the point where we used "Griffons per Second" over "Damage per Second" as a joke? Oh, I'm sure Warlocks loved all these metas.
    Oh sure, M14-15 were a way way healthier meta than it is now, as I explained myself on another post. No class was left behind, except maybe SW (but that's the case for years now sadly), every dps class could do a good job, the GWF-only era was long gone. Oh yeah top meta groups could melt content, but that's a very small portion of the population. Average groups were doing average runs, underperforming groups struggled with content. CODG was still a challenge for most, as was CR. The balance was here, and with the random queues the 3 dps needed resolved most 4-1 composition problems.

    Ha, what a joke this meta is when nothing is balanced. The game was actually balanced in PVE prior M16 when they decided to have a look at it, and destroy everything. Do you see any balance in content now? When T1 dungeons and skirmishes are way harder than T3 ones, when CODG melts like butter in oven, and where 3 classes (well 4, but SW...) are officially doing more dmg because they're not coded in the same way, aka NO BALANCE?

    So sorry, NO this is not, by a lightyear, the healthiest meta this game has known.
    Your original complaint was about ToMM, so I thought it was fitting to refference to end-game metas. My points refer to the highest-end content of each mod, not to how T1 dungeons are run.
    The only part of a character you can't change is the Class. Everything else can be fixed with enough amount of currency. The reason I consider this meta to be the healthiest is because, right now, a person picking a class can say "I want to maximize my character, Improve as much as I can and play this game to its limit" and actually do it. Every class has a build that makes it optimal for ToMM, meaning that your time and effort on building a character can be rewarded fully.
    Piece by piece.
  • agilestoagilesto Member Posts: 516 Arc User


    Your original complaint was about ToMM, so I thought it
    The only part of a character you can't change is the Class. Everything else can be fixed with enough amount of currency. The reason I consider this meta to be the healthiest is because, right now, a person picking a class can say "I want to maximize my character, Improve as much as I can and play this game to its limit" and actually do it.

    When was it not possible, and how did M16 changed that for you?


    Every class has a build that makes it optimal for ToMM, meaning that your time and effort on building a character can be rewarded fully.

    Except that for 3 classes, or 4 with SW, the dps path is not optimal for TOMM and so you can't be rewarded fully by having a character built for that. You don't see many GWF/GF/DC dps on TOMM do you?

    So it's not a healthy meta when some dps classes are clearly and officially inferior to others due to an imbalance in the way they're coded. It can't be.

    Anyway we're derived a bit from the original topic, but my opinion stands there with everything I wrote. For me the meta is not healthy at all due to the very structural imbalance between classes on a dps vision.
  • tom#6998 tom Member Posts: 952 Arc User
    agilesto said:


    Having a dual-role class is supposed to make your class more flexible, not to force the devs to balance around *both* your paragons.

    Kinda, yes. Because please tell me how can you be flexible if your parangons aren't balanced?


    agilesto said:



    Hahahaha. NO.

    While it's amusing to watch you act childish, I'd rather you be more specific. So, please, tell me specifically, which meta did you personally find healthier for the game? The 4-buff 1-dps comps that required x2 DCs and almost always preffered a GWF? The TR SoD one where TRs 1-shot Avatar of Orcus? The meta where the "prior to M16 Tank" could 3-shot anything with 3 Griffons to the point where we used "Griffons per Second" over "Damage per Second" as a joke? Oh, I'm sure Warlocks loved all these metas.
    Oh sure, M14-15 were a way way healthier meta than it is now, as I explained myself on another post. No class was left behind, except maybe SW (but that's the case for years now sadly), every dps class could do a good job, the GWF-only era was long gone. Oh yeah top meta groups could melt content, but that's a very small portion of the population. Average groups were doing average runs, underperforming groups struggled with content. CODG was still a challenge for most, as was CR. The balance was here, and with the random queues the 3 dps needed resolved most 4-1 composition problems.

    Ha, what a joke this meta is when nothing is balanced. The game was actually balanced in PVE prior M16 when they decided to have a look at it, and destroy everything. Do you see any balance in content now? When T1 dungeons and skirmishes are way harder than T3 ones, when CODG melts like butter in oven, and where 3 classes (well 4, but SW...) are officially doing more dmg because they're not coded in the same way, aka NO BALANCE?

    So sorry, NO this is not, by a lightyear, the healthiest meta this game has known.
    I have to disagree here, haveing no content that would actually require a full team to beat is not "balanced". Just because everything was so easy that it could be done by a toddler with both eyes closed doenst equate to "it was more balanced then".
    Some ppl here actually want the game to have atleast some challenging parts to it.
  • tom#6998 tom Member Posts: 952 Arc User
    And btw why is everyone here still complaining? What is there left to talk about?
    They wont disable ToMM and bann all players that ran it, as some here suggested....
    The devs are alrdy working on the next big balance patch. It wont go any faster if you argue over it here.
  • rafaeldarafaelda Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 666 Arc User
    agilesto said:


    and you're non-stop whining on the forums because "but I want to deeeeps, I dont wanna taaank".
    Either learn your class, adapt to the meta, and perform well, or make the decision to play an off-meta build, for your personal satisfaction, an expect it to perform as such.

    As as Barbarian, our position is a bit different than GF/DC since Mod 16. Like them, our class is underperforming because it's somewhat WAI compared to the other dps classes. The thing is prior to M16, GF could officially be only a tank, and DC only a support. There were some nice other builds, but the assigned role was always that because of the design. So in M16 when they see that dps mode is not viable enough, they can keep their tank/heal build and hope for a better future as a dps. But as a prior dps, Barbarians now see they're not viable enough, and actually need to change their role entierely, meaning changing all the mounts/pets/enchants and gear to get a tank build to be actually useful in TOMM.

    Yeah, blah blah, adapt to the meta, and other hamster. When 3 dps classes are overperforming there's no "adapt to the meta", there's "change your role entierely if you want to do something", and this is not correct. The devs gave us a dual-role build, we should be able to use them both.

    This is the healthiest meta I've personally experienced

    Hahahaha. NO.
    i feel your pain but i have 5 toons nearly at same boons stage because of that, this balance was NEVER here, for alooong time BWF ws rthe best DPS (i have one, was my main, things changed, went back to my wizard, after the changes i will look at it again, to be honest if Fighter starts to pull proportional dmg as wizard i may chango tho my fighter after that...

    i Hope for balance, but dont belive in real balance...
    So i have more toons and adapt when times come...

    btw i've asked like many others for a class change token to be sold, for the first time is see a reason to not have on, i cant imagine the number of people raging for using a class change to a "stronger class" like wizard atm and see it nerfed to the real place it should be later...
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Member Posts: 3,169 Arc User



    While it's amusing to watch you act childish, I'd rather you be more specific. So, please, tell me specifically, which meta did you personally find healthier for the game? The 4-buff 1-dps comps that required x2 DCs and almost always preffered a GWF? The TR SoD one where TRs 1-shot Avatar of Orcus? The meta where the "prior to M16 Tank" could 3-shot anything with 3 Griffons to the point where we used "Griffons per Second" over "Damage per Second" as a joke? Oh, I'm sure Warlocks loved all these metas.


    Mod 15 you didn't need two DCs. The devs resolved that issue. So using that as the base for the older setup you could run 1 GF or OP both were effective as tanks buffers, than the healer role could easily be filled by a OP, AC DC or DO DC (all were effective), the two DPS spots can easily be filled by a templock, hunter, wizard as all were effective. The last DPS spot could be filled by the GWF or TR. That was more balanced than what we have right now.

    Now we have this...

    Tank - Paladin
    Healer - Paladin
    DPS - Ranger, Rogue or Wizard

    This is the average LoMM preformed group. That covers five man content.

    Looking at ten man content you had 2 OP, 2 DC, CW, HR, SW, GF, 2 DPS usually TR/GWF. Typically I had every single class in the game when I ran a CoDG in mod 15. Sometimes we would swap out one of the DCs for another damage dealer. WOW every class was invited to CoDG groups. That is pretty imbalance right? Just like T9 and CR; every class was viable in a group.

    You can state whatever you want about the current meta but the reality is

    1 Paladin Tank
    1 Paladin Healer
    1 other tank
    1 other healer (if needed)
    6 damage dealers (Rogue, Wizard, Ranger)

    Mod 17 is just as bad as mod 10.5 was when MSVA launched. That content was for the groups running 3-4 DC, OP tank, GF tank, OP healer, templock, and 2-3 GWF. Most of the wizards, rangers, warlock dps, and rogues I know were upset with how MSVA was built and how imbalance classes were.

    Nothing has changed in NWO, it is very similar now to what it was when mod 10.5 launched. Just a change in which classes are negatively impacted.
Sign In or Register to comment.