gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Tue 2 Jun 2020 5:13 AM
imweasel wrote: ↑
Tue 2 Jun 2020 3:38 AM
I'm going out on a limb and say this is the worse reason ever.
You are now dictating behavior? That's so far from the nature of this game...it's like penalizing zergs because they are larger than other zergs...
Nerfs are pretty much always because of behavior which in turn is due to player perception. If an ability is completely OP but nobody uses it the likelihood of it getting nerfed is pretty low, only if something is actually used does it get evaluated at all, however, at the same time it's pretty much impossible for an ability to not be used if it is (perceived as) OP.
Buffs are a bit different, while the evaluation is still affected by usage, if something is basically never used it would be a good candidate for a buff as non usage is a pretty good indicator that something just sucks, however, as long as the class that has this ability has an otherwise usable kit there is no need to buff everything that isn't constantly used, good examples here are menta menta or summoning sm or ench ench or matter sorcs.
In this case it's pretty simple: the archer damage after the buff was perceived as OP (relics didn't help, pretty much nobody really speccing high enough in archery before the change and hence making the effective damage difference after the change even greater didn't help either), this lead to an explosion in the archer population. And I don't think really anyone would argue that a very high archer population would be something desirable.
So basically, you pretty much well agree with me. You dictate behavior. If players do something that you don't like, well then you just nerf it. Or you initially design things so classes fit in the one or two specs that you think the class should be spec'ed and played as.
After all this work between buffs and nerfs, you have turned archery back into 'no need to spec over 35 because it's just not worth the spec points to invest that high in'. This is literally what was wrong with bow spec TO BEGIN WITH. Everything was cookie cutter. Now it will be again.
And I won't even get into the stealth changes. You backed off on those nerfs because you put archery back into the same box it was in.
In other words, you didn't accomplish anything.
I am even now more fearful of style change rework as I don't believe the devs currently working on this game actually understand the difference on what balance is other than their perception of how they want a class to be played and as long as players spec and play the classes that way then 'it's balanced'. End of story.
This game has gotten so cookie cutter on spec lines it makes me wonder why bother to allow players the choice? You are literally forced to spec a toon/class into a shoe horn spec. It's gotten so highly specialized as there is a pve spec and a pvp spec for classes.
The majority of mid melee classes spec in hammer, unless you are a hunter in which case you can take spear.
Every scout specs 45 in shield of all things
because that's the only viable spec so they can have a chance in pvp. It's not archery. It's not stealth. It's shield that takes priority. On a 'bow' class.
Every single bard specs 43 nurture. Every. Single. One. Then the only other choice you make is 37 or 47 music.
I am beginning to understand players complaining that resources should be completely used to fix bugs first rather than waste time on trying to change cookie cutter spec paths.
It's literally a waste of time. I think the devs did a good job on QoL changes to the game and taking the tediousness of certain things out. I applaud you for that.
The rest just feels like a gerbil/hamster/small rodent running in his wheel treadmill on a classic pay server.
Sorry to have taken up your time.