Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#411
So this was a flat ~45 dmg boost to my spec, ~90 on crit shot. Assuming the RR5 I shot was templated.

I run 34+15 bow and used to crit shot for ~500 and now crit shot for ~590.

Frankly, this is the adjustment I thought dmg needed. I little more for hybrids because you will likely get rupted after first or second shot but people that want a firing team can do their thing with 50+x bow. They'll obliterate solos, and I was on the receiving end of that already, but a minst + 4 would obliterate a solo anyway but archers are much more vulnerable to adds, like bigger groups, unlike sins that can vanish. What I'm getting at is it is a lot of work to set up a group of archers which can easily be taken down by a three or four man of visis.

Crit shot is still unlikely to punch through a tanks defenses. Parry, Block, and Evade together make landing a shot let alone crit unlikely.
Pollojack FuwaFuwaTime - SB Frostbiter WasterOfDays - Hunter Ttoll - Shaman
Bodyache - NS Lofticries - Ranger Heartsigh - Ani Shuck - Champ Repetition - Eld Asido - Chant
PurgeFTW - Necro Politicalgnome - Minst

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#413
Siouxsie wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:23 am
The 3rd (last) nerf to Archery basically brought the damage down to just a sliver above what it used to be.
Is this what we're to expect? Nothing to really change or get fixed properly?
Archery changes / buffs have to be handled carefully as a noticable increase in archers and especially archer zergs would be a lot worse than having useless archery, therefore the behavior after these changes will be watched closely.

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#414
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:34 am
Siouxsie wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:23 am
The 3rd (last) nerf to Archery basically brought the damage down to just a sliver above what it used to be.
Is this what we're to expect? Nothing to really change or get fixed properly?
Archery changes / buffs have to be handled carefully as a noticable increase in archers and especially archer zergs would be a lot worse than having useless archery, therefore the behavior after these changes will be watched closely.
Well from my perspective the sniper fervor has died down now and the damage is in need of a bump. Too much was reduced

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#415
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:34 am
Siouxsie wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:23 am
The 3rd (last) nerf to Archery basically brought the damage down to just a sliver above what it used to be.
Is this what we're to expect? Nothing to really change or get fixed properly?
Archery changes / buffs have to be handled carefully as a noticable increase in archers and especially archer zergs would be a lot worse than having useless archery, therefore the behavior after these changes will be watched closely.

Why penalize the class entirely if the problem is behavior? I liked to go roam solo with my ranger archery specced. If you want to hit behavior hit that! Dramatically reduce the damage taken by 2 + archers does not eliminate the possibility for an archer to roam alone, it makes no sense

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#416
gruenesschaf wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:34 am
Siouxsie wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:23 am
The 3rd (last) nerf to Archery basically brought the damage down to just a sliver above what it used to be.
Is this what we're to expect? Nothing to really change or get fixed properly?
Archery changes / buffs have to be handled carefully as a noticable increase in archers and especially archer zergs would be a lot worse than having useless archery, therefore the behavior after these changes will be watched closely.
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...

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#417
imweasel wrote:
Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:38 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.

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#418
My opinion
As highish/sniper spec
Hunter is fine
I’d advocate the rangers DA gets added to bow damage as a percentage of bow spec(starts @40archery)
Scouts need special help in archery line
I don’t want self buffs for scouts but innate damage bonus or effects as archery progresses

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#419
gruenesschaf wrote:
Tue Jun 02, 2020 3:13 am
imweasel wrote:
Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:38 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.

Ad nauseum...

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.

Re: [Q2 2020] Archery

#420
imweasel wrote:
Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:18 am
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.
Please point out a daoc patch level that wasn't 100% cookie cutter to the point that most classes have precisely 1 viable spec and some 2 or at most 3. There never was a point in the history of daoc where actual spec variety was a thing.