[Swordmaster] Forceful Shock
- peterthepan3
- Posts: 6509
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close date: 12th May]
OP has a RR40 SM. Open.
Ads
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close Date: 12th May]
The gusting wind mass knockback is already all the knockback a sm needs imo. The tactic one has really bad vertical lift and thus bad range and i’d never waste a tactic slot on that.
I’d rather see blessing of heaven given a boost, or vaul’s buffer offering some synergy to group on procs.
I liked that some attention is being given to redirected force but the dmg reflect after testing doesn’t really make it worth the point or effort to keep it applied. Possible improvements are a resist debuff proc instead or a wb heal proc. The vaul tree in general needs to be less selfish as snb sm is really all about wb anchor and synergy. Like CA could i stead boost group armor, crashing wave has the right idea but is so deep you have to lose ww, which is unthinkable to play without, even if only for PoH cooldown.
I’d rather see blessing of heaven given a boost, or vaul’s buffer offering some synergy to group on procs.
I liked that some attention is being given to redirected force but the dmg reflect after testing doesn’t really make it worth the point or effort to keep it applied. Possible improvements are a resist debuff proc instead or a wb heal proc. The vaul tree in general needs to be less selfish as snb sm is really all about wb anchor and synergy. Like CA could i stead boost group armor, crashing wave has the right idea but is so deep you have to lose ww, which is unthinkable to play without, even if only for PoH cooldown.
Last edited by Wyzard on Sat Apr 28, 2018 10:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Archmage : Darktown Strutter
Kobs : Chezybel
BrightWizard : Wyzard Bard
Kobs : Chezybel
BrightWizard : Wyzard Bard
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Repost]
SM has only ONE ability that requires a shield: Crushing Advancepeterthepan3 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 4:34 pm I feel that giving FS to a Vaul ability would be best. It should require a SNB, lest 2h Khaine SM provide huge damage, BS, AOE KB and a ST KB (i.e. BG situation all over again). I feel that a CD would need to be given, and for this reason it can’t really be given to GS (a spammable that requires no stance). I also think it should be linked with Improved/Perfect stance abilities, to require some planning/stance dancing in keeping with SM theme.
Echo what Althi said regarding CD of ability.
For reference, here's CAs tooltip (values are base with 0 points in Vaul):
30 Action Points 5ft Range
Instant Cast 10s cooldown
Requires Improved Balance
Leads to Perfect Balance
Requires Shield
A calculated shield maneuver that inflicts 367 damage and interrupts any spells being cast. Additionally, for the next 20 seconds, your block rate is increased by 5% and your armor will be increased by 618 points.
Now, the problem with attaching Forceful Shock to this ability is that it is essentially removing an interrupt in favor of a single target knockback.
All other abilities will need either a shield requirement added or a cooldown added, or both, in order to prohibit 2 handed Khaine builds from gaining access.
Another option however is Redirected Force. It has no cooldown, but requires a successful block/parry/disrupt/dodge to activate. It'll need a shield requirement added though, for some strange reason it doesn't have one currently.
- peterthepan3
- Posts: 6509
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close Date: 12th May]
By 'it should require a SNB', I mean that whatever ability we decide to use, it should be made to have a SNB prerequisite (if it doesn't already) - so that only SNB SM can use it. However, this would mean giving it a CD of 20 seconds so as to be standardised with other SNB tank punts: what ability would you choose? Apologies if that wasn't clear.
The KB itself is mediocre, which begs the question: would changing the ability really do anything in the grand scheme of things?
The KB itself is mediocre, which begs the question: would changing the ability really do anything in the grand scheme of things?
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close Date: 12th May]
The ability to knock a single target into your group to be annihilated is extremely strong, as is being able to separate a guarded DPS from the tank guarding it.peterthepan3 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 28, 2018 10:30 pm By 'it should require a SNB', I mean that whatever ability we decide to use, it should be made to have a SNB prerequisite (if it doesn't already) - so that only SNB SM can use it. However, this would mean giving it a CD of 20 seconds so as to be standardised with other SNB tank punts: what ability would you choose? Apologies if that wasn't clear.
The KB itself is mediocre, which begs the question: would changing the ability really do anything in the grand scheme of things?
As to your question, I stand by my original wish of Graceful Strike. No, it does not have a stance requirement, but then neither do the punts of either (IB's requires 25 grudges but that's a small amount and in practice is always available), and as a normal stance ability, it combos perfectly with Crashing Wave which is a perfect balance KD, letting SM do what every other tank does by KDing a target, positioning yourself, then punting them in the right direction. It's a very rarely used ability meaning adding a 20s cd and shield requirement would not upset any existing builds, it has no important other effects that a knockback would nullify or make too strong when combined with, and any loss of threat generation in PvE is very easily solved by slotting Menace.
Also if it wasn't clear, the knockback distance/verticality should be similar to other tank ST punts. Not super-punt level but respectable-punt. Remember, you'd have to sacrifice a tactic slot to gain access to this because the idea is to change the tactic Forceful Shock to modify the ability into a single target punt, it is NOT a proposal to change the base ability.
- peterthepan3
- Posts: 6509
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close Date: 12th May]
Mystry wrote: ↑Sat Apr 28, 2018 10:54 pmThe ability to knock a single target into your group to be annihilated is extremely strong, as is being able to separate a guarded DPS from the tank guarding it.peterthepan3 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 28, 2018 10:30 pm By 'it should require a SNB', I mean that whatever ability we decide to use, it should be made to have a SNB prerequisite (if it doesn't already) - so that only SNB SM can use it. However, this would mean giving it a CD of 20 seconds so as to be standardised with other SNB tank punts: what ability would you choose? Apologies if that wasn't clear.
The KB itself is mediocre, which begs the question: would changing the ability really do anything in the grand scheme of things?
As to your question, I stand by my original wish of Graceful Strike. No, it does not have a stance requirement, but then neither do the punts of either (IB's requires 25 grudges but that's a small amount and in practice is always available), and as a normal stance ability, it combos perfectly with Crashing Wave which is a perfect balance KD, letting SM do what every other tank does by KDing a target, positioning yourself, then punting them in the right direction. It's a very rarely used ability meaning adding a 20s cd and shield requirement would not upset any existing builds, it has no important other effects that a knockback would nullify or make too strong when combined with, and any loss of threat generation in PvE is very easily solved by slotting Menace.
Also if it wasn't clear, the knockback distance/verticality should be similar to other tank ST punts. Not super-punt level but respectable-punt. Remember, you'd have to sacrifice a tactic slot to gain access to this because the idea is to change the tactic Forceful Shock to modify the ability into a single target punt, it is NOT a proposal to change the base ability.
Gotcha. Good points.
Given the ability is core, would you have the tactic moved into the Vaul tree somewhere, or do you feel the SNB prerequisite would be sufficient? (Playing Devil's advocate here).
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close Date: 12th May]
Both Forceful Shock talent and Graceful Strike are core, however I feel that the requirement of a Shield on Graceful Strike would be sufficient to distinguish it as a 'tank-only' tactic. Offensive builds for SM exclusively use Greatswords; both Ether Dance and Great Weapon mastery require a Greatsword to be equipped to function/be usable, so with only a Shield requirement, the ability (which is already at its base a tanking ability that is not beneficial in any way for an offensive build to use) is locked into a firm sword and board only state. Although it is possible to invest heavily into the Khaine tree and equip the tactic with a sword and shield, it is nigh-pointless to do so, as you would have very poor damage and lack all the defensive benefits of the Hoeth tree.peterthepan3 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 28, 2018 11:01 pm Gotcha. Good points.
Given the ability is core, would you have the tactic moved into the Vaul tree somewhere, or do you feel the SNB prerequisite would be sufficient? (Playing Devil's advocate here).
It is my belief that the current structure of SMs trees are enough to limit the usage to tanks only, as the only builds that sword and board really work for are Vaul/Hoeth or Hoeth/Vaul, and doing either of these means you can't get far enough up into the Khaine tree to do significant damage.
Sorry for the long posts.
Ads
- peterthepan3
- Posts: 6509
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close Date: 12th May]
Good points, and don't apologise for coherent posts; we need more of them!
Re: [Swordmaster] Forceful Shock [Close Date: 12th May]
Current redirected force has a 20s cooldown. The redirected force before that had a 5s cd. So no idea where you get the information that is has no cooldown. Also the current one doesn't require a shield; but the reflect only happens when you block so it all but requires having a shield to use it. (It probably should get the needs a shield ability tag!)
Changing graceful strike to a shield required ability does effect 2H swordmasters, mainly when we are under the effects of cooldown increasing abilities. There are only 3 normal balance abilities and there is a reason none of them have a specific weapon requirement.
Also it is NOT true that all offensive swordmaster builds use great swords. Ensorcelled Agony and Deep Incision tactics do not scale off of weapon dps but do scale well off of strength. There is a SnB strength/dots build that is utilized by vaul or hoeth in order to retain some of the functionality of those trees. Going up to ether dance for most of us removes the ability to get WW or CW.
I stand by what I stated earlier that in order to obtain what you are looking for, SnB use only, it would be best to make the tactic create the shield requirement and cooldown increase rather than just adding it to the ability.
I am in favor of adding it to new RD; but that requires a little restructuring of the vaul tree in order to keep a core tactic from only affecting a mastery ability.
----------
Changing graceful strike to a shield required ability does effect 2H swordmasters, mainly when we are under the effects of cooldown increasing abilities. There are only 3 normal balance abilities and there is a reason none of them have a specific weapon requirement.
Also it is NOT true that all offensive swordmaster builds use great swords. Ensorcelled Agony and Deep Incision tactics do not scale off of weapon dps but do scale well off of strength. There is a SnB strength/dots build that is utilized by vaul or hoeth in order to retain some of the functionality of those trees. Going up to ether dance for most of us removes the ability to get WW or CW.
I stand by what I stated earlier that in order to obtain what you are looking for, SnB use only, it would be best to make the tactic create the shield requirement and cooldown increase rather than just adding it to the ability.
I am in favor of adding it to new RD; but that requires a little restructuring of the vaul tree in order to keep a core tactic from only affecting a mastery ability.
----------
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests