Recent Topics

Ads

What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Let's talk about... everything else

Moderators: Developer, Management, Web Developer

UnspeakableOath
Posts: 23

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#41 » Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:15 pm

Manatikik wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:11 pm
Xergon wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 6:42 pm
Aspia wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 6:39 pm
Skirmish SW
65ft Range isn't very much for the middling damage the AoE Skirmish Spec can put out. You're far too close to getting GTTC puled and you won't even be alive when you land, and you're in range of ALL of their casters.
I'd either up the Range to 75 or 85 ft, Increase the damage dramatically to make it worth being able to be insta gibbed, and/or make whirling pin into an instant (read, no prior animation) backflip that gives you immunity for the duration of the leap.
So if GTTC is such cancer, i guess no one should play Slayer or BW then ?
You know that proper AoE BW is basically a Melee Casting DPS in proper BW ? he use basically only 2 range abilities just to poke but proper aoe dmg burst comes from melee range abilities on that class...

Crazy enough i know some groups who play those with success, must be bug or miracle i guess...

Your comment is just another example of SOLO PUG thinking player who has no idea what DPS class can do with proper support behind...
Except the damage is low. There's no way to beat around the bush; SW AoE damage is bad. Barrage is a nice tool but you're essentially giving up a DPS spot for 1/3 uptime (at best) Morale Drain (unless its full Warlord so it can do ASW/Barrage; which I'm pretty sure I'm the only one doing this).

SW is bad, its ok.
I think this is the thing that mystifies me most about this community. I can understand if primarily Destro players cry for nerfs of an Order class or vice versa; at least that benefits them. What I don't get are OTHER ORDER PLAYERS disputing what SW Mains are saying about the changes to the PRIMARY CLASS THEY PLAY AND THE OTHER ORDER PLAYERS DON'T.

It's a weird sort of masochism, I guess, that motivates that. I can't make sense of it otherwise.

Ads
User avatar
Manatikik
Posts: 1174

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#42 » Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:43 pm

UnspeakableOath wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:15 pm
Manatikik wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:11 pm
Xergon wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 6:42 pm


So if GTTC is such cancer, i guess no one should play Slayer or BW then ?
You know that proper AoE BW is basically a Melee Casting DPS in proper BW ? he use basically only 2 range abilities just to poke but proper aoe dmg burst comes from melee range abilities on that class...

Crazy enough i know some groups who play those with success, must be bug or miracle i guess...

Your comment is just another example of SOLO PUG thinking player who has no idea what DPS class can do with proper support behind...
Except the damage is low. There's no way to beat around the bush; SW AoE damage is bad. Barrage is a nice tool but you're essentially giving up a DPS spot for 1/3 uptime (at best) Morale Drain (unless its full Warlord so it can do ASW/Barrage; which I'm pretty sure I'm the only one doing this).

SW is bad, its ok.
I think this is the thing that mystifies me most about this community. I can understand if primarily Destro players cry for nerfs of an Order class or vice versa; at least that benefits them. What I don't get are OTHER ORDER PLAYERS disputing what SW Mains are saying about the changes to the PRIMARY CLASS THEY PLAY AND THE OTHER ORDER PLAYERS DON'T.

It's a weird sort of masochism, I guess, that motivates that. I can't make sense of it otherwise.
Xergon plays a ridiculous amount of toons on both sides, is decent at the game, and is in a solid guild that rolls most of the server - I'd say his analysis holds more weight than most people who post. I do think he also has certain notions in mind about breaking meta/playing alternative stuff that kinda clouds his judgement on SW a bit.
<Montague><Capulet>

User avatar
Xergon
Posts: 582

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#43 » Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:05 pm

UnspeakableOath wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:15 pm
Manatikik wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:11 pm
Xergon wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 6:42 pm
Spoiler:


So if GTTC is such cancer, i guess no one should play Slayer or BW then ?
You know that proper AoE BW is basically a Melee Casting DPS in proper BW ? he use basically only 2 range abilities just to poke but proper aoe dmg burst comes from melee range abilities on that class...

Crazy enough i know some groups who play those with success, must be bug or miracle i guess...

Your comment is just another example of SOLO PUG thinking player who has no idea what DPS class can do with proper support behind...


Except the damage is low. There's no way to beat around the bush; SW AoE damage is bad. Barrage is a nice tool but you're essentially giving up a DPS spot for 1/3 uptime (at best) Morale Drain (unless its full Warlord so it can do ASW/Barrage; which I'm pretty sure I'm the only one doing this).

SW is bad, its ok.
I think this is the thing that mystifies me most about this community. I can understand if primarily Destro players cry for nerfs of an Order class or vice versa; at least that benefits them. What I don't get are OTHER ORDER PLAYERS disputing what SW Mains are saying about the changes to the PRIMARY CLASS THEY PLAY AND THE OTHER ORDER PLAYERS DON'T.

It's a weird sort of masochism, I guess, that motivates that. I can't make sense of it otherwise.
I play SW myself (got full Invader RR 78+) and i wish this class to have very viable WB spec. I understand why most SWs whine, cuz they lost their Pepega Cancer Kiting spec, which was usable mostly as solo roamer to kill other solo roamers who had no gap closers...
Its just sad to me that ppl are blind and tunneled so hard. Devs made huge leap and change to class that a lot ppl were crying. Honestly im really shocked they actually made it, i thought it was lost case. So i admire their work and hope it will work out.

As i said before and in other topics, its change in good direction, hopefully not final, still missing some minor things, like LileathArrow atm is basically dead ability.

Is new AoE SW better than BW/SL most likely not but thats not the issue here, u should ask, Did SW had any viable AoE spec before changes ? And the answer was: No (unless u count LA spam as viable spec...) Does SW has now AoE viable spec ? And answer is: Surely better than before.
Although im pretty sure, good SW who will adopt to new changes and get support from SM/BW/WP can make very nice things with current build. I tested some things myself and honestly cant wait when we switch to Order to farm destro with it.

This game is group based game and around synergies between classes. Anyone who plays MSH understand its weakness as AoE class. If you join WB as MSH and u dont get 2 BO with Waaaaagh or at least Choppa with ChopFasta, you know, you will have very bad time. In city if u dont get those tools u can get outdpsed by handicapped AoE WE...
And trust me, current AoE on SW is way better than MSH AoE.
Image
The Unlikely Plan
YouTube

jaxamillian
Suspended
Posts: 35

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#44 » Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:21 pm

To compare BW aoe dmg to SW aoe dmg is just so so so wrong. You have multiple SW telling you youre wrong and the damage is ****. There is not a sane person on the server who would take a SW over a BW for aoe dmg. You are being completely non-helpful on this subject.

The only thing I can think of is you last played a few patches ago when yes IT DID do a lot of aoe dmg. Now IT DOESNT. So so so simple dude.

agemennon675
Posts: 169

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#45 » Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:34 pm

jaxamillian wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:21 pm
To compare BW aoe dmg to SW aoe dmg is just so so so wrong. You have multiple SW telling you youre wrong and the damage is ****. There is not a sane person on the server who would take a SW over a BW for aoe dmg. You are being completely non-helpful on this subject.

The only thing I can think of is you last played a few patches ago when yes IT DID do a lot of aoe dmg. Now IT DOESNT. So so so simple dude.
Even Few patches ago, it never did enough dmg to catch a MSH BW Slayer Marauder etc. and also require a SM to do so

Mystry
Posts: 396

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#46 » Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:21 pm

agemennon675 wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:34 pm
Even Few patches ago, it never did enough dmg to catch a MSH BW Slayer Marauder etc. and also require a SM to do so
Even with an SM using a dedicated Whispering Winds build (which most SM's don't do because lolkhaineetherdance), SW still does **** AOE damage.

Partly because the SW runs out of AP VERY easily, but mostly because the damage numbers on their abilities are just abysmally low.

agemennon675
Posts: 169

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#47 » Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:01 am

Manatikik wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:43 pm
UnspeakableOath wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:15 pm
Manatikik wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:11 pm


Except the damage is low. There's no way to beat around the bush; SW AoE damage is bad. Barrage is a nice tool but you're essentially giving up a DPS spot for 1/3 uptime (at best) Morale Drain (unless its full Warlord so it can do ASW/Barrage; which I'm pretty sure I'm the only one doing this).

SW is bad, its ok.
I think this is the thing that mystifies me most about this community. I can understand if primarily Destro players cry for nerfs of an Order class or vice versa; at least that benefits them. What I don't get are OTHER ORDER PLAYERS disputing what SW Mains are saying about the changes to the PRIMARY CLASS THEY PLAY AND THE OTHER ORDER PLAYERS DON'T.

It's a weird sort of masochism, I guess, that motivates that. I can't make sense of it otherwise.
Xergon plays a ridiculous amount of toons on both sides, is decent at the game, and is in a solid guild that rolls most of the server - I'd say his analysis holds more weight than most people who post. I do think he also has certain notions in mind about breaking meta/playing alternative stuff that kinda clouds his judgement on SW a bit.
Mmm I wouldnt be so sure about that Xergon: “AoE on SW is way better than MSH AoE.“

User avatar
Xergon
Posts: 582

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#48 » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:02 am

Ye i gave up, u guys are lost cause... you cannot even understand what i type, so good luck in your whining and bitching...
Image
The Unlikely Plan
YouTube

Ads
User avatar
Aurandilaz
Posts: 1828

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#49 » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:36 am

have you considered that damage should reflect a certain risk:reward formula and allowing a class with low risk access to high rewards would be bad from balancing POV?
you have classes with medium armor doing too much dmg at frontline (medium risk, high reward)
classes with light armor doing weak AoE + good ST (high risk, medium reward)
classes with defence penalty doing medium dmg (high risk, medium reward)
ranged classes with pet penalty doing medium dmg (medium risk, medium reward)
and ranged/melee casters doing high dmg with self harm mechanic (high risk, high reward)

Already I think many classes are too far from the ideal "curve" when it comes to ensuring appropiate reward for the risks involved (especially armor pen shrugging mara dealing higher aoe dmg than choppa without a self harm mechnic nor other drawbacks) or squishy We/WH being a joke in large scale fights but retaining their light armor, or BW/Sorc self harm mechanic being unnoticeable if you just get 1 HOT from any healer. Unironically aoe WL with medium armor and medium dmg and having to play without pet is probably "least imbalanced" when it comes to risk:rewards.
How does SW fit into this theoretical curve of giving a class damage output that reflects the risk they have to take in order to play in largescale/smallscale?
65ft is basically safe range, its considered long range bombing distance vs medium distance of 30-40ft and short bombing distance of 5-20ft. Only further extreme would be ST specs of engi/magus but then their effective "bombing" falls behind.

So if the class retains its 65ft operating range, then it cannot gain access to lot of rewards in creating dmg. It has to remain behind any class that takes higher risks at 5-20ft melee bombing range.
One way to maybe overcome this would be to add some "new" tactic like old Close Quarters where if you are within 20ft of your enemies, your dmg increases. Or add something extra to the stance, that allows some extra dot or debuff to proc if you are within 20ft of your targets. Or something like changes to VoN, which places a limit and reduces the range of all of your attacks to below 30ft, but in turn it becomes a 10s uptime 15s(20s?) cd buff and maybe adds 30 or 35 extra dmg instead of 25.

User avatar
Raldoran
Posts: 12

Re: What is a ranged shadow warriors role meant to be exactly?

Post#50 » Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:54 am

Aurandilaz wrote:
Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:36 am
have you considered that damage should reflect a certain risk:reward formula and allowing a class with low risk access to high rewards would be bad from balancing POV?
you have classes with medium armor doing too much dmg at frontline (medium risk, high reward)
classes with light armor doing weak AoE + good ST (high risk, medium reward)
classes with defence penalty doing medium dmg (high risk, medium reward)
ranged classes with pet penalty doing medium dmg (medium risk, medium reward)
and ranged/melee casters doing high dmg with self harm mechanic (high risk, high reward)

Already I think many classes are too far from the ideal "curve" when it comes to ensuring appropiate reward for the risks involved (especially armor pen shrugging mara dealing higher aoe dmg than choppa without a self harm mechnic nor other drawbacks) or squishy We/WH being a joke in large scale fights but retaining their light armor, or BW/Sorc self harm mechanic being unnoticeable if you just get 1 HOT from any healer. Unironically aoe WL with medium armor and medium dmg and having to play without pet is probably "least imbalanced" when it comes to risk:rewards.
How does SW fit into this theoretical curve of giving a class damage output that reflects the risk they have to take in order to play in largescale/smallscale?
65ft is basically safe range, its considered long range bombing distance vs medium distance of 30-40ft and short bombing distance of 5-20ft. Only further extreme would be ST specs of engi/magus but then their effective "bombing" falls behind.

So if the class retains its 65ft operating range, then it cannot gain access to lot of rewards in creating dmg. It has to remain behind any class that takes higher risks at 5-20ft melee bombing range.
One way to maybe overcome this would be to add some "new" tactic like old Close Quarters where if you are within 20ft of your enemies, your dmg increases. Or add something extra to the stance, that allows some extra dot or debuff to proc if you are within 20ft of your targets. Or something like changes to VoN, which places a limit and reduces the range of all of your attacks to below 30ft, but in turn it becomes a 10s uptime 15s(20s?) cd buff and maybe adds 30 or 35 extra dmg instead of 25.
I totally agree there should be a risk reward basis depending on how your class operates but the problem with SW particular the scout tree is that whilst it is true it can operate from 65 feet its hits like a wet noodle even on classes that are supposed to be squishy.

If you say that if it runs at 65 feet so it cant gain any rewards for creating dmg then what's the point of the class. why would you choose a sw over a bw or eng it doesn't bring anything to the table that would make it shine more than those classes. The only way that works is if you give SW's something to add to the utility of the warband/group if your not intending to give them any dmg upgrades

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ducktaped, GamesBond, Google Adsense [Bot], zenzo and 30 guests