The Magus/engi buff

[catholicism198]

Will you still (instantly) lose 4 stacks of Unholy Empowerment when the Daemon is lost/defeated/sacrificed?

Spoiler:

I am very glad to see the work being done with the Engi and Magus.

I would like to submit that the Magus Mastery tree be made more consistent. The proposal has three parts:

1) 9 pt. Changing Tree: Indigo Fire of Change be moved to the single target Havoc Tree and replace the 9 pt. Bolt of Change

2) Havoc Tree Bolt of Change be moved to the 13 pt. place on Havoc replacing Tzeentch's Firestorm.

3) Havoc Tree Tzeentch's Firestorm be moved to the Changing tree's 9 pt. slot.

I think these changes would make the single target and AOE trees more coherent. The rationale behind the idea of moving Bolt of Change to the 13 pt. slot and Indigo Fire of Change to the Havoc 9 pt. slot is the 9 pt. slot seems to be a standard placement from several other classes channel abilities. So, there would be a single target channel in the single target mastery and a aoe channel in the aoe mastery, instead of the odd reverse that exists now.

No to all of that. Please don't.
--
If you position yourself correctly when you send your squig you can actually knock their range into the fray.
*It's easier to do when you're attack inner

[ToXoS]

Hah, I guess the recent buff to Horned Squig made people remember that it has a knockback. Nice one.

I plan to formalize the buff (i.e. move it off Experimental Mode and onto the class proper) sometime next week.

Good news

[thefarthestland]

now need 300ft detaunt.

nice work

Even before the buff, BoC and Snipe were 150 ft range, SH and SW were able to hit at 110 ft range...(still can).
But I've never seen people complaining about that.
So what? Is getting killed at 110 ft range different from getting killed at 150 ft when your detaunt is 100 ft range?
We both know it isn't.
Again, BOTH magus and engie have ONE 5 sec CD and 3 sec cast ability that can hit at 200+ ft. And the classes have to spec for this ability.

Now both classes are unique, viable and propose something different from other RDPS classes.
So yeah, now engies and magi have to be feared like all other DPS classes.
They are not free kill and SH/Sorc/SW/BW meat anymore.

one skill 150 ft and CD 10 sec, you can see the difference? constant dps in 150ft A ONE against skill with 150 ft?


SW / SH has 110ft skill because they are the "counter" of socerer / BW
Therefore they have
110ft
silence
glass arrow / shrapnel arrer (reduces range)
to be a safe area


The idea of the magus / eng was to be a hybrid
+ Armor / toughness
- mobility / range

The game never needed a buff, just need a nerf in
bolling blood / word of pain
fireball barrage
eagle eye / plink 1sec cast
unshakable focus

BW / Sorcerer are caster which does not use a skill with cast (see sekudus playing, just use gloomburst 1sec)

SW / SH same very high damage with very low cast

Eng / magus has skill with 2 sec cast that takes less damage than instant cast of other classes


and BW / Sorcerer have aoe skill as good as eng / magus
that they do not have any function in the game

[Whitesands]

Maybe make strafing run a core ability, replace it with focused fire, then swap phosphorous shell with focused fire AND swap focused fire with Snipe, making snipe a 13 pt slot ability and focused fire a 9 pt one.

The original proposal was to swap Phos Shells with Strafing Run (to put the AOE corp DOT in the AOE corp DOT path and to put a physical knockback in the physical path). Genisaurus proposed it and all the engi posters agreed with the logic, although there was also consensus that both abilities had major flaws and swapping them did not fix the core issues of the class.

I don't know the Engi class well enough to comment. If engi posters were in agreement with those changes, that says something. Regardless is there is still felt needs for changes, steps in the right direction are, just that: making the mastery trees more coherent and therefore allowing for better specialization seems to me a good thing.

[Aceboltz]

My two cents.

The range buff is really good and should stay, it gives a spot where engie and magus can shine and its really cool. But I don't see the point of such a great damage buff. Both magus and engie have a great toolkit to be useful in a battle and are more "bulky" than all other mdps and the damage buff is a huge addition to an already large kit. The problem is it's mainly a buff for solo or laid-back gameplay! It doesn't promote group gameplay, on the contrary it really promotes solo easy-mode pewpew from 150+feet. It is specially true for rifleman/tinkerer spec.

For the sake of balance with other rdps classes I think the damage buff should be toned down. Maybe remove the damage up from turret to promote active gameplay instead of dots+turret and watch the ennemy melt? Remember we also have the problem (which cannot be solved by clapping the hands) of turrets hitting trough walls at the moment.

I think simply giving 150feet detaunt to everybody would be like admitting this buff is completely OP if every ranged career must have a huge defense tool to counter only one mechanic.

[Whitesands]

Will you still (instantly) lose 4 stacks of Unholy Empowerment when the Daemon is lost/defeated/sacrificed?

Spoiler:

I am very glad to see the work being done with the Engi and Magus.

I would like to submit that the Magus Mastery tree be made more consistent. The proposal has three parts:

1) 9 pt. Changing Tree: Indigo Fire of Change be moved to the single target Havoc Tree and replace the 9 pt. Bolt of Change

2) Havoc Tree Bolt of Change be moved to the 13 pt. place on Havoc replacing Tzeentch's Firestorm.

3) Havoc Tree Tzeentch's Firestorm be moved to the Changing tree's 9 pt. slot.

I think these changes would make the single target and AOE trees more coherent. The rationale behind the idea of moving Bolt of Change to the 13 pt. slot and Indigo Fire of Change to the Havoc 9 pt. slot is the 9 pt. slot seems to be a standard placement from several other classes channel abilities. So, there would be a single target channel in the single target mastery and a aoe channel in the aoe mastery, instead of the odd reverse that exists now.

No to all of that. Please don't.

What is the reason for your opposition? I would think consistent single target and AOE mastery trees are a good thing as it allows better specialization and presents a more rational mastery model.

[Fousek]

Some observations and testing from T3. Using decently geared toons. (I know game is not balanced around T3 but still)

Engineer full Rifleman spec: Snipe + full stacks + Unshakable Focus active my record is 2100 crit into low armor target light/robe. (crit into class like DOK with armor talis are around 800 which is kinda bad for spell thats in mid of mastery tree and can hit you only once per 8sec).

Shadoow Warriror full Scout spec: Festering Arrow + Vengeance + Unshakable Focus active my record is 3400 crit and its corporeal dmg so you can do this with some luck to any target excluding tanks. (kinda OP if you ask me but nobody plays Scout spec because mobility is meta).

Sorcerer: i dont have sorc in T3 right now but i got wiped in duel (under 6 seconds) by sorc with combo of instants and 1sec casts including crit for 2k (without Unshakable Focus ofcourse) and my spirit resist was 530 at that moment (not sure what spell was that or if he reduced my resist before it). but full dps geared sorc certainly dominates dmg wise.

And last thing Turret ignoring LOS and shooting through walls is problem of its channeled spell. Shadow Warrior with Rapid fire can do this too... Sorcerer with Hand of Ruin, Squg, Magus, shamman, Engi literally every equivalent of Rapid Fire spell once in a while bugs and finish its full cast no matter if you loose line of sight or not.

[peterthepan3]

My two cents.

The range buff is really good and should stay, it gives a spot where engie and magus can shine and its really cool. But I don't see the point of such a great damage buff. Both magus and engie have a great toolkit to be useful in a battle and are more "bulky" than all other mdps and the damage buff is a huge addition to an already large kit. The problem is it's mainly a buff for solo or laid-back gameplay! It doesn't promote group gameplay, on the contrary it really promotes solo easy-mode pewpew from 150+feet. It is specially true for rifleman/tinkerer spec.

For the sake of balance with other rdps classes I think the damage buff should be toned down. Maybe remove the damage up from turret to promote active gameplay instead of dots+turret and watch the ennemy melt? Remember we also have the problem (which cannot be solved by clapping the hands) of turrets hitting trough walls at the moment.

I think simply giving 150feet detaunt to everybody would be like admitting this buff is completely OP if every ranged career must have a huge defense tool to counter only one mechanic.

Range is useless if you don't have killing power to capitalise on it. Damage buff takes a long time to rack up and in fast pvp/6v6 you very rarely have full stacks. Damage is fine.

[blaqwar]

For the sake of balance with other rdps classes I think the damage buff should be toned down. Maybe remove the damage up from turret to promote active gameplay instead of dots+turret and watch the ennemy melt? Remember we also have the problem (which cannot be solved by clapping the hands) of turrets hitting trough walls at the moment.

As far as I know the turret doesn't receive the +damage from the stacks that the Engi gets, in this change it only benefits from increased range.

And last thing Turret ignoring LOS and shooting through walls is problem of its channeled spell. Shadow Warrior with Rapid fire can do this too... Sorcerer with Hand of Ruin, Squg, Magus, shamman, Engi literally every equivalent of Rapid Fire spell once in a while bugs and finish its full cast no matter if you loose line of sight or not.

These are two separate issues. One is the one you point out, channeled spells not checking for LoS in the mid of their animation (either that or they don't check it very often + the effects of lag, not sure). The other, the one most people are complaining about is NPCs ignoring LoS, which isn't an easy thing to fix and if I'm not mistaken needs to be patched in the client, which means they need a working patcher first. NPCs includes turrets/daemons and lions/squigs.

[ToXoS]

Will you still (instantly) lose 4 stacks of Unholy Empowerment when the Daemon is lost/defeated/sacrificed?

Spoiler:

I am very glad to see the work being done with the Engi and Magus.

I would like to submit that the Magus Mastery tree be made more consistent. The proposal has three parts:

1) 9 pt. Changing Tree: Indigo Fire of Change be moved to the single target Havoc Tree and replace the 9 pt. Bolt of Change

2) Havoc Tree Bolt of Change be moved to the 13 pt. place on Havoc replacing Tzeentch's Firestorm.

3) Havoc Tree Tzeentch's Firestorm be moved to the Changing tree's 9 pt. slot.

I think these changes would make the single target and AOE trees more coherent. The rationale behind the idea of moving Bolt of Change to the 13 pt. slot and Indigo Fire of Change to the Havoc 9 pt. slot is the 9 pt. slot seems to be a standard placement from several other classes channel abilities. So, there would be a single target channel in the single target mastery and a aoe channel in the aoe mastery, instead of the odd reverse that exists now.

No to all of that. Please don't.

What is the reason for your opposition? I would think consistent single target and AOE mastery trees are a good thing as it allows better specialization and presents a more rational mastery model.

Actually, this proposition is more of a nerf than anything else. But I'm fine with that because the trees would make more sense.
Getting BoC at 13 pt in the mastery tree means that once you have all abilities and tactics you need from havoc tree, you have less points to use in changing tree, which is important to reach the "daemonic reach" tactic and to give Surge of insanity more power.(SoI is an important ability for all ST spec magi, because it's in the ideal burst rotation).

To me, there is no reasons to not make this change. But I'm ready to listen people saying that's not the case IF they have real arguments.