[Engi / Magus] Pet Spawning

[Tankbeardz]

Almost no part of this game is purely 6v6. Almost all scenario's created by mythic are 12v12 and higher.

Almost all the SC's in this game can make use of this style of play I described earlier. Very few sc's can't make use of this style of play if any can't. What I'm trying to say is the magus/engineer defines the groups fighting style. Its not the other way around. You can't fit in the engineer into the fighting style of the kiting meta. You can try and it will be bad. Think of the group I described earlier as a slow moving bulldozer of area denial. You have to place your area denial in strategic desirable locations.

To me the must have tactics are lasting chaos tactic/extra ammo in any build. Expert skirimsher I can see the use of because it serves multiple uses and is a dps increaser. But well-oiled machine/chaos attunement is a waste of a tactic slot and is garbage. Even with the changes proposed I would still think its garbage. You just don't need to slot well-oiled machine/chaos attunement. Those tactics are just a handi-cap to the engineer/magus to try and force them into something they are not designed to do.

Well-oiled machine/chaos attunement is 100% not needed and is not a must have tactic slot at all.

The whole backbone of karast argument is that these two tactic slots are must have's. They are not must have's at all. Not even close.

I have no problems playing as a DPS and I don't build any groups around engi / magus. Your narrow view of how to play the class limits it's potential. It certainly WAS designed to be mobile, in certain builds, and I'm not really sure how you came to your conclusions.

Well-oiled Machine / Chatoic Attunement: In our POV...insta-pet is necessary for the damage increase, CC, range, and AP save (and it is super noticeable considering the high cost of redeploy).

[Tankbeardz]

Spoiler:

I disagree with you. We have a DPS paths and support paths for a reason.

dps path doesn't mean to be mobile and support path doesn't mean being stationary.
Engi/magus as glorian explained, are designed to be stationary dps, that's why we got such great buff with turret.
adding more mobility would result to nerf turret buff later certainly.

Azarael compared engi/magus to weapon siege alike. Noone said karast proposal was all bad, that's the mobile part that don't fit the class for some of us.

Fights are mobile and dps classes should be mobile IMO.
I hate the turret buffs and would prefer a change into class viability. I think I have echoed this statement enough times. That's great that you have your tank build now...why limit others that disagree with that playstyle?

Spoiler:

Blanket statements akin to "Fights are mobile" lack supporting evidence as per the guidelines for topic responders in here viewtopic.php?f=96&t=11105 - i.e. pressure applied through casting setback by melee and cc applied by tanks force rdps to have some mobile option.

- Refrain from posting your opinion on aspects that are not under-consideration nor contribute in a positive direction to agreeing with and supporting the original post or debunking proposed alternative solutions by other community members, i.e turret buffs and explain how OP solutions do not impeed on or remove the viability of existing defensive play-styles.

Gerv[/quote]

Spoiler:

Thanks for the warning... Not sure what it was for since I was arguing the point the OP was trying to make. I don't see anyone else providing any proof either. Eh whatever... Enjoy your forums I'll stay out.

[Tankbeardz]

Double post.

-Gerv

[Gerv]

A reminder that the aim of class balance is to 1) ensure all classes are viable options with all aspects of the game, 6v6, scenarios of 12v12 & 18v18 and ORvR/Warband scale. 2) ensure that a range of sepc's are viable rather than one or two as per the rules and guidelines here: viewtopic.php?f=96&t=11105 under "aims".

- Additionally, please refrain from re-posting the same points you have previously mentioned when addressing subsequent posts

- Gerv

[blaqwar]

From reading the responses it seems to me that the biggest counter to the OP's proposal is that the Engineer/Magus is not seen as a mobile career. That they are the masters of siege combat and dug-in positions. It's not a very good argument because the change has absolutely nothing to do with entrenched warfare:

a) This change wouldn't hurt the Engi/Magi siege potential and entrenched warfare specialisation.
b) It wouldn't increase the already formidable siege potential, or if it does it's a marginal diversity buff (it would allow a siege specced career to not completely fall flat on its face when caught by surprise). An entrenched position takes time to establish and right now the career requires maximum deployment stacks to reach max effectiveness. Summoning a turret/deamon quicker doesn't help with that (especially considering resummoning removes stacks).

So if the proposed change doesn't interact with what the career is good at then obviously the negativity must be stemming from people believing that the career is already good enough in the other major part of WAR, small-scale combat.

(Or people just don't want more diversity in allowing careers to be good at more than one thing. And that's just silly, so I'll ignore that.)

I'd disagree with the Engi/Magus career being competitve in small-scale, as I believe most of the community would but I'll leave it up to you guys.

Just one more thing to add; for when the argument of this change making the careers too strong in small-scale inevitably comes up;

a) It doesn't change much in how the careers already play as almost everyone already uses the tactic to make it instant cast as it's too important. So the change only frees up a tactic slot.
b) As it will most likely be accompanied with an increase in cooldown it would come with a downside of a stronger counterplay, if targeted and destroyed the turrets would become more difficult to replace (perhaps Well-Oiled Machine could be changed into something remedying that).

[Grunbag]

Spoiler:

After reading AoR patch note , redeploy was already supposed to cost 0Ap with well oiled machine since patch 1.3.6:

Well-Oiled Machine: This Tactic will now also reduce Redeploy's Action Point cost to zero.

It's probably a bug that is doesn't apply on RoR

Source : http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/G ... nd_Careers

Checked with 2 independent engineers, this tactic is functioning correctly, re-deploy does cost 0AP rather than 60 when slotted. - Gerv

Spoiler:

Also , reducing redeploy CD was already something that were in live : (source patch note 1.4.4 http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/G ... _1.4.4)

Engineer Warlord 7pc set will now reduce Redeploy's cooldown by 50%.
Magus Warlord 7pc set will now reduce Resummon's cooldown by 50%.

Dunno if it still the warlord 7pc set bonus still the same here

issues with post:
1) Whether or not it is implemented as live, gear pieces, inc set bonuses, are not an argument for the viability of a class, or the lack of a balance change, as per the balance rules. If you posted it for another reason, see point 2 below and I will happily remove the moderation.

2) any information needs to be explained how it is relevant to the discussion. I.e. how it impacts or potentially impacts the OP issues, his proposed solutions or alternative solutions posted by the community.

- Gerv

[Grunbag]

Why don't we bring back engineer's runes like buff and work on new ones ?

Can have :

Rune Of Forging
When you construct a turret, it will gain a protective barrier which will absorb up to 660 damage within the first 180 seconds.

Rune Of Reloading
While this buff is active : redeploy ap is reduced to 0ap, and the Cd is reduce to 50%.

Rune Of Warding
While this buff is active : turret cast is reduced to 1 second and can be casted on the move

This won't make the turret changes to "free" , cause you'll have to change / switch between the buff , and' would fit the differents gameplay, but could have a counterpart (gcd , ap cost for buff, buff cd ?, removed/cleansed by tanks)
It would also free 1 tactic slot : well oiled machine .

[Gerv]

2 weeks is up, locking. - Gerv

[dansari]

As it stands right now, our stance is that Engineer/Magus should still be restricted by their mobility, but we are brainstorming ways to make the trade more rewarding or to allow heavy point & tactic investment to offset the mobility hindrances. Moved to rejected.