Return of Reckoning

Destro tanks have more access to armor debuffs..no ty again

Bozzax wrote:
I guess this could also be seen as an improvement as it promotes not running 2 of same class

This is the major thing I think, not so much that it promotes not running say 2 knights, but that it improves the viability of other classes which bring a debuff/buff of the same type of an "alpha" class whatever that may be for the tier or the current meta.

Joshwa70 wrote:Destro tanks have more access to armor debuffs..no ty again

Chosen doesn't have one, would mean running BG+BO just to get 2 armor debuffs that wouldn't even stack that well if there was a mara in the party. So a destro party with no mara or chosen :^)

Joshwa70 wrote:Destro tanks have more access to armor debuffs..no ty again

Yes 3 vs 4 but I actually think it would improve balance and help order, why?

Lets assume 1000 is decided to be the armor max debuff

One SW and one IB even multiple IBs or SWs could be allowed to stack up to that value. A WL not specced into FO tree could also stack with other "weaker" buffs up to 1000.

From my Shammy POV
A WL could still debuff me up to 1600 (well above the 1000 max)
Multiple armor debuffs (possibly even from same class/ability) could stack up to 1000

Would help order and classes that have weaker armor debuffs or specs that are non optimal for armor debuff

This is literally "bring the player, no the class" notion in the form of "10 Ironbreakers should be able to emulate 1 WL armour debuff" - somehow game by design doesn't allow that is to be considered problematic?
I'm yet to see the benefits of this proposed changes, besides the usual "change the meta iz good, bruh", only the downsides of utterly screwing the game. Besides I not sure that there is a way to determine what the caps should be and how fair are they.
Its like instead of fixing some underperforming parts of the car you declare that now it should be able to take everykind of fuel there is.

eeehm no (!)

why is this a bad suggestion?
First of all one archetype - most likely (aoe specced) casters - and resistance dmg based classes would be favored more than physical dmg types and it would delete the viability of certain classes and destroy existing synergies. It would increase the effectiveness of AoE warbands by a lot - something which is already strong enough.

In detail:
- Classes like the engineer would become useless. Their resistance debuff would get covered by the combination of KotBS and SM. Ofc we can argue that he has at least EM but right now he has the possibility to choose between Grenadier and Tinkerer when joining a bomb group / warband. Grenadier for its damage and the high resistance debuff to support the first dps which is most likely a BW or Tinkerer for EM. If the resistance debuff gets covered by 2 tanks, you have no reason to take a engi because its damage can't compete with the BW.

- The TTK in RoR is already fairly low especially when it comes to open world PvP where you most likely face pugs. That's when AoE damage wins an significant emphasis and bomb warbands starts to shine; Bombing is insanely effective against pugs, by pugs i mean people who don't form warbands based on 2 knights, 2 bws and 2wps per group. If they have at least one tank or one heal in group they can be already considered stable. These guys would be forced to deal with higher damage (thanks to stacking debuffs) while they would also deal less damage than before (thanks to stacking buffs). That again means your suggestion kills oRvR even more - considering the live situations when our server heros of Porn Factory or Kings Own appear and start raiding empty keeps.

Not only that; If a premade runs into a formed warband - like we do pretty often - they are outnumbered. Now the warband has certain classes multiple times while the premade has 1, maybe 2 similar classes. While the premade would be able to have a max. of 2 sources for a specific buff/debuff, the warband would have at least 6-8 sources. Yet they have the advantage to outnumber and outpressure the premade but none in terms of buffes / debuffs. The premade would have a harder time to kill the warband (thanks to stacking buffs) and the warband would deal more damage (thanks to stacking debuffs). How is that not favoring the zerg?

- The existence of existing classes would be endangered and already superior classes would become even more broken. Let's assume we have a armor debuff max. of 1600 (that's what the WL provides in T4) and a IB debuffing 800 armor at 100 grudge. Now we combine it with 1 slayer and a dissolve proc offhand which can be achieved by finishing the epic quest in Caledor w/o much effort. That weapon debuffs 800 armor. 800+800=1600, so what exactly would be the reason to take a WL in a competitive group over a double slayer setup?


Some other questions would be:

How would you handle crit stacking? e.g. Ancestor's Fury, Dirty Tricks and initiative debuffs in general?
How would you handle defensive stacking? e.g. Oathbound? 2x 25% parry on a dual wielding slayer?
How would you handle 25% healdebuffs or healdebuffs in general?
How are those caps determined?

I daresay your post is ill-conceived and would destroy more than it would "fix".

Damn if only I had that much free time Bretin has or that much attention span... oh look a flower

Scrilian wrote:Damn if only I had that much free time Bretin has or that much attention span... oh look a flower

it is called a office job

Engineer is already useless and it's buff is too because knights/BW etc... What are you talking about? And TTK is horrible when 2 premades meet each other, game shouldn't be balanced around PUGs. Allowing buffs to stack in some way would make their corp debuff that much more useful.

And lowering the TTK favors premades much more than it does PUGs because it puts an emphasis on properly formed groups and makes it so a lone pug in a bad group comp has literally zero chance to do anything. This game has undermined skill at the singular player level since 5ever.

Bretin wrote: First of all one archetype - most likely (aoe specced) casters - and resistance dmg based classes would be favored more than physical dmg types and it would delete the viability of certain classes and destroy existing synergies. It would increase the effectiveness of AoE warbands by a lot - something which is already strong enough.

I agree that there is a problem with AOE. That is also why I wrote AOE debuffs of same class/ability possibly shouldn’t stack.

Bretin wrote: Not only that; If a premade runs into a formed warband - like we do pretty often - they are outnumbered. Now the warband has certain classes multiple times while the premade has 1, maybe 2 similar classes. While the premade would be able to have a max. of 2 sources for a specific buff/debuff, the warband would have at least 6-8 sources. Yet they have the advantage to outnumber and outpressure the premade but none in terms of buffes / debuffs. The premade would have a harder time to kill the warband (thanks to stacking buffs) and the warband would deal more damage (thanks to stacking debuffs). How is that not favoring the zerg?

Again, the max value of stacked debuffs would be below the current max buffs. In most zerg v 6 the alpha classes are present so you'll be debuffed above max values regardless

Bretin wrote: - The existence of existing classes would be endangered and already superior classes would become even more broken. Let's assume we have a armor debuff max. of 1600 (that's what the WL provides in T4) and a IB debuffing 800 armor at 100 grudge. Now we combine it with 1 slayer and a dissolve proc offhand which can be achieved by finishing the epic quest in Caledor w/o much effort. That weapon debuffs 800 armor. 800+800=1600, so what exactly would be the reason to take a WL in a competitive group over a double slayer setup?

Like I wrote on this very page multiples wouldn’t be allowed to stack up to the current ALPAs. So for armor 1600 ALPHA I’d consider something like 1000, 1200 or some other suitable value for the IB. So instead of that proc being worthless and redundant it has some effect.

2xSlayers is always better

Bretin wrote: How would you handle crit stacking? e.g. Ancestor's Fury, Dirty Tricks and initiative debuffs in general?
How would you handle defensive stacking? e.g. Oathbound? 2x 25% parry on a dual wielding slayer?
How would you handle 25% healdebuffs or healdebuffs in general?

It would only affect those that currently enforce strongest buff/debuff stacking rule

Bretin wrote: How are those caps determined?

Tried to dodge it a bit but something like 75-80% of current alphas seems about right.

A bit of off-topic by my side but what is ALPHAS anyway? Is it a clever way to pointing at the best synergy/best performing/most utility/.etc classes without actually having to call their names?
Looks like its easier to attack them by making another silly "meta"-ish name and pandering to anyone who claims no to be an ALPHA. Just call them what they truly are and in what group setups so one can at least debunk the argument.
Like some sort of guilt-cult to be bestowed upon those who run 2-2-2 setups and everyone else should be able to get some free stuff in the form of "unified" debuffs coz balance and ALPHAS.