Recent Topics

Ads

[Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Chat about everything else - ask questions, share stories, or just hang out.
User avatar
adei
Posts: 272

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#101 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 12:28 pm

dur3al wrote:
Wouldn't it much better have better players balancing classes instead of general opinion?

adei wrote:The idea is you balance around the masses, or you will have no masses [...]
Then why did you change WP/DoK since it was the most common class used by "the masses" and everyone was happily playing and enjoying it being a full back-line healer? Smells contradiction to me.

I'll be honest, this comment scares me, and if that is the direction I guarantee that you'll just keep breaking any sort of balance. To be frank, most people are still are noneffective on their classes for the most part, even seasoned players, so they'll obviously scream for a nerf or buff for stuff that they've no idea about. As an example, imagine if leaders of the world would only do things to "please the masses", everyone would be having a ferrari and have a vacation 24/7 - Sounds good no? But not really possible or feasible :lol:
And who decides who these better player are? you? me? that is all personal opinion and nothing else, the game is not hard, it just rewards cheese.

Perhaps I should have made it more clear that it was my personal opinion that we should balance around the masses before there are is nobody left playing. But now that you mention DoK, lets take a look what happened. Changes were made after initial testing, immediately after one day of play there was an uproar by the masses. What happened? Changed. The masses have a bigger voice than you think, and whos to say whos effective at what? Its not you, nor is it me, nobody can make a clear indication of who has enough knowledge to give feedback without having personal bias thrown in, that's just human nature. And your silly comment about ferrari and all that, this has a playerbase of under 1000 these days, so yeah.

Back to my original vote even before these changes came in, I already said I was of the voice that it was only the range that needed to be looked at, if anybody could give me a valid reason why a small nerf to the range to begin with, and perhaps a gradually tweak to make it right would be wrong, id love to know, I'm not talking a big change btw, I'm talking a relative small range tweak. I am personally not a fan of the way these classes are headed, it seems people want them to be a new sorc/bw but to be more tanky while doing it.

Ads
User avatar
Grunbag
Former Staff
Posts: 1881

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#102 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 12:39 pm

adei wrote:
dur3al wrote:
Wouldn't it much better have better players balancing classes instead of general opinion?

adei wrote:The idea is you balance around the masses, or you will have no masses [...]
Then why did you change WP/DoK since it was the most common class used by "the masses" and everyone was happily playing and enjoying it being a full back-line healer? Smells contradiction to me.

I'll be honest, this comment scares me, and if that is the direction I guarantee that you'll just keep breaking any sort of balance. To be frank, most people are still are noneffective on their classes for the most part, even seasoned players, so they'll obviously scream for a nerf or buff for stuff that they've no idea about. As an example, imagine if leaders of the world would only do things to "please the masses", everyone would be having a ferrari and have a vacation 24/7 - Sounds good no? But not really possible or feasible :lol:
And who decides who these better player are? you? me? that is all personal opinion and nothing else, the game is not hard, it just rewards cheese.

Perhaps I should have made it more clear that it was my personal opinion that we should balance around the masses before there are is nobody left playing. But now that you mention DoK, lets take a look what happened. Changes were made after initial testing, immediately after one day of play there was an uproar by the masses. What happened? Changed. The masses have a bigger voice than you think, and whos to say whos effective at what? Its not you, nor is it me, nobody can make a clear indication of who has enough knowledge to give feedback without having personal bias thrown in, that's just human nature. And your silly comment about ferrari and all that, this has a playerbase of under 1000 these days, so yeah.

Back to my original vote even before these changes came in, I already said I was of the voice that it was only the range that needed to be looked at, if anybody could give me a valid reason why a small nerf to the range to begin with, and perhaps a gradually tweak to make it right would be wrong, id love to know, I'm not talking a big change btw, I'm talking a relative small range tweak. I am personally not a fan of the way these classes are headed, it seems people want them to be a new sorc/bw but to be more tanky while doing it.
I already said I was agree with you with a range nerf of the gunturret and the rifleman range bonus . Testing a buff at 20% would be more fair to me . But if you tweak the range from half then the time to reach the buff should be reduce to 8 second too. I don't want to make engineer a new sorc , and as Tesq said the rifleman path should'nt have to biggest engineer 's burst , it already has a huge range and grenadier need more burst imo .
Grunbag - 40 - 33 Squig Herder
Skorri - 40 - 65 Engineer

Image

User avatar
peterthepan3
Posts: 6509

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#103 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:23 pm

My thoughts:

Would the range be further nerfed/fixed - whatever your poison - with BoC's CD restored to 5? I am unsure why the range must be nerfed further than it has been based on the complaints of people who still haven't learnt to adapt to the classes/exploit their weaknesses.

I think Rav would be of a similar stance, i.e. reduce the range if you must but restore BoC's CD, but we must wait for him to post his input.

Personally? I think there must be enough of a range advantage for the immobile stationary DPS concept to work. If we are operating with similar range to a sorc/sh, then it becomes a lot easier to dispatch of/exploit a Magus due to their slow casts and reliance on pet. 120ft is a nerf, but for a good Magus/Engineer I suppose it could be manageable. Also, these complaints about not being able to detaunt would have no salt at all as walking 20 ft to detaunt the Magus/Engineer is only about 3 seconds.

Worst comes to the worst: have Havoc abilities on 120 ft (which means Bolt is 180 - only 30ft more than it was on Live, so people should not be complaining) and restore BoC's 5 sec CD because even with the crit dmg modifier, FRF isn't hacking it. I know you're against the reliance on one/specific ability, Aza, but the same could be said for most DPS classes that have a burst rotation (Sorc's WoP, WL's Coordinated Strike, WP's HoS, etc.). just my 2c
Image

User avatar
Lektroluv
Suspended
Posts: 243

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#104 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:26 pm

Grunbag wrote:What you propose if I understand :
Rifle man : remove the damage boost and keep the range bonus
Grenadier : remove the damage bonus and add a range bonus
Tinkerer :remove the dodge / resist buff but keep the range nerf (add something in change og dodge/disrupt bonus?)

No, i didn't said Rifleman should lose damage bonus, i said he should lose the range bonus... the 150 feet on snipe is already 50% longer range than fester arrow and poison arrer from shadow warrior or squig herder, and all are 3 seconds cast time.
While Shadow warrior is a good ability which can do 4k hits in one shot, the poison arrer is a bad copy with casting time 3 seconds + 100 feet range and is not ignoring resistances like SW version, while the enginer version has 150 feet and a extra 40% more range + 40% damage buff right now. Making it 210 feet range, and basic in the rifle combo... definitively, or poisong arrer gets a boost, or enginer Snipe need a tonedown.

My prosposition is remove the range stacks buff from rifleman path and maybe lower the snipe range ability to 130 feets. Abilities from that path consist in burst damage, they don't need the extra range at all, and would put the enginer in the world of mortals other time beign closer to another range damage dealers, but still having longer range than other clases.
Now coming what you could get for this changes, make snipe ability other time 5 seconds cooldown timer and make the enginers get faster stacks for a quickly achievement of 40% buff, prolly geting full buff in 9 seconds instead of 16 seconds would make more sense for a more mobile gameplay, and add fun to the class. To me static gameplay idea is the most boring role a class could be in a mmorpg, but you can differ from my opinion of course.
The turret max range and damage buff could be 20% instant, not needing any waiting for stack buffs (only buff for turret, not the toon character which only will achieve the 40% damage buff waiting those 9 seconds and not geting range benefit from it)

The enginer would lost the extra unfair range, but geting faster buff stacks for him and instant buff for turret, and a 5 seconds cooldown snipe other time instead of 10, i think the change is fair, while he still retain longer attacks than other classes.


Next turret granadier one:
I forgot the extend range tactic (is been a long time, since live server) i am agree with you doesn't make sense a range buff from turret, so damage buff is probably the right path to go on this turret.
The idea about not lose stacks in 80 feet, i think is best a enginer has got in experimental mode and fully support this idea. Because as i said, i can't imagine a fun class around the idea of beign static, and not adding that movement liberty which i think this path is the one could provide them.
The 40% damage buff seems fair because the damage boost in dots abilities split in long timer is not a problem in this game, with all the group heals it has (i know this right, my Squigh herder dots are doing 47 hp ticks in tanks and 150hp ticks in squishy)

I think this path could be ok with a faster buff stacks procedure (full stacks in 10 seconds instead of 16)
40% damage buff at full stacks
10% extended range instant buff for both player and turret (since there is already a tactic extending range, making attacks even longer wouldn't make much sense)
And of course not losing stacks around 80 feets of turret mechanic which i think fits in this turret role.

I think is the most balanced of all ones and the ones which provide more mobility and fun.

And finally Tinkerer turret:
While i think the disrupt and dodge buff is positive, i think the amount of it is not... because stacking disrupt, directly breaks the Sorc and BW mechanic of burst in a combo (not even tanks can achieve this numbers, either tanks can heal group those numbers as enginers do with keg barrel and yeah not even defensive tanks should achieve that damage numbers either, with a much shorter range than enginer in theyr mele abilities)
A proposal could be a faster stacks buff achievement (full stacks in 10 seconds)
what they get at full stacks 18% disrupt and 10% dodge and 65% on both dodge-disrupt for turret (why lower amount of dodge than disrupt? let's face it the squig herder damage output withouth corporeal, elemental, spiritual damage is much lower than the magical one, and a tinkerer enginer will prolly be grouped, stacking defensive stats and having guard, making damage deal by the only class which can do ballistic skill attacks on destruction, a bad joke) this change would be still a reasonably amount of disrupt and dodge if you add the one you get from renow points and items, and you will achieve it 6 seconds faster, and far from the biblical buff amount of 32% and 80% on turret
Another benefit from change this path could be adding 5% crit to enginer because the low range and low damage nature of this archetype instant, withouth worry about buff stacks timing.
And finally in case the turret is destroyed the artifact will explode and make a long knowback in area (This is easy to achieve, should only copy the kaboom squigh herder effect and make it succed when the turret dies) i think it fits with what a tinkerer role should achieve


Maybe this changes can't be achieved right now withouth full control over game, but is good to discus about them now...in my opinion they are quite balanced and fits in each role of each turret.

Tell me what do you think about my ideas
Last edited by Lektroluv on Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:53 pm, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
dur3al
Posts: 251

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#105 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:39 pm

adei wrote:And who decides who these better player are? you? me? that is all personal opinion and nothing else, the game is not hard, it just rewards cheese.
If you re-read my entire post in the other thread, I said that even though the view of good players are down to personal opinion, knowledge is not.
Some people have thoroughly tested specs, tried off-meta ones, perfect the specs, figured out optimal rotations, synergy within his group, and excel within most classes they play. That is a good player, and that player with that amount of knowledge (and not only paper knowledge, but actually put it to use playing extensively against other fotm groups) should be the players used to be balancing imo.
You have to know the cheese in order to make it less cheese and even understand why is it cheese in the first place, and what I told Azarel in the other thread that unlike what he thinks; that good players will always try to keep their cheese; Those are fotm players, not good players.. good players will acknowledge the cheese and can potentially help it to increase the skill bar of certain classes and aspects of the game.
Latest DoK/WP changes for example, instead of increasing the skill cap, seems to have lowered it pretty low to the point the new "melee healers" are very effective spamming TE with tactics supporting it, as it can be show in the screen below what happens when a group max/min the effects of the changes done to the class (props for them for effectively trying out and testing the changes to its full potential):

Image

Now this melee heals can pull out insane amounts of healing due spammability of TE which goes unaffected by healing debuff. I hope you're not considering melee heals to triple the amount of cloth healers something fine and balanced..
adei wrote:Perhaps I should have made it more clear that it was my personal opinion that we should balance around the masses before there are is nobody left playing. But now that you mention DoK, lets take a look what happened. Changes were made after initial testing, immediately after one day of play there was an uproar by the masses. What happened? Changed. The masses have a bigger voice than you think, and whos to say whos effective at what? Its not you, nor is it me, nobody can make a clear indication of who has enough knowledge to give feedback without having personal bias thrown in, that's just human nature.
Biggest change was because the whole package of changes were made without thought or testing (if you ask me) that made them completely and stupidly OP without having any sort of cool-down between switching stances, making them go from full effective dps into full effective healers.
I pointed that out and got banned for discussing it. It wasn't the masses. It wasn't even the core testers who had the availability of testing for days prior to them being implemented. It was one player. I even came to that conclusion without properly playing my DoK, just by reading the patch notes and of my previous knowledge of the class. So no, I disagree with you in this. Refer to my original post at Changelog 15/11/16 thread, page 22 at the bottom where I explained why.
adei wrote:Back to my original vote even before these changes came in, I already said I was of the voice that it was only the range that needed to be looked at, if anybody could give me a valid reason why a small nerf to the range to begin with, and perhaps a gradually tweak to make it right would be wrong, id love to know, I'm not talking a big change btw, I'm talking a relative small range tweak. I am personally not a fan of the way these classes are headed, it seems people want them to be a new sorc/bw but to be more tanky while doing it.
I currently agree with this in the state of things now.
I'd go even further and say that buffing range/dmg recklessly was the wrong way to bring those classes up - plus the fact that I do not agree with the whole concept of stationary dps at all. Think about in group play (which is ultimately the most effective way to play this and how it should be played). You're never stationary, your tanks needs to move, your healers needs to move, all other dps classes need to move. Stationary play just furthers up the funneling issue at fighting in keeps (for example) and shooting from safe distances without counter play - warcamp spawning.
Last edited by dur3al on Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Martyr's Square: Sync & Nerfedbuttons - enigma
Martyr's Square: Dureal & Method - Disrespect/It's Orz again
Badlands: Dureal & Alatheus - Exo
Karak-Norn: Sejanus - Blitz/Elementz

User avatar
Glorian
Posts: 5004

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#106 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:51 pm

That a Tinkerer has guard and the SH none is bad compared in your post.
Either both or none have guard.

Overall reduce of dodge on tinkerer buff could be compensated by grant crit buff. But for an 18% dodge buff being reduced to 40feet range is hardly a bargain.
Also the turret with its high dodge rates is on of the only turrets that survive more than 3secs in an SC.

Destro players who have addepted to the new engie allways kill First the turret.
Before a new turret gives anything worth the Engi is dead.

User avatar
Azarael
Posts: 5332

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#107 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:54 pm

dur3al wrote:Latest DoK/WP changes for example, instead of increasing the skill cap, seems to have lowered it pretty low to the point the new "melee healers" are very effective spamming TE with tactics supporting it, as it can be show in the screen below what happens when a group max/min the effects of the changes done to the class (props for them for effectively trying out and testing the changes to its full potential):

Image

Now this melee heals can pull out insane amounts of healing due spammability of TE which goes unaffected by healing debuff.
I find it unfair that this point is being repeatedly stated when I have acknowledged it more times than I can count and stated that I am unable to do anything about it without having client control.

I'm also going to add that you achieve balance through experimentation and refinement. A few people seem to think that they have the ability to craft a package of changes which will fit perfectly with no further adjustment needed. It doesn't work that way. What I have an issue is is people criticising me for the actual process of refinement because they think that they could, essentially, fix classes perfectly in one shot. I've been in the optimal position previously of being one of the best players of a game and being its balancer/developer, and I rarely if ever managed to fix something in one go - and that was with a simpler system than WAR's and a playerbase that was about 2/3 of the size as well. I had to perform multiple coarse reworks to fundamental game mechanics before finding them acceptable.

Being good confers understanding of how a class or element works and how to exploit it to its best, as well as an understanding of its synergies, but that does not necessarily translate to knowledge of how best to fix that class, it doesn't prevent natural bias towards one's own classes, and it certainly doesn't give one person the ability to understand all of the subtle consequences that result from making any kind of change. Only experimentation and refinement do that.

Another issue is defense of the meta. Look at some of the arguments made against the DoK version of the changes - a principal one was that Covenant of Celerity, if locked to a melee DoK, would make a melee DoK overvalued or mandatory. This shows a lack of understanding of levels of balance, going up from coarse (foundational) balance up to fine balance. Like I said with Rubik's Cube - you need to understand that to properly solve a complex system, you must resolve foundational issues before making fine tweaks that risk being destroyed if you're forced into a coarse change.

There are 4 class pairings in my opinion that come under "coarse" because they were underperforming or overperforming AND they were concept violators:

1) Archmage/Shaman (terrible mechanic, worst healer at the time)
2) Engineer/Magus (joke status)
3) Knight/Chosen (mechanic violation, overpowered)
4) Warrior Priest/Disciple of Khaine (mechanic violation, overpowered)

So yes, when dealing with these 4 pairings, I fully expect(ed) that fine balance would be impacted. The difference between you and I is that I understand and expect fine balance shifts to occur if coarse ones are implemented, and I do not retreat from making coarse changes because of fine balance issues.

The good news is that those above classes represent the only ones which require coarse and disruptive adjustments. Once they are handled, I am more than happy to have fine issues commented upon by better players. I just won't be blocked on coarse changes.

User avatar
peterthepan3
Posts: 6509

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#108 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:00 pm

dur3al wrote: I currently agree with this in the state of things now.
I'd go even further and say that buffing range/dmg recklessly was the wrong way to bring those classes up - plus the fact that I do not agree with the whole concept of stationary dps at all. Think about in group play (which is ultimately the most effective way to play this and how it should be played). You're never stationary, your tanks needs to move, your healers needs to move, all other dps classes need to move. Stationary play just furthers up the funneling issue at fighting in keeps (for example) and shooting from safe distances without counter play - warcamp spawning.
It's a given that a stationary DPS doesn't function very well in a fast-paced and mobile game. However, rectifying this and, essentially, creating a new niche for the mag/eng will require a huge overhaul and a huge amount of time. If not a stationary DPS, what should the class be?

The damage/range buff has brought the class to an almost-equal level to the sorc/sh (provided the player is competent), but even then it will still get outdone due to - as you said - the mobile nature of PvP. I'm all for moving away from a stationary DPS role, but then we must decide what direction the classes ought to go in so that they are as viable a DPS in a group as the sorc/sh.
Image

Ads
User avatar
Azarael
Posts: 5332

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#109 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:08 pm

Indeed. If you can think of changes that add mobility and preserve viability while keeping some kind of uniqueness and playstyle difference in the class relative to its peers (i.e. it doesn't become Sorc or SH with a different skin, and it has a unique career mechanic) then go for it, but I don't see how that can be done without upending both classes.

There is a reason I move with the intent of the original design and its mastery trees when performing coarse reworks, and that's because I'm actually quite conservative when it comes to the classes' overall design and skillsets. Redesigning skills completely is something we do not want to have to do, because it's not safe - think back to the SM and BO, who had their defensive pounce blocked. Even something we consider to be harmless could be considered as a threat to the IP, and a threat to us. We know that anything Mythic implemented is safe and approved.

User avatar
Glorian
Posts: 5004

Re: [Feedback] Engineer / Magus Changes

Post#110 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:11 pm

I concur to peterpan: Stationary DPS is the trademark of then engie and what draw players to it.

If you want a running rdps play SH or SW.
The engie is about standing and holding a point.
I like a lot the new changes to the Grenadier to be mobile though. But this is one flavour. Rifle is standing Range. Tinkerer is AoE close. Not some kiting running Goblin.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests