SH changes

[Sundowner]

What are you guys talking about? I just cant believe it... You are looking on it from the wrong side. It is much better when you have more choices of how to play. Why do all classes have 3 mastery trees? warhammer has a big potential but it looks great on the paper only. All the classes have 3 mastery trees and the SH was one of the better examples (in this game) of how to have access to all of the talent builds and all of them are very good. You should ask why the other classes do not reach the full potential of all mastery trees? For example zealot... 3 mastery trees, but all are crap. You just have to pick up best abilities from all the trees, but there is not just one good and useful mastery tree.

If you write melee dok is still a healer, chosen is still tank etc., so sh is still dps (rsh or msh, still dps). Just the variability of gameplay changes and it is good.

Problem was not mSH having many ways to play, but that both aoe and ST trees with addition to many utility skills were stacked in one mastery tree. If you do not see problem here, maybe check how you look at things.

I do understand. I try to look at things from all angles. But to say SH is only class that can play differently than their archetype is just untrue. SO whatever. mSH is now pure aoe spam. Case closed.

Yeah, sadly. I too think that when devs place emphasis on largescale play, they at least should try to make aoe play of classes more interesting and engaging.

[agemennon675]

What are you guys talking about? I just cant believe it... You are looking on it from the wrong side. It is much better when you have more choices of how to play. Why do all classes have 3 mastery trees? warhammer has a big potential but it looks great on the paper only. All the classes have 3 mastery trees and the SH was one of the better examples (in this game) of how to have access to all of the talent builds and all of them are very good. You should ask why the other classes do not reach the full potential of all mastery trees? For example zealot... 3 mastery trees, but all are crap. You just have to pick up best abilities from all the trees, but there is not just one good and useful mastery tree.

If you write melee dok is still a healer, chosen is still tank etc., so sh is still dps (rsh or msh, still dps). Just the variability of gameplay changes and it is good.

Problem was not mSH having many ways to play, but that both aoe and ST trees with addition to many utility skills were stacked in one mastery tree. If you do not see problem here, maybe check how you look at things.

I do understand. I try to look at things from all angles. But to say SH is only class that can play differently than their archetype is just untrue. SO whatever. mSH is now pure aoe spam. Case closed.

Unfortunately yes, I would like to have ASW or MSH to have both aoe and st capability just like past MSH had but that is not the case anymore and giving it to only one side is also unfair

[Jastojan]

no class can change its playstyle by 100% like a msh could pre patch. A melee dok is still a healer, a sorc is still a range class no matter if aoe or single target and a chosen is still a tank even without shield. why is it okay a SH can be a 100% range class and a 100% melee class

What are you guys talking about? I just cant believe it... You are looking on it from the wrong side. It is much better when you have more choices of how to play. Why do all classes have 3 mastery trees? warhammer has a big potential but it looks great on the paper only. All the classes have 3 mastery trees and the SH was one of the better examples (in this game) of how to have access to all of the talent builds and all of them are very good. You should ask why the other classes do not reach the full potential of all mastery trees? For example zealot... 3 mastery trees, but all are crap. You just have to pick up best abilities from all the trees, but there is not just one good and useful mastery tree.

If you write melee dok is still a healer, chosen is still tank etc., so sh is still dps (rsh or msh, still dps). Just the variability of gameplay changes and it is good.

Problem was not mSH having many ways to play, but that both aoe and ST trees with addition to many utility skills were stacked in one mastery tree. If you do not see problem here, maybe check how you look at things.

Kníck and I were talking about mastery trees and tha variability of gameplay. Not about many utility in one tree, but yes. Even more utilities is much better than have no option and be forced to push 2-3 buttons. So the point of my reply was: why to reduce the variability of gameplay instead of making all the other classes to have access to 3 fully useful and viable specs?

[Sundowner]

What are you guys talking about? I just cant believe it... You are looking on it from the wrong side. It is much better when you have more choices of how to play. Why do all classes have 3 mastery trees? warhammer has a big potential but it looks great on the paper only. All the classes have 3 mastery trees and the SH was one of the better examples (in this game) of how to have access to all of the talent builds and all of them are very good. You should ask why the other classes do not reach the full potential of all mastery trees? For example zealot... 3 mastery trees, but all are crap. You just have to pick up best abilities from all the trees, but there is not just one good and useful mastery tree.

If you write melee dok is still a healer, chosen is still tank etc., so sh is still dps (rsh or msh, still dps). Just the variability of gameplay changes and it is good.

Problem was not mSH having many ways to play, but that both aoe and ST trees with addition to many utility skills were stacked in one mastery tree. If you do not see problem here, maybe check how you look at things.

Kníck and I were talking about mastery trees and tha variability of gameplay. Not about many utility in one tree, but yes. Even more utilities is much better than have no option and be forced to push 2-3 buttons. So the point oh my reply was: why to reduce the variability of gameplay instead of making all the other classes to have access to 3 fully useful and viable specs?

Not all classes have 3 fully viable trees. Variability of gameplay was reduced because, again, mSH had everything stacked in one tree and with dmg, utility and escape tools was way ahead of other classes. Devs decided to torn mSH into aoe spec, you can drop suggestions into respective forum. I too do not like limiting variability, but I do not like overtuned classes more.

[knick]

if you have a choice you still dont have it. people always stick to the most powerful most pushing and overall strongest path and playstile the game provide and find a reason why the other two paths are crap out of hell. you will never ever have 3 full viable trees equal to each other because there will always this one path who is a bit better in a certain situation aka the meta path.

[zulnam]

Honestly Sharpened Arrers is what bothers me most.

I understand the pet was hitting for a lot when it could be bothered to hit, buggy as it is. OK.

I understand the changes to SA; it feels like they basically want you to commit to either ranged or melee. Fine.

I understand Outta My Way (although they could've towned it down, not cut it by two thirds).

I am almost fine with the Bounce change. We needed a filler aoe in between rotations for warbands. They could've fixed the tactic that turns Git'Em into an aoe to make it viable, since we're now supposed to stick to one form and like it, so having a stun is good (and switching out of SA while in melee to stun someone is suicide).
The argument that SH had too much CC when literally everyone has 30sec immunity after a single stun is, imo, bs. But again, we got an aoe filler. Yay.

But to gut Sharpened Arrers like that, and not just to make it usable for only one tree, but for it to be the wrong tree, is just...

deep breaths.

I don't think anyone really plays SH though in the decission-making part of the community, and this counts for a lot when classes get nerfed (WP, WL, WH, chosen...). It was generally agreed that rSH was "overperforming" (read: a nuisance for some people who can't stick to the warband and get picked off) and it was dealt with.

Reality is rSH is a spec that has no place in the warband meta, except in very rare circumstances, for the ST group of a warband, and even then they suffer from:
1. pet constantly dying, resulting in massive dps drop and need to stop and resummon a pet (basically having to "reload" in the middle of a warband fight)
2. very squishy if targeted, even with guard in range
3. being exclusively ST

But hey, maybe RvR is not important anymore. We have a new fancy window for ranked (ngl, it is very cool). Maybe new meta is smallscale. RvR is just a pass-time.

[Orontes]

What was done to the SH class from this patch can only really be seen as a hostile act.

[Andack]

It's pretty simple with this patch they destroy ST Msh, you can't run alone anymore (no stun, poor mobility) or ranked, your dps is now trash (m1 nerf) and the m4 is impossible to had with the nerf of numbas.

For aoe msh, we lost the waagh and they want to switch the fasta to 2h choppa, it will destroy the AoE msh too. They gave us a crap aoe who cost 35 ap, useless flat dps again.

And dont listen to knick et he is sad because his WL coudnt handle us, now he is happy he can stun us be on our back with his speed and drain us wirh his lion, what a fair fight we will have.

[Arsanist]

As far as the rSH changes went I agree with m1 change but think sharpened arrers change was a bit unnecessary. Who plays big shootin? the main ability is corp damage anyway so now tactic not going to to used. It was previously a nice option that some people used in quick shooting builds but that has been nerfed as wel.

Overall - too much nerf to rSH and mSH turned into 2 button city spam class with 0 skill cap / options for interesting play

[Jastojan]

Problem was not mSH having many ways to play, but that both aoe and ST trees with addition to many utility skills were stacked in one mastery tree. If you do not see problem here, maybe check how you look at things.

Kníck and I were talking about mastery trees and tha variability of gameplay. Not about many utility in one tree, but yes. Even more utilities is much better than have no option and be forced to push 2-3 buttons. So the point oh my reply was: why to reduce the variability of gameplay instead of making all the other classes to have access to 3 fully useful and viable specs?

Not all classes have 3 fully viable trees. Variability of gameplay was reduced because, again, mSH had everything stacked in one tree and with dmg, utility and escape tools was way ahead of other classes. Devs decided to torn mSH into aoe spec, you can drop suggestions into respective forum. I too do not like limiting variability, but I do not like overtuned classes more.

You hit the spot!
"Not all classes have 3 fully viable trees."
This is all I was talking about. And I ask, why? The design of the mastery-tree system is so reach and opened for many possibilities to bring us huge variability of gameplay. And SH was a good example! Wouldnt be awesome to have more and more classes with 3 fully viable trees? When it comes to "too many tools in one tree" - that is a question for tweaking and I am ok with that, but I do not support the "path of nerfs" (not to mention these huge nerfs we see). Instead of nerfs I would rather see order buffs (no cd on stance switch for SW for example, longer pounce/leap distance for WL etc, blink or teleport for BW and Sorc). These last days changes will lead to force us to play with 2 buttons, BUT most important part - you should play in WB, this game is balanced for WB gameplay (it doesn´t matter if I am in WB or not when all I can do is pushing 2 buttons - that should bring me fun?). That is not proper argument for me to bring such nerfs/ changes.