Return of Reckoning

the felse feeling about progression will keep ppl to their chars much more than hard cap

Toldavf wrote:

lator wrote:Would be happy to see RR90 and RR100 armor sets with identical stats to RR80 sets and only as a cosmetic effect. Would be very little effort of coding I would imagine and incentive to play with "maxed" characters.

Most of those sets where fugly

WF gear was sexy

Azarael wrote:

Karast wrote:There is a big difference between 40/40 and 40/80 when it comes to gear, and it falls apart for a lot of classes with the later sets and renown ranks. The whole dynamic shifts.

And I'm keenly aware of it, too. The real question is, is the community prepared to make sacrifices?

isn't bolster is supposed to handle it?
i remember how my fresh choppa doesn't had any problems in rr100 world.
also i remember funny topic on myphic forums where WH shows that bostered torment hits harder (due to bolstered stats) than his rr100 while set procs is off

Bolster is a poorly designed solution to a problem created by poor design. Relying on it to address power imbalance would be a mistake.

bichka wrote:

Azarael wrote:

Karast wrote:There is a big difference between 40/40 and 40/80 when it comes to gear, and it falls apart for a lot of classes with the later sets and renown ranks. The whole dynamic shifts.

And I'm keenly aware of it, too. The real question is, is the community prepared to make sacrifices?

isn't bolster is supposed to handle it?
i remember how my fresh choppa doesn't had any problems in rr100 world.
also i remember funny topic on myphic forums where WH shows that bostered torment hits harder (due to bolstered stats) than his rr100 while set procs is off

You misunderstand. My objection is not to relative power. My objection is to massive power creep which distorts the game design and not only imbalances some classes, it makes other features nearly impossible to balance.

Azarael wrote:
You misunderstand. My objection is not to relative power. My objection is to massive power creep which distorts the game design and not only imbalances some classes, it makes other features nearly impossible to balance.

What are your feelings about adding in RR80+ content, even if it is only cosmetic or RR point based advantages (difference between RR80 and 100 would be essentially 72 stat points or equiv?)

muh carrot on a stick

Jaycub wrote:

Azarael wrote:
You misunderstand. My objection is not to relative power. My objection is to massive power creep which distorts the game design and not only imbalances some classes, it makes other features nearly impossible to balance.

What are your feelings about adding in RR80+ content, even if it is only cosmetic or RR point based advantages (difference between RR80 and 100 would be essentially 72 stat points or equiv?)

muh carrot on a stick

Or an 18% increased chance to parry, which makes a helluva bigger difference than 72 extra strength or wounds.

idk if you compared it to wounds they should come out at about the same amount of mitigation overall?

parry only helps against melee classes so it totally neglects everything else in terms of a mitigation stat. Wounds will cover every type of damage even stuff like morales. 720 HP is like 7-10% of someones total HP pool in T4? 18% parry can pretty much be seen as 18% less melee damage taken?

I could be totally overlooking something though.

Jaycub wrote:

Azarael wrote:
You misunderstand. My objection is not to relative power. My objection is to massive power creep which distorts the game design and not only imbalances some classes, it makes other features nearly impossible to balance.

What are your feelings about adding in RR80+ content, even if it is only cosmetic or RR point based advantages (difference between RR80 and 100 would be essentially 72 stat points or equiv?)

muh carrot on a stick

There is plenty more content in the client, some of it never seen before, and I know others on the staff are eager to have it accessible to the players.

As for myself? I'm fine with progression beyond RR80 as long as it's either cosmetic or sideways, instead of up. I think that it's actually very necessary to have such progression. All I want to ensure is that the power creep and minmaxing potential is kept within reasonable limits, so that the gameplay and balance can benefit.

What actually are you thinking of in terms of sideways/horizontal progression? IIR in other games that usually comes down to being able to specialize in a certain area/ability more (at the cost of something else being less). How exactly would that translate into WAR's current systems?