Warrior Modifier Tweaks

13»

Comments

  • ShedrinShedrin Member Posts: 905 Transcendent
    Veyils said:

    For group Al for passive damage build and anti-prism and Cav for the best hinder.
    Agree with this and your above post. Nothing impossible to tweak, though.
  • SynkarinSynkarin Nothing to see here Member Posts: 3,216 Transcendent
    Veyils said:
    Synkarin said:
    I don't think warriors need to combine affs and wounds. I don't believe warriors are struggling to build wounds in general. I think 2hers in general have significantly more wounding power while 1hers have more flexibility and options. To be honest, at this point. I think it's probably a good idea to maybe make a few spec-specific tweaks and then sit on things and really see how they play out. Warriors have been in constant flux and I think the big issues have been addressed and fixed. 



    I think people are really overestimating the slight flexibility one handers get vs the wounding power of two handers.

    Two handers right now wound faster and have better wounds at lower wound levels and two handers are also going to get a wound/affliction boost soon as well. So they are already more powerful than one hander and are going to get a buff.

    Even if one handers and two handers had the same wounding output two handers would still be in a very good place what with having things like legtendon and impale at lower wound levels.

    I know, I agree they don't need buffed (I've already commented on the most recent report stating that I no longer supported it). 

    I do think you are downplaying the flexibility of one handers a bit here. 

    Everiine said:
    "'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in."
    -Synkarin's Lament.
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,457 Mythical
    Synkarin said:
    Veyils said:
    Synkarin said:
    I don't think warriors need to combine affs and wounds. I don't believe warriors are struggling to build wounds in general. I think 2hers in general have significantly more wounding power while 1hers have more flexibility and options. To be honest, at this point. I think it's probably a good idea to maybe make a few spec-specific tweaks and then sit on things and really see how they play out. Warriors have been in constant flux and I think the big issues have been addressed and fixed. 



    I think people are really overestimating the slight flexibility one handers get vs the wounding power of two handers.

    Two handers right now wound faster and have better wounds at lower wound levels and two handers are also going to get a wound/affliction boost soon as well. So they are already more powerful than one hander and are going to get a buff.

    Even if one handers and two handers had the same wounding output two handers would still be in a very good place what with having things like legtendon and impale at lower wound levels.

    I know, I agree they don't need buffed (I've already commented on the most recent report stating that I no longer supported it). 

    I do think you are downplaying the flexibility of one handers a bit here. 


    I mean there is very little I could do as a one hander that I can't do as a two hander only better.

    I do better passive damage as an axelord. Pureblade has twist which is basically pulp for no power costs and less set up.

    For hindering as a pb/al I can leg tendon/impale on the third hit vs knock down wind on the second hit. Or Cav can just impale instantly.

    Also as well as a one hander I find I'm are hurt way more by a number of defenses such as the pacifism or dodge on hit.

    After playing around with them the one handers are significantly weaker than the two handers. The one handers could do with some buffs I think.



    I mean warriors are not bad but its just a case of part of the issue is that warriors in general don't bring much to a group fight that most other classes don't bring already. 


  • ShedrinShedrin Member Posts: 905 Transcendent
    Bumping the collapsedlung idea to get some opinions:

    Move CollapsedLung to PB and BM, change the effect:
    2s equilibrium disrupt on hit and every 6-8s
    or
    2s balance loss + prone on hit and every 6-8s.
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,457 Mythical
    I was thinking about this a bit recently. I'm not so sure about putting a second decent disrupt on the kill zone areas. 

    I mean pureblade already had for hinder impale on the gut(kill area) and legtendon as well. 

    If your giving it a hinder on the kill area that also requires an ice application to apply that also gets better with more wounding levels then its a really really good affliction to use.

    If pureblade and blademaster need more hinder I'd prefer to put their hinder on areas that are not part of the kill build like legs or arms. EG knockdown.

    If you gave blademaster damaged arms as a modifer then their hinder would be pretty good.

    I mean right now pureblade hinder is pretty good but I think if people want to buff its hinder then its extra hinder should be on the legs or arms.

  • KarlachKarlach God of Kittens. Member Posts: 3,731 Transcendent
    Still waiting to see if this is necessary once the 2h attacks report gets implemented.

    If it is then I'd recommend bringing back some variation of sever nerve, assuming damagedarm prevents standing when prone. I'm with Vey, spreading out bodypart targeting rather than just lumping it all on areas you need to go for anyway seems too easy.

    The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."

    You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!


    image
  • ShedrinShedrin Member Posts: 905 Transcendent
    Well part of the idea is to make the buildup smoother for those specs and give credible threats on each bodyparts to convert the wounds into something useful. Not just on chest, though it's obviously an important bodypart for each spec.

    To clarify, the suggestion isn't to make it scale with wounds, 6-8s is just a range for the tic rate. When implemented I'd settle on a specific number, but I'm not sure whether to go for the low end or the higher end there. I think both mutilates and impale will be superior for pure hindering.

    And don't worry, I'm trying not to rush into changes here, but I do like to get discussion started early and build some consensus. (Though I thought there was decent consensus on the power attacks report that apparently wasn't there among envoys).
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,457 Mythical
    edited December 2016
    Oh what I mean scaling with wounds is that I assume your keeping it as an ice cure right?

    So it'll take like 2ish delayed seconds to cure at heavy and just under four at critical right?


    --

    EDIT:

    I still think if your adding more hinder it should be more spread like you said not just stack all the good stuff on chest/gut.


  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,457 Mythical
    Also question if your making it a disrupt of equilibrium would you be requiring that it needs concentrate to cure it? Or just a natural recovery like knock down or wind?
  • RiviusRivius Your resident wolf puppy Member Posts: 1,615 Transcendent
    edited December 2016
    I tried playing a bit more as current Cavalier and still stand by the 2H modifier report. Right now, you basically have to choose between using modifiers or racing toward required wounds, and building woulds really is the better bang for your buck. Even impale is a pretty meh hindering option 1v1 if someone can just heal out of heavy range, parry and counter-hinder as normal. Old warriors had some degree of hindering built into their offense, but now it's a choice, and very rarely a good one 1v1. Most of my fights against other warriors for example, just feel like races that either of us can win. It feels like a lot of strategy is kind of gone, and you're very restricted to a certain playstyle.
    I find new warriors very boring and 2 dimensional :/

    I think being able to get even half wounding with a modifier would be pretty helpful. Heck, you can even do a trial of removing the wounding bonus from 2 handers. But right now, I just dont see any advantage over doing regular strikes until you're in kill-condition range...which is boring and easily dealt with by hinder-heavy classes.
  • ShedrinShedrin Member Posts: 905 Transcendent
    Veyils said:
    Also question if your making it a disrupt of equilibrium would you be requiring that it needs concentrate to cure it? Or just a natural recovery like knock down or wind?
    Forgot to reply. I meant needing CONCENTRATE, yes.

    Rivius said:

    I find new warriors very boring and 2 dimensional :/
    That's really my biggest issue with Warriors, regardless of overall powerlevel.
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,457 Mythical
    edited December 2016
    I'm not sure about giving warriors a spamable reoccurring disrupt that requires concentrate and can be stacked as an ice cure feels like it'd stack too much in group combat with confusion and mental afflictions.

    I'd be more inclined to make it a balance based disrupt that cured naturally on its own without any further input.




  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,457 Mythical
    edited December 2016


    Rivius said:

    I find new warriors very boring and 2 dimensional :/
    That's really my biggest issue with Warriors, regardless of overall powerlevel.

    The design of warrior is a bit static and not the best in these terms I guess.

    Like if your thinking on making warriors do more then dramatically increase warrior wounding, then heavily nerf the instant kills themselves, like super nerf the instant kills and then you can buff individual modifiers and afflictions to balance that.

    If you want more fun and warriors to be throwing afflictions around more to try and get to the instant kill you need warriors to do enough wounds firstly to let them actually use their modifiers without them being such a huge waste.

    Secondly you'd need to really nerf the instant kills so that the dramatically increased wounding levels don't just mean warriors get to instant kill level and pop their instant kill macro straight away.

    I mean right now the best thing a warrior can do is strike to wound to instant kill because basically nothing else is going to kill an enemy, warrior damage is poor, there are no affliction locks etc etc. Only the wound based instant kill will kill a target outside of huge group damage.
  • ShedrinShedrin Member Posts: 905 Transcendent
    That's all good points. That'd be more than 'tweaks', though, if people even want to go in that direction?
  • VeyilsVeyils Member Posts: 1,457 Mythical
    edited December 2016
    Well yea I guess its really what direction do you want to take warriors. Nothing to do with balance but entirely about design quality and such.

    I mean right now the biggest complaint I hear from old warriors is that the skill set just hasn't been designed in as fun a manner as the old one, ignoring strength or weakness(these can always be tweaked and such). Its a fairly basic design with the instant kills as the goal and a fairly static path to get to it, very one two three.

    I mean you've just spent the best part of a year getting exceptionally minor tweaks to make warrior in the new era actually work ok.

    So like I guess do you want to go back to the drawing board and totally redesign warriors again or just keep them as the basic design style they are now?

    I'd be surprised if the admin are willing to look at redoing warriors in such a grand scale again when there are so many big projects around that still need to be done.

    EDIT:I mean a way you could go about trying to get the kind of old style warrior is simply put back in wounding and afflictions on the same hit but tweak the afflictions that warriors can give to suit. I mean that is one of the big complaints I hear as well that doing nothing but strike for wounds is the most effective thing to do.
13»
Sign In or Register to comment.