Since the idea of being able to focus a cure on a particular affliction was presented, one would assume the cures are normally random (when you don't focus).
Maybe. We've had some discussions about having particular afflictions take precedence over the rest, but that's details that'll depend on feedback and our choices of afflictions
I am very optimistic and excited about the direction we've decided to take on this! It has many implications, not the least of which is removing the burden of trying to balance a whole new system with incremental information and theorycrafting, which I'm sure the envoys were experiencing the same difficulty we were in that area. My hope is that using a system we all already are familiar with will help ease the discussions.
I just wanted to touch briefly on the some of the inspiration here to the new approach. Obviously, the guiding principle as Estarra has pointed out is to really shave off what has become a really overwhelming number of curatives and afflictions. I drew directly upon bards, as I feel they are among the most balanced in Lusternia, and specifically the method in which bards stack and track auric afflictions really places the burden upon the bard rather than the target to keep up. As all aurics are cured with the same herb, horehound, the more skilled the bard is at tracking how the target cures and the order of cures, the more successful the bard is.
Hopefully this will herald the reemergence of strategic affliction classes and cure stacking, which I feel does not really exist in Lusternia right now. It's much more akin to throwing spaghetti at a wall and some inevitably sticking or setting up an unavoidable burst kill rather than chasing cure balances and assessing the situation in real time. That's very exciting!
Obviously this includes a careful review of what afflictions stay and which ones go, and how they are sorted between the 4 cure balances (i.e. not dumping too many strong afflictions such as aeon and succumb into the same balance) and we will be keeping some specific unique afflictions but that is on a case by case basis.
The new approach will be a bear to figure out, purely because it sounds like we are working on trial and error instead of an intended path of afflictions.
The good:
- More flexible than the trees, and doesn't explode as fast.
- Being able to target cures better could improve overall survival, making for more interesting fights.
- Simpler changes are likely better.
- Even in groups with affliction stacks the ability to target a cure could improve chances. Will focusing increase cure time or cost anything? or will top tier be heavily choose your own cure?
The bad: - Target curing also means we will likely see a higher rate of output, otherwise the affliction you NEED to stick never will..... unless some afflictions will have the purpose of screwing up target curing (like impatience fails focus body and cures first on focus mind).
- Envoys will have to agree on what afflictions are good and bad, which gets extra hard when the systems are being remade. Suddenly dementia might be better if improved, but stupidity vs impatience? Hrm.
Overall I like the new approach better, and I think this has some major chances at improvements in things. Wondering how we will handle things like sap, aeon, ecto, etc as asked about... since I assume sap is not going away, and though I could hope, I assume aeon is staying too.
1) Was there any thought about reviewing blackouts (motes still have 8s version, passives can too) and stuns? Can also throw champion artys in there, warrior and monk artys are bleh, guardian artys are crazy.
2) Any discussion on separating stats from damage or speed? The way it was originally laid out having a high stat would mean really really high DPS because it increased both damage and recovery speed.
I'm of the opinion to let them get the afflictions and stuff worked out first, and then balance times and issues surrounding that can be figured out. One step at a time, no sense in getting ahead of one self. It sounds like a lot will be dependent on feedback of envoys and the envoys can represent the playerbase, so lets see how things roll out and then start asking questions.
Edit: While we're talking about feedback and afflictions, lets remove sleep, hunger and booze attrition.
Also agreeing that this does appear to be a more positive development. So I am cautiously optimistic!
Questions:
Will endurance/willpower be staying? If they are to be removed, it'd knock out some niche affs like scrambled brain & some blunt/cutting warrior affs. This would then immediately reduce the number of affs, and the skills which give them could be re-purposed to better integrate with the newer combat system (or not). Another byproduct would be parity between how sleep locks work vs melee/caster classes.
How will envoys be directed to work on this? Making use of the special report system class by class?
Racial balance/equilibrium bonuses/maluses another concern, though likely more suited to Phase IV.
I would like to get rid of endurance/willpower so yeah those afflictions would go.
I was thinking we'd restart the envoy monthly reports and ask them to focus on any overhaul changes implemented. I don't think class-by-class report would work at this time because many afflictions could impact several classes, but as we go forward we very well may need to do specific class reports. Again, we're just starting by focusing on curing and afflictions.
Can the envoy system be made transparent to the rest of us? I enjoy reading envoy reports in game, and being able to see all the ones being looked at/discussed and then messaging my specific envoy what I think about X report would be nice, instead of having to troll around for an envoy to paste bin everything for me.
Can the envoy system be made transparent to the rest of us? I enjoy reading envoy reports in game, and being able to see all the ones being looked at/discussed and then messaging my specific envoy what I think about X report would be nice, instead of having to troll around for an envoy to paste bin everything for me.
Definitely this. I'm personally quite wary of the direction the overhaul is heading now... but that's besides the point. I've been feeling that several classes need their abilities looked at from the ground up for some time now. I doubt this will make combat more accessible. True, you can just spam eat/drink/smoke/whatever to cure yourself of afflictions, but chances are to escape kill methods that rely on afflictions you will need to focus specific cures, which won't exactly be a solution for the average newbie, not without them spending the time to learn the ways each and every class works toward their kill goal (And we're back to where we were, or even worse as systems will need to know what class they're fighting to be able to prioritize cures against opponents, so newbies likely won't have that to fall back on either). Affliction classes will remain king, if not even more so in fights and every other class that attempts to accomplish anything via afflictions without the backing of an aeoner (at least) will be hopelessly left in the dust.
In the end, my personal opinion is that this change of direction in the overhaul is going to leave us in a worse position than we are presently. True, I haven't seen the end result, and I am probably horribly wrong, but that's how I feel about this change after reading about it.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Can't agree enough with what Tarkenton said about envoys.
Once envoy reports became main stream for everyone to see submitted reports, you saw a dramatic increase in responsible reports that were more focused on balancing than on empowering.
(And agreeing with what Ushaara said about bal/eq bonuses in regards to races).
2014/04/19 01:38:01 - Leolamins drained 2000000 power to raise Silvanus as a Vernal Ascendant.
2014/07/23 05:01:29 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Munsia as a Vernal Ascendant.
2015/05/24 06:03:07 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Arimisia as a Vernal Ascendant.
2015/05/24 06:03:58 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Lavinya as a Vernal Ascendant.
In general, the envoy system is pretty transparent
Finalized reports have always been viewable by the general playerbase, but the stages before that have not been and given that reports are automatically finalized by the 15th of any given month, that's 15-16 days minimum for anyone to pressure their envoy to make comments.
The only real way to make it even more transparent would be to allow the general playerbase to see pending/drafted reports, but those are subject to change until they are finalized. Sometimes good constructive changes can be given during those points to make more suitable solutions, so I wouldn't be opposed to that.
I don't see the point of envoy reports being closed from the player base at any point, we can't comment on them and feedback still has to go through the envoys themselves.
I'd certainly like the caveat of "higher standard" being attached to people envoying cross class be removed during this, it's entirely possible that a small number of classes or possibly archetype have a large number of necessary changes in this system, and multiple reports be needed to resolve them.
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!
I echo the optimism about this change, as the burden of learning an entire new system of combat was extremely daunting. I also appreciate that envoys will be able to provide feedback as it becomes phased in. I just hope that each guild is appropriately represented, as currently there are many guilds with vacancies, inactive placeholders, or "who-the-fudge-is-that"s.
Also, while the prospect of having a single herb cure is interesting, I must give a moment of silence to all of the hours we have spent harvesting. Hrm, and just the other day I was trying to scheme up how I could occupy Earth to impose a monopoly on the earwort trade. Next!
Will there still be an opportunity to tweak some of the mechanics of certain classes (monks, knights?)?
They are allowed. Submitting a report aimed to weaken another guild will, naturally, be more scrutinized. The work around is as Shuyin stated, which has been done in the past.
Also, while the prospect of having a single herb cure is interesting, I must give a moment of silence to all of the hours we have spent harvesting. Hrm, and just the other day I was trying to scheme up how I could occupy Earth to impose a monopoly on the earwort trade. Next!
From my understanding, herbs will remain, just not as cures. They'll be used exclusively as ingredients in the four cures (which might hopefully mean no more earwort/merbloom, which would be awesome).
To clarify, I believe Estarra is asking which group of the four sounds best. Each group has a theme (group #2 is Buddhism, group #4 is the four temperaments, etc.).
Why not just go with the four temperaments sans-suffix?
EDIT: Or give every org's crafters their own flavor of each curative, different only in crafting-type messages? Different name/making message/probe/taste/smell.
Comments
I am very optimistic and excited about the direction we've decided to take on this! It has many implications, not the least of which is removing the burden of trying to balance a whole new system with incremental information and theorycrafting, which I'm sure the envoys were experiencing the same difficulty we were in that area. My hope is that using a system we all already are familiar with will help ease the discussions.
I just wanted to touch briefly on the some of the inspiration here to the new approach. Obviously, the guiding principle as Estarra has pointed out is to really shave off what has become a really overwhelming number of curatives and afflictions. I drew directly upon bards, as I feel they are among the most balanced in Lusternia, and specifically the method in which bards stack and track auric afflictions really places the burden upon the bard rather than the target to keep up. As all aurics are cured with the same herb, horehound, the more skilled the bard is at tracking how the target cures and the order of cures, the more successful the bard is.
Hopefully this will herald the reemergence of strategic affliction classes and cure stacking, which I feel does not really exist in Lusternia right now. It's much more akin to throwing spaghetti at a wall and some inevitably sticking or setting up an unavoidable burst kill rather than chasing cure balances and assessing the situation in real time. That's very exciting!
Obviously this includes a careful review of what afflictions stay and which ones go, and how they are sorted between the 4 cure balances (i.e. not dumping too many strong afflictions such as aeon and succumb into the same balance) and we will be keeping some specific unique afflictions but that is on a case by case basis.
- Target curing also means we will likely see a higher rate of output, otherwise the affliction you NEED to stick never will..... unless some afflictions will have the purpose of screwing up target curing (like impatience fails focus body and cures first on focus mind).
I am not adverse to normalizing blackout times if it will simplify things.
EDIT: For whatever that's worth :P
Questions:
I was thinking we'd restart the envoy monthly reports and ask them to focus on any overhaul changes implemented. I don't think class-by-class report would work at this time because many afflictions could impact several classes, but as we go forward we very well may need to do specific class reports. Again, we're just starting by focusing on curing and afflictions.
In the end, my personal opinion is that this change of direction in the overhaul is going to leave us in a worse position than we are presently. True, I haven't seen the end result, and I am probably horribly wrong, but that's how I feel about this change after reading about it.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Once envoy reports became main stream for everyone to see submitted reports, you saw a dramatic increase in responsible reports that were more focused on balancing than on empowering.
(And agreeing with what Ushaara said about bal/eq bonuses in regards to races).
I'd certainly like the caveat of "higher standard" being attached to people envoying cross class be removed during this, it's entirely possible that a small number of classes or possibly archetype have a large number of necessary changes in this system, and multiple reports be needed to resolve them.
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!
Also, while the prospect of having a single herb cure is interesting, I must give a moment of silence to all of the hours we have spent harvesting. Hrm, and just the other day I was trying to scheme up how I could occupy Earth to impose a monopoly on the earwort trade. Next!
Will there still be an opportunity to tweak some of the mechanics of certain classes (monks, knights?)?
No problem with letting everyone see reports though.
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!
(I'm bad on what beast curing can do.)
Anyone like the above? Any other suggestions?