Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
Except for the part where I didn't say it was a "problem." I said there were strong opinions. My strong opinion was that it was not broken, and some people agree and disagreed.
You're not even capable of speaking honestly right now.
Not to side one way or another, but double haegl was a problem long before that report.
2
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
edited September 2015
Which is fine, it's not about sides or validating whether or not it was a problem. That's a fairly pointless debate considering that report passed a while ago. I've already made the point that the skill was a part of a pre existing debate while Maligorn tried to claim it was not, that concern sprung, like magic, from the Aeromancy report. What we can be sure of is that the aeromancy report created a new situation, a new issue, and we factually know that it prompted someone, and not the someone who stated they would do so, to resolve the issue.
I've refrained from the name and shame game because I don't think it's productive. Most envoys don't get along or see eye to eye with at least 1 other envoy. Clashes occur, it's a thing, and it's fine. That being said, this kind of high handed rhetoric and fabricated outrage over "vicious" comments while he's outright calling Synkarin dishonest is exactly why a limited pool is always going to be more constructive than a system where everyone is allowed to be involved. Some people simply are not going to be honest, they are going play whatever game they have to to score points for their argument and their organization, and that's much more easily governed in a group of 15 or 20 than it is from a literally limitless pool of whoever happens to be playing. You can't eliminate the discourse, and the discourse is important for a constructive system. However, for the discourse to remain productive, the absolute minimum requirement is integrity of some degree. Some players, some players that have been envoys, do not have that quality, and we've seen them removed on a few occasions. Governing that over a boundless reporting system that is limited only by how many people log on is going to be impossible. The report system isn't going to work if it just becomes the forums.
It would be awesome if people who have nothing constructive to add to a discussion could leave their petty finger pointing elsewhere. I enjoy a good dose of forum drama as much as the next person, but at least make your jabs subtle and stuff them between helpful discussion (some in this thread are far better at it than others).
I have never been an envoy. I doubt I ever will be, unless things get seriously desperate in a guild I'm in. It doesn't bother me to leave the envoying to those people who have worlds of experience, and those who are doing it because their guild needs them and they have an active interest in it. From a player perspective outside of the envoys, I appreciate the envoys who discuss their reports/intentions with their guild and ask for input. Llandros for example did it a lot because he recognised that outside perspectives and opinions were valuable and helpful, and I enjoyed it because it helped me understand my own skills better.
I don't think there is a need for every tom dick and harry to put up their own reports, and have their say on every report. There is nothing stopping anyone from approaching an envoy and proposing/discussing putting up a report. I'm a firm believer that too many cooks spoil the broth, and I don't see how opening the process to input from anyone and everyone will make anything better.
I would encourage envoys to try and encourage input from their guild. Most guilds already have their mostly ooc combat clan, so I think it's good to at least ask for ideas or remind people to look at the report you're preparing for input. Anyone wanting to help and be involved can be.
It solved the problem stated, that's all it needs (read the report!). You have to realize that without badluck doing its hindering thing anymore, ectoplasm (eventually) going away, and so on, illus (especially those who aren't OP tarot) actually have a bit of difficulty securing their kill condition, believe it or not.
I would like to say I have a lot of experience with that, but hey what do I know.
Further, I am literally one of the only people posting in this thread who has actually self-nerfed themselves repeatedly, so shaming me into doing it further (especially for the wrong reasons) isn't gonna work.
P.S. Still fine with 5 envoys per org and letting everyone read reports.
Difficulty securing their kill, which hekoskeri does nothing to support - hence the frustration at a passive incurable ectoplasm effect.
It would also be hard for any other guild to nerf themselves as much as Illuminati have, based on the starting condition :P. You might have to literally delete guilds for that.
EDIT: My comment about draft reports was to give envoys a place to spitball without the feeling of open scrutiny. Once you think something is polished enough for general envoy (or populace) input, you slap it in pending for up to a month. At that point, there isn't any reason to gate off which players can read the reports.
I can't win. Apparently nerfs don't count until you say it does. It's as if only Illuminati have crazy skills. It's not like there are affs that are equally incurable unless you leave the meld or something...
Pretty sure if I changed hekoskeri to do something that will directly help getting illuminate, which, read: means screwing with cure balance, insanity balance, or some other form of mental hindering, people will still bitch. Yeah, I think I'm good.
That wasn't intended to be a jab, but a reference to how overpowered illuminati (and the other new guilds in general, like pyromancy and harmonics) were at release. The old and storied guilds (like wiccans) would be hard pressed to nerf themselves within a recent timeframe as far as the newer classes have in that same timeframe because most of their BS stuff was long ago, and most of the major wrinkles have been ironed out.
EDIT: Something doesn't have to be directly applicable to a kill or as tremendously hindering as doubling balance time to everything that used eq or balance (everything offensive that isn't psionics) incurably for half the time to be useful or viable. If it were a 'necessary evil' needed to prop up the Illuminati offense, it would still be frustrating... but probably would draw less heat, as it wouldn't be some random thing layered on for the heck of it. That's what I meant that comment: it's extra annoying to be hindered out of using your class skills for zero opportunity cost without there being a solid reason for that hinder besides 'why not, suck it' or 'can't win either way'.
Pyromancy reminds me of a question for the larger discussion. When Pyromancy was released, I do remember it being considered OP. There was a special report, for both it and Aeromancy. For some reason or another, pyro's envoy was absent for the report. I remember a lot of people upset, because the report ended very badly (unfairly?) for the Pyromancers. These were the same people who told me Illus were severely underpowered at release, though, so I'm curious if others would agree that it was an unbalanced special report.
If so, how does that sort of thing happen in an unbiased system, even if one party is absent?
Mayor Steingrim, the Grand Schema says to you, "Well, as I recall you kinda leave a mark whereever you go."
It ended very badly in the sense that Pyromancers received a MASSIVE nerf... from a place of being totally and outrageously over powered with no counter play besides "never ever step into a pyromancer demesne for any reason". The reports that followed were a series of minor boosts and quality of life changes, but there was only a brief window of time where pyromancers fared worse than other melding types, if at all.
The worst example of that kind of change (that I can remember) would be the recent problems with the Guardian pact investment changes.
EDIT: As @Rivius alluded to, it is more often that a new skillset or mechanic is introduced that requires hefty changes against staunch resistance. As in, it took some time to get any changes to Pyromancers even though everyone else was badly suffering. Once things are in the game, the bar for changing them LEAPS much higher, and this overhaul is the first time players are really getting a pass at feedback before things go fully live.
Further, I am literally one of the only people posting in this thread who has actually self-nerfed themselves repeatedly, so shaming me into doing it further (especially for the wrong reasons) isn't gonna work.
here's a list of Institute self-nerfs, unsure if all by the same person
My wishlist: - A way to test skills and artifacts that you don't own. - Let everyone view pending reports (but not draft reports). - Appoint envoys by org instead of guild (maybe).
Otherwise I think the system works fairly well. The biggest problems are much more limited nowadays (Solution 4s, being too strict or not enough on envoying enemy skills, etc.)
The one thing the system does not do well, as pointed out by a few people already, is when a class needs a large rework to many abilities. I think the best solution here is just allowing special report cycles where needed.
IMHO the envoy system started out as a source of new ideas, turned into politicking and in some of the games (Imperial, to a lesser degree Aetolia) it resulted in every class being made the same because that's the most obvious form of balance. It took years but eventually it ruined a lot of the things that made IRE great.
I still remember when priests (slow and steady, health/mana attacks), knights (two afflictions), sentinels (defense stripping, traps, balance manipulation), monks (counting limb damage hits), mages, occultists, they all played very differently from each other. If you log into the games today they all play more or less the same way. Aside from utility skills and role-play there is almost no reason to play different classes anymore in much of IRE.
Part of the moves of meta balance has little to do with the envoys system(s) of the IRE games or politicking in the systems and everything to do with... actual balance. And not the "most obvious" form of balance either, whatever that means. For one, in the Achaea/Aetolia combat scenes, limb damage was simply so powerful that once a knight user figured out they could use it - they did. And then comparisons with monks, who had damage and limb damage, but no poisons showed how there was an imbalance between speed knights (who could get to sub 2s dsls) and monks. The games and the admin of the games started to get small and important buffs and nerfs to shift the two classes to a more balanced state.
As it is, however, the statement that all the classes play the same is not really true. I don't have as deep an understanding of Achaean combat balance, of course. At the very least, Aetolian combat certainly has evolved quite a fair bit, and quite a lot of their classes have a fairly reasonable amount of different avenues to pursue - it is really quite impossible to make the statement that everyone is "the same" there.
And that's also definitely not true of Lusternia, where differences WITHIN an archetype can be very pronounced, and result in very different strategical planning and tactical execution, not to mention between archetypes.
It's not very fair to be pointing the finger of blame at the system for "ruining" things... that are actually a lot more healthy now than they were in the past.
Further, I am literally one of the only people posting in this thread who has actually self-nerfed themselves repeatedly, so shaming me into doing it further (especially for the wrong reasons) isn't gonna work.
here's a list of Institute self-nerfs, unsure if all by the same person
Whether or not they were obviously needed, colour me unimpressed.
K. I really just wanted to point out that I was more than willing to nerf things if I felt they were problems, not because the loud angsty forum/game populace demanded I do so.
That's certainly more impressive than certain people's comparatively brief stints as envoys at the very least IMO!
My wishlist: - A way to test skills and artifacts that you don't own.
IIRC, there should be test server access still for envoys. Might ask about that. Otherwise, this is probably one of the most important points I've actually seen raised in the thread. I can think of a few occasions where all the arguments hinged on "well, you don't actually use it so you don't know exactly how it works" and it would be a looooong time before there was a more conclusive "Oh, you're right, so there's a little more to it" or a "see, it's exactly as we said". People don't want to invest in alts for this purpose - they'd rather just assure you they are 100% correct. Make sure you got access, if it's still available!
@Iosai had a test server where envoys could test skills but that went away when she did
I think a special arena (limited to envoys or not, I don't care) like the test server would be great for envoys to test things out. We kind of already have a portion of it with the overhaul arena, so expanding on that would be amazing.
You still wouldn't really be able to test proposed skills to their fullest, but it'd be a good arena for nerfs.
Further, I am literally one of the only people posting in this thread who has actually self-nerfed themselves repeatedly, so shaming me into doing it further (especially for the wrong reasons) isn't gonna work.
P.S. Still fine with 5 envoys per org and letting everyone read reports.
@Shuyin: Woah, I am not shaming anyone. I do not honestly think you were out for anything, and we obviously disagree on how influential it is. We're human.
I have left you a message with a bullet point on why I think what I do, but that is not the point of this forum thread so not carrying the topic, nor should anyone else as it is a derail.
/ Shuyin Reply
I will say that this could be a prime example though of when some find a problem and others disagree. I like to assume no envoy intentionally tries to do something imbalancing, and a number of them have shown they are willing to take a hit for the overall good. As a result, anytime someone looks at a skill and say it needs to be nerfed, the envoy clearly disagrees or just has not gotten to it.
The biggest flaw in the system is the humans in it. There are multiple ways to fix a problem, some work, some don't, and some are just strange.
If it's not too much to ask, I would like a test server, again, please.
Viravain, Lady of the Thorns shouts, "And You would seize Me? Fool! I am the Glomdoring! I am the Wyrd, and beneath the cloak of Night, the shadows of the Silent stir!"
Pyromancy reminds me of a question for the larger discussion. When Pyromancy was released, I do remember it being considered OP. There was a special report, for both it and Aeromancy. For some reason or another, pyro's envoy was absent for the report. I remember a lot of people upset, because the report ended very badly (unfairly?) for the Pyromancers. These were the same people who told me Illus were severely underpowered at release, though, so I'm curious if others would agree that it was an unbalanced special report.
If so, how does that sort of thing happen in an unbiased system, even if one party is absent?
I remember this, as I had a character within the Pyromancers at the time (I knew very little of combat or how everything worked) and frankly it was one of the first things that made me lose faith in the Envoy system. A special report was put up where apparently the pyromancers were -not- represented, and they apparently got shafted for it. I remember Aeromancers after that report becoming quite formidable and pyromancers just disappearing. It does make me wonder why people stopped using cloudcoils altogether, when they were pretty damn effective once upon a time. Nonetheless, it was my first taste of how the Envoys seemed less focused around balance and more focused around "Org vs Org" skill mechanical warfare.
Im not saying Pyromancers didnt need a nerf, passive amputates was just a bad bad idea, but they were pretty neutered after. Truth be told, I rather like their current 4 level burn kill concept and I do wish here were some Pyros still out there that tried to strive for it.
All that aside, I frankly hate melds and the concept of them and cant wait for the day that their overbearing influence on game combat is somehow heavily decreased.
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
edited September 2015
They were not neutered. They were completely viable post special report. Maybe not Mage "viable" aka better off than most of the game, but certainly still entirely viable. The only Pyro before that special report had been Munsia, who just abused the hell out of amputations and promptly quit after the easy button was removed, but other than that there was no one to "disappear."
Arcanis is rewriting history.
edit: It's important to distinguish between "no one is playing them" and "neutered." Wildewoods and Wyrdenwoods are actually neutered. They're terrible. Pyros simply weren't played, Gaudi was not a competitive org at that time. They haven't received enormous buffs since that report, and they are certainly competitive now.
I am one of those Envoys with limited combat experience. I am also completely biased to my org and my skills. I also like to think that I have enough brains in my head to know when a report that could make my skills fall into the "overpowered" sector is being put up and comment against it, like I did the Pyromancer report for giving offbalance/prone to Runes. Though I am a Spiritsinger I play a druid and even my "limited" knowledge could see the issues with that.
I could have easily let that report slide by with no comment and then (ab)used the rune in sap locks had it gone through, but I spoke against it.
My point, in case I rambled to far away, is that an Envoy can be both biased and reasonable. Just because we all want to win the arms race doesn't mean we can't say no when we see something that's to much.
I don't always comment on every report, because some things I just don't have enough first hand experience with, but I read every report so that I:
1) Can learn more about the skill through Envoy comments (not always an easy task filtering out the snarkiness) 2) If I have made a comment, I may change my mind about said comment based on other Envoy comments bringing to light information I was unaware of.
I don't believe you need to be 100% combat ready to be an Envoy, and it's a bad judgement call to assume that someone new to Lusternia can't have the reasoning skills to be an Envoy(Analyst) or judge game balance. You do not know what they do outside the game.
The test server wasn't particularly useful for intensive combat testing, it was too slow/laggy for anything with precise timing.
Config options that show exact balances used and damage output would be very useful.
@Arcanis, see my post above yours and @Celina's below. Pyromancers are still powerful, and are easily in the top two melders in basically every category: synergy, damage, afflicting, hindering, and group management. The one 'deficiency' is in healing abilities, which I find are almost always overvalued (unless they are overwhelming, like trueheal). It's just that they used to get you to maximum burns in 1-2 demesne ticks with no input (not effort: input, literally hands off the keyboard), with amputates possible from a single tick of the demesne, guaranteed in 2-3 - again with no input. So yes, it was a massive nerf!
Pyromancy reminds me of a question for the larger discussion. When Pyromancy was released, I do remember it being considered OP. There was a special report, for both it and Aeromancy. For some reason or another, pyro's envoy was absent for the report. I remember a lot of people upset, because the report ended very badly (unfairly?) for the Pyromancers. These were the same people who told me Illus were severely underpowered at release, though, so I'm curious if others would agree that it was an unbalanced special report.
If so, how does that sort of thing happen in an unbiased system, even if one party is absent?
It does make me wonder why people stopped using cloudcoils altogether, when they were pretty damn effective once upon a time.
No comments on Pyromancy, but cloudcoils were never viable beyond people not curing properly/having bad anti-illusion. Once systems caught up, cloudcoils stopped working.
Comments
I have never been an envoy. I doubt I ever will be, unless things get seriously desperate in a guild I'm in. It doesn't bother me to leave the envoying to those people who have worlds of experience, and those who are doing it because their guild needs them and they have an active interest in it. From a player perspective outside of the envoys, I appreciate the envoys who discuss their reports/intentions with their guild and ask for input. Llandros for example did it a lot because he recognised that outside perspectives and opinions were valuable and helpful, and I enjoyed it because it helped me understand my own skills better.
I don't think there is a need for every tom dick and harry to put up their own reports, and have their say on every report. There is nothing stopping anyone from approaching an envoy and proposing/discussing putting up a report. I'm a firm believer that too many cooks spoil the broth, and I don't see how opening the process to input from anyone and everyone will make anything better.
I would encourage envoys to try and encourage input from their guild. Most guilds already have their mostly ooc combat clan, so I think it's good to at least ask for ideas or remind people to look at the report you're preparing for input. Anyone wanting to help and be involved can be.
It would also be hard for any other guild to nerf themselves as much as Illuminati have, based on the starting condition :P. You might have to literally delete guilds for that.
That wasn't intended to be a jab, but a reference to how overpowered illuminati (and the other new guilds in general, like pyromancy and harmonics) were at release. The old and storied guilds (like wiccans) would be hard pressed to nerf themselves within a recent timeframe as far as the newer classes have in that same timeframe because most of their BS stuff was long ago, and most of the major wrinkles have been ironed out.
The worst example of that kind of change (that I can remember) would be the recent problems with the Guardian pact investment changes.
Report 445
Report 466
Report 553
Report 827
Report 1134
Report 1135
Report 1176
Report 1177
Whether or not they were obviously needed, colour me unimpressed.
- A way to test skills and artifacts that you don't own.
- Let everyone view pending reports (but not draft reports).
- Appoint envoys by org instead of guild (maybe).
Otherwise I think the system works fairly well. The biggest problems are much more limited nowadays (Solution 4s, being too strict or not enough on envoying enemy skills, etc.)
The one thing the system does not do well, as pointed out by a few people already, is when a class needs a large rework to many abilities. I think the best solution here is just allowing special report cycles where needed.
Estarra the Eternal says, "Give Shevat the floor please."
I remember this, as I had a character within the Pyromancers at the time (I knew very little of combat or how everything worked) and frankly it was one of the first things that made me lose faith in the Envoy system. A special report was put up where apparently the pyromancers were -not- represented, and they apparently got shafted for it. I remember Aeromancers after that report becoming quite formidable and pyromancers just disappearing. It does make me wonder why people stopped using cloudcoils altogether, when they were pretty damn effective once upon a time. Nonetheless, it was my first taste of how the Envoys seemed less focused around balance and more focused around "Org vs Org" skill mechanical warfare.
Im not saying Pyromancers didnt need a nerf, passive amputates was just a bad bad idea, but they were pretty neutered after. Truth be told, I rather like their current 4 level burn kill concept and I do wish here were some Pyros still out there that tried to strive for it.
All that aside, I frankly hate melds and the concept of them and cant wait for the day that their overbearing influence on game combat is somehow heavily decreased.
I am also completely biased to my org and my skills.
I also like to think that I have enough brains in my head to know when a report that could make my skills fall into the "overpowered" sector is being put up and comment against it, like I did the Pyromancer report for giving offbalance/prone to Runes. Though I am a Spiritsinger I play a druid and even my "limited" knowledge could see the issues with that.
I could have easily let that report slide by with no comment and then (ab)used the rune in sap locks had it gone through, but I spoke against it.
My point, in case I rambled to far away, is that an Envoy can be both biased and reasonable. Just because we all want to win the arms race doesn't mean we can't say no when we see something that's to much.
I don't always comment on every report, because some things I just don't have enough first hand experience with, but I read every report so that I:
1) Can learn more about the skill through Envoy comments (not always an easy task filtering out the snarkiness)
2) If I have made a comment, I may change my mind about said comment based on other Envoy comments bringing to light information I was unaware of.
I don't believe you need to be 100% combat ready to be an Envoy, and it's a bad judgement call to assume that someone new to Lusternia can't have the reasoning skills to be an Envoy(Analyst) or judge game balance. You do not know what they do outside the game.
Config options that show exact balances used and damage output would be very useful.