Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

RE: =ED= Balance Discussion VIII

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel General Discussion >> RE: =ED= Balance Discussion VIII
Page 29 of 30«<2627282930>»
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
6/2/2012 16:13:08   
Joe10112
Member

@Depressed: I do not like your idea of Static Charge-cooldown is insanely long, it's worth 1 heal. I suggest we keep cooldown at 2, and buff static maybe halfway between what it is now, and your suggestion.

Or, leave Static Charge as is, and lower cooldown by 1.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 701
6/2/2012 16:38:47   
Stabilis
Member

http://forums2.battleon.com/f/fb.asp?m=20364606

quote:

cooldown is insanely long, it's worth 1 heal


Ah, yes, 1 Static Charge will be worth approximately 1 level 1-3 Field Medic. If we decrease the cooldown, the power decreases. If we increase the cooldown, the power increases. It is a relative balance method. The problem with having a lower cooldown and depending on the skill, is that you essentially Strike every second turn. Who can do that? That is still a method for the Strength and Dexterity stats, not for the Technology or Support stats. This is why I suggested this change. I have been working with the Cyber Hunters for many months now, three quarters of a year and counting. If you have supporting details as to how your suggestion results, or how it improves balance, post them. You can make suggestions but without detailed reasoning I have no stigma to follow you.

Removed off-topic content. --SMGS

< Message edited by SMGS -- 6/3/2012 11:15:27 >
AQ Epic  Post #: 702
6/2/2012 17:04:08   
liy010
Member

What if we there was a skill for each Class that only required 1 Skill point so it can't be upgrade sort of like this...

Bounty Hunter: Dark Arts
100% to Block your Opponent once in the Battle.

Blood Mage: EP Regain
Gain 2 EP Per turn

Tech Mage: Tech Shields
Cast a Weak DM and E Shield on yourself on one Random Turn.

Cyber Hunter: Cyber Strike
On one Random turn in battle, you Drain 15 EP from your opponent (Strike Only, May be Blocked)

Mercenary: Raging Lust
Gain 100% of the Damage dealt back to you on your first Rage. May be Blocked.

Tactical Mercenary: Deadly Strike
100% to hit a Critical in the Battle.

Took me like 10 sec of thinking so yeah...
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 703
6/2/2012 17:33:28   
Joe10112
Member

quote:

Ah, yes, 1 Static Charge will be worth approximately 1 level 1-3 Field Medic. If we decrease the cooldown, the power decreases. If we increase the cooldown, the power increases. It is a relative balance method.


Your point here is? Of course "increasing cooldown = more powerful", that the simple rule of balance. I just say-4 turns is an awfully long time, it's about 1 static per battle. Battles nowadays usually don't go past 6-8 turns, either a Rage killshot comes along, or a Finishing move, etc..., I rarely even static 3 times during a battle. Almost never, most I get is usually 2 times, and sometimes even 1 because you get killed too fast. With a 4 turn static cooldown, it's essentially only 1 static per battle. Two 15 EP statics > One 21 EP static. (0.6*34 = 20.4 -> 21 energy gained back), I'm calculating both at fully maxxed, and the average level 34 CH to have around 15+34 primary damage. Sure, your static might be blocked, but that's just a nuance, in most of your battles, having two smaller statics of about 14-15 EP each is better than having only 1 static that regains 21 EP all at once.

quote:

The problem with having a lower cooldown and depending on the skill, is that you essentially Strike every second turn. Who can do that? That is still a method for the Strength and Dexterity stats, not for the Technology or Support stats. This is why I suggested this change.


Sure, one turn is a little low, I agree with that. But then again, we all agree the Static Charge "nerf" was a little overkill. Solutions? Lower cooldown or increase static charge regain. Since SC cooldown = 2 right now, if we were to lower, we'd lower it to 1 cooldown. Maybe we can lower to 1 turn cooldown, but lower maximum regain to like 25%? Or, keep cooldown at 2, but buff it a little bit, maybe increase maximum regain to about mid-high 30%? Either way, Cyber Hunter is KNOWN for it's Static Charge (and Plasma Armor I guess now...), and I am just thoroughly against increasing the cooldown rate.

quote:

Sure If you have supporting details as to how your suggestion results, or how it improves balance, post them. You can make suggestions but without detailed reasoning I have no stigma to follow you


I do have ideas. I have posted them before. I have made suggestions, and detailed reasoning. And who said we have "any stigma to follow you?" I don't see your idea being tested out and reported back.

Quick Question-Have you even been a CH before? You're currently a BM, so I'm not sure. If so, you *might* have run into those times where you REALLY need a static charge at this moment to prepare for a heal next turn, but they're both in cooldown. With extended cooldown on SC, more and more of these scenarios will start to appear. Sure, you *might* have been a CH longer than I have, and you might have fought more matches, but every CH has his/her opinion bro. I respect your idea, but I don't like it, because in my experiences, a 4-turn cooldown on Static is too long. It's basically pre-static charge nerf Static Charge except a little weaker, made unblockable, and cooldown increased by two turns. Seems like too much to me. Only thing I like about it is "Unblockable Energy Return", but even still, I don't see my Static getting blocked all that often, although when it does, it's rather annoying.

Flaming and off-topic content removed. --SMGS

< Message edited by SMGS -- 6/3/2012 11:18:39 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 704
6/2/2012 19:54:59   
Stabilis
Member

I am at work, so my reply will come at approximately 3 hours from now. For some reason I see Trans' voice in your post, coincidence?
AQ Epic  Post #: 705
6/2/2012 20:11:05   
Joe10112
Member

All I see is the words of a person whose been a CH for a while, and doesn't take too kindly to unasked attacks or provocations. Just spoke my mind, I thought it was a bad idea because the cooldown is insanely long, and you had to make it personal, didn't you?

Sure, I'll wait for your response, but it should be a Balance post, not about provoking or attacking me again. If it is, can it. I don't want to argue with you anymore, I'm done. It wastes time, energy, and gives mods/AKs a great excuse to hand down warnings to us. Thanks.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 706
6/2/2012 20:15:25   
Midnightsoul
Member

u guys can go2 page 28 and look at my suggestion for cyber... :)


-Midnightsoul
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 707
6/2/2012 22:15:39   
rayniedays56
Member

Guys. I have been a Cyber since the day they came out. There have been many changes in the class, including the many SSC nerfs...60-55@80-44-29..... So far, I have only agrees with the nerf to 44 because a 60 was too powerful. However, i feel this class has been picked on way too much. I am sure that we are getting another nerf to our EMP since the other classes dound this skill to pick on. What is next? Get rid od malf sonce it gives `too much synergy`? What is the root to the nerfs of our skills? Plasma Armour. So stop fighting and please look at the real issue.


Thanks.

Amber Rayne
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 708
6/2/2012 22:25:43   
Mr. Black OP
Member

Atom Slicer
%s are of the the weapons own damage (strength does not influence it) so a Lv 33 weapon (with 33) at level 1 will cause the enemy to lose 13 energy, it does NOT do any damage to health.
Level 1: 50%
Level 2: 68%
Level 3: 76%
Level 4: 84%
Level 5: 91%
Level 6: 98%
Level 7: 105%
Level 8: 112%
Level 9: 119%
Level 10: 125%
Cost: 4 energy, goes up by 1 for every level.
Tier 2, takes DM's space and DM will take EMP's place.
Claws only. 2 Cool down. It is block able.

Plasma Armour Nerf? (Since the balance team refuses to get rid of it)
Level 1: 1 resistance
Level 2: 1 resistance, 1% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 3: 2 resistance, 1% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 4: 2 resistance, 2% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 5: 3 resistance, 2% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 6: 3 resistance, 3% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 7: 4 resistance, 3% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 8: 4 resistance, 4% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 9: 5 resistance, 4% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 10: 5 resistance, 5% increase for a chance to deflect
This would be an improvement because now you would not need to use PA for a good build. This would increase creativity.
But if they remove it then forget my idea and remove it.

Buff up plasma grenade, give static a 44% (or the 55% at 80% damage), and buff venom strike.

Does anyone wanna even take my suggestion into consideration?

Possible nerf/debuff skill for tlm?
Dead Zone-Lowers Support
Energy Required:
Level 1: 14
Level 2: 16
Level 3: 18
Level 4: 20
Level 5: 22
Level 6: 24
Level 7: 26
Level 8: 28
Level 9: 30
Level 10: 32
Weapon Required: None
Stat Required: 19 Dexterity (+2 per skill level)
Takes Blood Shield's place? (not sure where to put it)
Improves With: Technology (+1 Support Reduction at 22 Technology; +1 Support Reduction per 4 Technology after)
Warm Up: 0
Cool Down: 1


< Message edited by Mr. Black OP -- 6/2/2012 23:32:47 >
Epic  Post #: 709
6/2/2012 22:31:45   
Retrosaur
Member
 

I used to like CH when they had technician lulz.

I used to like TLM when they had technician.

On a real note, I think the TLM tree should be changed.

Replace FC with Blood FC
Replace Frenzy with Intimidate.
That at least guarantees a debuff for TLMs.

< Message edited by hypedxlord -- 6/2/2012 22:32:53 >
AQW Epic  Post #: 710
6/2/2012 23:11:13   
liy010
Member

quote:

Replace FC with Blood FC
Replace Frenzy with Intimidate.


Why? Blood Commander was made for Mercs since they were UP. TLM doesn't need it.
Boy you underestimate Intimidate. A level 1 Intimidate can screw up my build so much.
It makes my STR average, when I use a STR build. It screws up my Static Charge gain so I can't Mass.
Etc...

quote:

Level 1: 43%
Level 2: 50%
Level 3: 57%
Level 4: 64%
Level 5: 71%
Level 6: 78%
Level 7: 85%
Level 8: 92%
Level 9: 99%
Level 10: 106%


This is actually very UP. All Blades so 34 DMG right now so 106% would be 36.4, Rounded to 36 DMG. A Max will do 36 DMG. Our EMPs were doing 50 at level 4. Plus the fact that it can be blocked...Atom Smasher takes 27 EP at level 1...Increase the %s
Next, think of this for low Levels. At Max, using the Light Blades (+15) would only give you 16 Energy Drain. I can do that much from a Level 1 EMp on my BH and my BH is a Dex build, not a Tech build.

quote:

Level 2: 1 resistance, 1% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 3: 2 resistance, 1% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 4: 2 resistance, 2% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 5: 3 resistance, 2% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 6: 3 resistance, 3% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 7: 4 resistance, 3% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 8: 4 resistance, 4% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 9: 5 resistance, 4% increase for a chance to deflect
Level 10: 5 resistance, 5% increase for a chance to deflect


I like this but we start off at 2 so I think level 1 should be 2 Resistance...I don't like this skill that much since it's based on luck...I'd rather have something I can see the results of...No offence but I'd pick Trans' revamped PA using %s over this skill anyday.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 711
6/2/2012 23:16:33   
Joe10112
Member

@^: My EMP does only 33 at level 4, am I doing something wrong? *whistles*

And the resistance + deflect thing seems a little low. Coupled with the fact that it's deflect chance = luck, it seems pretty UP. I'd like it to max out at 10 resistance, and like 8% chance for BLOCK, although that's probably too high.
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 712
6/2/2012 23:23:23   
Mr. Black OP
Member

quote:

I like this but we start off at 2 so I think level 1 should be 2 Resistance...I don't like this skill that much since it's based on luck...I'd rather have something I can see the results of...No offence but I'd pick Trans' revamped PA using %s over this skill anyday.

Balance wise or strength wise?
quote:


This is actually very UP. All Blades so 34 DMG right now so 106% would be 36.4, Rounded to 36 DMG. A Max will do 36 DMG. Our EMPs were doing 50 at level 4. Plus the fact that it can be blocked...Atom Smasher takes 27 EP at level 1...Increase the %s

Thanks for the feedback
I increased the %, now max is 43 energy, also all of it rounds up.
@joe
It's supposed to NERF plasma armor that way people won't need it for a build. It's the best I could think of without removing it. Since the balance team are clinging on to the skill.

< Message edited by Mr. Black OP -- 6/2/2012 23:31:42 >
Epic  Post #: 713
6/2/2012 23:42:19   
liy010
Member

quote:

My EMP does only 33 at level 4, am I doing something wrong? *whistles*

You play a Dex build with low tech...You should see Raine's Tech build...

quote:

Balance wise or strength wise?


I'd say balance wise since 5 Resistance is less than Half of what we had before...And if we nerf PA, shouldn't we nerf MA and HA too? They all fall under "Passive Armors"

_____________________________

AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 714
6/2/2012 23:48:39   
Mr. Black OP
Member

^
Actually I was just thinking about those 2 passives.
For MA I say do the same thing but have block chance instead of deflect, for HA have stun chance reduction, critical chance reduction (2% max though, 1% at lv 5, 2% at max) and +3 defense and resistance (maybe 4 since mercenaries are UP).
But of course though, deflection and blocks have to use the same formula, same minimum and maximum chance, just with different stats. Also technology and dexterity should increase defense/resistance at the same rate.
I actually want all classes to not have to depend on passives. The reason why multi was nerfed was because the devs claimed all builds needed them in 2v2. So by making passives weaker all builds won't need them. This would increase build creativity. Trying to figure out how to make bl and reroute weaker without lowering %s. Perhaps only with certain weapons?

< Message edited by Mr. Black OP -- 6/2/2012 23:58:50 >
Epic  Post #: 715
6/3/2012 0:40:31   
Stabilis
Member

quote:

quote:

Ah, yes, 1 Static Charge will be worth approximately 1 level 1-3 Field Medic. If we decrease the cooldown, the power decreases. If we increase the cooldown, the power increases. It is a relative balance method.


Your point here is? Of course "increasing cooldown = more powerful", that the simple rule of balance. I just say-4 turns is an awfully long time, it's about 1 static per battle. Battles nowadays usually don't go past 6-8 turns, either a Rage killshot comes along, or a Finishing move, etc..., I rarely even static 3 times during a battle. Almost never, most I get is usually 2 times, and sometimes even 1 because you get killed too fast. With a 4 turn static cooldown, it's essentially only 1 static per battle. Two 15 EP statics > One 21 EP static. (0.6*34 = 20.4 -> 21 energy gained back), I'm calculating both at fully maxxed, and the average level 34 CH to have around 15+34 primary damage. Sure, your static might be blocked, but that's just a nuance, in most of your battles, having two smaller statics of about 14-15 EP each is better than having only 1 static that regains 21 EP all at once.


"Your point here is?". My point here is, yes, cooldowns are relative, but there are limits. As such, there are no skills who's cooldown exceeds 4 turns. I believe that Static Charge is more optimized with a greater cooldown. Static Charge is a parent skill that branches to Malfunction and then to the level 10 skills. As it is a source of energy, it becomes that much more coveted to use to repeat skills like Massacre twice in battle even with an energy capacity for only 1 Massacre. Static Charge is used to conserve energy allocation as well as to fall back on versus EMP type skills.

"I just say-4 turns is an awfully long time, it's about 1 static per battle". Yes, it may be a long time relative to the opinion of a speed build, but to a shield build 4 turns may be very short if you know what I mean. It depends on the player, all playstyles.

"Battles nowadays usually don't go past 6-8 turns, either a Rage killshot comes along, or a Finishing move, etc". Battles for who, though? A shield build can be unfortunate enough as to be critical stricken against, raged against, energy drained against... but realistically with respect to EpicDuel battles, not everyone goes by 6-8 turn battles. I will not go ahead and say I am one of them, no. I have before though, and longer battles were my most enjoyable battles. Right now I have a juggernaut specific build that is designed for shorter battles. This is off-topic, but the current build is meant for the level cap rising.

"With a 4 turn static cooldown, it's essentially only 1 static per battle". Essentially being an abstract term, yes? By now you know how I would respond to a specific instance or generalization: does this respect the Cyber Hunter community as a whole? As some Cyber Hunters design themselves to last beyond 4 to 8 turns.

"Two 15 EP statics > One 21 EP static. (0.6*34 = 20.4 -> 21 energy gained back)". Energy values is not my most significant concern. The fact that Static Charge requires striking, depends on connecting, and a lower cooldown at lower power make it more of a nuance than just the factor of blocking itself. With those conditions in play, and improving by Strength as it does today... how does a Technology build manipulate Static Charge? No Strength (low power), no Dexterity (low success rate), Static Charge is essentially nullified for qualifying as a skill. The same applies to Support. A very significant issue that I have just mentioned, was cooldowns. The current Static Charge can be blocked. Consider that, then add a lower cooldown. Relying on Static Charge a more frequent rate increases the number of instances of Static Charge failing. Not even that, Static Charge is striking. This skill with a 1 turn cooldown for example could potentially be used every 2 turns. Dexterity Static Charge practically ensures success but low power. Strength Static Charge ensures power but low success. Having both could only mean that Strength and Dexterity builds could ever exist. One could get by with average Strength and Dexterity and have a moderately powered Static Charge that normally connects, but there will never be a Technology or Support build truly since points are always added into Static Charge for the said reason of safekeeping one's energy reserves. We nearly all use it, and if not the build is vulnerable to EMP attacks and one-time skill usages. That right there is a 8- turn build. My humble Static Charge suggestion is to allow a reliable energy replenish, use any build, and not worry about melee but instead worry about the rest of the build but more specifically other skills than the universally known Static Charge.

"Having two smaller statics of about 14-15 EP each is better than having only 1 static that regains 21 EP all at once". Is it really better? As said above, using more frequently used Static Charges is a means of 2 stats more so than 4 the lower Static Charge's cooldown is. I prefer Static Charge to have power over cooldowns so that Cyber Hunter players may use other skills and strategies instead of narrowing one's views upon Static Charge. The skill should be an asset to the arsenal, not a multipurpose tool like Support was with deflections involved.



quote:

quote:

The problem with having a lower cooldown and depending on the skill, is that you essentially Strike every second turn. Who can do that? That is still a method for the Strength and Dexterity stats, not for the Technology or Support stats. This is why I suggested this change.



Sure, one turn is a little low, I agree with that. But then again, we all agree the Static Charge "nerf" was a little overkill. Solutions? Lower cooldown or increase static charge regain. Since SC cooldown = 2 right now, if we were to lower, we'd lower it to 1 cooldown. Maybe we can lower to 1 turn cooldown, but lower maximum regain to like 25%? Or, keep cooldown at 2, but buff it a little bit, maybe increase maximum regain to about mid-high 30%? Either way, Cyber Hunter is KNOWN for it's Static Charge (and Plasma Armor I guess now...), and I am just thoroughly against increasing the cooldown rate.


"We all agree the Static Charge "nerf" was a little overkill". Generalization. Maybe not all of us (but those who do not are probably crazy), but I for one believe it to be overkill. Plasma Armour is invented, and it's aftershocks cause harm to a generally accepted skill... Static Charge. This is wrong in my opinion. Problems arose following Plasma Armour, and the staff that handle balance decide to take aim at a bystander, Static Charge, which was in no new way a contributor to the imbalance of the skill tree that had the second Static Charge (the original was weaker) and new Plasma Armour together. This is why I believe that the action taken against Static Charge could be considered "overkill".

"I am just thoroughly against increasing the cooldown rate". Why, though? Cooldown simply means unavailability. If you wish to excel in the way of the Cyber Hunter for example, you have to cope with the fact that no skill will be fully utilizable. If you depend on Static Charge too much what happens when it becomes nerfed for example, will you let that nerf you? More cooldown, generally speaking, gives one more time to perform with other skills... like also considering EMP Grenade or Cheap Shot for example (or Striking, and Auxiliary too).




Anyways, this is where I see a breaking point. I will come out with it right away with no regrets. If what I said had any intent or sign of being disrespectful to you Joe, then I am sorry. I came at you with protestation as I "think" that you were not a Cyber Hunter during the entire lifespan, is that correct or not? I made an assumption about your experience and I am sorry to offend you in that way. I was wrong. I am not self-righteous, nonetheless a megalomaniac, but I have been a Cyber Hunter one month, and some few days after the evolved classes release when the skill tree was original; that is why I "think" I am qualified to advocate for all Cyber Hunters. Even I am still learning every detail about the class, but I have the experience and background throughout every change and the knowledge that goes with those changes. When I began as a Cyber Hunter, for example, I was advocating for Energy Shield to replace Technician since Resistance was a grand issue and Technician did not fulfil that goal.



quote:

quote:

Joe, your suggestion was made in 30 seconds, while you were posting.


Your point is? Sure, even if you feel that my previous post was made in 30 seconds, I hardly think you can say this post was made in 30 seconds.


"Your point is? Sure, even if you feel that my previous post was made in 30 seconds, I hardly think you can say this post was made in 30 seconds". My point here was that proper planning, taking the time and consideration as to how the suggestion affects Cyber Hunters and everyone else as a whole and overtime is very important. It may be unlikely, but what if staff uses a suggestion that severely cripples Tactical Mercenaries even though it was initially a good idea? That is why I use a certain method before suggesting ideas for a PVP game where balance is utmost important, not too far behind valuing the players.



quote:

quote:

Sure If you have supporting details as to how your suggestion results, or how it improves balance, post them. You can make suggestions but without detailed reasoning I have no stigma to follow you.


I do have ideas. I have posted them before. I have made suggestions, and detailed reasoning. And who said we have "any stigma to follow you?" I don't see your idea being tested out and reported back.

Quick Question-Have you even been a CH before? You're currently a BM, so I'm not sure. If so, you *might* have run into those times where you REALLY need a static charge at this moment to prepare for a heal next turn, but they're both in cooldown. With extended cooldown on SC, more and more of these scenarios will start to appear. Sure, you *might* have been a CH longer than I have, and you might have fought more matches, but every CH has his/her opinion bro. I respect your idea, but I don't like it, because in my experiences, a 4-turn cooldown on Static is too long. It's basically pre-static charge nerf Static Charge except a little weaker, made unblockable, and cooldown increased by two turns. Seems like too much to me. Only thing I like about it is "Unblockable Energy Return", but even still, I don't see my Static getting blocked all that often, although when it does, it's rather annoying.


"I do have ideas. I have posted them before. I have made suggestions, and detailed reasoning. And who said we have "any stigma to follow you?" I don't see your idea being tested out and reported back". I am sure you have posted detailed suggestions, but post #701 was not, I saw that as a petty remark at the same time as advertising yourself to step over me. What could have ended well is if you helped me help you by posting some flaws and nice things regarding my suggestion so that I could improve it to your personal liking at the same time as being respectful to the general public (especially Cyber Hunters) if you know what I am saying?

"Quick Question-Have you even been a CH before? You're currently a BM, so I'm not sure". Yes, I have been a Cyber Hunter in each stage of their development, but not absolutely I will admit. When Cyber Hunters are becoming too popular/powerful I often follow my Hipster ways of switching to the most underpowered/underused class. For example, when Plasma Armour was introduced, I had switched to Blood Mage. When Tactical Mercenaries were nerfed I switched to them. I just like to prove that no matter what circumstances I am given, I can find a means of achieving victory even when the odds are against me. I like challenge, but not competition.

"With extended cooldown on SC, more and more of these scenarios will start to appear". True, when one require the abilities of the skill but it is not available then there may be panic involved. I avoid this panic by specifically stating that "Energy restoration is unblockable". If it is more preferable, I can say that Strike is no longer a Static Charge component but the energy conversion becomes higher, is that acceptable?

"Sure, you *might* have been a CH longer than I have, and you might have fought more matches, but every CH has his/her opinion bro". I respect that, it is just so hard to text how you actually talk and feel. I mean no harm.



quote:

Does not take too kindly to unasked attacks or provocations.


It is difficult to tell from text alone the attitude or intentions of another. For some people it is no problem. Unfortunately I do not do this well and often overreact to petty little things like I have to defend myself. My apologies yet again.

quote:

Just spoke my mind, I thought it was a bad idea because the cooldown is insanely long, and you had to make it personal, didn't you?


Nope, still not personal. For everyone's information, it becomes personal with me when I start talking to you by PM. I can handle a share of aggression from others, but if it gets too serious I "may" have to report someone if I understand their psychological profile.

quote:

Sure, I'll wait for your response, but it should be a Balance post, not about provoking or attacking me again. If it is, can it. I don't want to argue with you anymore, I'm done. It wastes time, energy, and gives mods/AKs a great excuse to hand down warnings to us. Thanks.


Done.

Removed off-topic content. --SMGS

< Message edited by SMGS -- 6/3/2012 11:21:02 >
AQ Epic  Post #: 716
6/3/2012 0:55:50   
Joe10112
Member

@Depressed (Sorry Pivotal, although Bro hug here as well :P): Bro hug. It's all good, text conveys feelings/emotions pretty poorly. Nothing against each other, we're cool, k?

Anyway, as I was a CH for around 5 months now, and the current state of SC being relatively useless since the regain is not even enough for a level 1 heal, it's just frustrating. IDK, maybe the balance team will work something out.

< Message edited by Joe10112 -- 6/3/2012 13:53:53 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 717
6/3/2012 8:30:36   
PivotalDisorder
Member

@Joe: um I think you mean Depressed, plus I hate the 4 turn CD on Static Charge too.

quote:

Guys. I have been a Cyber since the day they came out. There have been many changes in the class, including the many SSC nerfs...60-55@80-44-29..... So far, I have only agrees with the nerf to 44 because a 60 was too powerful. However, i feel this class has been picked on way too much. I am sure that we are getting another nerf to our EMP since the other classes dound this skill to pick on. What is next? Get rid od malf sonce it gives `too much synergy`? What is the root to the nerfs of our skills? Plasma Armour. So stop fighting and please look at the real issue.


Thanks.

Amber Rayne
@Amber Rayne: the staff have said it is very unlikely Plasma Armour will be removed as many people on facebook would complain. true story.

much more likely CH are gonna become even more boring, instead of just removing the one obvious skill that broke the class in the first place. sad right.

< Message edited by PivotalDisorder -- 6/3/2012 8:36:46 >
Post #: 718
6/3/2012 9:03:13   
liy010
Member

@Mr.Black OP instead of nerfing a skill, why don't we buff other ones?

If we just keep nerfing, it'll turn out like this

Static Charge is too strong. NERF it to 10%
Reroute is too strong now. NERF it to 10%
Bloodlust is too strong now. NERF it to 10%
God, DA is too strong now. NERF it to 10%
All these skills are useless now.

Sig removed. Please only use it once per page. ~Mecha


< Message edited by Mecha Mario -- 6/3/2012 9:39:00 >
AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 719
6/3/2012 11:06:26   
dark warrior31
Member
 

ED is unfair to TLM cause every other class has a stats lowering skill
Tech Mage and Cyber Hunter have Malfunction
Mercenary and Blood Mage have Intimidate
Bounty Hunter have Smoke Screen
But what has TLM ? NOTHING ;(
Please add something so TLM aren't left out ;(
AQW Epic  Post #: 720
6/3/2012 11:09:56   
drinde
Member

^^

TtM, CH, Mercs have passive armors. BHs, TMs, BMs are so left out.

TtM, CH, TM have direct EP regains. BHs, BMs, Mercs are so left. out.

TtM, BH, BM, Mercs, CHs can take away EP. BMs are so left out.

What's your point?
DF MQ Epic  Post #: 721
6/3/2012 11:14:44   
dark warrior31
Member
 

My point is that Evolved classes should be better than simple classes!
AQW Epic  Post #: 722
6/3/2012 11:35:19   
drinde
Member

And what, pray tell, is the balance in that?
DF MQ Epic  Post #: 723
6/3/2012 12:49:41   
liy010
Member

quote:

My point is that Evolved classes should be better than simple classes!


What the...If this was true why do people still use regular Classes?

AQ DF MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 724
6/3/2012 12:51:32   
khalidon5000
Member

quote:

My point is that Evolved classes should be better than simple classes!

You my friend have missed the entire point of the Balance Discussion Thread.
If evolved classes were meant to be stronger then their predecessors then there would be no balance.
The new classes were only made so people could try out a variety of different builds using different skills.
Epic  Post #: 725
Page:   <<   < prev  26 27 28 [29] 30   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel General Discussion >> RE: =ED= Balance Discussion VIII
Page 29 of 30«<2627282930>»
Jump to:



Advertisement




Icon Legend
New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Content Copyright © 2018 Artix Entertainment, LLC.

"AdventureQuest", "DragonFable", "MechQuest", "EpicDuel", "BattleOn.com", "AdventureQuest Worlds", "Artix Entertainment"
and all game character names are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Artix Entertainment, LLC. All rights are reserved.
PRIVACY POLICY


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition