Discussing Balance

[drcossack]

I understand that this discussion is just a subset of the views of the community and that some of the combat changes the community proposes will effect PvM and PvP. Nothing discussed here is set in stone as the team’s current focus is to finish Publish 95 which will not include any balance changes.

· Balance should be based off 1v1 which is confirmed by the community. Rock, Paper, Scissors.

· Moving shot needs to be adjusted without touching the damage.

· Corpse Skin + Curse should not stack from the same “Focused Spec” caster.

· Based on the feedback from my question: Do you feel that removing over capped DCI has removed some of the variety in mage templates and why? I have a new question: Do you feel that the addition of balanced weapons which increase the max dci cap would add to the meta?

· As for Siege, I feel that the Siege community are the only ones who know what their needs are for enjoyable combat. We are open to suggestions that will improve the overall experience of the Siege player base. As a Siege player, what should the cost be to participate in PvP?

· Let’s talk about Tactics being required for weapon specials. So my first thoughts on this have been no, no, and a decided no. But every story has multiple sides and I would like to push the discussion of this topic. I feel that by removing Tactics requirement for weapon specials we would be removing the value of Tactics from the game. This would be a huge change in terms of combat as the invest skill points used for Tactics would be used in other skills. So what new templates would you make after this change and why? What are your thoughts on increased mana cost for Tactics less activation? Understanding that this change affects all combat what value does this bring to PvM?

· “If we are talking about putting special moves back can I please have them back while in forms? It's stupid to have them unable to be used just because I changed forms.” Maybe the forms need special moves of their own?

· I’m not a fan of “Weapon Specials being toggled while casting or holding spells” as it was stated during the discussion this would increase burst damage templates and would have too big of an impact on the current meta.

· I would like to get more of the community’s feelings on allowing shields to be disarmed or why should we continue to not allow shields to be disarmed? There have been some light responses but I would like to hear more meat and potatoes

Moving Shot - HCI penalty like throwers (w/out the parry skill) get when they use a shield? But not that drastic a change. Maybe a 50% reduction? I know it used to have a hit chance penalty, but I honestly have no clue when that got changed.

Corpse + Curse: Hard cap of 55, even with both on the affected person, whether or not they have focused spec. 55 is manageable, but 45 is too extreme a reduction in resists. That much a reduction takes player skill completely out the window and completely turns it into a game of chicken if you're by yourself, even if it's a 1v1 fight. If you get hit (and you will), it's going to HURT. About a week ago, I was fighting a group of focused spec necro dexers. There were no mages present in the group (that I knew of, although I didn't pay close attention), and I have no doubt I could have (eventually) killed them all. If they had stacked the two spells, there's no chance I'd have survived. In other games, even one resist debuff (corpse skin) would have been the catalyst for a quick death.

Tactics: Without the Tactics requirement, I would definitely play a tank mage again. I do understand that I could do it now, but it would likely require skill point boosting jewelry, which I currently do not possess (or a complete rework of the character.) PvM effects: Hmm. I would likely still run Tactics on my pvm dexers since it affects weapon damage & I go for as much as I can (due in part to using them at EM Events.) Increased mana cost for specials w/out Tactics: Hmm. It could work. With modern gear, players can fire off a ridiculous amount of specials, even with the doubled mana cost that was introduced many years ago in Publish 25.

Forms: Hmm. Could be good.

Toggled specials while casting: Pretty sure I might have brought this up at one point, not that it matters. Regardless, I'll agree that it would increase burst damage to a ridiculous level, so leave it as is.

Shields: no to them being disarmed. I'm not sure how many players use a shield to get to 4/6, but I know there's at least a few. This would completely make Chivalry useless, due to requiring two items to be re-armed/affecting casting.

@Bleak - can we get your thoughts on Alchemy breaking focused spec (for mages) & hard-capping EP to 50% (whether using the skill or EP?)

 

[CovenantX]

· As for Siege, I feel that the Siege community are the only ones who know what their needs are for enjoyable combat. We are open to suggestions that will improve the overall experience of the Siege player base. As a Siege player, what should the cost be to participate in PvP?

· Let’s talk about Tactics being required for weapon specials. So my first thoughts on this have been no, no, and a decided no. But every story has multiple sides and I would like to push the discussion of this topic. I feel that by removing Tactics requirement for weapon specials we would be removing the value of Tactics from the game. This would be a huge change in terms of combat as the invest skill points used for Tactics would be used in other skills. So what new templates would you make after this change and why? What are your thoughts on increased mana cost for Tactics less activation? Understanding that this change affects all combat what value does this bring to PvM?

· “If we are talking about putting special moves back can I please have them back while in forms? It's stupid to have them unable to be used just because I changed forms.” Maybe the forms need special moves of their own?

· I’m not a fan of “Weapon Specials being toggled while casting or holding spells” as it was stated during the discussion this would increase burst damage templates and would have too big of an impact on the current meta.

· I would like to get more of the community’s feelings on allowing shields to be disarmed or why should we continue to not allow shields to be disarmed? There have been some light responses but I would like to hear more meat and potatoes

Siege PvP - The most important thing to note between Siege & Production shards is that no insurance limits what templates siege players will likely choose. so while it is important to take in Siege players opinions, what is overpowered on production shards may not be something that's possible for a siege player to get away with. - If it's balanced on production, it'll be better for siege.

Tactics no longer being required for specials - I'm so glad you're talking about this, regardless of what the outcome may be... I'm for Weapon Specials to be used with only weapon-skill at 70-90 for primary/secondary specials. Because, one it's very similar to how Magery works with or without Eval-int. some dexers don't "need" tactics, some mages don't need eval, but dexers cannot be a "dexer" without tactics. -It'll open up much more variety in dexer templates besides Archery-only. -If it's not an archer now, it basically has to be a tamer or 4/6 chivalry. otherwise it's not so viable.

Special moves while in forms - that sounds interesting if they had their "own" special moves. but that's something I think should probably be looked at after we get more viability in variety going on again.
Right now, animal form is mostly used to escape dismount ganks.

Weapon specials toggled while casting - Well, it wouldn't really increase the burst damage, the people that still play tank-mages, can still stack the attacks with the spell-combos by toggling the special on after the spells are finished. This change is more of a quality of life change to me, this is also why I said I'm more for Tactics no longer being required for specials, then to have spec-toggling while casting. It's not really going to change anything, except it'll make the tank-mage or any casting-weapon-based damage dealers more user friendly.

Disarming Shields - I'm against shields being disarm-able. because if someone has parry, it's because that particular person may have difficulty fighting dexers, if shields are disarmable, it would negate the reason to have parry which isn't guaranteed to work in the first place. this is also the reason there are so few or no evasion dexers, they lose too much from one special that just about every dexer has.
It would work for wrestle/parry or anatomy/parry but it just not really a good thing. because other templates that use Parry skill will still lose the same amount or more defense than what wrestle+parry & Anatomy + Parry loses by being disarmed. (weapon + shield = -67.5% chance to block/dodge attacks, down to 5% chance while disarmed, while anatomy/wrestling+Parry lose 35% block chance. still remaining at 50% chance to dodge)

 

[CovenantX]

If you're saying stacking should only drop allow poison and fire to drop to 55, I agree with this, requiring two people.

Well, even if it didn't require more than one person, it wouldn't be as much a problem as it is now. but I do agree, it should take 2 people to accomplish that.

 

[MalagAste]

It has only because of HLD and the damage output of archers. Now it's pretty much required to have parry to dial down DPS. Before it wasn't so bad because You weren't getting instantly smoked when HLD nailed you.

However in the parry Mage it allowed too much of a benefit and where they'd never drop below the 67.5% block/dodge.


Balanced two handed weapons will have to be able to parry and evade, but yes that'd help a lot. I think this is a good idea.







I'm not a fan of removing tactics across the board.

I could see say removing tactics from something like nerve strike as a secondary special as long as you have 120 real bushido, just as an example.

Another option would be to lower the cap or damage output if they do not have tactics.

Say armor ignore with tactics is 35, and without let's say 20.

But to just remove it I'm not sold on.


No specials for ninjutsu forms.

I'm no fan of removing Tactics either... As was said I could see that making a bunch of overpowered combinations without Tactics.

As for the No specials in Ninjitsu forms Why? IMO being in form is just like dealing with someone mounted and I can do specials while mounted do it all the time... and if I am thinking of it can't you knock someone out of form just like you can dismount someone??? and don't they suffer the same penalties???? So then what is with crippling the Ninja?

If I was a Ninja or wasn't a Ninja archer I could still hit you a million times with moving shot from horseback ... from my pocket pony I see no difference or reason to cripple the ninja.

Is it because they can stealth in form hit you and run off mounted? I can stealth up to you, mount hit you and run off without ninjitsu... Infact doing it that way I can then moving shot hit you some more... So again I'm not sure why specials are removed from Ninja's... Just don't allow them to cast but there really is NO reason to not let them use weapon specials IMO... it's no different than if I were mounted.

 

[chester rockwell]

Make shields disarmable. You will still have wrestle and/or wpn skill to keep ur dci active. Shield and wpn, then you have a 50/50 of having zero dci. It would be a good variable and help "balance" parry mages.
Adjust the hit chance for moving shot. It makes sense and debuffs pvp archers a little bit to help "balance" that.
Both of these adjustments would help balance and make other templates more viable without messing up pvm.


Timers on all pots.

Put spawn rates back to normal.

Ban cheaters. Doesnt have to be perm, just enough and consistent enough to make it annoying for them.

 

[drcossack]

Make shields disarmable. You will still have wrestle and/or wpn skill to keep ur dci active. Shield and wpn, then you have a 50/50 of having zero dci. It would be a good variable and help "balance" parry mages.

One problem with that: You'll be able to disarm shields AND weapons if that goes in. That'll reduce dexers (if they use a shield) to having a 5% chance to miss. Good luck with that, especially against another dexer.

 

[CovenantX]

I'm no fan of removing Tactics either... As was said I could see that making a bunch of overpowered combinations without Tactics.

Name an overpowered template that would come about if tactics wasn't required for specials?

I see a lot of people say this, but they N E V E R say what template(s) they are. -I'll assume it's an excuse. (much like everything that can't be proven)

 

[cobb]

Based on the feedback from my question: Do you feel that removing over capped DCI has removed some of the variety in mage templates and why? I have a new question: Do you feel that the addition of balanced weapons which increase the max dci cap would add to the meta?

I'm a bit confused by this question. What do balanced weapons have anything to do with mage templates or max dci?

 

[OREOGL]

One problem with that: You'll be able to disarm shields AND weapons if that goes in. That'll reduce dexers (if they use a shield) to having a 5% chance to miss. Good luck with that, especially against another dexer.

I had this same thought but it's no different than disarming any other dex template without parry or a Mage just using a Mage weapon.

It was a wash to me except it's take them disarming two things vs a normal templates one.

 

[OREOGL]

As for the No specials in Ninjitsu forms Why? IMO being in form is just like dealing with someone mounted and I can do specials while mounted do it all the time... and if I am thinking of it can't you knock someone out of form just like you can dismount someone??? and don't they suffer the same penalties???? So then what is with crippling the Ninja?

Ninja gets bonuses per form already.

You cant also stealth a mount speed while on a horse. Extra hp, poison resistance etc.

Or the new tiger mastery gets DCI and can bleed, let alone the speed and can go straight into stealth.

None of these things are equivalent to a mount.

And then give them weapon specials on top of it?

I'll pass.

 

[OREOGL]

I'm a bit confused by this question. What do balanced weapons have anything to do with mage templates or max dci?

He's proposing to have two handed balanced weapons that will allow you to overcap DCI.

So in theory will allow for different Mage templates that don't get rocked every time HLD goes off Because they will have over capped dci (and can chug)

 

[Lythos-]

· Based on the feedback from my question: Do you feel that removing over capped DCI has removed some of the variety in mage templates and why? I have a new question: Do you feel that the addition of balanced weapons which increase the max dci cap would add to the meta?



· Let’s talk about Tactics being required for weapon specials. So my first thoughts on this have been no, no, and a decided no. But every story has multiple sides and I would like to push the discussion of this topic. I feel that by removing Tactics requirement for weapon specials we would be removing the value of Tactics from the game. This would be a huge change in terms of combat as the invest skill points used for Tactics would be used in other skills. So what new templates would you make after this change and why? What are your thoughts on increased mana cost for Tactics less activation? Understanding that this change affects all combat what value does this bring to PvM?

· “If we are talking about putting special moves back can I please have them back while in forms? It's stupid to have them unable to be used just because I changed forms.” Maybe the forms need special moves of their own?

· I’m not a fan of “Weapon Specials being toggled while casting or holding spells” as it was stated during the discussion this would increase burst damage templates and would have too big of an impact on the current meta.

· I would like to get more of the community’s feelings on allowing shields to be disarmed or why should we continue to not allow shields to be disarmed? There have been some light responses but I would like to hear more meat and potatoes

Removing overcapped dci forced everyone into a parry mage to counter. It then became so easy to make due to your legendary pieces. Reverting the DCI change will do nothing now since everyone already has their suits. If you revert this now, it will make current parry mages impossible to hit with a melee.

Removing tactics will add variety to templates. Tactics would still be needed for damage increase so I see very little effected in a negative way.

The ability to toggle specials while casting were what made tactics mages. Make tactics mages great again.

Balanced weapons should not effect parry or evasion chance.

I'm not a fan of adding specials while in animal form.

I wouldn't want a shield to be disarmed. IF you did consider this maybe lower the disarm chance a little more.

Other thoughts:
-Revert deathstrike. Currently damage is tied to hiding and stealth. Damage value should be only based on ninja skill level. (this would open a floodgate of ninja templates)
-Revert bushido. Evasion should be based on bushido skill level only. Nerve strike should not need tactics to perform. (this would bring back bush mages which were extremely fun to play)

-Skill timers need to be shortened. (Peacemaking, Detect hidden, ect)

If you revert these things it will make UO somewhat like it was when shards were packed.

 

[OREOGL]

If you revert this now, it will make current parry mages impossible to hit with a melee.

His idea was to only overcap DCI by using two handed balanced weapons. Rules out overcapping parry mages.

I'm a fan of the idea.



I agree with tactics being removed from nerve strike requirement given the bushido is real skill.

 

[chester rockwell]

One problem with that: You'll be able to disarm shields AND weapons if that goes in. That'll reduce dexers (if they use a shield) to having a 5% chance to miss. Good luck with that, especially against another dexer.

The only dexers I see that use a shield are 4/6....or pure paladin rp-types....but they don't really "pvp", per se.

 

[OREOGL]

The only dexers I see that use a shield are 4/6....or pure paladin rp-types....but they don't really "pvp", per se.

Yeah it doesn't rule really anything out since the chance to have no blocking by disarming is already available against a lot of templates.

 

[Lord Gandalf]

· Balance should be based off 1v1 which is confirmed by the community. Rock, Paper, Scissors.
(-) You can pretty much find a counter template to any template in this game, a good step was taken already by removing the spirituality shield & dropping down dci cap to 45, 1v1 is pretty solid as it is.

--------------------

· Moving shot needs to be adjusted without touching the damage.
(-) You could force moving shots to do physical damage, good for players using rpd suits, but no major changes should be done.

--------------------

· Corpse Skin + Curse should not stack from the same “Focused Spec” caster.
(+) agree

--------------------

· Based on the feedback from my question: Do you feel that removing over capped DCI has removed some of the variety in mage templates and why? I have a new question: Do you feel that the addition of balanced weapons which increase the max dci cap would add to the meta?
(+)75dci was OP especially on bok bush mages. But the +25dci+45dci is alright on balanced weapons since you cannot parry with them. So chances that mages go back to their old skills (scribe/alchemy/spellweaving/poisoning) using repeater crossbows for example could be a nice changes

--------------------

· As for Siege, I feel that the Siege community are the only ones who know what their needs are for enjoyable combat. We are open to suggestions that will improve the overall experience of the Siege player base. As a Siege player, what should the cost be to participate in PvP?
(+) Loot a random number (1 or 2) of items per kill

--------------------

· Let’s talk about Tactics being required for weapon specials. So my first thoughts on this have been no, no, and a decided no. But every story has multiple sides and I would like to push the discussion of this topic. I feel that by removing Tactics requirement for weapon specials we would be removing the value of Tactics from the game. This would be a huge change in terms of combat as the invest skill points used for Tactics would be used in other skills. So what new templates would you make after this change and why? What are your thoughts on increased mana cost for Tactics less activation? Understanding that this change affects all combat what value does this bring to PvM?
(+)Id say unlink tactics from bush/ninja, like nerve strike, riding swipe, double shot, frenzied whirlwind, double shot.

--------------------

· “If we are talking about putting special moves back can I please have them back while in forms? It's stupid to have them unable to be used just because I changed forms.” Maybe the forms need special moves of their own?
(+)Tiger form is already cool (bleed passive and evasion chance), wolf form (random mortal+hpi30), krin (random disarm+stam30) why not

--------------------

· I’m not a fan of “Weapon Specials being toggled while casting or holding spells” as it was stated during the discussion this would increase burst damage templates and would have too big of an impact on the current meta.
(+) i agree, never have that happen, i can already see 4/6 chiv temp spamming holy light and performing specials like frienzied whirlwind from now

--------------------

· I would like to get more of the community’s feelings on allowing shields to be disarmed or why should we continue to not allow shields to be disarmed? There have been some light responses but I would like to hear more meat and potatoes.
(+) would add that to the wresling mastery only if i were you

Thank you @Bleak

 

[Modoc]

Well it is fair to say no one should take this guy serious when it comes to pvp.

No One Does, Believe me. Just listen to LS or ATL chat for 5 mins while hes yammering and you will see for yourself

 

[drcossack]

No One Does, Believe me. Just listen to LS or ATL chat for 5 mins while hes yammering and you will see for yourself

Do you have anything constructive to add to the thread, preferably something that's not agenda-driven like Paith's nerfs for Chivalry? By all means, please contribute some ideas.

 

[Modoc]

EC's speed only applies to turning. Straight line, there is no difference, and I have NO problem keeping up with them on the CC. Have you already forgotten how often I've played with Sibble? btw, that quote was one of MANY examples of known CC users running IN A STRAIGHT LINE.[/QUO

Do you have anything constructive to add to the thread, preferably something that's not agenda-driven like Paith's nerfs for Chivalry? By all means, please contribute some ideas.

Confirming Paiths post is most Constructive as to help other readers to avoid and cut thru some of the BS that's being spead in this Thread.

 

[drcossack]

Watching this returning Player ive

Confirming Paiths post is most Constructive as to help other reads to avoid and cut thru some of the BS that's being spead in this Thread.

You're clearly a better pvp'er than I am, and obviously MUCH smarter, so please present some actual ideas on what needs to be balanced in UO's current pvp metagame. Without agreeing with what others have already proposed.

 

[Modoc]

EC's speed only applies to turning. Straight line, there is no difference, and I have NO problem keeping up with them on the CC. Have you already forgotten how often I've played with Sibble? btw, that quote was one of MANY examples of known CC users running IN A STRAIGHT LINE.

You're clearly a better pvp'er than I am, and obviously MUCH smarter, so please present some actual ideas on what needs to be balanced in UO's current pvp metagame. Without agreeing with what others have already proposed.

I couldn't agree more and thank you for your honesty its very refreshing considering the source, but can we please get back on topic. Too limit me to not agree with what others opinions are is unfair and pretty short sighted but that's what we have come to except outta some posters.

 

[CovenantX]

Other thoughts:
-Revert deathstrike. Currently damage is tied to hiding and stealth. Damage value should be only based on ninja skill level. (this would open a floodgate of ninja templates)
-Revert bushido. Evasion should be based on bushido skill level only. Nerve strike should not need tactics to perform. (this would bring back bush mages which were extremely fun to play)

Revert Ninjitsu>Deathstrike - so that it no longer requires hiding/stealth would create a problem (I could maybe see, it requires only hiding) but it should not work as a stand-alone skill.... You said "(this would open a floodgate of ninja templates)" but the problem that change would create is the same thing we're dealing with now. but it would be with the Ninjitsu skill, instead of Alchemy, Parry, or Archery. - I'll say it the way most of you would say it (because this is what they've done regarding the skills I just mentioned) "No template would be worth playing, without ninjitsu, if this change is made".

Bushido>Evasion - I honestly don't know of a time (I'm pretty sure there never has been a time) where you could evade with only bushido and actually evade everything... It was always tied to Parry, what has changed is with Evasion though is it now requires a Weapon Skill this is why it's no longer usable with a "Mage-Weapon" -too many skill points = not possible without giving up something crucial.

Weapon skills (not including Wrestling or Anatomy+Eval-int) are useless without Tactics currently, that's the main reason evade-mages don't exist anymore.

 

[Basara]

I don't seek out PvP; in fact I deliberately avoid it.

But to me, there's already been too many changes for the benefits of PvPers, and PvM Sampire templates, to the detriment of all others.

The implementation of Skill guiding Chivalry instead of Karma, totally gutted reasons to actually BE good. There needs to be something more in-between the old and current versions, where it's Karma-based, but high skill adds on top. Necro and Chiv should be mutually exclusive, not Chiv being relegated as a booster for Sampires in PvM, when it was meant to be a primary PvM skill.

I can understand why some of the Chivalry abilities got nerfed as a means of making them more viable in PvP, but I really wish that there had been more thought to the changes from the viewpoint of the non-PvPers. Monsters can screw up your stamina FAR worse and more quickly than another player, for example, and the Divine Fury changes to keep it from being OP in PvP made it near-useless fighting high-end monsters. If the spells could be back to the Karma-based way they were before, but with bonuses for 90+ skill and caps that only took effect when one was flagged as being an attacker or defender in PvP, it would be more attractive.

For Chivalry, the spells that target your weapon toggling the specials never made sense. I can understand the healing/curing/debuff removing spells toggling them, as well as the direct damage and traveling spells. But, Consecrate Weapon & EoO really shouldn't - and perhaps not even DF.

Much as Bushido & Ninjitsu, and far more than necromancy, Chivalry is a weapon booster more than a casting skill. Chiv needs to be one of the skills that adds toward special move cost reduction like the SE skills.

As for the Special move requirements. here's a Tactics option to consider. What if Tactics (real skill or not) wasn't "required" to "do" a special move, but influenced the maximum effect?
Remove the "real tactics skill" requirement (leaving the primary skill as is). Replace it with the effect of a special move being diminished to 30% of normal effect (or chance of success) at 0 Tactics for a primary special move, 10% for a secondary special move, then have it increase by 1% per skill point (and humans' JOAT would make them 50%/30% until they reach 20 real skill).

At 70 Tactics, the Primary ability would function at 100%. At 90 Tactics, the Secondary ability would reach 100%. Having more than these numbers would give additional bonuses, but wouldn't necessarily keep advancing 1/1 like it did before 100%.



Perhaps it is actually time to make NEW Bushido, Chivalry, Ninjitsu and maybe even Necromancy spells - ones that have similar abilities to some of the other skills spells, but at different levels and different side-effects. Bushido has way too few "spells", especially. Bushido needs a way to decouple from relying on Necro & Chiv buffs, and abilities that stand alone. Chivalry is too bottom-loaded, and could use some skills that mirror those of other skills (say, some spells in the same difficulty range or higher as Holy Light, analogous to Cleansing Winds or Gift of Renewal, a gate-like spell that requires 99 Chivalry, or a spell that does the Ward Removal effect on others; some of these ideas would work for both Bushido or Chivalry). More misdirection for Ninjas, and possibly a low-power healing ability at high level. An actual create and CONTROL undead spell at areond the same level as VE, that allows the created undead (or maybe even "wild" undead) to be ordered around (but they would take control slots) - or just have Spirit Speak work on undead the way Herding works on living monsters.

 

[virem]

I really don't think we should be talking about advanced changes in PVP at this point. We don't need to remove tactics requirement on specials, we don't need to to toggle while casting spells (it doesn't even matter you can hit specials no problem).

We need SMALL changes. A running shot nerf will stabilize pvp and allow people to start playing other templates again. After that we should talk about changes that add more diversity.

And corpse skin shouldn't stack with curse AT ALL why is this still up for debate? It should just lower fire/poison to 55 regardless of if you are overcapped or not.. and honestly it shouldn't have to be a focused necro to do it, that should just be how the spell works. That's how the spell was originally intended, I don't see any reason why a single non-focused necro shouldn't be allowed to lower fire/poison to 55.

In no way shape or form should DCI be overcapped.. NOTHING should be able to overcapped, it doesn't make sense. It is an absolutely ridiculous game mechanic.

 

[Lythos-]

Revert Ninjitsu>Deathstrike - so that it no longer requires hiding/stealth would create a problem (I could maybe see, it requires only hiding) but it should not work as a stand-alone skill.... You said "(this would open a floodgate of ninja templates)" but the problem that change would create is the same thing we're dealing with now. but it would be with the Ninjitsu skill, instead of Alchemy, Parry, or Archery. - I'll say it the way most of you would say it (because this is what they've done regarding the skills I just mentioned) "No template would be worth playing, without ninjitsu, if this change is made".

Bushido>Evasion - I honestly don't know of a time (I'm pretty sure there never has been a time) where you could evade with only bushido and actually evade everything... It was always tied to Parry, what has changed is with Evasion though is it now requires a Weapon Skill this is why it's no longer usable with a "Mage-Weapon" -too many skill points = not possible without giving up something crucial.

Weapon skills (not including Wrestling or Anatomy+Eval-int) are useless without Tactics currently, that's the main reason evade-mages don't exist anymore.

Ninja used to be a stand alone skill and it wasn't very OP because there's only 2 reasons to even have ninja. Form and Deathstrike. Form has been hardcapped at 0 FC which I am in full agreement with and do not want changed back and Deathstrike only works if a person runs. It does 12-14 damage if a person stands still. I think that's a more than fair tradeoff for a 120 skill.

Bush. Way back there was a semi decent chance to evade without parry. I'm talking about the old bokuto nerve strike evade mages that actually had a wep skill. I can't remember the exact mechanics back then but what killed evade mages were adding parry tactics AND anatomy to evade chance. We're talking apples to oranges in terms of -mage wep evaders vs nerve evade bok mages with actual wep skill.

Either way though, we've been talking in a couple threads about adding variety back to pvp. If they leave parry as is and leave 15/30 SDI as is and revert some changes then we're accomplishing our goal of making other templates viable and decreasing the amount of cookie cutter shield mages and basic archers.

 

[PaithanTheElf]

Ninja used to be a stand alone skill and it wasn't very OP because there's only 2 reasons to even have ninja. Form and Deathstrike. Form has been hardcapped at 0 FC which I am in full agreement with and do not want changed back and Deathstrike only works if a person runs. It does 12-14 damage if a person stands still. I think that's a more than fair tradeoff for a 120 skill.

Bush. Way back there was a semi decent chance to evade without parry. I'm talking about the old bokuto nerve strike evade mages that actually had a wep skill. I can't remember the exact mechanics back then but what killed evade mages were adding parry tactics AND anatomy to evade chance. We're talking apples to oranges in terms of -mage wep evaders vs nerve evade bok mages with actual wep skill.

Either way though, we've been talking in a couple threads about adding variety back to pvp. If they leave parry as is and leave 15/30 SDI as is and revert some changes then we're accomplishing our goal of making other templates viable and decreasing the amount of cookie cutter shield mages and basic archers.

Zero fast cast is still easy to get off, especially if you toss on a quick protection. Deathstrike should not be standalone. It was bad enough when all mages ran with ninjitsu just for the survivability. They should not be given extra damage. And if you do move, it does 40 damage.

 

[OREOGL]

Shields: no to them being disarmed. I'm not sure how many players use a shield to get to 4/6, but I know there's at least a few. This would completely make Chivalry useless, due to requiring two items to be re-armed/affecting casting.

I don't know man, 3/6 is still pretty fast.

I think disarming shield would be okay even for chiv templates. I assume they're not running only parry either at 35% but weapon or wrestling. If they arent, they're crazy.

Double disarms for a chiv template would drop them as low as 2/6 assuming they had fc on a weapon and not a 1/3 ring orny combo.

Mages would drop to 1/6 if using fc on a shield.

I think the trade off is reasonable.

 

[OREOGL]

Revert Ninjitsu>Deathstrike

Can't say I'm a fan of this. Fighting these templates was just a constant 50 point deathstrike spam.

 

[virem]

It baffles me that we are talking about disarming shields.

How about we remove the mastery that lets archers not be disarmed? That change alone literally removed an entire class of melee dexers.

archers last major weakness was disarming them when they put people on foot and killing them with a death striker. Can't do that anymore, and because of that all the melee dexers switched to... archers.

Archery is dictating the meta, they have two counters, parry mages and.. archers. Nerf archery and you instantly change the amount of templates from 2 to like 8.

 

[Great DC]

@Bleak Would there be a way to add some of the discussed ideas to the arena on TC? This way people could test all different types of templates with the possible changes to see if it would create any other OP setups before adding them into some kind of patch permanently. Im thinking in the options on the arena choices, like no tactic requirement or some of the other reasonable ideas. I definitely think moving shot needs it nerf anyway. Maybe it would be good to remove the combat lmc bonus as well, that would limit special spamming on archers as well. Could we also get rid of the 5% wiff chance on dexxers that isn't related to any calculation in this game, like hci dci calc or parry chance. Nothing is more annoying then trying to spawn with 120 wep skill and 45 hci and whiffing on 1st level spawn, it shouldn't happen.

 

[drcossack]

I don't know man, 3/6 is still pretty fast.

I think disarming shield would be okay even for chiv templates. I assume they're not running only parry either at 35% but weapon or wrestling. If they arent, they're crazy.

Double disarms for a chiv template would drop them as low as 2/6 assuming they had fc on a weapon and not a 1/3 ring orny combo.

Mages would drop to 1/6 if using fc on a shield.

I think the trade off is reasonable.

But how many are using the Orny? I mean, I'm sure some are, but given that the 4/6'ers are using a wider variety of skills (i.e. weapon skills), they're going to want HCI as well. You won't get anywhere near max HCI without uber jewelry. If they're a parry/chiv char, there's a chance they'll use the Hephaestus for the FC, but I think it far more likely that they'll have an even better shield without Spell Channeling (which they don't need) and FC 1. Jewels/shield puts them at 3/6, then they either have town bonus or an FC 1 weap. Allowing both to disarm not only slows Chiv down to a level where it's much easier to interrupt (I mean, I'm perfectly ok with that, since I hate the 4/6 Chiv vs 2/6 Mage stalemate), but it also has the added drawback of making the char a sitting duck if both weapon/shield are disarmed.

The main draw of Chivalry is the extra survivability it gives. If you remove that with disarmable shields as well, what's the point of having it at all?

 

[OREOGL]

But how many are using the Orny? I mean, I'm sure some are, but given that the 4/6'ers are using a wider variety of skills (i.e. weapon skills), they're going to want HCI as well. You won't get anywhere near max HCI without uber jewelry. If they're a parry/chiv char, there's a chance they'll use the Hephaestus for the FC, but I think it far more likely that they'll have an even better shield without Spell Channeling (which they don't need) and FC 1. Jewels/shield puts them at 3/6, then they either have town bonus or an FC 1 weap. Allowing both to disarm not only slows Chiv down to a level where it's much easier to interrupt (I mean, I'm perfectly ok with that, since I hate the 4/6 Chiv vs 2/6 Mage stalemate), but it also has the added drawback of making the char a sitting duck if both weapon/shield are disarmed.

The main draw of Chivalry is the extra survivability it gives. If you remove that with disarmable shields as well, what's the point of having it at all?

I see what you're saying, I just have a hard time basing balance on suits.

But this aside, I think there is an immunity timer in disarm that lasts longer than the actual disarm. So I'm not really sure they could do both.

If it's not there, it wouldn't be hard to reimplement it.

The disarm should always toggle the for weapon first and if not there toggle the shield. I don't think it should be a separate macro to disarm one and then the other.

 

[PaithanTheElf]

But how many are using the Orny? I mean, I'm sure some are, but given that the 4/6'ers are using a wider variety of skills (i.e. weapon skills), they're going to want HCI as well. You won't get anywhere near max HCI without uber jewelry. If they're a parry/chiv char, there's a chance they'll use the Hephaestus for the FC, but I think it far more likely that they'll have an even better shield without Spell Channeling (which they don't need) and FC 1. Jewels/shield puts them at 3/6, then they either have town bonus or an FC 1 weap. Allowing both to disarm not only slows Chiv down to a level where it's much easier to interrupt (I mean, I'm perfectly ok with that, since I hate the 4/6 Chiv vs 2/6 Mage stalemate), but it also has the added drawback of making the char a sitting duck if both weapon/shield are disarmed.

The main draw of Chivalry is the extra survivability it gives. If you remove that with disarmable shields as well, what's the point of having it at all?

3/6 casting is still very fast. And you are saying "this would make chiv users SLIGHTLY vulnerable for 8 seconds, we can't have that."

I think disarming shields would make parry pretty worthless, but trying to make an argument because of chiv is... lol-worthy.

 

[OREOGL]

3/6 casting is still very fast. And you are saying "this would make chiv users SLIGHTLY vulnerable for 8 seconds, we can't have that."

I think disarming shields would make parry pretty worthless, but trying to make an argument because of chiv is... lol-worthy.

Disarming shields seems like a good idea on paper but I'd like to try it out on test center.

I'm not sure it'd be worthless, it'd just make the parry Mage template vulnerable for 5 seconds.

Then immunity to disarm for another 5.

Dropping blocking to 50% at best 5 of every ten seconds doesn't seem like much of a loss.

But again, I'd like to try it out to see if it's practical.

 

[drcossack]

3/6 casting is still very fast. And you are saying "this would make chiv users SLIGHTLY vulnerable for 8 seconds, we can't have that."

I think disarming shields would make parry pretty worthless, but trying to make an argument because of chiv is... lol-worthy.

Well, that too, but I didn't think it needs to be stated over & over - I'm pretty sure it already was. If you're going to nerf parry (which, by itself, doesn't NEED a nerf IMO), it should be in the block chance, and not by completely neutering the skill with disarmable shields. Wrestle/Anat mages can still get misses without a shield, but it'd still probably be a death sentence. As far as Chiv being slightly vulnerable: All the chiv chars I've fought weren't using a weaponskill mastery for Saving Throw, since they ALL use Holy Fist. Allow for disarmable shields and they'll be completely defenseless, even more so than a parry mage. With a low chance to miss, they're going to drop and they're going to do it fast.

Allowing disarmed shields is just a stupid idea all around.

I see what you're saying, I just have a hard time basing balance on suits.

But this aside, I think there is an immunity timer in disarm that lasts longer than the actual disarm. So I'm not really sure they could do both.

If it's not there, it wouldn't be hard to reimplement it.

The disarm should always toggle the for weapon first and if not there toggle the shield. I don't think it should be a separate macro to disarm one and then the other.

Is there? I can't even remember the last time I tried to disarm someone, but I know it's been months - guildmate was afk on his archer, I decided to try disarming him to see how many tries it took. 5 failures before it finally succeeded. I'm 99% sure my complete lack of HCI played a part in that, but I'm not using Wrestling for the specials. Mostly BECAUSE of the lack of HCI, but also because I'd have to get up close to do it & casting will toggle it off.

 

[OREOGL]

Well, that too, but I didn't think it needs to be stated over & over - I'm pretty sure it already was. If you're going to nerf parry (which, by itself, doesn't NEED a nerf IMO), it should be in the block chance, and not by completely neutering the skill with disarmable shields. Wrestle/Anat mages can still get misses without a shield, but it'd still probably be a death sentence. As far as Chiv being slightly vulnerable: All the chiv chars I've fought weren't using a weaponskill mastery for Saving Throw, since they ALL use Holy Fist. Allow for disarmable shields and they'll be completely defenseless, even more so than a parry mage. With a low chance to miss, they're going to drop and they're going to do it fast.

Allowing disarmed shields is just a stupid idea all around.



Is there? I can't even remember the last time I tried to disarm someone, but I know it's been months - guildmate was afk on his archer, I decided to try disarming him to see how many tries it took. 5 failures before it finally succeeded. I'm 99% sure my complete lack of HCI played a part in that, but I'm not using Wrestling for the specials. Mostly BECAUSE of the lack of HCI, but also because I'd have to get up close to do it & casting will toggle it off.

I thought there was and I looked it up and says there still is. Says 5 seconds duration for the disarm and 10 for immunity. But that could be dated. I haven't disarmed anyone in a long time.

It said the timer did not apply to wrestling.

If I get time I'll check it later.

Also you want to PM what guild we
Moved to from LS to ATL?

I made a semi shoddy parry Mage with a horrendous suit Id like to try out some more.

 

[virem]

I am a bit confused about @Bleak saying that the community wants moving shot changed without changing the damage. I think MOST people want the damage reduced, but without effecting PVM damage/base damage on bows. It flat out does too much damage because of interactions with curse/corpse. The two solutions two this would be capping the damage on moving shot or making moving shot do physical only damage.

 

[drcossack]

I am a bit confused about @Bleak saying that the community wants moving shot changed without changing the damage. I think MOST people want the damage reduced, but without effecting PVM damage/base damage on bows. It flat out does too much damage because of interactions with curse/corpse. The two solutions two this would be capping the damage on moving shot or making moving shot do physical only damage.

Would it even be hard to change the damage on JUST moving shot? I'd guess no, since it was done to Armor Ignore. But would a "double nerf" be needed? If you go with the HCI penalty, that should be enough, no?

 

[chester rockwell]

@Bleak Would there be a way to add some of the discussed ideas to the arena on TC? This way people could test all different types of templates with the possible changes to see if it would create any other OP setups before adding them into some kind of patch permanently. Im thinking in the options on the arena choices, like no tactic requirement or some of the other reasonable ideas. I definitely think moving shot needs it nerf anyway. Maybe it would be good to remove the combat lmc bonus as well, that would limit special spamming on archers as well. Could we also get rid of the 5% wiff chance on dexxers that isn't related to any calculation in this game, like hci dci calc or parry chance. Nothing is more annoying then trying to spawn with 120 wep skill and 45 hci and whiffing on 1st level spawn, it shouldn't happen.

AND FIX THE SPAWN RATES!!!!! Put them back to normal.

 

[virem]

I want it to be know first of all that I hate parry mages. I never want play them because they are boring, mostly skilless, and the character that represents the most dumbed-down version of UO that I have seen in 20 years.

However, The idea that nerfing parrying (making it disarmable) will have a positive effect on the game is ridiculous. It will do nothing but make disarming splintering archers even stronger. It won't even create other dexer templates. It will just give people a reason to use their 30 splinter warforks before the 45 damage running shots.

The problem isn't that parry is too strong, or that other mages are too weak (necro is a bit weak) it's the fact that archery is completely stifling to ANY character without parry/evasion.

Two years ago NO ONE (some bad players) played parry mages because no one opted for the extra defense because it wasn't really needed - it wasn't meta (most effective tactic avaliable). People would rather have ninjutsu as their defensive skill because dismount was the most effective way of killing people.

Today, while dismount still works, and most people would love to run ninja on mages. It has taken a back seat to parrying, why? Because if you don't have it you die. It's that simple. The mage in the group without a shield on gets targeted, moving shotted with 45 damage running shots, and dies.

Ok so, we have to have parry, so how can we still do damage? Oh right, pure mages. It's not that pure mages do much more damage than mystic mages or are more offensively effective than tank mages, it's just that it's the easiest way to HAVE PARRY and still do damage.

Nerf archery and let people adjust to the fact that they won't NEED parrying anymore to stay alive and everyone will start trying to play other templates again. But nerfing parrying because everyone plays it because everyone is FORCED to to play it, is ridiculous.

 

[virem]

Would it even be hard to change the damage on JUST moving shot? I'd guess no, since it was done to Armor Ignore. But would a "double nerf" be needed? If you go with the HCI penalty, that should be enough, no?

HCI penalty or not, getting hit from two moving shots for a combined 80+ damage in 2.5 seconds is stupid. RNG will always be stronger than an HCI penalty.

 

[chester rockwell]

Cossack, I really don't think making shields disarmable would trash any template or playstyle. I guess I'd rather see every template take a bit of a haircut, as far as power, than buff more and more skills up. Suits are already ridiculous and damage keeps moving in that sliding scale too. If we balance pvp templates by debuffing a little bit, you open up a lot more options naturally. If you buff up one or another, then you narrow the window with template choice....

HCI penalty on moving shots. Small debuff for archers.
Disarmable shields. Small debuff for mages.
Like Virem said, archers that cant be disarmed......thats just flat out stupid.

 

[CovenantX]

Ninja used to be a stand alone skill and it wasn't very OP because there's only 2 reasons to even have ninja. Form and Deathstrike. Form has been hardcapped at 0 FC which I am in full agreement with and do not want changed back and Deathstrike only works if a person runs. It does 12-14 damage if a person stands still. I think that's a more than fair tradeoff for a 120 skill.

I didn't necessarily say it was "OP" but, the problem with allowing Death Strike to do 50 damage with only 120 ninjitsu is the same thing that what's going on with alchemy (less scale because of how avoidable most of DS's damage is) but, every single dexer would have ninjitsu if that change is made, much like every single parry-mage has alchemy. it's not overpowered in the sense that "anyone can use it" but then again, nothing else would be either...

Besides, just saying that Deathstrike should be this good without hiding or stealth, just says that 120.0 Ninjitsu is worth having for Deathstrike alone -You don't see any problems with that?
right now - Every dexer is "better" with Archery (or ranged weapons)... every template is "better" with Alchemy- if that change goes through, everything is better with ninjitsu. not just better though, you're penalized for picking anything other than ninjitsu because of how much you get.

Bush. Way back there was a semi decent chance to evade without parry. I'm talking about the old bokuto nerve strike evade mages that actually had a wep skill. I can't remember the exact mechanics back then but what killed evade mages were adding parry tactics AND anatomy to evade chance. We're talking apples to oranges in terms of -mage wep evaders vs nerve evade bok mages with actual wep skill.

Weapon skill + Parry + Bushido +80 dex = evade chance. Anatomy & Tactics = increases evasion duration (~2-4s at 100.0+ in each tact/anat) up to ~8-12 second maximum duration with a 20s cooldown (12-8 second downtime)

That chance to evade, is the same as it always has been with exceptions of the Dexterity & Evasion Weapon skill requirements. so in your first post (in this thread) you said this:

3) Revert tying parry into evasion so we can have evade mages again.

That has never been true. - Parry has ALWAYS been tied to Bushido for Evasion. If you evade without Parry skill, it's because you're human (JaoT for the 20.0 parry) the chances are exactly the same as they use to be, IF you have a weapon skill & enough dex to meet the minimum requirements. -reverting that tie never existed to be reverted in the first place.

It's false, but perhaps you made a mistake (details are important).

Either way though, we've been talking in a couple threads about adding variety back to pvp. If they leave parry as is and leave 15/30 SDI as is and revert some changes then we're accomplishing our goal of making other templates viable and decreasing the amount of cookie cutter shield mages and basic archers.

I just disagree with removing the tie between Ninjitsu + Hiding +/- Stealth. Death Strike isn't the only thing ninja has that's useful, and people still use it for animal form alone in a lot of cases. (anyone with ninjitsu that does not have hiding/stealth). There should be more choices for the templates, but reverting "tactics change" (without the proposed ninjitsu>DS change) will address the same things with little to no risk.

I do want more diversity but I don't want it to change from what we have into two different templates that are the better than what we have now if you do just the ninjitsu change more templates will come out, but they will have common factors- which will be ninjitsu, that doesn't really fix the problem, it shifts it.

 

[CovenantX]

Can't say I'm a fan of this. Fighting these templates was just a constant 50 point deathstrike spam.

I'm against it too, the rest of the post explains that and why I'm against reverting the ties between Deathstrike & Hiding/stealth.. but I would like to keep the option open to untie Stealth from it, but not both hiding & stealth. I also don't think that should be considered until After we get the tactics change reverted, just to ensure less/no other unforeseen problems arise.

 

[ansyears]

@Bleak
There are finally a few necros running around. Continue to let Corpse skin and Curse stack, you take that away and you won't see necros again. If you do nerf necros let corpse and curse drop resist to 50 instead of this 55 BS.

 

[drcossack]

Cossack, I really don't think making shields disarmable would trash any template or playstyle. I guess I'd rather see every template take a bit of a haircut, as far as power, than buff more and more skills up. Suits are already ridiculous and damage keeps moving in that sliding scale too. If we balance pvp templates by debuffing a little bit, you open up a lot more options naturally. If you buff up one or another, then you narrow the window with template choice....

HCI penalty on moving shots. Small debuff for archers.
Disarmable shields. Small debuff for mages.
Like Virem said, archers that cant be disarmed......thats just flat out stupid.

I agree, but in a vacuum, don't like the idea. With how deadly archers are now, not having parry is death. Would it still be the case after an archery nerf? Maybe. I'll agree that not being able to disarm them is dumb - throwing & archery should have their own passive.

I make fun of Paith for it all the time, but I can't deny that what he does is effective: Curse target, let dexers in the group mow them down with moving shot. That's just ridiculous, and should not be a thing.

If Archers are toned down a bit, I'd definitely consider dropping Parry. When you fight at Yew Gate on Atl, the dexers you'll see are, 99% of the time, archers. Fighting there, I'd likely keep it because you want the extra survivability. Random 1v1 fights, nah, not necessary. But toning down archers will definitely revitalize some templates. Dropping the Tactics requirement for specials would likely do the same.

@Bleak
There are finally a few necros running around. Continue to let Corpse skin and Curse stack, you take that away and you won't see necros again. If you do nerf necros let corpse and curse drop resist to 50 instead of this 55 BS.

No. I'm fine with necros running around, but it shouldn't be because of focused spec. Whether the player has "overcapped" resists, Corpse Skin should reduce the cap regardless of the user being focused spec or not - Curse's resist drop has NEVER needed Focused Spec to drop caps to 60. Further, it shouldn't stack with Curse to the point that it drops Resists to 45.

 

[Revan123]

I understand that this discussion is just a subset of the views of the community and that some of the combat changes the community proposes will effect PvM and PvP. Nothing discussed here is set in stone as the team’s current focus is to finish Publish 95 which will not include any balance changes.

· Balance should be based off 1v1 which is confirmed by the community. Rock, Paper, Scissors.

· Moving shot needs to be adjusted without touching the damage.

· Corpse Skin + Curse should not stack from the same “Focused Spec” caster.

· Based on the feedback from my question: Do you feel that removing over capped DCI has removed some of the variety in mage templates and why? I have a new question: Do you feel that the addition of balanced weapons which increase the max dci cap would add to the meta?

· As for Siege, I feel that the Siege community are the only ones who know what their needs are for enjoyable combat. We are open to suggestions that will improve the overall experience of the Siege player base. As a Siege player, what should the cost be to participate in PvP?

· Let’s talk about Tactics being required for weapon specials. So my first thoughts on this have been no, no, and a decided no. But every story has multiple sides and I would like to push the discussion of this topic. I feel that by removing Tactics requirement for weapon specials we would be removing the value of Tactics from the game. This would be a huge change in terms of combat as the invest skill points used for Tactics would be used in other skills. So what new templates would you make after this change and why? What are your thoughts on increased mana cost for Tactics less activation? Understanding that this change affects all combat what value does this bring to PvM?

· “If we are talking about putting special moves back can I please have them back while in forms? It's stupid to have them unable to be used just because I changed forms.” Maybe the forms need special moves of their own?

· I’m not a fan of “Weapon Specials being toggled while casting or holding spells” as it was stated during the discussion this would increase burst damage templates and would have too big of an impact on the current meta.

· I would like to get more of the community’s feelings on allowing shields to be disarmed or why should we continue to not allow shields to be disarmed? There have been some light responses but I would like to hear more meat and potatoes

we're doomed

 

[ansyears]

No. I'm fine with necros running around, but it shouldn't be because of focused spec. Whether the player has "overcapped" resists, Corpse Skin should reduce the cap regardless of the user being focused spec or not - Curse's resist drop has NEVER needed Focused Spec to drop caps to 60. Further, it shouldn't stack with Curse to the point that it drops Resists to 45.

What the hell is that first sentence, why shouldn't necros be running around because of a focused spec? Yes it should stack with curse, necros will go back into the closet if you can't stack them, so like I said if he MUST nerf it drop it to 50 at max.

 

[drcossack]

What the hell is that first sentence, why shouldn't necros be running around because of a focused spec? Yes it should stack with curse, necros will go back into the closet if you can't stack them, so like I said if he MUST nerf it drop it to 50 at max.

I'm saying it should drop the cap whether you have Focused Spec or not, although I'm open to arguments against non-Focused Necromancers being able to do it. Overcapped resists from armor shouldn't have any effect either.

 

[ansyears]

I'm saying it should drop the cap whether you have Focused Spec or not, although I'm open to arguments against non-Focused Necromancers being able to do it. Overcapped resists from armor shouldn't have any effect either.

I decided Pure mages spell damage should be reduced back to 15, they shouldn't be running around because of focused spec. I'm open to arguments against focused mages on why they shouldn't have 15 sdi