Please make discord an aggressive action that flags the bard.

[Llewen]

With the changes coming to pet balls, this is an important issue. Right now just about the only way a tamer has any chance if there is a bard around discording pets is to hide the pet and use a pet ball to summon her when needed. With the changes coming to pet balls this will no longer be effective.

I don't mind that peacing doesn't flag the bard. It just makes sense in an rp way that a bard spreading peace won't be flagged. However, it is much easier to discord than it is to peace, and discord is extremely deadly. If you are in a guard zone there is no way to combat it, and if you are out of a guard zone the only way to defend yourself against a blue bard (and every bard I've ever seen has been blue) is to take a murder count.

I posted this in U Hall in it's own thread because I didn't think there was any chance anyone with any possibility of influencing whether this change is made (ie. Jeremy or Leurocian) would see it any other way. Please make this change.

 

[Razeial]

For PvP, i could see this a viable action, for PvM....it'd make a bards life hell....

 

[Llewen]

I was just thinking about it, I don't think it would make all that much difference. In most cases anything a bard will want to discord will be aggressive anyway, and beyond that it won't be any different than casting a spell at a range, ie. if there is someone else tanking it won't make any difference, and if there isn't anyone or anything tanking, it won't make much of a difference either. The only situations where it will make any large difference will be where there are mobs that aren't aggressive like cu sidhe. In the majority of situations it won't.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

Reasonable request ... the bard is "affecting" the target in a negitive "not helpful" manner ... the bard didn't "accidently" do it ...
well, yeah could have .. done it actually unintentionally .. like stepping on someones toes ...
STILL have to apologize ... huh?

up to the "offended" whether they'll accept the alibi ...

Sure ... make it so
/signed

 

[Gildar]

<blockquote><hr>

for PvM....it'd make a bards life hell....

[/ QUOTE ]Why would it be doing things for a bard that it shouldn't be doing already?

Discording something shouldn't be any different than casting curse on them as far as flagging goes. It's an aggressive action.

 

[Guest]

I'm not a discorder, but wouldn't a discorded creature is easier to peace?

 

[Guest]

We have to take into consideration working the skill too, not just after the skill is done.
Discord to 120 is a very long tedious process and is difficulty based. Those people who actually don't sit at home and afk macro it are going to be a severe disadvantage when working their skill, especially mid level while you're discording all those pixies

With that being said discordance is in itself an aggressive act, and should be treated accordingly, but there should also be some leeway given to the bard using the skill in PvM. *nods* I hope that made sense...

 

[Llewen]

Makes perfect sense Flutter. Maybe what they need to do is make gains a little easier to come by as part of the change.

 

[joblackjon]

To Maplestone,

Indirectly Disco does make taming easier in that the creature is 28% (at 120 Disco) weaker so when it hits you, you don't take as much damage! Disco does not, however, have any direct effect on the creature's tameability.

As mentioned previously, I think Disco/agro is a non-issue since the only creatures I Disco, except for Cu, are already agroed on me.

 

[imported_Sarphus]

I agree discord should aggressor flag the discorder and criminal flag if necessary.

I think target peace should as well because target peace can be used to remove pets from combat and make them not obey their owner while the owner is still in the guard zone. Target peace can be used to grief in guard zones.

 

[pacific lily]

It really annoys me when people want to nerf bard skills. It only affects the pure bard... those discord tamers or peace tamers or whatever the current template is that is specifically using some bard skill to someone else's disadvantage for PVP won't suffer... they will just do something different. If they nerf discord, THOSE players will just drop discord and pick up some other skill that they think will give them an advantage. Which leaves those of us who actually PLAY bard characters and enjoy that with a less enjoyable playing experience.

So, no thanks. Maybe you can get them to un-nerf something else for you.

Lily

 

[Guest]

Here we go again lol.

The pet ball changes haven't been published to prod shards, so I think it's a wee bit premature to say nerf bards. Once tamers are taken down a few pegs with the changes, bards won't be nearly so necessary. So logic dictates that more PvPers will use their mains rather than a weaker bard. Because they'll likely see fewer gimp tamers, and those tamers they do see are much easier to deal with. So I think this is a lot of fuss over a problem that may go away.

However, the effects for us folks who play bards will be felt much longer. I disco things for my pets before they attack, many bard tamers do. Same as when I'm voking. So I'm supposed to become the target of any big game I hunt, simply because you don't like bards in PvP? If I'm discoing my pets to help them train, I'm supposed to face their wrath regularly, just so you can PvP contentedly with your tamer? No thanks. You guys didn't want tamers nerfed in PvM, yet you don't mind messing up bards in PvM. C'mon...

Again, it's funny that there used to be calls of "learn how to fight tamers" when folks called for a nerf to pet balls, yet whenever a template comes up that does succeed against you, you don't like it. Pets are not intended to be invincible in PvP any more than players. However, the instalog option is still there for you if the barding gets too troublesome.

And, let's be honest, if I see a tamer acting like an idiot in fel, no amount of flagging grey will stop me discoing their pets. So unless you hug the GZ at yew gate, your change won't stop anything. If anything, it's likely that bards will go out of their way to disco your pets even more.

Wenchy

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

... K ...walk me through it step by step ...

"I disco things for my pets before they attack, many bard tamers do"

Please ... step by step,
your (I'm guessing, its why I'm asking for the slow version) hunting .. and discoing before the pet attacks (makes sense)
but you WANT to maintain ...??? ... an element of surprise ???
on your target ...
Am I close?

 

[Guest]

Every "Lets Nerf.... 'Insert Skill here'..." has been coming from the PvP community lately on a regular note

. Again, in this one post "Guard Zone" is mentioned so we know they ain't talking Tram! Not everything in this game is about PvP, it's really becoming a whine festival lately with all the PvP'rs crying about something. 1st Greater Drags (oh heaven forbid a stronger pet), then pet balls (they called in their pet &amp; I didn't know it), then being in animal form as a tamer with a gr drag (oh they are keeping up to me with their pet), now Discordance (wow a real damage inflicter here, ya can't disco people, be nice, but ya can't so wheres the problem). Doesn't the term PvP mean Player Vs Player, no matter what he/she has in their closet for ammo (or doesn't have! How many times do Reds take out a harmless miner, Lj'r, Smith gathering resources then lol's at him "I Owned you", wheres the fair play/balance there). Countries fight, one has Tanks, the other has Stealth Bombers, ya think the one with tanks is going to call up &amp; say "Hey, you got them stinking bombers, we no got no stinking bombers, you can't war with us!!! Duh! Next think we'll see is biotching about Peacing &amp; how it's so Aggressive! Suck it up &amp; deal with it. Trammies don't whine half this much

.

 

[Guest]

Oki,

There are some situations when say you've got a pack of cats out, and you're taking on some tougher beasties, and you want those beasties taken down a few pegs so the job is a bit easier.

So you'll tell the pets to stay safely behind you, nip within range of the monster, then disco it. Nip back, call pets and set them to kill. Then you've just got to keep up with the vetting till the beastie dies. Now some aggressive gits will target the bard anyway and you need an invis, but it's like pre-casting an explosion, you can "pre-cast" the disco, and "drop" it in the same way.

If you changed that so you flag as aggressor, you'd need to invis after every disco you did, to break target and be able to stand by a pet and vet it through the attack. Otherwise you'd be healing a pack while getting chewed up by the monster.

Now with pet training, I might disco my pets when they're hunting to speed up their gains. Again, I'd need to invis after that just to stop them taking offence. It's lucky I have magery, but if you've got a template like mine that squeezes 3 bard skills, 3 taming ones and borrows from magery to take those over GM, you'll fizz invis on occasion Basically, it'd be an irritation.

Now, taking the pure bard who isn't using pets. If they have disco and provo, they'll often disco a mean monster to reduce it's strength and barding difficulty for a provo. Or so that one actually dies! Provoing 2 of the same monster often results in a stalemate where they effectively spar each other for ages. Add to that the fact that to maintain the disco, you need to stay within range and visible, or the disco wears off. There are skill delays between using bard skills. So you can't just disco, then 'voke another monster onto the disco'd one. You've kinda got to hang around, dancing the ebolts as it is

Making disco flag you as aggressor would mean much more dancing around a spawn, that's assuming that you do manage the disco attempt, as you may need a few attempts (courtesy of silly high barding difficulty) so what you end up with is a very very high risk template which IMHO isn't overpowered in PvM at all.

Wenchy

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

Okay then, gotcha self a "wedge issue" ... ie. NOT a purely PvP thang going on ...
Fair enough ...
could you accept that as a "wild" that there would NOT need to be a "full on aggro" flag ... for discoing a "grey"? (wild)
but
Discoing a "pet" should flag you ...

I mean ... someone slips a "pet" a mickey, or a curse or feeblemind or clumsy ... makes it less effective ... as an owner/handler ... I certainly WOULD want to know exactly whom did what to MY pet ... or a guildies, or a friend, shoot ... even a passerby ...
Just saying ... anyone that attacks a Pet first ... instead of the handler ..."smart" as it maybe .... tampering the pet first ... well ... there's a couple of centuries of family tradition that marks that type of manuver ... well ... down ... lets say ...

So, yeah ... a minor chance that PvM and PvP should be different ... I say minor because as you said ... fair chance the wild is gonna aggro on ya anyway.

Combat pets should be under the same flagging system as their handlers. There's talk, and there's actions
Wild animals are "different" .... let the "karmas" and fame and "conscience of Players" be decided by each seperate style.

Fair ?

 

[Llewen]

<blockquote><hr>

*nods*
Among other skills that need some changes to the way they are gained Discord is in the top 5, if not #1.
To have an aggressive behaviour spawned by discordance the person working the skill will have to have another method of protection/combat already on their templates, meaning no new players can have discord until they have worked other skills. (Which isn't necessarily a bad thing considering it's power)
Discord now is
*use skill*
*wait for skill delay*
*use skill on new target*
Rinse and repeat.
Discord as an aggressive act would depend upon a few factors.
Will the discorded creature continue to attack the bard the entire time it is under discord?
Ie: Discorded dragons will attack bard until bard is dead or the discord wears off
Or
Will the discorded creature initially attack the bard when targeted with the discord skill just the one time?
Ie: Discorded dragons will attack bard until the bard hides/uses invis spell/peacemake skill?

Also, if other things/people are attacking the creature and the bard comes in and discords after the fact what is the creature's actions?
A. Ignore all other attackers and attack the bard?
B. Have the bard go "grey" but continue to fight whatever is hitting it
Ie: Peerless. Group goes over sets down EVs and bard discords. Peerless does what now? Ignores the EVs and focuses on the bard?

Also, would you (or anyone in this discussion) object if discord became an aggressive act and also gave the bard some sort of looting rights (be it some sort of damage credit or some other system)?

Discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I must admit I didn't think about the looting issue. I think bards would still have to be involved in dealing damage for that. As for the rest of it, I think it would be fairly simple. Just make the initial act of discording the aggressive act, so you can invis yourself to break the aggression in pvm situations. Also, just make it an aggressive act like a spell, or more specifically a curse, so the mob will only switch targets to you if you are closer, or they are fighting something that isn't doing damage to them.

I realize this would make some things more difficult. Heck, I use discord to train pets, but it wouldn't stop me from being able to do that, I'm certain of it. For pvm, a bard is probably the most powerful pvm template available, so I don't think making things slightly more challenging would be completely beyond the pale, and as I posted above, I think that once bards got used to the changes, they would find it wouldn't make all that much difference.

If you are a "pure" bard, you simply peace the mob first, then discord, or if you need to discord it first in order to peace it you will need something to distract the mob before you can peace it after discording. It will make certain situations slightly more challenging, but I honestly don't think it will make that much of a difference. Having said that, there really is no such thing as a "pure" character of any sort in UO. There are too many skill points available for that. Every character is a combination of more than one specific kind of template.

 

[Guest]

I have been asking and supporting others that have asked to Discord to be counted as a lootable act. I think the issue is "Risk vs Reward"
If you increase the risk the reward has to be balanced. Here in lies the issue in it's self. Looting rights are based on your "Damage out put". Disco does not do direct damage. SO...... If you discord a creature the looting table need to be tweeked to allow for Discord to allpy as some sort to scaleable table. If you discord once should you then have full 1/2 or any looting rights.. If you allow discord to apply as a agressive act then in return this issue I named will need to be addressed.
Please take this into consideration before allowing this to happen with no reward.

 

[Guest]

But if we found that it was rare for a bard to turn up in a PvP fight after the pet ball changes, what's the point in nerfing them? It's going to be much easier to kill a PvP tamer with pet ball changes, the bards really won't be needed. I don't see a real "need" here, when the "problem" might correct itself. The devs have better things to fix, than pander to the wants of a very small minority of tamers. Especially if they may not even have said problem in a few weeks time...

What if my friend wanted their pets disco'd so they could train, but they don't have a bard tamer? I'd flag on them and their pets, when I'm actually trying to help them gain. That would still cause problems.

If the GZ was removed from fel moongates, that would prevent GZ hugging tamers from standing inside GZ and scoring easy kills. I wouldn't really feel the need to disco a tamer if they and their pets were openly attackable. Out in the field, again I'd use a PvP char to kill the tamer and then their pets, if I was that way inclined. The bards got called in because the tamers were too powerful with pet balls.

But what we have just now, is the GZ hugging tamer who sets their pets on others, whose red friends can't attack that tamer or their pets because all are blue. So while they'd get ganked silly out in the field, in the GZ they're sitting waiting for someone to "all kill" Pet ball changes won't make much difference to that tactic. One of the best counters for that tamer's "tactics" is to disco their pets. Then at least the strength of their attack is diminished. Otherwise, all the gimps who used to petball spam will just sit untouchable in GZs waiting for some passing reds they can noto.

Wenchy

 

[5% Luck]

Criminal act VS blue but not an aggressive act. Like stealing.

Not a criminal act VS grey/red. Not an aggressive act. Like stealing

This would be a good case for a solution.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Criminal act VS blue but not an aggressive act. Like stealing.

Not a criminal act VS grey/red. Not an aggressive act. Like stealing

This would be a good case for a solution.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree that this is PART of the solution. Still a looting issue for the other sugestions.

 

[Guest]

Stealing actually gets you something however... Yes I know you can flag on failures, but even so. Better to compare it with snooping, because it's not until you follow through and grab something that you flag. And with disco, it's not until damage is done to the pet, that the effect of the disco actually "hurts" said pet.

Wenchy

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


If you are a "pure" bard, you simply peace the mob first, then discord, or if you need to discord it first in order to peace it you will need something to distract the mob before you can peace it after discording. It will make certain situations slightly more challenging, but I honestly don't think it will make that much of a difference. Having said that, there really is no such thing as a "pure" character of any sort in UO. There are too many skill points available for that. Every character is a combination of more than one specific kind of template.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahem, not every bard wants to be a peacer. I don't want to take 20 mins to cycle through skill timers just to kill something.

The pure bard would need 120 x 4 in skill points, which isn't leaving much room for the rest of the template. Barding difficulty as it is, we're really pushed towards maxed out skills already. Let's not add the extra pressure to take up yet another 120 skill. For the sake of a couple of PvPing tamers, the end does not justify the means. Besides, next thing is you'll be calling for peace to be nerfed because bards switched to using that on you instead. Which they will

Much as I don't care for peace at all, I don't see why a handful of tamers who can't take a bit of heat, justify further nerfs to a skill which is a joke in PvM already.

Wenchy

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

Sure ... a wait would be in order ... but ... it IS a flagging issue ... for the PvPer's.

Now you've created a third catagory ..."friendly training" ... mmmm
again, a wait is in order ...

let's see how well the "command" tweaks work out ... eh?

Could even test them out now, with the set on test as is ...

aggro a "friendly" (you CAN do that ... eh?) friendly trainer gives the "stop" ... redirects the pet ...
almost "just like" disco training might/would be ...
Even work out the rest of the command/response set ...

Brings up a (obvious) unnoticed aspect ...

gonna need re-train the trainers ...

huh?

Well done.

btw ... not toooo likely that ANY advantage will NOT be used ... by PvPers ... eh? (if we found that it was rare for a bard to turn up in a PvP fight)
as long as they can act without getting flagged ...

good chance they WILL ...

As for the "sitters" all safe in the GZ / house .... again, it IS a flagging issue ... for the PvPer's ... you mess with my pet, I want to know who ___
SET your pet on ME

I should have a shot at you ... I'd even settle for a little remote justice ... "pet is attacking you" Guards! *whack* com'ere fluffy, while your master's away

something I want to show you wayyyyy over here ... *sees pet-ball float off corpse into guards pocket* ... come on fluffy ... here ya go ...

just saying ...

 

[Guest]

Nah, my bards are messed with as it is. Enough is enough. Not for a couple of tamers per shard. I've not once had my pets disco'd in Fel, and I've seen plenty of GZ hugging that didn't result in the pets being disco'd. My bard has taken her share of dirt naps around Yew gate even as a blue, so we're not at all invulnerable. Nor are we around every corner.

Barding needs improving, not nerfing, timers reduced between skill usage and 120 skill shouldn't be nearly as necessary as it is, for a chance to bard higher end monsters. I don't want to disco peerless, I just mean the bread and butter hunting should be attainable without powerscrolls. Then we can talk about flagging. But to smack us around with the nerf stick some more, for a pathetic handful of players is just not justifiable IMHO. I want my bards to be fun chars, not a lesson in tediousness.

If disco got a nerf, give it a week and the bards will use peace instead. Then we'll get the joke scenario of calls to make peacemaking an aggressive act lol.

This is a couple of tamers crying because they think they'll be stalked by bards. Which, if the nerf was put in, I guarantee they'd experience in reality too.

Wenchy

 

[Guest]

Discordance and Targeted Peacemaking should be criminal actions against a blue pet. This is a no brainier and should have been implemented almost 6 years ago.

 

[Guest]

I agree with this completely. Could even add mirror image into that. Anything that targets a player or players pets and summons should flag. Doesnt need to flag aggressive to non tames though.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

fair enough ... "I've not once had my pets disco'd in Fel" ... how about the other way around? just checking, not accusing ...
disco'ed any pets from afar? that were camping IN the GZ ? that had Not been sicced on you ? good bard

I'm not seeing where "Your" bard is gonna be hindered/nerfed in anyway for discoing a blue pet in a GZ ... so far ... doesn't look like ya "do it".
Out in the field ... pffft! no GZ ... same for champ's ... right? of the three, prov, peace, disco ...

Prov should definately be a flag on the bard ... yes? flagging should apply, "did/intended harm"

Peace ... really shouldn't be(animals QUIT fighting)flagging that characters/pets are in should remain the same, only the "aggro" state has changed ...
for the pet ...
and as long as they take no harm(while tranquilized) don't really need to "defend themselves" BUT should snap out of it IF they OR their charge (guard target) DOES ...

how about "peaced" follow the same breaking rules as "para" ...take harm, broken ... extended to their master ... mmmm?

Disco, from a GZ ... target in a GZ or out ... causes "harm" ...flagging should apply ... as well and equally from Outside the GZ, target in a GZ or out ...flagging should apply.

As for "alternate realities" ... pffft! GZ around gates in fel ...

drop'em ... they're kind of a "false bottle neck" keep the GZ in towns as they are ...

discoing at gates no longer needed.(what with runes and gates and SacredJ and recall and scrolls and books)

Pet "flagging" rules, should be tied into/upon the handler (supposed "brains" of the team ... right?) ... both sides of the red and blue gate ... should have a single flagging "physics"

Being a "good bard" ... I haven't seen where you've been nerfed ... IF flagging for an aggresive act, follows TO the bard.

Flagging as a whole needs a re-do ... yea? nay? ... Flagging as a whole, would needs cover barding too ...
A "Fair" re-do ... gonna need to cover all cases, yours with others as well as others with you.

in my opinion.

 

[Guest]

Funny, the last time a bard peaced my pet in Fel, they saved it's life... Nobody has disco'd my pets in Fel. Yet you'd think it was an epidemic reading this thread.

And of course, who cares if there were undesirable side effects affecting all bards. If you just want to run around killing with your pets, why would you care about a bard's life?

Leave bards alone. Better still, some tamers can learn what to do when their pets become peaced or disco'd. Because I refuse to take further bard nerfs on the chin when there is absolutely no sign of any positive improvements to the barding skills. And no real proof that this "issue" will really exist in a few weeks anyway. Bards have to draw the line somewhere, and much more "taking" from our skills and we'll be rendered less useful than the humble beggar.

Heh, it's funny though, because if certain tamers feel they've got a problem with bards now, what's it going to be like when bards really do hate tamers? Flagging grey won't deter an angry bard, as the only "essential" kit the bard needs is an instrument. Think about it. Your "solution" is likely to give you more of a problem than you started with.

Wenchy

 

[Guest]

Yep. Peace too.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

Well ! great Strings and Lutes and Drums Wenckin ... bring on ideas for "enhancement" ...
herding or leading springs to mind ...soothing and healing notes

why NOT ???
Equipable, runic craftable, quests and duels and such ...
Where's the brass section ? the woodwins ?

The shocking sounds o BAGPIPES !!!

custom didties relayed via digital vibrations ... comm crystals relaying calls to arms, retreat, flank left right forward back ha'step slow/quick march and charge
the hunters tracking wail, or coaxing call to blind's concealed ...

bring on ideas for "enhancement" ...

You've done quite well playing "defense" ...

reward your efforts with a "paid forward" for any ground that maybe lost ...

 

[Guest]

I'm only discoing pets belonging to GZ huggers who abuse the system to score easy kills. And also happen to be grade 1 jerks. The others I know of tend to also target gimp jerks with their barding. I'd love to see the GZ around gates removed, just to end the cowardice.

See my definition of harming a pet is to do something that removes hps. The effect of disco or peace is only felt when the pet is actually hit with something. Whether that be a pet I set on it (as I usually do) or through a red attacking it. In both cases, the person damaging the pet is flagged to the tamer.

Now provo does result in physical damage for the pet so clearly that does deserve flagging. I'm sure it does already, but it's a while since I voked on a player

If the flagging was restricted to only flag to the tamer, and wouldn't result in any side effects to the positive barding uses (like my disco'd pets biting my butt) then we can talk. I don't have any issue with fighting that tamer (usually I do lol), just as my thief expects her mark to try settling the score. It's just the whole guardwhacking, getting ganked by notos and aggroing pets/other side effects that I hate here.

Barding used to be fun, now it's strung out with silly timers, needs scrolling out to hunt effectively and provo is a great way of getting monsters to spar and not kill each other lol. See, basically, it's frustrating remember the old bard days and playing as we are now. I don't want more frustrations with a skill template I once loved. I want more reasons to play my bards, not less.

Wenchy

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

I'm only discoing pets belonging to GZ huggers who abuse the system to score easy kills. And also happen to be grade 1 jerks. The others I know of tend to also target gimp jerks with their barding. I'd love to see the GZ around gates removed, just to end the cowardice.

excellent point ! the "cowardly/jerks", were and are "my" target ... and with this last I believe we've thoroughly circled "the problem" ...
perhaps sufficient to finish.

As long as there are gz's round gates ... any commands "from Safe ground" flags the sitters as aggresive and whackable/actionable ...
"Innocents" have a chance to enter and leave by the gate ... toss an action out to open ground

puppy

you are now engaged.

In or Out ... innocent ...in or out ... and quickly ... IF you were "fleeing" ... keep on running .... say ... 10? seconds to catch their breath/choose a destination?
peek about the newly arrived destination? decide quickly which point of the compass ... to hurriedly be on their way?
popping in and out, no safe guard ..

Longer and longer for "cohesion" to gather ...
what was the old tune ... enticement? If I &gt;can't&lt; dare you ... perhaps your pet ...

can be called to entertain me ...

Fel is dangerous, well away from towns ... e'en more so.

FROM the guardzone ... disco is aggresive ... preparatory to an attack.
INTO the guard zone ... 'wink' tis to be expected ...
In or Out ... innocent ...in or out ... gather thy courage or flee.

how's that?

Bear in mind ...
houses are next

(probably NOT by me ...)

*Tips skullcap*
Ma'am

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I'm only discoing pets belonging to GZ huggers who abuse the system to score easy kills.

[/ QUOTE ]
So this isn't a "nerf to bards" it is because you want to keep abusing this oversight. You call others a coward when you won't accept that this is clearly an aggressive action?

This also happens outside of the guard zone and the only way to retaliate is to take a murder count. Which is exactly what the greifing bard wants you to do.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Discordance and Targeted Peacemaking should be criminal actions against a blue pet. This is a no brainier and should have been implemented almost 6 years ago.

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely!
Can you peace/disco a pet in Tramm? NO. Why not...BECAUSE it's an agressive act.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


So this isn't a "nerf to bards" it is because you want to keep abusing this oversight. You call others a coward when you won't accept that this is clearly an aggressive action?

This also happens outside of the guard zone and the only way to retaliate is to take a murder count. Which is exactly what the greifing bard wants you to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you truly think that flagging as aggressor is going to solve your problems? Do you seriously believe that no possible harmful side effects will come of it?

I don't.

I doubt that the "flag bards" tamers are even thinking about a single bard when it comes to their nerf cries. Let's not bother testing the new changes or waiting to see how many bards are around when they're implemented. Nah, we'll cry nerf now because we can.

It doesn't matter if no bards are bothering to disco pets in PvP after the patch, because the very fact that they possibly could, is worth crying over. Who cares if there are negative consequences that may go along with your demands, you want to be left in peace in or out of the GZ, and you want it now.

If you want to get bards flagging, then call for a removal of GZs round moongates, and end some of the childish behaviour some of us are mopping up. Out in the field I can assure you, nobody really cares if they flag grey on a tamer. Well except the tamers who are afraid to go red...

So what would you fix? Oh a wee pocket of safety where tamers could hug the GZ with their little zoo. Worth the trouble? Probably not. Next weeks crying will be "pet killers should get counts" and so forth.

Wenchy

 

[imported_KoolAidAddict]

Yeah, you made that thread about your pwoor wittle dwagon being disco'd while your in "a guard zone deciding what red to attack".
Hehehe.....big bad pvper.

If I flag, then so should the "all kill" words.
If I flag, then uttering the words "all kill" in a guard zone should get you wacked.

Yeah, this sounds like another nerf the bard deal. Lets please take away the one thing a 4 x 120 bard can do in pvp.

Pffttt, I hope this falls on deaf ears so hard the thud is heard on every shard!!!

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


Well, I must admit I didn't think about the looting issue. I think bards would still have to be involved in dealing damage for that.

[/ QUOTE ]
*nods*
Ok but... if you are going to make the bard go "grey" or effectively make the bard the target of the creature discorded, should not there be some sort of bone thrown to the bard for this change? 200-240 skill points to use this skill.
I am fully for making it an agressive act. No one should be allowed to discord my pet without going grey. But shouldn't the bard get something out of the deal?

 

[Guest]

Wenchy I am interested in your opinion on this too....
If discord gave some sort of points toward looting rights (not full looting rights that's too easy IMO) would you be more inclined to vote the other way?
What if it only applies to {tame} or {summoned} creatures?
What if they threw in the ability to discord other players for some short duration (15 seconds)?
Or what other bones could they toss your way to make this idea more digestable for you (and other bards who are voting "against" the idea of making discord an agressive act)

 

[Guest]

I'll agree to flagging aggressor if we also got some good improvements to barding. Ideally nuke gate GZs too, because those are quite honestly more trouble than they're worth.

I wouldn't want looting rights, I think I should work for those harder than just dropping a disco or peace. I dread to think how much screaming there'd be if we could disco players, much as it'd be funny, the same tamers who hate me being able to disco their pets, wouldn't be chuffed if I disco'd them and they couldn't control said pets

What I'd rather see is a reduction in the skill timer so we're not twiddling our thumbs waiting till we can follow that disco with a provo. That does truly drive me crazy sometimes. It's not like you can tell monsters to stand in line till you get round to them

I'd also like to see someone look at barding difficulty and reduce the dependency on scrolls for success. It's one thing to give a bonus when the bard goes over 100, but the success rate is pretty low at around GM IMHO.

Basically, I want more fun and less frustration from playing a bard. Oh, and maybe do something to fix poor old provo. When I set 2 monsters to fight each other, I don't want to spar them. I want the one I "angered" with my music to try beating the other one.

I certainly don't want bards to be all powerful, but at the same point, they're not as much fun as they stand now.

Wenchy

 

[Llewen]

<blockquote><hr>

What if they threw in the ability to discord other players for some short duration (15 seconds)?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think being able to discord and peace players would be a great idea. It would make a bard an incredible asset in pvp, and not just against pets. I don't see why it should have to be 15 seconds, I would suggest it be implemented just as it is against mobs. But discording would definitely have to be an aggressive act.

<blockquote><hr>

I'm only discoing pets belonging to GZ huggers who abuse the system to score easy kills. And also happen to be grade 1 jerks. The others I know of tend to also target gimp jerks with their barding. I'd love to see the GZ around gates removed, just to end the cowardice.

[/ QUOTE ]
I could take issue with this and get all upset and give myself a migraine, but it wouldn't be worth it. Suffice to say that if there were no guard zones at Yew gate, there would probably be no pvp there. I am one of those cowardly jerks that uses the guard zone to my advantage, and no I don't want to go red, or get guard whacked dealing with the bards sent specifically to target me (and no, I'm not being paranoid - many times they are sent specifically to deal with me).

My guild consists of one person, me. This is due to the fact that I have been completely unable to find a guild that pvp's where cheating isn't a common and accepted practise. This means that when I go to Yew gate for a little fun and relaxation, I am generally outnumbered - often six or more to one. If it weren't for the guard zones most of the time there would simply be no reason for me to show up.

I am not well liked by many in the pvp scene on my shard. In part due to the stand I have taken against cheating, in part because I am tamer, and in part because I am a tamer that doesn't die easily. Before greater dragons were introduced, I was one of the few truly successful pvp tamers on my shard, if not the only one.

If it weren't for the guard zone I would show up, and be immediately ganked. If I was red, the result would be the same. There simply wouldn't be any point in my trying to pvp at Yew gate, and a lot of the fun I have in UO would be gone for me.

And this "cowardly jerk" rarely trash talks. Occasionally I will deal out some verbal abuse if I feel the victim truly deserves it, and the vast majority of the time that is in response to verbal abuse I have received or witnessed... but for the most part I don't trash talk, and I don't cheat, which is far more than I can say for most of the noble and brave reds I battle against.

 

[imported_Lord GOD(GOD)]

rtlfc

"Please make discord an aggressive action that flags the bard."

I vote no. I think everything that gets used in PvP should have a counter, this is the counter to your over powered pets.

 

[Guest]

rtl

*nods*
But let's not make this about PvP at all. Let's just make it about how the discord skill works.

So we have:
A discorded creature is aggro toward the bard if:
a) The timer between discord and "use another skill" is reduced or removed.
b) The aggro can be broken if the target looses LOS from the bard.
c) The way to gain skill is tweaked a bit to make it easier

Anything else anyone wants to propose?

@ LG
No one is saying that the bard be unable to discord (ie: counter the overpowered pet) just that the bard flag as an aggressive in doing so.

 

[imported_Lord GOD(GOD)]

<blockquote><hr>

But let's not make this about PvP at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it already is. The only way to discord someones pet outside of PvP would be if your guilded with them which would assume you want them to for training purposes. Or if you want this in relation to monsters, sure, it should work the same as provoke though and only flag on failures.

<blockquote><hr>

@ LG
No one is saying that the bard be unable to discord (ie: counter the overpowered pet) just that the bard flag as an aggressive in doing so.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know this, I still disagree. There are a lot more tamers in PvP than there are bards which puts the power in the hands of the tamers and yet this proposed change affects bards. Wrong way to look at it imo. Same as adding a control slot to animal form was the wrong way to look at fixing pet ball abuse.

 

[Guest]

Yew gate is no more PvPing than standing inside one's own house casting spells. I might suck at PvP but at least I'm prepared to engage beyond the GZ.

Isn't the fact that bards are called in to deal with you, a wee hint that there's a problem fighting you? If I was a PvPer, I'd want to do the job myself rather than call in a namby-pamby bard to do it.

You want to fix bards so they can't interfere with your chosen kill methods, yet who is allowed to kill you? At what ratio of success:failure will you call nerf? Let's face it, if you're fighting from the GZ, you are the one starting the fights. You already have a vast advantage in having a GZ to retreat to. None of the reds, blues or greys can attack you or your pets while you're in the GZ. Instead they're meant to wait till their number is up? Then they can try responding, but if you retreat to the GZ after a few hits, what are they meant to do?

No matter how annoying the locals think you are, they can't openly attack you in GZ. Their only counter is to reduce the effectiveness of your pets with a disco bard. I'm afraid I have no sympathy for you till you step out of the GZ. Do that, then we can talk about flagging issues...

Wenchy

 

[Llewen]

<blockquote><hr>

I think everything that gets used in PvP should have a counter, this is the counter to your over powered pets.

...

There are a lot more tamers in PvP than there are bards which puts the power in the hands of the tamers and yet this proposed change affects bards.

[/ QUOTE ]
And seeing as there are a lot more dexxers, mages and necros (a lot more of each) in pvp than there are tamers (with the exception of Seige), I guess that puts the lie to what you said about over powered pets. Perhaps the disarm move should be recoded so you can use it as a blue and not be flagged as an aggressor. The current situation with bards is roughly analogous to that, only much worse because peace lasts much longer than the effects of a disarm move, and discord lasts as long as you have los between the bard and the pet...

 

[Guest]

I can't believe this topic has deteriorated into yet another discussion about Yew moongate PVP, specifically how murderers need this to be left alone for their benefit.

 

[Guest]

The underlying concern to me seems that said tamers want to be able to deal with the bard when the bard discos their pets. All they need is for that bard to flag to them so they don't get a count from killing said bard. No need for any pets going aggro, or anything that will hurt PvM bards.

The only tamers I'd want to help out here are those outside the GZ who are subject to being freely attackable by anyone. They're much better balanced than the GZ ones. There is much less risk inside the GZ so the countermeasure of a bard is much more necessary there. In other words, no to guardwhacking. There's enough yelling for guards around Yew gate as it is lol.

Drop the GZ of course and then we're sorted. I'll be very happy if I never need to disco a tamer's pets at Yew gate again

Wenchy

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I can't believe this topic has deteriorated into yet another discussion about Yew moongate PVP, specifically how murderers need this to be left alone for their benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]
/agreed
Let's drop PvP out of the discussion please.
This topic is really supposed to be about bard not the pvp. The bard will flag against any creature they discord, PvM or PvP in my scenario above *points up a couple of posts*

 

[Guest]

In other words, shift the benefit to the tamers instead.

I gotcha...

You want bards "fixed" so you can do as you please inside the GZ.

There are no balance issues whatsoever with that line of argument...

/sarcasm

Wenchy