stop the Warlock whine please...

[Thorwyn]

First of all, the gear was not crappy, nor as good as toa gear. It was an average outfit. Take a look at the screenie someone posted here about that rr9 sorc getting wacked. And no, I don't find the argument meaningless, as I think that it's utter madness that a class has to be buffed and has to have the best gear to survive the first attack of another class. IMO it should not be possible to 1 shot ANY class at the same lvl, if he is'nt naked, that is.

1000 hitpoints are in fact meaningless. Being buffed and with decent gear is the norm these days. When we´re talking about balance, we need to set a norm somewhere and it doesn´t make sense to take an unbuffed char as a scale when every man and his dog is running around with twice the hits. THAT`S the standard we need to adjust the game to.

As far as I know, the reason for this discussion is wherether the warlock whine should continue or not.

Well.. we´re currently discussing gamedesign issues. The "discussion" about the whine being justified or not never really was a discussion.

And I'm trying to say that it is alot of other things that is too good in this game. I find the "you're dead anyways" argument quite relevant, as I've experienced it alot myself, and I'm sure you have too when you come to think of it.

No... see, that´s exactly the point. Whenever I`m running into a "oh well, I`m dead" situation, I know that *I* have done something wrong. I either got too bold and stepped too close to the tower, or I failed to see the assassin setting up a PA. Whatever it is, I know there are tools to counter it. There is no counter against massive, uninterruptable, "semi-instant" damage though. I cant´even IP it when the WL is puking all his chambers on me.

You don't get the bigger picture. People are complaining about 1 class being able to kill another class within 3 seconds. In the meanwhile the 8 mids in that movie is capable of killing 100 albs in the same amount of time. That should not be possible. I fail to get your point, this difference you speaking of.

So you say: a lion fighting a rabbit is fair, because 500.000 lemmings are jumping off the cliff?!

First off... inferior numbers in a defensive position are OF COURSE able to hold off larger forces. That´s the reason why people invented the concept of castles in the middle ages. If you´re making use of the defensive potential of your position, you can multiply your effectivity for the loss of offensive capacity and of course mobility. That´s the same in RL, in all kind of strategy games and everywhere, where terrain is coming into play. The difference is pretty obvious. I know: 8 hibs are in this tower, casting their funny pbaoe spells. My options: a. let them have the fooking tower and sod off. b. gather some mates and try to get into their range. In case of b., I know that I`m fighting from a inferior position, I need to get into their range and cross the barricade their defensive stance grants them. I.e. I have to make a decision to go up there and fight. Now, that´s fundamentally different from running around, bumping into the 2000 unit range of a warlock, see his arms wave and then eat some dirt with NO way whatsoever to keep him from casting.

I repeat - It should not be f****ing possible, its insane. If 100 + albs decides that they want to kill 8 mids, they damn well should be able to.

If numbers would be the only indicator of strategy, it would be damn easy to fight and win a battle. I recently played a game of chess against someone. I was a rook, 2 knights and 3 pawns up. Unfortunately, my opponent checkmated me in 1. Hope you get my point.

 

[old.Whoodoo]

44% matter resist and fully buffed i get side stun on warlock, /face 638, 694, 583 hits me insta killing me, didn't have time to IP. 30% damage reduction is more than fair, you will no longer insta kill people, how unfortunate.

LOL quotes the LOS bugged animist and baseline stun and nuke-the-shit-out-of chanter, stfu! FYI 3 chambers = 6 seconds, 3 seconds longer than it takes a chanter to nuke my arse back to Svasud.

 

[war elephant]

I'll resist the temptation to make a cheap comment about how this reflects on the average mid-player's mentality

But you just did.

 

[Illtar]

Firstly, has any non mid actually seen the end result of this nerf, puttting your predjadices aside? No? 30% reduction in all damage...doesnt that seem a little harsh, if not lets compare, Ill use my lock as a basis, so these figures are not exact, but a decent guess:

Current chamber damage:

DD+LT chamber = 180+500 : 3 chambers = around 2k if 0 resist in 6 seconds

Post nerf

DD+LT chamber = 140+350 : 3 chambers = around 1400 if 0 resist in 6 seconds

Now from experience:

Fire Wizz = (22% heat resist) 1200 - 1686(!!!) single bolt
Sorc with MoC = 15 secs, 1.5 per cast, lifetap = 350(ish) x 10 = 3500
Chanter = 9 sec base stun, pet + caster nuke in 6 seconds up to 3k damage

Theres lots of OPd classes, chain pet stunning, tamable pets that nuke and stun and root, pet spamming, mental RR5 abilities, in fact lots that mids have been complaing about for a long time, yet nothing has been done, so finally we get a comparable class and guess what. Locks are OPd no doubt, but the nerf bat here swung a lil hard tbh.

If you have never really played mid, you cant really compare, so please dont try. Sure, you have your gripes about a single class, like insta mezz thats resisted by 50% of enemies, or how hard a zerker can hit, but I dont see you admitting your realms classes are nasty.

Then look at the stats for Valkyrie, what a waste class that is, Thane Mark II and we still cant get it right, no one wants to play them, simple.

IMO 30% is way too much, sure we can kill 1 vs 1, but that doesnt happen a lot, normally they are the best leechers around, looking for fg fights and picking whats left, i sure do!

Now think of your eld / wizz / sorc etc and think 30% reduction, see how you feel.

As for being a brainless toon to play, try it, and compare to a sorc mezz - moc - nuke...hardly rocket science either is it.

Your damage numbers for the warlock spells are way way off.

The LT hits for 750ish atm not 500.

And somehow post nerf you get it to that:

Warlock delve 191 LT hits for 350.
While Sorc delve 179 LT * 0.75 (moc) = 135, hits for 350.

Yeah that makes sense...

And you didnt even include UI Casts from the warlock.

A warlock can (atleast pre nerf) run into 8 ppl and kill one even though all the ppl are attacking him, if there is no DI up, that sucks utterly.

A warlock can do Massive damage Uninteruptable. That is what all the whine has been about.

Btw just saw you said 0 resists.... lol

At 0 resists a sorc will not hit for only 350 on moc.

And a warlocks LT will hit for around 900 prenerf.

And the DD surely doesnt hit for 180...

And yeah i am talking 50hex/(19-20)WC

Even if the warlock only had 43 hex: 163 delve > 179 * 0.75 (thats the sorc with moc)

 

[Illtar]

LOL quotes the LOS bugged animist and baseline stun and nuke-the-shit-out-of chanter, stfu! FYI 3 chambers = 6 seconds, 3 seconds longer than it takes a chanter to nuke my arse back to Svasud.

You just dont get it?

the 3 damage numbers he posted was likely.

Chamber (2 spells) + 1 UI LT:

This sequence takes 0.8 sec on a twinked warlock, and is completely uninteruptable.

For Arguments sake, a chanter to do anything similar would take:

2 sec QC Stun
2 sec more being interupted
then 4*1.1 sec for 4 nukes.

Yeah 0.8 secs Unpurgeable death is the same as a death that takes 8 sec can be purged, and others can interupt him.

 

[Ingafgrinn Macabre]

Your damage numbers for the warlock spells are way way off.

The LT hits for 750ish atm not 500.

And somehow post nerf you get it to that:

Warlock delve 191 LT hits for 350.
While Sorc delve 179 LT * 0.75 (moc) = 135, hits for 350.

Yeah that makes sense...

And you didnt even include UI Casts from the warlock.

A warlock can (atleast pre nerf) run into 8 ppl and kill one even though all the ppl are attacking him, if there is no DI up, that sucks utterly.

A warlock can do Massive damage Uninteruptable. That is what all the whine has been about.

Btw just saw you said 0 resists.... lol

At 0 resists a sorc will not hit for only 350 on moc.

And a warlocks LT will hit for around 900 prenerf.

And the DD surely doesnt hit for 180...

And yeah i am talking 50hex/(19-20)WC

Even if the warlock only had 43 hex: 163 delve > 179 * 0.75 (thats the sorc with moc)

You don't need to doubletap every button in windows. Enter (Return) ís one of them. One time really is enough. It's becoming quite unreadable should you tap it too often.

 

[Vilje]

*All you said* =)

Aye, the fact that 1000 hp is meaningless is what I'm talking about.. It should'nt be like that, but thats not the players fault, thats the the developers fault. Just like I think that 8 mids being able to slaughter 100 + albs ( even though they got that bad ass defence position ) is insane.

As for the gear, I agree with you. I can't compare a guy with semi decent gear to a guy with good gear in this game, however I used that as a tool to show that I think it is bullshit that a guy with good gear can oneshot a guy with semi decent gear. I think it should'nt be like that. A guy with good gear should have an advantage, sure, but not like that imo. With the best gear I could maybe tweak my hp up to 1100 unbuffed, if I go for casting speed etc in it. In short, I think good gear and buffs matters too much, especially with toa bonuses.

When I picture a "oh well, I'm dead situation", I think mostly of a situation in which you run solo, and some guy suprise you from behind. Thats the situation I think a regular caster can be compared to a warlock, as it is capable of dealing similar amount of dmg in the same amount of time, unless it is interupted. For which you ofc need super-reflexes.

As for the game designing issues, thats what im on about here. Im saying that i don't like the fact that a guy can one shot me just because I dont have the best gear to all times, and that 8 mids can kill 100+ albs, if they have the right setup and arena for it. Im not talking "holding off"/"stalling" the albs. Im talking slaughter. And with all the abilities of the 100 albs, they did'nt even stand a chance.

So you say: a lion fighting a rabbit is fair, because 500.000 lemmings are jumping off the cliff?!

To be honest, thats maybe what I'm saying, 'cause I did'nt get this one

I thought more in the lines of this: "It does'nt matter if a lion kills a rabbit, 'cause the rabbit is also capable of killing nowadays. A lion can kill 1 or 2 rabbits, still 8 midgardian rabbits can kill 100 alb-rabbits.", or something like that. How fast one can die in daoc nowadays reminds me of counter-strike. Headshot I tell you.

 

[Vilje]

First off... inferior numbers in a defensive position are OF COURSE able to hold off larger forces. That´s the reason why people invented the concept of castles in the middle ages. If you´re making use of the defensive potential of your position, you can multiply your effectivity for the loss of offensive capacity and of course mobility. That´s the same in RL, in all kind of strategy games and everywhere, where terrain is coming into play. The difference is pretty obvious. I know: 8 hibs are in this tower, casting their funny pbaoe spells. My options: a. let them have the fooking tower and sod off. b. gather some mates and try to get into their range. In case of b., I know that I`m fighting from a inferior position, I need to get into their range and cross the barricade their defensive stance grants them. I.e. I have to make a decision to go up there and fight. Now, that´s fundamentally different from running around, bumping into the 2000 unit range of a warlock, see his arms wave and then eat some dirt with NO way whatsoever to keep him from casting.

Oh, and yes, thats true about the middle ages and about the castles. However, I've never heard about any attack on a fortress/castle where the defenders won when they were outnumbered 15 : 1 Attackers have tools of their own, which is exactly why I think that 8 mids should'nt be able to slaughter 100 albs. One of them tools is zerg, which should beat 8 mids hanging on a roof top anytime. But still its not possible =)

 

[Bracken]

But you just did.

Well done - have a cookie

 

[Maoni]

I've heard all the whines about warlock already.. and tbqh, it's making me sick to the stomach.
Sure, it's an op'd char, and it can almost instakill a character... 1.
Now compare this, for instance, with a duo of Bainshee's. They can kill an entire group in 1 second more then a warlock can kill 1 char.
Or how bout a Vampiir... he can kill an entire group on his own pausing halfway to smoke a cigarette... and cast while attacking in melee...

Only char that didn't come out just as strong is the heretic, but hey, atleast albies got the Zerg V Realmability on all their char's

Anyway... it's always the mids that get the nerfs. Getting really demoralizing now...

Oh cool I can kill a fullgroup with my vampiir.....omg nerf me!!!
right...mate thats first class craptalk =P

Do you really think its ok for a class to take down 2500 hp in 1-2 seconds?
A warlock can do that, while a banshee really nukes hard, thats true, but the nuke damage cant be compared to warlocks output..
I hope they nerfed warlocks down to same level as other casters now so they cant "earn" rp in a way it wasnt supposed to be..

 

[Elendar]

horray for the warlock nerf, i plan to point and laugh at any i see today

vamps and banshees are a little op, but nothing like warlock

 

[Flimgoblin]

Oh, and yes, thats true about the middle ages and about the castles. However, I've never heard about any attack on a fortress/castle where the defenders won when they were outnumbered 15 : 1 Attackers have tools of their own, which is exactly why I think that 8 mids should'nt be able to slaughter 100 albs. One of them tools is zerg, which should beat 8 mids hanging on a roof top anytime. But still its not possible =)

how about 300:1 and they had artillery...

http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/northberwick/tantalloncastle/

 

[Roken]

how about 300:1 and they had artillery...

http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/northberwick/tantalloncastle/

30:1 but still cool

 

[Ingafgrinn Macabre]

<snip>


EDIT: nm... roken beat me

 

[Zede]

Warlocks pose no real problem for me, hit moc, insta heal, stun and u have one scared warlock, Bainshees however.........thats were the real nerf is needed.

 

[Killerbee]

Oh, and yes, thats true about the middle ages and about the castles. However, I've never heard about any attack on a fortress/castle where the defenders won when they were outnumbered 15 : 1

Then time to study the Hungarian history.

 

[Thorwyn]

We´re drifting into an OT here, but still ...

As for the gear, I agree with you. I can't compare a guy with semi decent gear to a guy with good gear in this game, however I used that as a tool to show that I think it is bullshit that a guy with good gear can oneshot a guy with semi decent gear. I think it should'nt be like that. A guy with good gear should have an advantage, sure, but not like that imo. With the best gear I could maybe tweak my hp up to 1100 unbuffed, if I go for casting speed etc in it. In short, I think good gear and buffs matters too much, especially with toa bonuses.

Just consider your equipment another part of your character. Just like a lvl 40 char won´t stand a chance against a lvl 50 char, an under-equipped char won´t survive against a fully toa-ed char. That´s just a normal game mechanism. Hitting level 50 is not the end, there´s still room for developement and that´s a good thing, becuase otherwise, the game would die.
If the difference was smaller, people wouldn´t need to take care of their characters and the PvE which would lead a stalling situation. However, if you´re more or less forced to keep your character up to date (equipment-wise), you´ll notice the difference. Some people may say that´s unfair and BBs and TOA etc. are spoiling the game for the casual players, but that´s how the game works. Success in a MMORPG = time. If you´re not willing to spend some time to keep your character in shape, then you need to accept the drawbacks. To an extend, I agree that the BB situation is pretty annoying. That´s one real "flaw" in the design, however, a flaw that´s creating money for the devs.

Oh, and yes, thats true about the middle ages and about the castles. However, I've never heard about any attack on a fortress/castle where the defenders won when they were outnumbered 15 : 1 Attackers have tools of their own, which is exactly why I think that 8 mids should'nt be able to slaughter 100 albs. One of them tools is zerg, which should beat 8 mids hanging on a roof top anytime. But still its not possible =)

I know what you mean, but it´s impossible to create a situation where the chances are 100% realisitc, simply because we´re talking about people casting spells etc.etc.
Historically, there are a couple of impressive performances of outnumbered forces. Battle of Crecy saw a 1:3 ration against the english and they still won (in a more or less open field!) due to superior equipment (sic! ), terrain and better strategy. Agincourt had an even higher ratio, 1:6 approximately.
I`m sure that if you´re browsing some medieval history, you´ll find some more spectacular examples, especially in siege situations.