Page 1 of 1

Profession Rebalancing

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:18 am
by Silvana
At this point in the process, how interested do you find yourself in keeping up with the profession re-balancing documents? Do you read them when they come out and give your opinions or do you not care one way or the other as long as your favorite nano programs are left untouched?

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:16 am
by ViOS
I am already banned for giving my opinion there. So I guess I should vote I don't keep up with it.

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:17 pm
by xyz123abc
I dont like change for change. I only like change for improvement.

I don't see much rebalancing there. Just changes.

On the other hand, I didn't want a "Class X beats Class Y beats Class Z beats Class X" outcome, and luckily we didn't ^.^

I just want they to trim OP professions and ql3x implants at level x. More hours in the battlefield, less hours twinking :(
(here is where everyone throws rotten tomatoes at me :oops: )

Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2011 6:58 am
by Demoder
I don't see it as "rebalancing" any more. I see it more as a complete overhaul of the entire game; Mostly for the better.
Local cooldowns on the nano lines, so that you can cast a nuke then a debuff then another nuke line, then the first nuke line when it becomes available again? Awesome. You no longer have to pick the "best" nano to cast, you have to pick the best combination of nanos.

As for tweaking numbers and calling it a day.... that isn't good enough. AOs issues go down to the core of how the mechanics work, and we have band-aid fixes (100k heal and mobs bypassing evades/reflects) on top of band-aid fixes (insane amounts of HP, ACs, absorbs and reflect shields) on top of band-aid fixes (hardcap on special damage, 50% pvp damage reduction, max 40% hp per hit in pvp).

I think Funcom is taking the right approach on this one; The system has to be redesigned. I only hope they're willing to go further than what they've revealed so far.

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:29 pm
by ViOS
I actually agree with xyz123abc, it is change for the shake of change.

In the last documents I read there was no changes that could prevent or correct what demoder says. Reading the documents anyone can see that everything has changed to change nothing. It is just making lots of bandaids over the bandaids. I would like demoder, if you can, to explain me how they are taking out all those bandaids "(100k heal and mobs bypassing evades/reflects) on top of band-aid fixes (insane amounts of HP, ACs, absorbs and reflect shields) on top of band-aid fixes (hardcap on special damage, 50% pvp damage reduction, max 40% hp per hit in pvp).
" after reading the documents.

Many nerfs have been set to prevent the use of the new "cool" mechanics. High casting cost, lockdowns, casting incompatibilities. In the end the game has been simplified and most nanocasting professions nerfed.

Gameplay has been simplified without addressing the real problems. Saying that the problems will magically disappear doesn't work in the real world. Ignoring the problems that the new changes are bringing is not going to make them disappear also. I would like FC to take care of the actual game problems, they could decide to make changes in gameplay later if people ASKs for them.

As I see it, it is just change for the shake of change.

They could simplify the game, not the gameplay, taking out some non needed skills, hardly used skills. They could remove some instances and items. They could stop making new instances that will be empty in a week and instead retool old encounters and items. The item and instances are the real inflation of the game.

They should also decide what kind of game they are promoting. Going back to the conflict could revitalize mass PvP, nerfing neutrals promote competition and collaboration against the other side, less communication between sides. Or they could finish the job making the neutrals a real side, giving an end to the war and making this and org-individual game with less mass PvP, taking out the side benefits to towers and only leaving the org ones... One of the reasons peoples leaves the game is this.

Anyway, after seeing how much I wrote I don't really see any reason to discuss it here if they ignore it in the A-O-forums.

And yes, I also would like more hours in the battlefield, less time twinking.

Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:38 am
by Llie
From a froob point of view, I find the rebalancing a little frustrating.

NT nukes loose all their special effects and now rely on nano burst and damage changing. Right now, we NT's have to be selective. We pick nukes to maximize DPS, to draw mass aggro and kite off some of the mobs to alleviate the healer and tank. We see fixers in GA and use our gridspace nukes. Not everyone is a LE triple nuub. We were the only profession that warped people to cities. Three different nuke-lines with different local cool-downs sounds good, but froobs will zip through our limited nano pool in seconds. And not to mention the lack of a nano deck. Only time will tell, right now Resonance Blast and gridspace nukes makes my froob NT a formidable, but I'm afraid my NT will be useless after the rebalance. In the case of NT's I feel like rebalance will be robbing the profession of many of the things that make it unique.

Switching all of the Engineer nanos from nano skills to tradeskills seems like a nice idea, except that we froobs, or those without organizations and access to the HQ tradeskills machine, no longer get the ability to stack Mocham's + Wrangle to nearly double our bot raising skills. In this case, switching the requirements of Engy nano lines makes the Engy profession truly unique, but at the cost of about -130 to the skills we used to use to raise bots. It might not be so bad if FC allows trader TS buffs to stack with engineer ones.

Those are the most noticeable changes to me, as these two professions are the ones I've played to froob end-game. Personally, I'm not looking forward to the changes.

Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:13 am
by xaatxuun
I didn't know they was doing a re-balancing till now with this thread/poll.

I don't go to the official forums, since I can not longer post there (just a Froob now), So Froobs have no say . . Understandably why too.

I didn't know that the professions needed re-balanced either. If there was something that needed rebalanced, I would say the RK weapons ned some adjustment.

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:55 pm
by Gimpeline
Don't really see the need in it.
From what I have seen it is changes for the sake of changes.
From what I have heard AO will be a pretty quiet place once it hits live.
Hope I'm wrong.

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:19 am
by Krishina
I'm pleased with the idea of engi nanos running off tradeskills. It'll make self launching easier. And Funcom has said they're putting out some new nanos to compensate for the loss of wrangles (the Maestro line covers what Mochams currently does).

I'm going to wait for the rest of the documents to come out and see what happens before I decide yay or nay.

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 5:02 am
by Gimpeline
Sadly I think the engie document is one of the reasons why the "rebalance" is a big failure.
No engie apart form the tradeskill monkeys have their tradeskills maxed.
I have a 220 engie myself, and I have to do a full ip reset just to cast my nanos.
I have talked to several engies and I yet to find one that think this is a good idea

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:08 am
by Krishina
Well, from what I've seen everyone in every class is going to have to do a full IP reset and there are going to be howls of complaint if Funcom doesn't offer one, so I don't consider redoing stats as a singular reason to reject the process.

Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:53 pm
by Llie
Yeah, but for Engy's not just an IP reset, but a whole new set of imps, all different armor (Barter armor not currently available to Engys -- will there be a Miy's Tradeskiller Armor set after rebal?), something to replace my Shining Soft Pepper Pistol?

The only thing I think I'll want to keep is my Solar-Powered Master Engineer Pistol.

=P

Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:20 am
by Snakebite
Personally I think running nanos off tradeskills is a stupid idea.
I mean, nanos run off nano skills, it's that simple, if nanos can run off tradeskills too, then why can't they run off weapon skills? Or something else for the other proffs?

It's like someone bringing out a light bulb that runs off toast.

It makes no sense at all...

Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:53 pm
by Casorinth
Snakebite wrote:Personally I think running nanos off tradeskills is a stupid idea.
I mean, nanos run off nano skills, it's that simple, if nanos can run off tradeskills too, then why can't they run off weapon skills? Or something else for the other proffs?

It's like someone bringing out a light bulb that runs off toast.

It makes no sense at all...
I beleive the idea is that the nano programs for engineers are not actually nanos, they would instead be them crafting the stuff.

For example they'd use their elec+mech engi to craft their droids then use their elec engi+QTF to program the droid/ncu's to produce the desired effect.

yes its a bit of a strain and such but if you really really dont want a slightly better IP template then give it to the fixers! FC are trying to remove us entirely :(