Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

These proposals have passed an internal review and are implemented in some way on the server. Review for specific implementation details.

Moderators: Balance Forum Mod, Developer, Community Manager, Moderator, Management, Game Master, Web Developer

Penril
Posts: 4366

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#41 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:16 pm

bloodi wrote:That is the point, if the skill is so powerful, then lets balance that power, not just let them use it sometimes due to RNG.

If pulls are so good vs ams, what fun ams will have being pulled sometimes while others disrupting it? Imagine the fun and joy of playing and just relying on that guy failing his pull for you to be able to play.

Give them a 100% pull and then balance around that.
Ok. If i understood you correctly, and according to the issues we are discussing, you are in favor of a Str-based check for TE (or making it have a 100% success rate, ie Undefendable), making it a reliable skill against any target, and balance its power instead.

Don't know how it could be balanced though; the only thing I can think of to balance an Undefendable pull would be a longer CD (1 minute, maybe even more). And this would be a nerf to Maras/Destro since they already have a hard time catching good rDPS/healers. So unless you have some other way to balance the power of an Undefendable pull, i'm gonna say i still disagree with that suggestion.

Ads
bloodi
Posts: 1640

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#42 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:26 pm

If a 100% pull is not balanced, then a RNG pulls is no either, we come to the same thing, a skill that works sometimes and gives you a great advantage when it does, its not balanced because sometimes it doesnt work based on RNG.

My point is that if we cant have a 100% pull because its too powerful in the current version of the pull, we cant have the current version of the pull either then.

Specially as the current version is mostly a pull + root, afaik you can damage the target with melee abilities while he is in midair https://github.com/WarEmu/WarBugs/issues/6542

Of course the same goes for fetch but this aint a fetch topic.

User avatar
Telen
Posts: 2137
Contact:

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#43 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:38 pm

bloodi wrote: Specially as the current version is mostly a pull + root, afaik you can damage the target with melee abilities while he is in midair https://github.com/WarEmu/WarBugs/issues/6542
That was true on live as youre in range on their client.
Image

User avatar
th3gatekeeper
Posts: 939

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#44 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:42 pm

Spoiler:
Azarael wrote:
Koha wrote:I would rather address the zerg conditions in ORvR later than design pulls around this particular case.
Ive written about this in a few threads, but am not sure if you have seen them Az.

The only way to address zerging in RvR is to address WHY people zerg in the first place.

Reason #1 - rewards are too localized. In order to get rewards from a keep take, you have to be near the keep. This reason is a LARGE reason why everyone zergs the keep and noone stays at BOs to guard them.

Reason #2 - there is no REASON to not zerg. You capture BOs, and head towards the keep (#1) as there is no reason to stay and try to defend.

Reason #3 - Keep takes take MASSIVE amounts of time, and need as much help as possible to try and bring the doors down.



So, how do we address these areas?

Solution #1 - ALL rewards should be zone wide. Much like how it was when a zone was locked and the influence/renown was spread zone wide. This will promote more spread out play as players wont feel they HAVE to be part of the zerg for benefits. This, however does introduce some liabilities of people logging into the zone for just the ticks + loot. This is where I think a 'minimum contribution' requirement can be inserted. Contribution should be given for BO takes (again lake-wide) as well as damage dealt to the door (much like in PQs, once the door is down, it gives contribution spread to the group based on damage dealt to door) as well as damage dealt to the Hero - again giving contribution. I DONT think this should be factored into the "roll" however because then you didnt solve this at all... Players will do EVERYTHING possible to max contribution - meaning ditch BOs to hit the door, etc. This means the contribution system needs to be changed as well but thats a different topic.

Solution #2 - Put more weight on attacking and holding the BOs. One of the biggest issues with zerging is the fact that BOs lock. So you zerg to a BO, lock it, then move on. It requires no defense. The SECOND issue is that even once you have all the BOs, doors take SOOO freaking long to take down that (again) everyone needs to be there. So the solution, to me, is to not have BOs lock as long, and once all BOs are captured and HELD, the door falls much easier. My SUGGESTION for this: Remove the 3:00 contest period where the BO needs to be held before it locks. INSTEAD, once you capture a BO, it caps and locks IMMEDIATELY for 3:00. After that 3:00 lock is up - the NPCs (Hero/Champs) spawn and act as the defense for the BO. What this does is makes BO capping much easier to swap back and forth, since they are not locked as long. Meaning more battles over the BOs, and less zerging from one BO to another. Instead it will require an offensive force and a defensive force to capture and hold BOs.

Solution #3 - So the other aspect, now that BOs are more easily traded... The keep doors need to be scaled INCREDIBLY more based on the number of BOs taken. So that if all 4 BOs are taken and held, the door should fall fairly easily. If even 1 BO is recaptured by the enemy it should SEVERELY derail the keep attempt - forcing players to play "defense"/Scouting. My suggestion is something like a "wounds buff" to the door, where it increases the current and max HP on the door, so that once the BO "wounds buff" is removed, essentially the door is healed back to full. Meaning losing ONE BO, is a colossal loss to the keep attempt. This will also solve the Problem #3 as now a Keep assault relies MORE on holding BOs than on the offensive force actually hitting the keep. You will still need a formidable warband put together to attack a keep, but you will EQUALLY need defensive forces holding BOs. You can ONLY have this system with the first two "solutions" in place though since those guys holding BOs will want the keep take rewards.

I have talked to many players about this system and have not yet met a person who I have talked to about it, and didnt like it. Id love to share the thought process and everything that has been discussed about this system - if you want to send me a PM or chat in TS or something.

Thanks!
Spoilered by Azarael - complete topic derail. Read the rules of this subforum.
Sulfuras - Knight
Viskag - Chosen
Ashkandi - Swordmaster
Syzzle - Bright Wizard
Curz - Marauder
Andrithil - Blackguard

User avatar
Vigfuss
Posts: 393

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#45 » Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:13 pm

bloodi wrote:If a 100% pull is not balanced, then a RNG pulls is no either, we come to the same thing, a skill that works sometimes and gives you a great advantage when it does, its not balanced because sometimes it doesnt work based on RNG.

My point is that if we cant have a 100% pull because its too powerful in the current version of the pull, we cant have the current version of the pull either then.

Specially as the current version is mostly a pull + root, afaik you can damage the target with melee abilities while he is in midair https://github.com/WarEmu/WarBugs/issues/6542

Of course the same goes for fetch but this aint a fetch topic.
I think the use of rng in games is a totally seperate topic. WAR was one of the few games that had quite a lot of rng built into how it works. Consider avoidance and tanking. Personally I like it, but it's a polarizing subject. There are quite a few players who absolutely hate any kind of avoidance rng.
Fusscle of Critical Acclaim

User avatar
Toldavf
Posts: 1571

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#46 » Thu Jun 09, 2016 11:52 am

The end cast kinda mauls this ability. You will never now be able to pull at 65feet unless the target is completely oblivious and remains still. Between latency and bonus move speed from mounts. flee, charge and procs the ability has become quiet a bit less reliable as players are free to just get out of range.
Khorlar, Thorvold, Sjohgar, Anareth, Toldavf, Hartwin, Gotrin and others -_-

Image

User avatar
Azarael
Posts: 5348

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#47 » Thu Jun 09, 2016 3:33 pm

There is no end cast range check anymore and hasn't been for a number of days.

User avatar
roadkillrobin
Posts: 2532

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#48 » Thu Jun 09, 2016 3:58 pm

Noticed as I got pulled something like 300+ feet yesterday.
Image

Ads
User avatar
Tesq
Posts: 4591

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#49 » Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:49 am

Azarael wrote:There is no end cast range check anymore and hasn't been for a number of days.
what you mean by that? it shouldn't have a check range + 25% compensation like other channeling ? or something like that?
Image

Nazgul--> ambitious but rubbish, cit Blast :D

User avatar
Azarael
Posts: 5348

Re: Terrible Embrace (range check, defensibility)

Post#50 » Tue Jun 14, 2016 10:57 am

What that means is that there are 3 checks on an ability:

Start (LOS/range)
60% of the way through cast (range only)
End of cast (LOS only)

The client also sends a packet to interrupt the cast for certain casts if the target goes out of range on the client.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest