Patch Notes 23/10/2020

[manaworm]

One thing is sure.

Playing a melee char who doing 80-180 damage is ridiculous. A warrior without any " agressivity " is ridiculously iréalistic and make the player feel himself bad.

Maybe devs need to lower the defences of tanks and up their damages. With that we can avoid this situation where guarded heals are overpowered and tanks feels no real danger when guarding someone and being healed. This can make the game more fast and dangerous, more realistic and fun to play.

[Acidic]

One thing is sure.

Playing a melee char who doing 80-180 damage is ridiculous. A warrior without any " agressivity " is ridiculously iréalistic and make the player feel himself bad.

Maybe devs need to lower the defences of tanks and up their damages. With that we can avoid this situation where guarded heals are overpowered and tanks feels no real danger when guarding someone and being healed. This can make the game more fast and dangerous, more realistic and fun to play.

Think that’s a bit drastic when the basis of a lot of the problem is a simple issue of stacking armour talies, probably this should be looked at and aletered

[MightyPhred]

Wow bad time to main a Chosen. Imagine going thru Gunbad, BB/BE, BS, countless keeps, forts, and cities to acquire Bloodlord, Warlord, and Sovereign only to be completely neutered.

I think now is the right time for someone from the RoR team to make a post addressing the community and laying out a roadmap for balancing changes....

i used to main chosen (kinda got bored after rr80 but stil play him occasionally), i think it was about 3 weeks after that tactic was first released that i learned about it, and i have never used it - you dont need it to solo with a chosen, lol

[Alucard2010]

Wow bad time to main a Chosen. Imagine going thru Gunbad, BB/BE, BS, countless keeps, forts, and cities to acquire Bloodlord, Warlord, and Sovereign only to be completely neutered.

I think now is the right time for someone from the RoR team to make a post addressing the community and laying out a roadmap for balancing changes....

i used to main chosen (kinda got bored after rr80 but stil play him occasionally), i think it was about 3 weeks after that tactic was first released that i learned about it, and i have never used it - you dont need it to solo with a chosen, lol

I think most of us have already established this - chosens dont give a crap about this. It only directly nerfs the hell outta knights

[nat3s]

On my dps dok, wls die. On my tank magus, wls die. On my chosen, wls die. On my WE, wls die.

Wls are only good in solo roaming to gank glass cannon rdps.

A properly setup solo WL running 3x Fleshrender rings and Sentinel accessory with hp/s gem will destroy most of those.

It used to be the case that def magus and rejuv/def WEs could challenge them, not so much now.

I'm playing my WE now, so far hadn't run into a single wl which gave me any trouble 1v1.

Edit: 3x Fleshrender + Send gem is 200 or so regen every 4 sec, why would I care about it as a WE? For it to matter, wl also need to have the parry numbers which actual regen tanks have- which wl won't.

You don't go for parry, you go for tough/armour.

[Korhill]

A properly setup solo WL running 3x Fleshrender rings and Sentinel accessory with hp/s gem will destroy most of those.

It used to be the case that def magus and rejuv/def WEs could challenge them, not so much now.

I'm playing my WE now, so far hadn't run into a single wl which gave me any trouble 1v1.

Edit: 3x Fleshrender + Send gem is 200 or so regen every 4 sec, why would I care about it as a WE? For it to matter, wl also need to have the parry numbers which actual regen tanks have- which wl won't.

You don't go for parry, you go for tough/armour.

You should stop the WL Vendetta. Trying to sell that pet "buff" as a new OP Guardian Age is so silly. Stop this nonsens. They got many nerfs in the last Patches.
Likle Zxul said the WL is Good at killing low Level Player and class cannon builds.

[Zxul]

A properly setup solo WL running 3x Fleshrender rings and Sentinel accessory with hp/s gem will destroy most of those.

It used to be the case that def magus and rejuv/def WEs could challenge them, not so much now.

I'm playing my WE now, so far hadn't run into a single wl which gave me any trouble 1v1.

Edit: 3x Fleshrender + Send gem is 200 or so regen every 4 sec, why would I care about it as a WE? For it to matter, wl also need to have the parry numbers which actual regen tanks have- which wl won't.

You don't go for parry, you go for tough/armour.

Yep, and with the tough/armor which wl can get, I kill them on WE just fine regen or not. Like I said, need tank's parry lvl for that regen to matter, specially vs WE.

[Ramlaen]

Natherul was against mirroring the ability, and I agree.

Nath wanted to nerf old Runefang so KOBS were given Mighty Soul in return (your statement, not mine).

Shouldn't the removal of Mighty Soul mean KOBS are given old Runefang back?

Imagine there's longer more detailed conversations, or even arguments, about what to do with each balance change and it wasn't a simple whimsical swapping of some data. We don't need to have those hard conversations with a hundred more people on the forums, you guys are doing just fine talking to each other.

Also imagine giving a long-form explanation, as requested, to have a single point cherry-picked, misrepresented, so you can ask for it to be reverted, ignoring all other context of the post. I'm sure that's going to generate a desire to post long-form reasoning for balance changes in the future right?

Wait, your argument against long form reasoning for balance changes is because different people respond to different parts of a long list of topics?

But since you made the assertion, what did I misrepresent here;

[wargrimnir]

Nath wanted to nerf old Runefang so KOBS were given Mighty Soul in return (your statement, not mine).

Shouldn't the removal of Mighty Soul mean KOBS are given old Runefang back?

Imagine there's longer more detailed conversations, or even arguments, about what to do with each balance change and it wasn't a simple whimsical swapping of some data. We don't need to have those hard conversations with a hundred more people on the forums, you guys are doing just fine talking to each other.

Also imagine giving a long-form explanation, as requested, to have a single point cherry-picked, misrepresented, so you can ask for it to be reverted, ignoring all other context of the post. I'm sure that's going to generate a desire to post long-form reasoning for balance changes in the future right?

Wait, your argument against long form reasoning for balance changes is because different people respond to different parts of a long list of topics?

But since you made the assertion, what did I misrepresent here;

You initial statement is an oversimplification based on limited information that you're going to have.

[Ramlaen]

Imagine there's longer more detailed conversations, or even arguments, about what to do with each balance change and it wasn't a simple whimsical swapping of some data. We don't need to have those hard conversations with a hundred more people on the forums, you guys are doing just fine talking to each other.

Also imagine giving a long-form explanation, as requested, to have a single point cherry-picked, misrepresented, so you can ask for it to be reverted, ignoring all other context of the post. I'm sure that's going to generate a desire to post long-form reasoning for balance changes in the future right?

Wait, your argument against long form reasoning for balance changes is because different people respond to different parts of a long list of topics?

But since you made the assertion, what did I misrepresent here;

You initial statement is an oversimplification based on limited information that you're going to have.

So it wasn't that I misrepresented it, it was that you feel what I said was oversimplified. Would you fill in the gaps, as you would have better access to said information, so that people like me do not oversimplify?