Shalktonin wrote:I don't see what the problem here, as shouldn't healers be more reistant to int based dps forcing people to use melee dps on healers and such. Isn't this the kind of rock paper scissors thing we are trying to achieve?
footpatrol2 wrote:@shalktonin
yep that is my thoughts exactly.
I'd say caster eats tank/mdps, mdps eats healer, prdps eats caster, tank and healers eating everything in terms of support (nothing functions without them, without guard(strip)/heal things fall apart) - passive avoidance eats large scale uncoordinated AoE, HtL eats uncoordinated rdps pewpew from across the map, guard eats uncoordinated single target, morales eat zergs, CC eats guard/HtL, movement eats morales.
Note: The issue isn't that healers have an edge in defense against casters, but that with little to no effort they get to a point where CC - that should apply regardless of archetype unless badly used - is going poof alongside the dps pressure.
Shalktonin wrote:I don't see what the problem here, as shouldn't healers be more reistant to int based dps forcing people to use melee dps on healers and such. Isn't this the kind of rock paper scissors thing we are trying to achieve?
You don't see a balance issue with a party requiring mdps assuming it wants to win (need to kill enemy healers to win), but the same mdps can still do okay against tanks (lot of tools available on mdps classes against high armor targets).
Vast majority of fights are won by destroying enemy healers, if the healers are functional and keep throwing out heals, fight will last and dps remain operational.
"Go for enemy healers and kill them" is the basic tactic you pull day after day to win fights.
It's a pvp game, you play to win pvp fights. To win pvp engagements, you bring DPS classes to your party. Their task is to hurt enemy DPS classes, Enemy healers and Enemy tanks. You can choose between physical melee classes, ranged physical classes and ranged magical classes.
Of the aforementioned choices, you know all of them have various strengths and weaknesses, but you learn fast that ranged magical dps classes have immense challenges when it comes to dealing with enemy healers. So you probably end up preferring physical melee dmg classes or ranged physical classes.
Because, why gimp your party by bringing unreliable dmg when you can bring reliable dmg?
Rework dodge/disrupts to have a secondary check. Have, let's say the defender's initiative, be a scaling determiner of how successful the dodge/disrupt is with regards to this secondary check.
So you have a 25% disrupt chance... You get popped with an ignite, but you beat the odds and disrupt it! In the current state of the game, the spell has been defeated, the unfortunate Fire Clown is now out 35AP and a GCD. However, with a secondary check instated, there would be a roll to see if it was a partial disrupt or what is now the accustomed normal disrupt.
In the above scenario... If the defender's secondary disrupt roll goes poorly, the spell will go through, rather than be outright turned aside. The ignite will stick, but in a less impactful form.
Propositions for partial disrupts/dodges:
-- The damage of the ability or dot tick is cut by 40%
-- The defender's initiative and toughness scores are treated as doubled with regards to all checks against that ailment/damaging
ability
-- Duration of the CC portion of ailments are cut by 25% (in addition to one of the other proposals in terms of any dmg portion)
-- Any check made for a crit is automatically eschewed, additionally, the damage is cut by 25%
-- Duration of the CC portion of ailments are cut by 10%, the damage portion of the ailment/ability by 10%, and the defender receives a 2s buff that reduces the damage of spells or arrows lobbed at them by 10% (or spell/arrow dot ticks). This would be a non-refreshing, stackable buff --- So someone harassed by 3 SH's happens to (partially) dodge attacks from the first two: would receive 90% damage from the first 'dodged' attack, 81% damage from the second 'dodged' attack (90% of 90% ---> 10% reduction from the 2s buff, plus 10% reduction from the 'partial' dodge), and 80% damage from the third SH's attack (thanks to the 10% + 10% double buff, neither of which have quite yet fallen off)
The last proposal adds a bit more dynamism to the concept of stacking dodge/disrupt, as opposed to outright binary rejection of enemy fire, which seems to be the focal point of the 'imbalance' here with the defenses.
Note that the 'partial' proposals here also shores up the issues of healing classes being essentially immune to CC. Failing a secondary disrupt/dodge check will lead to them receiving lesser sentencing, rather than outright acquittal of Sigmar's justice (or Khorne or whatever blasphemous god the treacherous evil doers worship).
I took the time to re-read the whole thing and i really got amazed when i linked togheter over some things what wargrim/telen and road wrote
Spoiler:
wargrimnir wrote:Crazy thoughts. Go nuts they said.
Initiative now does
+ dodge and disrupt avoidance
+ crit reduction
+ stealth stuff
Willpower now does
+ healing power
+ disrupt strikethrough (same rate as INT)
There are no significant caches of items that provide tons of initiative, stacking it would only be so effective, and it certainly wouldn't reach the heights that an average healer would get to in Willpower. Also, prior to Willpower receiving the innate disrupt buff, it was removed from all of the non-healer items. Largely because without disrupt it was pointless/unwanted to stack outside of pumping the occasional self-heal ability.
As there are exceedingly few ways to stack willpower from items unless you're a healer, it wouldn't be like free disrupt strikethrough for your average caster beyond what the base willpower provides. As it would provide the disrupt strikethrough at the same rate as INT, casters wouldn't bother stacking it unless they were capped. It would always be better to get more INT until you're capped. Being capped on INT and pumping into Willpower would be the purest of glass cannon specs, there are far more important places to put your stats if you want to survive. This change to add disrupt strikethrough to Willpower would largely resolve the issue of healers totally unable to land any offensive skills short of a full DPS spec.
This would also give IB/BG some synergy with Inspiring Attack and Brutal Smash, as those Willpower buffs landing on a caster would provide a nice chunk of additional disrupt strikethrough. But then you would have a tank buffing a rdps, requiring a melee target be within ~50' of the rdps, and OF/DP NOT on a class that would benefit from the several other buffs (maybe not that common an opportunity).
It would mean Willpower debuffs (of which there are not many that I'm aware of, summon Bozzax) also switch to reducing the targets Disrupt strikethrough instead of reducing their avoidance. This would, on casters, be almost entirely offset by their base Willpower stats not climbing higher than 200 anyway. Which means heavily debuffed, you would go back to current Disrupt rates or at least very close to it, which would probably feel right.
This doesn't resolve issues of class mirroring, but we prefer the classes aren't mirrored in the first place. It would be easier to balance of course, but it's also lazy as **** and boring.
1-In regard wargrimmir post as other ppl, i feel like ini will be too powerfull, also tank/healers would get access to a too easy way to find we/wh around with out talk about crit reduction; imo good thing but still pletoria of reason to spec ini oer other things ( with possible problems for squig/sw with cames with not core crit things)
from this instead i tough i always look at the fact that all stats do at least 2+ things while
toughness do only 1 and willpower change making totally sense.
maybe an hard approach could be used for statfix: instead apply an hard cap of 75% to str/wepskill/bal /int for bypass let em be no cap as previously; so this way it will balance willp on healers etc but let toughnss deal with the bypass reduction instead have a fixed cap, so now toughness will deal with the bypass reduction reducing the cap from 100% into lower values, which mean you need 1 stat for increase def and another one to make it worth.
This is to allow tank to be hit less harder than other, make archtype avoidance balance less chaotic so that by default tanks will still have a better way to avoid hits.
2-I also quote telen from page 1 of the thread dots atm are really easy to deal with, probable have the same chance to avoid a dmg over time as the application is not right.
Spoiler:
Telen wrote:Its particularly hard on dots having to go through avoidance a second time. The same avoidance check on hit as dd and then a second check on tick. I see the thinking behind it. So you can react once a dot is on and that many dots contain a debuff element that needs to be checked but if dot damage goes through two checks they should be disrupted at a lower avoidance than dd with its single damage check.
3-To work also on road proposal it feel pretty on spot stats usually get ignore for pure defense % maybe it is time the game move back to origins to a more stats approach (rather than pure % increase both avoidance and striketrought), exept the HTL thing; because buff willp/ini woudl also buff heals and reducing chance to be crit + allow easy to spot stealth which is lame.
Spoiler:
roadkillrobin wrote:Significiantlly increase Disrupt/Dodge from willpower and initiative aswell as Parry from weaponskill and disable the renown abillities that increase these avoidance stats by a flat %.
Keep Block as is.
Make HTL boost will/ini stackeble up to 3 times with itself aswell as any other highest power buff.
so i really like both wargrimm, telen and road post and i got this in mind
//////////////////////////////////
-remove all pure % and and make wep skill/ini/willp increase defense as renown pure % ability (road idea)
-avoidance for dots= half normal avoidance chance post bypass reduction ( to fix what telen told)
-stats fix:
str/int/ball skill (primary stats)
+offensive power
+avoidance stats bypass
*these additions are for counter ap drain which will hit easier for offensive purpose (ap regen) and possible deal with ap drain for def purpose (wounds regen due lack of ap for heal and ap due ap drain)
////////////////////////////
i really feel like both wargrimmir and telen CRITICAL hit the spot respectivly on willpower and dots, imo those were
perfect calls and i also sympathize with road idea, plus i added my usually way to see things.
Last edited by Tesq on Wed Jan 24, 2018 1:23 am, edited 9 times in total.
Klesko wrote:Rework dodge/disrupts to have a secondary check. Have, let's say the defender's initiative, be a scaling determiner of how successful the dodge/disrupt is with regards to this secondary check.
So you have a 25% disrupt chance... You get popped with an ignite, but you beat the odds and disrupt it! In the current state of the game, the spell has been defeated, the unfortunate Fire Clown is now out 35AP and a GCD. However, with a secondary check instated, there would be a roll to see if it was a partial disrupt or what is now the accustomed normal disrupt.
In the above scenario... If the defender's secondary disrupt roll goes poorly, the spell will go through, rather than be outright turned aside. The ignite will stick, but in a less impactful form.
Propositions for partial disrupts/dodges:
-- The damage of the ability or dot tick is cut by 40%
-- The defender's initiative and toughness scores are treated as doubled with regards to all checks against that ailment/damaging
ability
-- Duration of the CC portion of ailments are cut by 25% (in addition to one of the other proposals in terms of any dmg portion)
-- Any check made for a crit is automatically eschewed, additionally, the damage is cut by 25%
-- Duration of the CC portion of ailments are cut by 10%, the damage portion of the ailment/ability by 10%, and the defender receives a 2s buff that reduces the damage of spells or arrows lobbed at them by 10% (or spell/arrow dot ticks). This would be a non-refreshing, stackable buff --- So someone harassed by 3 SH's happens to (partially) dodge attacks from the first two: would receive 90% damage from the first 'dodged' attack, 81% damage from the second 'dodged' attack (90% of 90% ---> 10% reduction from the 2s buff, plus 10% reduction from the 'partial' dodge), and 80% damage from the third SH's attack (thanks to the 10% + 10% double buff, neither of which have quite yet fallen off)
The last proposal adds a bit more dynamism to the concept of stacking dodge/disrupt, as opposed to outright binary rejection of enemy fire, which seems to be the focal point of the 'imbalance' here with the defenses.
Note that the 'partial' proposals here also shores up the issues of healing classes being essentially immune to CC. Failing a secondary disrupt/dodge check will lead to them receiving lesser sentencing, rather than outright acquittal of Sigmar's justice (or Khorne or whatever blasphemous god the treacherous evil doers worship).
As a dot class you have to get your full power dots on to reach any sort of burst. You dont want a bunch of half power dots stuck on that wouldnt even trouble a hot.
As a dot class you have to get your full power dots on to reach any sort of burst. You dont want a bunch of half power dots stuck on that wouldnt even trouble a hot.
Current state of game: Disrupt/dodge check is made: Damage reduced to ---> 0
My proposal: Disrupt/dodge check is made: succeeds ---> secondary check now rolled ---> Partial Disrupt/dodge: Damage goes through at 60% of normal
I think maybe you skimmed my proposal... My proposal takes some of the teeth out of dodge/disrupt avoidance (without trivializing it). As a dot class (of which I main one...) this proposal would be a boon, not a bane. You would actually want something like this implemented.
Shalktonin wrote:I don't see what the problem here, as shouldn't healers be more reistant to int based dps forcing people to use melee dps on healers and such. Isn't this the kind of rock paper scissors thing we are trying to achieve?
Something to consider in the rock/paper/scissor aspect is how the fights play out in RvR in respect to positioning and pressure as well. By the time Melee classes are able to push in and start smashing healers, the conflict should be in cleanup mode for the winners as they've eliminated the frontline threats. You have in any engagement, with proper position, quite a bit of range between the casters/physical rdps classes, and the enemy healers. Even with slight range bonuses, for a physical rdps to close in on a healer, they need to be dangerously close to the frontline, and melee should be wrecking them once they can get off a charge. For casters, it's even less as they get no inherent range bonuses (except for magus, alas who is stationary). It's not entirely feasible to say they hold the key component to removing healers during a real fight, only in smaller skirmishes, 1v1 to 6v6 encounters.
The classes that can quickly close in on healers are the stealth classes, and you can ask one how quickly they're dealt with when they pop up in the backlines, it's a suicide mission to hopefully change the dynamic of the fight, get healers to panic, and have the warband collapse from the frontline.
Pulling slightly higher disrupt rates from the healers, in a larger fight with appropriate positioning, shouldn't do much to their survivability in full heal mode. Giving the healers the innate disrupt strikethrough means they can use more of their utility during extended fights instead of solely healing, which allows for brief disruptions in their pure heal output they currently engage in (largely because they can't reliable land utlity). The various utility components of a healer would be directed at the frontlines as an additional factor in turning a fight. Instead, it's largely absent outside of dps specced healers which have suffered to a fair degree from the disrupt changes as they are more frequently disrupted by virtue of having lower INT distribution on gear than pure casters. Pure casters already have good burst that can handle being disrupted, and still manage to maintain dps output.
If a pure caster were to invest fully into Willpower, they would get some additional strikethrough, but since it conceptually would run the same rate of disrupt strikethough as INT, they're going to be better off softcapping INT before investing anything into Willpower, at which they wouldn't invest more than maybe 300 Willpower total, be in full glass cannon mode as they've invested nothing into defense, and have to suffer that drawback in exchange.
As a dot class you have to get your full power dots on to reach any sort of burst. You dont want a bunch of half power dots stuck on that wouldnt even trouble a hot.
Current state of game: Disrupt/dodge check is made: Damage reduced to ---> 0
My proposal: Disrupt/dodge check is made: succeeds ---> secondary check now rolled ---> Partial Disrupt/dodge: Damage goes through at 60% of normal
I think maybe you skimmed my proposal... My proposal takes some of the teeth out of dodge/disrupt avoidance (without trivializing it). As a dot class (of which I main one...) this proposal would be a boon, not a bane. You would actually want something like this implemented.
Dots are already pretty meagre and dont generally trouble healers. Having 60% dots will just be fluffing their numbers. Id rather it disrupt so I can try to get a full rotation that might trouble a healer. Between guard and the amount of heals in war even less powerful dots would be next to meaningless.
As a dot class you have to get your full power dots on to reach any sort of burst. You dont want a bunch of half power dots stuck on that wouldnt even trouble a hot.
Current state of game: Disrupt/dodge check is made: Damage reduced to ---> 0
My proposal: Disrupt/dodge check is made: succeeds ---> secondary check now rolled ---> Partial Disrupt/dodge: Damage goes through at 60% of normal
I think maybe you skimmed my proposal... My proposal takes some of the teeth out of dodge/disrupt avoidance (without trivializing it). As a dot class (of which I main one...) this proposal would be a boon, not a bane. You would actually want something like this implemented.
Dots are already pretty meagre and dont generally trouble healers. Having 60% dots will just be fluffing their numbers. Id rather it disrupt so I can try to get a full rotation that might trouble a healer. Between guard and the amount of heals in war even less powerful dots would be next to meaningless.
Telen, very respectfully, I'm asking that you go back and read my proposals. I'm putting food on the table where there is none. My proposals literally put damage back into a rotation that would never ever exist in the current state of the game.
Not every ability has a 0s CD, such as ignite. Perhaps I should have used in my example something like boiling blood,which would really highlight the significance of a 'partial' dodge/disrupt system.
If the boiling blood is resisted (as you would prefer it to remain), the spell is dead. The potential from it (all potential) is gone, snuffed out by the wind... Not to be seen again for another 10s.
On a partial resist system, the spell LANDS! (on a failed secondary check)
Each subsequent tick would be exposed to disrupt checks per normal, except now they would deal 60% damage (as a figure I threw out there), instead of 0 damage!
In every possible way this is a buff to dot damage, and rotations. Spells will land more, resists and dodges will not be NEARLY as imbalanced as they are in their current state.
