Quote:
Originally Posted by LawZ
PS2. After reading the corresponding spanish thread, I found a post of Adrian stating that "barbarian MUST reach the ranged player". I don't fully agree on this, but let's assume that it is legit. Why he has to come with -60% ranged, while archer will have an additional malus dmg from buffing evasive tactics? And what will be happening on close combat conditions like fort wars? Plus, what with the survivability that increases on barbarian escaping (flee) mode, cause of remark (3)? Anyway, my point is that (3) must be removed. Spring should be a burst MS buff with limited (even less than 8.33 % MS) impact on the longterm or vice versa. Anything else added on it (like spell resistance, -ranged receive damage, or whatever else) just makes it unbalanced.
|
Do you have the whole context of this statement? Did adrian refer to 1v1 situations or RvR? because i don't see how barbs have any trouble reaching their target with proper support (like it should be ?).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentan
And I agree with Adrian... "barbarian MUST reach the ranged player"... but this won't happen... barb hits too hard and knight is too tanky :P
|
About knights being too tanky, in my opinion the problem is not how tanky knights are, but how easy they can be tanky. In other words the current def stance design is the problem.
This is why we have so many heroes dancing in front of their zerg feeling pro about tanking archer hits.
I think giving def stance a duration could fix this. By this i mean it should still be activable like it is now, so whenever a knight casts def stance he can still deactivate it himself. But it should also deactive itself after a certain period of time. This way a well timed confuse/darkness/dizzy/knock can keep the knight out of def stance.