Jewellery and how it affects the game

[Lebeau]

Originally Posted by The_Pirate

Well, it is an offensive class. Get stuck in a lock's chains and you are pretty much done for. Only fair that they have lower defense. And lvl 47 dying in 3 hits - much the same with hunter and barb and conju. Its low lvl, can't compete with a high lvl offense class, especially marx.

I like offense classes having poorer defense - it compensates for their high dmg, and makes ppl work together i.e. offense supported by defense, defense supported by offense. (Main char is barb here).

Buwahahahaha ... lock hasn't been a truly offensive class since lvl cap & better weapons & armors went to 60th, but spells stayed the exact same as they had been at 50th. Locks still PvP fairly well (except v marks), but in RvR, they are at best a cc & utility class, not an offensive direct damage one. Many have long pointed out & lamented this inescapable FACT. Locks lack the necessary time to do what a lock can still do. No real defense, low move speed, UM & DI effectively ends the class's ability to cc/survive during a RvR push.

Barbs have the highest DPS in game by far, yet also have among the highest armor defense. Marks also have high defense even without stra posit but their greatest defense really is in being UNreachable due to having such an UNbalanced long range. This has also been repeatedly pointed out & lamented by balance-gurus for a long time now. Marks & barbs are the OP classes & have been for years now. Period.

My suggested fix (along with making jewelry into a simple add & adding a new %-based proportional armor/soak system to CoR) is to boost all direct damage & DoT spells by 15-20%(offsetting the new higher armors), to nerf all bow ranges by 5 units & to also nerf certain %-based damage boost spells: rech arrows, berserk, fulminating to 30% max (or even 25%) at lvl5. This balances the overall damage done & also reduces the overall impact of superior damage weaponry, thus closing the gap somewhat. In compensation, UM & spring would last 12 sec. & thus give barbs a better chance to reach enemy targets. Certain reworks of marks' spells would compensate them as well.

FFS, let's get & be real here: 2k+ leth str's & 3k+ sou cross's are ample evidence of complete IMbalance & just over-the-top ridiculous. Am I wrong?...(IDTS)

[pieceofmeat]

Originally Posted by Lebeau

Buwahahahaha ... lock hasn't been a truly offensive class since lvl cap & better weapons & armors went to 60th, but spells stayed the exact same as they had been at 50th. Locks still PvP fairly well (except v marks), but in RvR, they are at best a cc & utility class, not an offensive direct damage one. Many have long pointed out & lamented this inescapable FACT. Locks lack the necessary time to do what a lock can still do. No real defense, low move speed, UM & DI effectively ends the class's ability to cc/survive during a RvR push.

Warlocks may have dealt slightly better damage than now for a short period, from 2010 balance to WM update (so a couple of months), but before that their damage was way weaker especially on buffed opponents since DoTs also was effected by armor and protection buffs.

I get that WM update increased the DPS for others but I fail to see how that effects the warlocks offense.

Didnt almost all warlock switch to full DoT capability already before WM-update?
Meaning it for nearly all warlocks it was likely only meteor and fireball that was effected by increased armors stats. (Sure some noob is going to cry about crystal blast and golems fist now, haha)

Warlocks defence is now pretty solid with bracelets and enchantments, 6k HPs with WM and EB, 1.4 k recastable, health drains top of that.

Tbh I wish my hunters DPS had been as unaffected as my warlocks since the lvl 60 armor boom, but armor stats just keeps getting better and better and the only class that is pretty much unaffected by that is the warlock.

[Lebeau]

Originally Posted by pieceofmeat

...I get that WM update increased the DPS for others but I fail to see how that effects the warlocks offense...

Please allow me to more fully illuminate this issue somewhat then:

1) Higher DPS for other classes due to superior 60th weapons & not much additional lock defense generally means that locks die sooner now than then, when lvl cap was 50th. Less time for a lock to spend casting = fewer spells cast. Fewer spells cast = less damage done by locks.

2) Higher soak values due to better 60th lvl armors versus the same 50th lvl cap version of spells means that locks do less damage now, whether using direct damage spells ... or DoT spells.

-These 2 factors, along with WM off. banners (thankfully gone now) & the nerfing of several mage/lock spells all combined overall to lessen the aggregate impact of the warlock as a class in RvR. There are any number of threads & posts on this very subject dating to around version 1.6.2 & thereafter.

-If I am doubted, simply research my claims on these & the GS forums. Capslock (Van Da Man) was one of the fiercest critics of the changes made by NGD, & those not made as well. He was not alone in this. Many pro-locks far better than me as players all said essentially the same thing then & many quit playing game or lock as a result. Their consensus: warlock is no where near the offensive class it once was.

-Barbs most of all, & boss-ammy-&-ring equipped archers (marks moreso than hunters) & some very well-equipped knarbs also, are now the truly offensive classes in CoR. Mechanically atm, all mages (locks too) have been essentially relegated to being additional targets & support/utility subclasses in CoR RvR, not high-DPS damage dealers.

[-Aniara-]

[QUOTE=Lebeau;1798977]Please allow me to more fully illuminate this issue somewhat then:

Yes yes, but. Any changes may render the lock even more op in 1 vs 1 situations.

To bring things back on topic, add following amu's

Amu of dragon rage +12% dmg bonus for direct dmg spells. (It would buff lock direct dmg such as fireball but not dot based dmg)

Amu of dragon tear +10% heal bonus.

Ps Also remember the mage buffs. Instant devotion, shorter cd for for fireball and meteor, increased barrier and windwall.

Best regards

/A

[Shwish]

Originally Posted by -Aniara-

Yes yes, but. Any changes may render the lock even more op in 1 vs 1 situations.

To bring things back on topic, add following amu's

Amu of dragon rage +12% direct dmg spells bonus.

Amu of dragon tear +10% heal bonus.

Ps Also remember the mage buffs. Instant devotion, shorter cd for for fireball and meteor, increased barrier and windwall.

Best regards

/A

What is this "spell bonus" you speak of?

[-Aniara-]

Originally Posted by Shwish

What is this "spell bonus" you speak of?

I edited my post, hopefully it makes more sense now.

/A

[pieceofmeat]

Originally Posted by Lebeau

Please allow me to more fully illuminate this issue somewhat then:

1) Higher DPS for other classes due to superior 60th weapons & not much additional lock defense generally means that locks die sooner now than then, when lvl cap was 50th. Less time for a lock to spend casting = fewer spells cast. Fewer spells cast = less damage done by locks.

2) Higher soak values due to better 60th lvl armors versus the same 50th lvl cap version of spells means that locks do less damage now, whether using direct damage spells ... or DoT spells.

-These 2 factors, along with WM off. banners (thankfully gone now) & the nerfing of several mage/lock spells all combined overall to lessen the aggregate impact of the warlock as a class in RvR. There are any number of threads & posts on this very subject dating to around version 1.6.2 & thereafter.

-If I am doubted, simply research my claims on these & the GS forums. Capslock (Van Da Man) was one of the fiercest critics of the changes made by NGD, & those not made as well. He was not alone in this. Many pro-locks far better than me as players all said essentially the same thing then & many quit playing game or lock as a result. Their consensus: warlock is no where near the offensive class it once was.

-Barbs most of all, & boss-ammy-&-ring equipped archers (marks moreso than hunters) & some very well-equipped knarbs also, are now the truly offensive classes in CoR. Mechanically atm, all mages (locks too) have been essentially relegated to being additional targets & support/utility subclasses in CoR RvR, not high-DPS damage dealers.

Oh yeah I had my discussions with vandaman and this sicias.
You want me to research their ridiculously biased opinions on mages?
Sorry but exactly what it is, no more, no less. I bet they still belive GCD was a nerf to mages, buwahahah.


Offense = damage?

Just no, its whole deal, (pretty much) armor ignoring DoTs and endless CCs.
Even if you dispel that barb that is going forward to crush a conjurer in a few hits, thats an offensive move imo.

Warlocks been reduced to something? They are at their fucking prime apart form maybe the few months before WM update.

As for dying faster are you shitting me?
Locks can have near 6k hps now, 1.4k recastable and health drains on top of that.
Better armors reduce the DPS on you, but not on your opponents since most of you damage ignore armor anyway.
Did you see anyone put in lightning or ice enchantment in their armors maybe?

Even if you don't use all that HPs available with WM and health drains, you still feel rather tanky as a warlock now compared to how it used to be.

Im beyond this tbh, no point arguing.

Just like wandaman etc you are allowed to have a false opinion.

Btw I do think NGD system could eventually break the warlock class if they keep boosting DPS on archer especially.

Thats not what I been arguing with these guys or you about, they try find every single change that happen and turn it into something terrible for their beloved class.
If I just suggest, "hey increased base movement speed did actually help locks" or "GCD was not nerf, first it actually decreased you invocation" then they go all bananas and call you names and what not. Why? Simply because they are so biased and protective about their very much flawed view on the warlock class, dont you dare say something good happened to this "outdated class".

[Awrath]

So a discussion on jewellery has now become a discussion about warlocks. You wonder why NGD doesn't read these threads. Try to keep it on topic, they are trying to give attention to an issue that most people complain about. This is rare, don't waste it.

[pieceofmeat]

Originally Posted by Awrath

So a discussion on jewellery has now become a discussion about warlocks. You wonder why NGD doesn't read these threads. Try to keep it on topic, they are trying to give attention to an issue that most people complain about. This is rare, don't waste it.

Never mind the discussion of DPS and protection etc since it has absolutely nothing to with jewelry unless you actually mention jewelry a few times.

[Lebeau]

Originally Posted by pieceofmeat

...Offense = damage?...

...armor ignoring DoTs...

...and endless CCs...

...Even if you dispel that barb that is going forward to crush a conjurer in a few hits, thats an offensive move imo...

...they try find every single change that happen and turn it into something terrible for their beloved class...

-Yes, offense = damage.

-DoT's do NOT negate or ignore armor. Never did. Where u get this idea?

-CC's are less then useful versus a zerg of UM-using, DI-buffed barbs. They aren't at all endless when ya' get ended in 3-5 sec. by mega-hits (3k south cross ring any bells for ya'?)

-Dispelling that barb isn't "offensive" (wtf?); helping ANOTHER to kill more efficiently &/or keeping THEM in the fight is pure support/utility in action.

-I play all 6 classes equally btw ... & actually, support knight has become my personal fav.

To repeat, "Yes, offense = damage." The more the damage, the quicker that damage, the more offensive the class. Locks in RvR are no longer an offensive class in comparison, especially in comparison with the boss-ammy-&-ring using warriors & archers.

As I've said elsewhere, CoR RvR is now an overly barb-centric DPS-fest with all others (except boss-ammy-&-rings-using marks) mostly just setting the enemies up for them with various debuffs & what cc's they can, etc. WM def. banners grant 2k health, so think on this: how long does it take a barb to do 2k? Ahhh, now how long for the other classes tho? In ranged versus unranged, distance = time ... & time is a lock's ally if he has enough of it ... but his enemy if he does not.

No greater proof exists of a spell's lack of usefulness in CoR than it's lack of use. Strong spells get skilled & cast, weak ones rarely do. Same is true of class. I've noticed the only time one typically sees many locks online is in the current zerg realm (it's safer to play one then). In more 'balanced' realm fighting, one usually sees barbs, lotsa' barbs, along with their support harems, overwhelmingly having the most RvR success. The mostly mage &/or archer groups routinely get utterly crushed by such. Why? Because this current IMbalanced game model rewards this approach. High DPS, high hp's, strong armor + armor/soak system built for 50th lvl cap + proper support that keeps these big guns up, moving, fighting & killing = Barbs Rule RvR! Period!

Boss ammy/rings jewelry only compounds this OP-DPS issue ... but it also tends to mask it somewhat by compensating/boosting archer damage in comparison ... but ok, whatever, don't see the game holistically or any of this as related ... "Im beyond this tbh, no point arguing".

?