08-29-2011, 07:35 PM | #31 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 342
|
I agree that Hunters should be Buffed... Big time.
|
08-29-2011, 08:08 PM | #32 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 280
|
|
08-29-2011, 08:41 PM | #33 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Chocolate's Factory
Posts: 32
|
barb is lame too easy I mean, 4-5-6-7 Spring Um kick win
I lost the fun of the game at all... |
08-29-2011, 09:12 PM | #34 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 843
|
Quote:
http://fulga.u-s.ro/fotos/hunters_dmg2.png my marx cant hit so fast this dmg and make max crit 380 dmg on mages... Ensnare 500 up to 900 dmg once at 8 seconds become usual....cold blod hits 500 normals... |
|
08-29-2011, 09:15 PM | #35 |
Apprentice
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 59
|
|
08-29-2011, 09:35 PM | #36 |
Initiate
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 111
|
Well ngd made a couple of comprises so they are listening to the community at least a bit(ambush being 10m and not 0, will domain still existing) though id lower the CS on ambush a bit(.5 mabey).
Other than that im neutral to all the other changes. Also just a side opinion. Hunters should get ally buffs which would help make their role more clear imho. BUT MOST INMPORTANTLY REMEMBER TO PUT BACK THE OLD SAVES!!! |
08-30-2011, 12:28 AM | #37 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 280
|
Nicely spotted. Iron you are going with barb only with support and huge zerg. But if you'll try to run some time alone with, you'll see that barb needs a way more player skills to win.
|
08-30-2011, 04:23 AM | #38 |
Initiate
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CS (afk)
Posts: 105
|
isgandarli, rarely see you alone. Even to kill me grinding you take friends. XD
__________________
Pendalf, Alturian Conjurer (Horus) |
08-30-2011, 04:46 AM | #39 |
Master
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kriegsplatz 6, Hopstad Alsius Ra
Posts: 291
|
Intimidate should give more speed penalty to enemy.
Long time ago you take off speed bonus from knights and gave us intimidate. This could have a sense with better speed penalty. Now this spell will have even barbs with spring. I always have Intimidate on 5. And it is just 10% penalty. But Vanguard is @mast have@ for knights. Tactcis... hm... not really... I still like that at least something changes. Maybe next stages will bring more balance.
__________________
Truewar The Knightmare |
08-30-2011, 07:23 AM | #40 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Coralville, IA
Posts: 202
|
I have no love for the direction the game has been going in lately, that's for sure. But consider this. We are given small stages, very minor things, and asked to comment on them, or to summarize.
However, I feel it is impossible to give fair assessments of individual changes when we cannot see the overall goal, or the "big picture." I do not like some of the changes, and I think a lot of the crap going on is pure bollocks. If NGD is asking for player summaries and comments on the balance changes, then they really need to give more of the big picture, and let us know the direction they are steering the game in. Another thing: Something as large a scope as balance, something that is so interconnected and fragile, needs to be done as a complete "piece" I don't have a good analogy or visual, but something so interconnected cannot be done in small steps. It all needs to go in as one piece, and then analyzed after implementation to see how all pieces work together. Then certain individual parts of the balance can be adjusted as needed based on feedback, and how well those parts work with the other facets of the overall balance. Right now, though, it is like we are asked to comment on individual pieces of the jigsaw puzzle.....like a single edge, or some obscure piece in the middle somewhere. We cannot see how this piece will fit with other pieces.....How can asking for comments on that single piece possibly be a good thing!? OR: Maybe it is like building an engine, or some other mechanical piece. Sometimes parts need to be put together externally, and then fit into place in one go in the prototype, and then do test runs to see how well they work together as one piece. Then, after analysis, it can be determined if a part needs to be redesigned, or adjusted to work more optimally. That's the feeling I'm getting with these "stages" anyway. I think small steps is the wrong way to go here. But that's just my gut feeling. Okay, so maybe I did have a couple analogies. Don't know if they're all that relevant though, heh. |
|
|