Jump to content

Dannicus

Members
  • Posts

    130
  • Joined

Everything posted by Dannicus

  1. Not to derail from the thread, but I'm surprised you think Bioware has been doing much of anything more than WoW ever did to benefit RPers. Really, the only thing WoW lacks by comparison is an equivalent to the codex (and to some extent customizability in gear) which is entirely meaningless given SW:TOR has got to be one of THE most barebones RP games I've ever played. FFS, we don't even have chat bubbles or sittable chairs, and considering this game is from Bioware I think what offends me the most on the RP standpoint is there's no Pazaak, let alone ANY kind of Star Wars Universe tabletop or card game. I want to roleplay as part of the game and as part of socializing. This game doesn't provide for RPers if the only RP you can make from it is treating SW:TOR like Second Life, a glorified 3D chat room. Of course, it doesn't help to get into the mood when every single quest treats me like the only person in the whole universe capable of doing anything. They dropped the ball for roleplayers right on our toes, picked it back up, then dropped it again before acting like it was all an accident. At least Blizzard had the courtesy to just throw the ball at us and then ignore us entirely with a nice note on it saying, "lol rp"
  2. Tech/Force attacks cannot be defended against, nor do they trigger shields, thus they always hit. ACs that rely heavily or entirely on Tech/Force seem to bare the brunt of most nerf requests and are perceived to be the most OP. By contrast, weapon damage reliant ACs are considered the most underpowered or underwhelming. Furthermore, by virtue of the mechanics of Tech/Force, tank specs in PvP are underperforming due to the nature of their many talents relying on or enhancing shielding and/or defending attacks. Are there any plans to revisit the combat system and address issues like these?
  3. Welcome to every MMO that tries to compete with WoW rather than make a good, unique game. They release too soon and numerous things that should have been in from the getgo take months to roll out. Especially when a company like EA is on the label...
  4. I recently submitted a bug regarding crew skills. I explicitly mention that I have a max deployable of 5, yet randomly I can only send 4, sometimes only 3, ever since my class story made a companion unavailable despite being able to summon the bugged companion and have them sell trash. In the response I got, I was told my max deployable was only 4... I'm level 50, you retard <_< I don't think most of their CSRs play this game.
  5. I'd simply suggest that carrying the ball caps your speed so speed buffs don't work, greys out any jump moves you have so you cannot leap to enemies/friendlies, and no one can friendly pull you. If the ball dropped when you speed buffed or did a leap/pull there'd never be a touchdown. Just cap movement speed, grey out leap/pull abilities for the ball carrier, and make the ball carrier immune to friendly leaps/pulls.
  6. Alderaan matches that are all troopers are *********** boss. It just looks so cool seeing them all over the place.
  7. If I'm out of combat, and I use my recovery ability, it shouldn't be interrupted. It's an extremely retarded mechanic. Quite frankly, the recovery ability should just wipe your debuffs and dots away completely. I'm out of combat. I should be safe to recover.
  8. Mars IS a very gassy god of war, afterall...
  9. I propose the following changes and offer the following reasoning: Force/Tech attacks a.k.a. "Yellow" damage Force/Tech attacks now trigger shields and can have damage absorbed They are now affected by the Defense stat and can be "resisted", reducing damage done BY the defense stat. 10% defense resists 10% of the damage with a 10% chance for a resist to occur. The reasoning: The majority of attacks made by most advanced classes are Force/Tech. These cannot miss, be dodged, be deflected, or trigger shields as they work currently. Numerous tank tree talents increase defense and/or shield chances, or rely on defending/shielding attacks for a variety of passives to trigger. Many defensive abilities do not affect Force/Tech, making them useless against most attacks. These three aspects of Force/Tech are a contributing factor to the many perceptions that certain classes are overpowered/underpowered and the lack of effectiveness of tank focus specs in PVP Alacrity, the cooldown/cast time/channel reducer Alacrity should also increase energy regeneration The amount of haste provided by Alacrity should be increased somewhat The amount of energy generation should correlate with the amount of haste, such that a sniper (for example) might snipe five times before energy regeneration is reduced. Increasing alacrity should retain this level of regeneration with its ability haste such that 5 consecutive snipes always results in reduced energy regeneration. The reasoning: Alacrity currently is a subpar stat, benefiting only cast time and channel heavy classes. The energy regeneration will make it more valuable to more classes. As it is now, Alacrity is counter productive, because the increased speed of ability use requires a player to be more stringent with when to use abilities or they risk draining resources too quickly thus causing a break in flow and overall effectiveness. Because of Alacrity's counter productivity, other secondary stats are given much more value, when all should be valuable based on build and playstyle. Accuracy, the defense and miss reducer Accuracy should also reduce shield chance for white, weapon damage attacks Accuracy for weapon damage attacks also penetrates armor Any additional accuracy over 90% should also reduce defense chance before reaching 100%, not after -OR- should slightly contribute to crit chance past 100% for weapon damage attacks Accuracy for Force/Tech reduces how much damage is resisted and how much shields absorb at a 1-to-1 ratio and be able to effectively reduce resists and shield absorbs to 0. The reasoning: The few weapon damage focus ACs (particularly for the Sniper/Gunslinger AC) are perceived as underpowered in PvP in great part because they are affected by defense and shields. Accuracy needs to be a more viable stat for all ACs, especially given its current commonality in itemization even among Force/Tech heavy classes. Accuracy needs to be a competitive stat, much like Alacrity, as both are seen as worthless. With a buff to accuracy, players have more viable options in playstyle and builds.
  10. Irony being the quote this replied to about an Imperial Agent using Force Choke isn't exactly far-fetched. I think someone needs to play an Agent through Hoth and meet Ensign Temple.
  11. No one's asking for PvE's BiS to be PvP's BiS or vice versa. No one's asking that I can get a BiS from PvP that is superior to anything in PvE or vice versa. We're asking that PvE gear be viable in PvP and PvP gear be viable in PvE. The Expertise stat pointlessly and arbitrarily splits the two primary forms of end game content, punishing those who enjoy both. Instead of a stat that only benefits one side, the differences should be in what stats are emphasized and in set bonuses. The set bonuses should be the primary benefit of being decked out in a PvE set when PvEing, and vice versa for PvP. It's the set bonuses that should be mutually exclusive, not some arbitrary stat. PVP set bonuses should be necessary to maintain an edge in high end, high competition, ranked warzones (or arena if they are introduced). PvE set bonuses should be necessary to complete the hardest raids and their hardest modes. However, I should still be able to take even my best PvE stuff into PvP and be competitive while I should still be able to take my best PvP stuff into PvE and be a raid asset. We want the two sides of endgame to be stop being mutually exclusive with purpose and value behind focusing on one or another without punishing those who like both.
  12. I'm quoting this entire post because it's mother *********** true. I want to PvE AND PvP, and I shouldn't be punished for it. DOWN WITH EXPERTISE!
  13. There is absolutely zero logic behind PVP stats. I wish Expertise would be gotten rid off and for PVP sets to have stats and bonuses suited towards PVP. I'd like to be able to get into the raid game without needing to start from the beginning of an arbitrarily separate treadmill. PVP gear is good. PVP stats are bad.
  14. Bold emphasis mine. How about gear that is comparable in stats for PvE AND for PvP, and drop Expertise entirely? The problem is in the stat. Having gear progression for PvP is perfectly fine. They should just be designed, in particular the set bonuses, around the game aspect they're intended for. People who didn't or couldn't raid in MMOs where PvP systems were being introduced were at an unfair disadvantage because there was no gear for them to use to compete with players who also raided. PvP gear was a great answer. The PvP stat, however, only turned the problem on its head and introduced a slew of others. PvP stats are horrible ideas. Skill should always have a chance to trump gear, but this stat makes such a thing impossible. It unfairly punishes players who are unlucky or focused the PvE game till max level.
  15. You just missed my point entirely. Gear disparity is one thing. Disparity of a PVP stat is entirely another. I fully expect that someone in better gear has an advantage over me. The problem is that his gear not only is superior but he has an artificial buff giving him more damage than normal and takes less damage than normal because of the PvP stat. Skill can only trump so much gear in games like this. Expertise is a completely unfair stat for those who lack it because it's an arbitrary and unnecessary second advantage. Gear should make a difference, but skill should matter the most, and it's not only unfair but flat out stupid if I can consistently outplay some players yet consistently lose because they have Expertise and I don't. And as I had pointed out, it's not so much that Expertise even exists, it's that in order to have a competitive level of Expertise, you either needed to dedicate a lot of the leveling process to getting a bag and 1k/1k OR suffer through warzones where you've gone from powerful and effective to weak and worthless until you finally catch up. I'm topping kills, damage, and objective points with my level 14 Marauder. I'm effective and strong from an extremely early moment in the 10-49 bracket. In the 50 bracket, if I don't have something like 300 expertise minimum, I'm nothing but a drag on my team and a free kill for the other. I should not be forced into grinding for expertise just to become competitive in the 50 bracket when I can be a force to be reckoned with the moment I hit fleet for the 10-49. Suffice it to say, a PvP stat is a horrible idea in every game it's implemented in, and needs to be discarded badly.
  16. Maybe you accidently nudged the switch on the bottom of your naga. This changes it from using the number keys to the numpad. lol and I speak too soon.
  17. I love how much of this thread derailed into a lot about what the OP never even was talking about. So many people here have missed the point entirely. The key problem with Expertise is that it trumps skill. Unless you can match that stat against your opponent and neutralize the bonuses it provides, even if you are a significantly better player they are going to destroy you. PvP stats have been a terrible idea since their inception. Not PvP gear, but the stat in particular that only factors into fights between players. The stat disparity then, in most cases unless you're a geared raider, only exacerbates the problem. Stat disparity between a fresh 50 and a geared 50 is one thing. It's not only expected but the foundation behind gear progression design. A PvP stat is entirely another. Now, I am a PvPer, but my sniper will be my first character to ding 50 yet only has one bag and nowhere near 1k/1k at level 49. Some of my alts are going to be in a much better situation, though, because I'm mixing in more PvP and focusing more on just doing class quests with them. But, my sniper, being my first character, has rather purposefully done a lot more PvE to experience that part of the game. Why should I, just because I may have focused more PvE over PvP for a character, be at a tremendous disadvantage the moment I ding 50? Why should ANY player, just because they leveled to max on PvE, be FORCED to slog through a couple hundred warzones of being completely worthless and being utterly destroyed by almost every other player just to become competitive? Why shouldn't I be able to eek out the best non-raid stuff I possibly can for myself and be competitive? Why is it that my personal leveling choice to reach max mean the difference between fun PvP and being ostracized by my team? PVP gear needs to lose Expertise and its stats/bonuses normalized to be more in line with raid gear. A change like that would only anger the selfish jerks who think they deserve more than other people for no other reason than because they want to have more than other people. It would, however, open up both sides of the game to all players without this pointless and arbitrary wall between them and would stop punishing players who didn't ding 50 with a bag and 1k/1k comms just because they didn't feel like leveling only on warzones for that character. I'd like to use my sawbones scoundrel in PvP some day but I've been leveling him only PvE to play with friends. I'll not even be valor 10 by time I ding 50 at this rate. Why should I be punished because of that, especially when I'm a good player? Why should my skill be trumped by your PvP stat just because I dinged 50 in the PvE game?
  18. Alacrity only needs to increase energy regen for classes that'd use it at a rate consistent with the increased energy usage. If it takes me 5 1.5 sec snipes to go under full energy regeneration, for example, it should then take me 5 1.2 sec snipes to reduce my regeneration rate. That's all alacrity needs: Increased regeneration.
  19. Thing is, this would add in much more depth to the game. I'd rather they not arbitrarily re-categorize certain tech/force into weapon damage because the big thing about many of them is that they clearly do not use the weapon itself but a tool or power. What I think needs to happen is that they are at the very least shieldable because one of the other big drawbacks of a tank spec is that a lot of talents rely on the shield proccing or only affect shields. The damage that goes through all mitigation should be internal/elemental and DoTs. Those should be what most reliably destroys a tank. Tank specs are too weak as is, they do NOT have survivability, and THAT should be their threat. They can live. They can use taunt debuffs. They can harass. They can guard someone. They can get in your face and force you to deal with them. As it is now, they just die far too quickly, and it's just as unfair for the weapon damage AC's that they are pointlessly made weak against half the classes in the game (such as my Sniper, keep in mind this thread's as much about those sorts of classes as they are about tanks) whereas mister Sage/Sorc over here demolishes everything consistently because he doesn't use a single weapon skill.
  20. I really think force/tech should at LEAST be shieldable. I'd be perfectly fine with a 15% all damage reduction while in tank stance when attacking another player as a balancing act. Still, the shadow/assassin is not nearly as shield based as vanguard/PT, they're defense based, so that's another factor as far as tanks are concerned. Don't know about guardian/jugg.
  21. There is plenty that can be argued one way or another as to what classes are overpowered (or underpowered), or what classes are too easy (or too hard), or what classes have too much utility (or too little). One thing, however, that has greatly contributed to the many threads crying foul about the classes they love or the classes they hate are the mechanics behind Force/Tech attacks, the yellow damage attacks as opposed to white (weapon) damage. Force/Tech attacks... Cannot miss Cannot be deflected Cannot be dodged Do not trigger shields These four major aspects of force/tech attacks has been, or certainly seems to have been, a major contributing factor to the perceptions of overpowered and underpowered for a variety of classes. I can most certainly attest that it feels like the sage/sorc can pump out higher and more consistent damage than I can with my Marksman Sniper and it's not just because of how their attacks function but because all of my attacks are subject to defenses. It also feels like my tank-spec Vanguard is underperforming in PvP because some of my talents rely on shields being triggered while others only benefit shielding itself, yet these instances are uncommon due to the focus most AC's have force/tech damage. Finally, and I can't say this reliably (but it goes to show how force/tech mechanics lead to such perception), it seems like they aren't mitigated properly if at all by armor rating. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm by no means saying my sniper is crap when I've had plenty of good moments where every attack hits and I get consistent crits and my target dies before they notice and then lead both teams on damage and kills. I've topped damage, protection and medals in the same match on many occasions with my vanguard. The fact still remains, however, that the few white-damage reliant AC's/trees are commonly ridiculed as underpowered and their attacks being defended and shielded is probably the most noted issue these players have. The fact still remains that scoundrel/operative was heavily nerfed and perhaps more than they should have been yet their most powerful attacks are all tech. The fact still remains that Sage/Sorc is seen as a Jack-of-all-trades class yet master of all that pumps out a lot of consistent damage without slowing down. The fact still remains that I have often felt just as squishy on my vanguard as I have on my sniper and many people have professed dismay with tank AC's and tank specs in PvP (and I think most would agree vanguard/powertech is still mostly better off than the jedi/sith tanks). So, I ask you all, should force/tech mechanics be changed or reworked somehow? If they could be shielded or deflected and otherwise more reliably mitigated, would they be easier to balance? Would sage/sorc become less perceived as an overpowered class? Should tanks benefit the most out of any changes, more specifically should they be able to shield force/tech? Would another defense/mitigation stat be the answer? Should force/tech even provide a major advantage over weapon attacks? Should force/tech mechanics be changed at all?
  22. I'm pretty sure the competition is being server first. Obviously, a guild that can test the raid content before another guild that is not given the same opportunity is at a disadvantage to achieve the server first.
  23. This thread is entirely wrong on numerous points. The problem isn't ranged/caster classes, the problem is force/tech attacks, the ones that cause yellow damage as opposed to white. As a marksman sniper, I can attest to numerous misses, dodges, deflects, and shieldings of all of my attacks because they're ALL white. Meanwhile, my Vanguard is almost entirely reliant on tech attacks, and they always hit no matter what. Force/tech attacks never miss and cannot be defended against or shielded. THIS is the problem. Not only is this a contributing factor to the perception of sorc/sage being OP (and really why lots of other ACs are, as well), it's also a problem for tank specs in PvP. Much of your mitigation essentially ignored (especially by sorc/sage because of the internal/elemental damage) and you also have many talents that provide defense bonuses, damage bonuses, improved resource management, and more that rely on either defending or shielding attacks, thus they are nullified almost completely.
  24. Shields definitely need to trigger for direct damage tech/force attacks. Defense is already useless enough. The real problem isn't so much that force/tech cannot be defended or shielded but that most attacks for most AC trees are force/tech leaving tank specs as subpar damage dealers. I've got a MM Sniper. I have to know who to target and how to prioritize because all of my abilities are weapon damage, which can miss, be defended, and be shielded, but it also means that against the targets I SHOULD go for I'm still at a big disadvantage over, say, an engineer or a lethality sniper or an operative. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm a very effective player with my shielding spec Vanguard in PvP, but I tend to die just as fast as my sniper does who also has more damage and more defensive cooldowns and benefits as well as more CC. Direct damage force/tech definitely need to be shieldable and I think the tank stance for the ACs that have one should offer extra protection (at least with DD attacks) against force/tech. I'd be ok with, say, a 15% damage reduction against players while active so long as my heavy armor and defensive talents mean something against yellow damage. There's also the fact that many talents of ours rely on dodges/deflects and shields going off. These talents need to work when attacked with force/tech, too.
  25. Most abilities of most AC's are considered tech/force, or "yellow", damage, meaning that they cannot miss, cannot be dodged, and cannot be shielded. This also leads to the notable perception that AC's that use mostly standard "white" damage attacks, such as the Marksman Sniper, suffer problems, mostly in PvP. This also leads to the perception that tanks in PvP aren't nearly as effective as they should be since their mitigation and many talents are diminished to near uselessness since most attacks cannot be dodged, deflected, or shielded in PvP. Are there any plans to address this? Will tech/force attacks be given new mechanics to defend against them?
×
×
  • Create New...