Force Barrier to be like stealth in APG nodes

[Ruhun]

I look at Lightning Sorcs as the best example of a nerf gone wrong. People were exactly right that Force Storm was broken. In response, the developers over nerfed that power and nerfed a whole lot of other things that were not broken besides. I do not want to see that happen again to any spec or class.

 

I don't want to see that happen either, hell I want to go back to playing my Lightning Sorc and feeling like I'm contributing, not hitting people with a wet noodle.

The problem is that people usually come here to vent, and more often than not it's after seeing 6 sorcs (four madness and two corruption) on the enemy team farming theirs.

I see 4 sorc premades all the time, and the dominate every single match.

When things get too hairy, one of the sorcs logs and uses his PT tank to protect the healer and continue farming regs.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Ruhun

[Master-Nala]

I don't want to see that happen either, hell I want to go back to playing my Lightning Sorc and feeling like I'm contributing, not hitting people with a wet noodle.

The problem is that people usually come here to vent, and more often than not it's after seeing 6 sorcs (four madness and two corruption) on the enemy team farming theirs.

I see 4 sorc premades all the time, and the dominate every single match.

When things get too hairy, one of the sorcs logs and uses his PT tank to protect the healer and continue farming regs.

 

No argument, but I recall a video recently where someone took a premade of all Snipers and wrecked. Any class stacked on each other can work well.

 

As for venting, I know people are venting, but they do themselves no favors by their overreach.

[AlrikFassbauer]

People were exactly right that Force Storm was broken. In response, the developers over nerfed that power and nerfed a whole lot of other things that were not broken besides.

 

Unfortunately, "over-nerfing" is Biowares *usual* approach to perform any "balancing".

 

I really don't recall *any* balancing move by Bioware of which people said "this was done right". I only remember "over-nerfs". Like Freighter Flyby.

 

This is what PvE people think of Gunslingers / Snipers nowadays : http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=881356

 

Yes, I'm biased.

[Ruhun]

No argument, but I recall a video recently where someone took a premade of all Snipers and wrecked. Any class stacked on each other can work well.

 

As for venting, I know people are venting, but they do themselves no favors by their overreach.

 

I saw that video, it was 8 Snipers though.

4 sorcs can change the tide of the match considerably.

 

I've run 3 mara teams and we absolutely rekt, but we also died a few times.

Stacking Sorcs all but guaranties immortality if they run in packs, and if they have a pocket tank then it's GG.

[Lhancelot]

I saw that video, it was 8 Snipers though.

4 sorcs can change the tide of the match considerably.

 

I've run 3 mara teams and we absolutely rekt, but we also died a few times.

Stacking Sorcs all but guaranties immortality if they run in packs, and if they have a pocket tank then it's GG.

 

Some classes are crap if you stack them. Lethality ops stacked as a trio? laugh. 3 lightning sorcs? laugh. 3 madness sorcs? Not laughing.

 

There are some classes that if stacked are formidable if they work together, but with madness sorcs they do so much dot spreading and single target damage that they can be uncoordinated and wreck a team as long as the players behind them are not bad.

 

For other classes to stack and win, they really have to coordinate unless they are up against an awful team.

[Ruhun]

Some classes are crap if you stack them. Lethality ops stacked as a trio? laugh. 3 lightning sorcs? laugh. 3 madness sorcs? Not laughing.

 

There are some classes that if stacked are formidable if they work together, but with madness sorcs they do so much dot spreading and single target damage that they can be uncoordinated and wreck a team as long as the players behind them are not bad.

 

For other classes to stack and win, they really have to coordinate unless they are up against an awful team.

 

We ran two Carnage and one Anni.

They would focus on the poor bastard I was tunneling and we moved on from there.

 

Three Madness Sorcs with a healer don't need to focus target, they can just apply DoTs and watch **** fall, and if they get focused they have enough self heals and a pocket healer to boot.

They will not die.

[Tsetso]

Some classes are crap if you stack them. Lethality ops stacked as a trio? laugh. 3 lightning sorcs? laugh

 

watch and laugh

[QuiveringPotato]

watch and laugh

 

This was back when Lethality actually had good damage, though.

[Tsetso]

This was back when Lethality actually had good damage, though.

 

true but now we have really nice heals

[Lhancelot]

This was back when Lethality actually had good damage, though.

 

Yeah man, those were the bad days though. Now you got awesome heals! Heals > damage all day, amirite?! JA?!?!

[Master-Nala]

Yeah man, those were the bad days though. Now you got awesome heals! Heals > damage all day, amirite?! JA?!?!

 

I seriously had to log off in frustration when my Ruffian Scoundrel had more heals than damage 3 WZs in a row. I know I'm bad, but still.

[Lhancelot]

I seriously had to log off in frustration when my Ruffian Scoundrel had more heals than damage 3 WZs in a row. I know I'm bad, but still.

 

It's actually fun to play lethality as a healer, more fun doing that than doing dps imo. lol. I see why Hottie for fun ran a lethality for heals. She did 3k hps on the ss I seen.

[Glower]

yeah, thats a monumental oversight on the part of the devs to allow that. i hadnt noticed it.

 

Bioware does not care about Force Barrier in arenas after acid. So maybe it's just "worked as intended"...

[Ruhun]

Bioware does not care about Force Barrier in arenas after acid. So maybe it's just "worked as intended"...

 

It also makes them immune to fire and acid in Huttball.

[foxmob]

As for venting, I know people are venting, but they do themselves no favors by their overreach.

 

it would be far better for PVP (if not the game as a whole) if BW "over-nerfed" classes every 3-6 months than what they are/aren't doing right now. I know you may hate that if sorc is the only thing you (impersonal you) play and sorc is the AC getting the nerf bat. but there's literally nothing wrong with that. the problem is that the nerfs come at random, irregular intervals and many of the same ACs/specs remain the best for incredibly long periods of time. sorcs (especially heals) are the poster children for that. so of course you're going to see more hate. but I think if you're honest with yourself, nerfing a spec to the ground for a season isn't a big deal. leaving a spec at the top of the pyramid for 5 seasons is a horribly big deal.

 

either way, the problem is still the same: BW isn't going to meaningfully adjust balance in a reasonable time frame. and they show little to no interest in doing so to coincide with ranked seasons. so all you have left to do is reroll or vent. iunno. how I see it today.

[Ansultares]

I see no reason to engage in personal attacks. I do get frustrated in some of the crazier arguments put forth here, but I try to step away before it gets too petty.

No, you'd rather endlessly argue semantics.

 

I look at Lightning Sorcs as the best example of a nerf gone wrong. People were exactly right that Force Storm was broken. In response, the developers over nerfed that power and nerfed a whole lot of other things that were not broken besides. I do not want to see that happen again to any spec or class.

The longer they wait to bring down the nerf, the greater in magnitude it needs to be. A minor nerf to sorc/sages won't be enough to bring people back from other games.

[Ansultares]

so all you have left to do is reroll or vent. iunno. how I see it today.

It's called reroll another game.

 

I'm not interested in engaging in wild hyperbole over the state of sages/sorcs. It's now reaching a point where the in-game experience, due in large part to the sage/sorc meta, is so lackluster and so repetitive that I no longer look forward to logging in. Once my next stipend comes in, I'll try transferring to see if another server isn't quite as heavily burdened by that meta. If the next server is just as bad, I hear Overwatch is releasing; that should be entertaining enough until something else comes along.

 

The point is, once players are out of here, a 1-3% nerf to sage/sorc healing won't bring people back.

[Master-Nala]

No, you'd rather endlessly argue semantics.

 

That's a curious claim. Semantics is the study of the meaning of words. There is more to it, but that's the basic definition. I don't believe that I have been arguing semantics, because we have broad agreement as to the meanings of the relevant words.

 

I do acknowledge that this post is literally arguing semantics.

 

But what I find curious is that people believe it somehow illegitimate to argue semantics. Many questions, some extremely important and serious turn on the meaning of terms. I had a case recently where six figures of damages turned on the meaning of the term "gross".

 

So I really don't see why folks consider it a retort to say someone is arguing semantics. Meaning is important.

[Jake_Chambers]

Yes. Barrier needs to stop contesting the cap. The only map similar to APG node design is hurt ball, in that a player constantly interacts with the node/ball. Now, barrier drops the ball just as stealth out and other high end defenses do because it provides overly powerful ball holding, if you will. Similarly, as long as a person is in barrier, the node should not be contested.

[foxmob]

So I really don't see why folks consider it a retort to say someone is arguing semantics. Meaning is important.

 

huh? this line made me double take. the definition of semantic is meaning. but the idiom, "that difference is semantic" or "you're arguing semantics" means the opposite, that the things you're arguing lack significance (i.e., meaning). are you trying to be coy by "turning" the definition of the idiom on its head by using the definition of the individual term?

[Lhancelot]

huh? this line made me double take. the definition of semantic is meaning. but the idiom, "that difference is semantic" or "you're arguing semantics" means the opposite, that the things you're arguing lack significance (i.e., meaning). are you trying to be coy by "turning" the definition of the idiom on its head by using the definition of the individual term?

 

This discussion on words and semantics is too highbrow for me, will you guys get back to simple arguments about what classes need nerfed and why?

[Master-Nala]

huh? this line made me double take. the definition of semantic is meaning. but the idiom, "that difference is semantic" or "you're arguing semantics" means the opposite, that the things you're arguing lack significance (i.e., meaning). are you trying to be coy by "turning" the definition of the idiom on its head by using the definition of the individual term?

 

Without getting into a semantic argument, your definition of the phrases are not my understanding of what they mean. Not really was that my point.

[foxmob]

Without getting into a semantic argument, your definition of the phrases are not my understanding of what they mean. Not really was that my point.

 

they're dismissive. I'm not sure what else you think ppl mean. but it's not "hey. that's important. don't address it!"

 

anyway....

This discussion on words and semantics is too highbrow for me, will you guys get back to simple arguments about what classes need nerfed and why?

 

the thread has exactly one topic. I'm pretty sure all points of view were expressed a few pages ago. petty bickering is all that remains. nobody's convincing anyone of anything.

[Rantank]

That's a curious claim. Semantics is the study of the meaning of words. There is more to it, but that's the basic definition. I don't believe that I have been arguing semantics, because we have broad agreement as to the meanings of the relevant words.

 

I do acknowledge that this post is literally arguing semantics.

 

But what I find curious is that people believe it somehow illegitimate to argue semantics. Many questions, some extremely important and serious turn on the meaning of terms. I had a case recently where six figures of damages turned on the meaning of the term "gross".

 

So I really don't see why folks consider it a retort to say someone is arguing semantics. Meaning is important.

 

^ Not as helpful as you might have thought for supporting your case that you're not into semantics.

[Master-Nala]

^ Not as helpful as you might have thought for supporting your case that you're not into semantics.

 

I'm not sure I have any case to support. This is a side issue and in the litany of complaints about Sorcerers, this isn't that high up there. If the devs changed it so that Force Barrier operated like Stealth in OPG, I'm not going to complain.

 

My point all along is that I don't see why everyone is picking on this one power and not the other powers that break the mechanics of this map. In fact, my first post in this thread was a question. Many pages of thinly veiled bias against Sorcs in general (as opposed to the singular power that was referred to in the OP) ensued.