Underpowered/Overpowered?

[Jon]

Originally Posted by Destruction

I think warriors are underpowered as opposed to wepmasters. I am a wep master, and a warrior is barely ~5% more in damage for max hit. I think it deserves to be close to a gladitorial 20% and at the same time, wep masters need something that separates them from warriors. Min damage bonus isn't enough, as the max bonus isn't enough for warriors atm.

I think these classes are currently too similiar. I think perhaps archers/rangers are in the same situation. Need more class defining dfferences.

Ummm...which Nod are you playing man.

Warriors are fine as is, and are in no way underpowered. No other melee class can compete with Warriors with consistency.

The shield debate is a joke, Melee can equip a shield just as an archer can, they both sacrifice massive amounts of dps to do it, but both can can it.

With maxed petmanship skills and dual whips, archers gain ~5-6% dps over simply using damage pets and no weapons. That is an unacceptable gain for the amount of exp needed to max out petmanship. The whip penalty for archers reduces almost all the gains that are gained from maxed skills.

And to the consistancy point, over time (as my tests were all for 100-300 fights) archer dmg should not be that far behind melee dmg, i cant comment on caster dmg as i do not have a caster at 70. Over a long enough period of tests archer dmg should be atleast comparable to melee dmg in terms of dps (time spent in fight vs total dmg done) - in its current state, an equally geared melee (ie. 80+ uncommon or 81 epic slasher vs full 78 epic archery) out dps's a archer by a massive amount over 100-300 fights.

[Destruction]

Ummm...which Nod are you playing man.

Warriors are fine as is, and are in no way underpowered. No other melee class can compete with Warriors with consistency.

Nodiatis 2....??

What I mean is that wep master get like 10.5%...thats too close to warriors. A warrior should have higher % then just 4.5 higher then wep masters.

At the same time, wep mast have nothing really unique that makes them different then from warriors , with the exception of min damage.

[Jon]

Originally Posted by Destruction

Nodiatis 2....??

What I mean is that wep master get like 10.5%...thats too close to warriors. A warrior should have higher % then just 4.5 higher then wep masters.

At the same time, wep mast have nothing really unique that makes them different then from warriors , with the exception of min damage.

Trust me...10.5% is enuff to set Weapon Masters apart from Warriors.

And NO..no more melee dmg bonus for Warriors please. You're shooting yourself in the foot man.

Unless class-based skills come in, I'm fine with the bonuses to dmg for Warriors and Weapon Masters

[Destruction]

Alright. Perhaps I'm mistaken with the damage. I didn't think 4.5% amounted to that much of a difference, but meh.

[Relic]

Originally Posted by Hidden

The shield debate is a joke, Melee can equip a shield just as an archer can, they both sacrifice massive amounts of dps to do it, but both can can it.

With maxed petmanship skills and dual whips, archers gain ~5-6% dps over simply using damage pets and no weapons. That is an unacceptable gain for the amount of exp needed to max out petmanship. The whip penalty for archers reduces almost all the gains that are gained from maxed skills.

And to the consistancy point, over time (as my tests were all for 100-300 fights) archer dmg should not be that far behind melee dmg, i cant comment on caster dmg as i do not have a caster at 70. Over a long enough period of tests archer dmg should be atleast comparable to melee dmg in terms of dps (time spent in fight vs total dmg done) - in its current state, an equally geared melee (ie. 80+ uncommon or 81 epic slasher vs full 78 epic archery) out dps's a archer by a massive amount over 100-300 fights.

Hidden, c'mon man us melees have taken HUGE nerfs already, please stop rallying for another. I am technically the most skilled and most expierenced player in nodiatis, and i can be beaten by an archer (Srci) 70% of the time, when im in FULL PVP MODE! Leave. it alone. already. Atleast Archers have PvP skills, while all other classes have NOTHING.

And your not even taking into consideration the Luck factor, If an archer gets 3 trishots per battle (Which does happen often) they get much more DPS than a melee anyday.

Besides..

Originally Posted by Glitchless

Also try avoid merely lobbying for your favorite class to receive endless bonuses in hopes of there being no way to counter them. There should be no class in Nodiatis that is able to defeat all other classes.

Relic - i am not calling for any nerfs to melee's, nor to any class - the only nerf i think that should happen is to aura's in pvp as i stated, if anything this is a buff to melee's.

Also, none of my post had anything to do with pvp (except aura's) - my post was for PvE and direct compairisons of damage over time spent in battle. Archers have a huge advantage in group pvp due to their pvp based skill, i agree there should be atleast an equivilant for melees, but others who have done more pvp can explain why as i dont have the experience in pvp as others do.

And to the "luck factor" that you talk about - over the course of enough tests, that luck factor becomes 0, and all that is left is average dps. Again this is all in terms of PVE.

Also, I have 3 melee level 70's as well so i am not simply rallying for my own class, yes i have 3 archers, in terms of pve, my melee's with 1/3 the exp my archers have and no epics out dps my archers over time. This is not balanced by any stretch of the imagination.

[Relic]

Originally Posted by Hidden

Relic - i am not calling for any nerfs to melee's, nor to any class - the only nerf i think that should happen is to aura's in pvp as i stated, if anything this is a buff to melee's.

I didnt read your earlier post, for that i appologise.

Im having a problem accepting more damage from archers, when im already easily defeated by one, and i got great gear, and max skill.

[zenga]

Well if I would have to believe blindly a conclusion based on numbers and excessive data mining, it would be only from hidden. His chars are among the most experienced/skilled and he only talks in numbers & dps.

He is one of the very few who can compare archer dps vs melee dps. However I feel the same as relic. But that's just a subjective feeling.

Anyway, until there is a model on how to compare builds/classes; it's extremely difficult to do that.

How do you compare?
Amount of time it takes to finish a fight?
Or do you take the amount of hp left at the end of a fight and regen time?
Possible extra damage a build can do (like archers with pets & damage gems?
At what level do you compare? Only at the capped builds?
Do you take all skills into account? Also the level 20 and 40 skils?
Do you only take epic weapons into account?

My point is, comparing dps ain't enough to say if a certain build.class is OP or UP.

Relic - I do see your point since PVE = PVP dmg now, so what i suggest is that balance if first made between the specs (all of them, not just melee/archery) and then altered for the other - IE balance the spec's for PVE and then adjust their power in pvp.

Adjustments must be made only after balance is achieved at the penultimate level, if it is 80 or higher, it doesnt matter, balancing the specs at 70 makes no sense if the level 80 skills will simply unbalance them yet again.

If some of the underpowered suggestions are balanced with level 80 skills, then they dont need adjustment, but since we do not know any of the 80 skills we can only speculate and discuss what we currently see at level 70.

Z - I agree that you can not simply say that one spec is underpowered or overpowered, it depends on the variables. But when the variables are equal on both sides, compairisons can be made - but again, this only truly matters at the end game cap. At 70 these discussions are simply a waste of time and/or a way to vent issues that have been bothering us. As with every level cap raise, changes will occur in the balance of power and will need to be readjusted to accomidate new skills.

And the testing that ive done is not based on formulas, they are real world tests(well not exactly real world but you get the point) - calculating the total damage done in a fight and the time spent in a fight, this means that skills are all included in the tests. regen time isnt counted as 99% of my fights i am at full hp and energy/mana regen at a quick enough rate to not warrant counting. Possible extra damage is not an issue either since again, over a long enough test period this is reduced to 0 as it averages into the final numbers.

As for epics, i have tested with the 78 epic set since it is the best archery set in terms of dps available (other then the 84 set, but that is only a marginal increase and is much higher then the melee weapons used which would skew the results)

[Sapreaver]

can you guys move the discussion to another thread since this is just for saying what you think is over powered or not and the discussion makes smaller complaints like pet damage and stuff like that more easily missed because of your walls of text

[zenga]

My post was not about questioning your methods of data mining, but more general about how we should compare classes/builds. An archer at lvl 15 is different from an archer at level 50. It goes hand in hand with new skills (like dual wield @ 20 for melee) and available epics. , The only accurate way to compare classes in pve is when jeff creates a set of testing chars, skilled and equipped with the top gear and fight them hours at different levels. And compare the data. As this thread is intended for pvp and not pve I believe we can skip the pve part here.

My whole rant in the other thread I made lately about why i stop with duels was all about the imbalance and the attempt to create balance. A failed attempt imo as it only targets specific builds while there are a bunch of other classes/builds that are still weaker and stronger. Some classes request/whine/lobby for a boost, while other classes (like a trapper) have no class specific combat skills. And the eternal adaption it requires due to inconsistent changes.

Therefore I'm glad with this thread, as it aims to take care of all classes/builds. I'm still *preparing* my post with suggestion though (since I've stated/ranted there is an imbalance, i should at least come up with some decent arguments .

My apologies, i did not notice this was a thread intended for PVP discussion, i simply saw the title and glanced over the posts - Disregard my posts for this discussion as they apply to PVE

a shield for a melee user? hahaha that made me piss myself

but whatever i am done with this thread i see that it is just another Bi$%^ thread

and archers are very overpowered so saying they are underpowered must be a joke or maybe you thought it was opposite day today

[Sapreaver]

lol who voted Pets/whips

[Faithfulservant]

EDIT: This thread has turned into a crapstorm of begging for your own classes to be buffed. Let's try a poll instead, vote above.

k then we shall do this the old fashioned way....range overpowered,casters underpowered,buffs please.

[Destruction]

Lmfao @ crapstorm of bias.

I vote range for obvious trishot hits.

Though if you alter the trishot, then it becomes fairly even, imo.

[Faithfulservant]

You who chose whips/pets should be shot on the spot

[Destruction]

Keep in mind when voting, that if I heard right from zenga, aura of thorns with a high skill (palidise (sp?)) can pretty much obliterate whips/pets since they do so little but rapid damage.